Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: skingfong
Page: <<prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 25 next>>
Jun 21, 2017 22:34:34   #
boberic wrote:
It's always better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.


Exactly! I think we're on the same page.
Go to
Jun 20, 2017 19:22:27   #
BebuLamar wrote:
Inspired by Jim Bob question I see that there are a number of us who know which camera they would want to keep for life. If so shouldn't we buy the one we want to keep for life from the start instead of buying the lower end now and upgrading later? I heard so many recommendation for newbies to buy the entry level camera and upgrade when they learn more.


It really depends on the individual. If a beginner isn't a techie, buying too much camera is a waste because they'll never use a lot of the features. They might even stay in the auto or P mode. If a person is technically inclined and visually astute, starting with the best camera they can afford is a good idea. But then again, in a few years that camera might almost be obsolete the way technology advances.

There's no correct answer that covers everyone. Everybody is different with their technical savvy and eyes.
Go to
Jun 20, 2017 18:47:53   #
cdunn wrote:
I currently shoot with the original 6D, which I've enjoyed for almost 5 years. Lenses are 16-35 f2.8 ll, 24-105 f/4, 100 f/2.8 ll Macro, 100-400 f/4-5.6 ll. I'm preparing to buy a body upgrade. The specs on the 6D M2, scheduled to be formally announced on June 29, are mostly confirmed and include 26 megapixels, 45 focal points (all cross-wise), an articulating touchscreen LCD, Digic 7 sensor, no 4K video, and single card slot. I have no interest in video, concentrate mainly on landscape and close-up, but also do some shooting of wildlife and live orchestral concerts.

The street price of the 5D M4 has dropped to $3,000, making the difference with the 6D M2 only $1,000. Since I will likely have the camera for at least 5 years, the $1,000 is not a major impediment. I do like the articulating LCD and the more simplified operation of the 6D, since I probably won't use several of the features on the 5D, but these are not deal breaker considerations. I also don't shoot in rough conditions.

I would welcome opinions on whether there are aspects of the 5D M4 that would likely make it a meaningfully better camera for me than the 6D. I fully understand the decision is mine, I am just looking for experienced opinions about the difference in capabilities, assuming the specs on the 6D are correct and operate as one would expect. Thanks very much.
I currently shoot with the original 6D, which I've... (show quote)


Since the $1000 difference isn't a major impediment, get the 5D M4. That way you won't have any regrets. If you get the 6D MK2 you might be saying to yourself, I wish I would've bought the 5D M4. It's always better to have more than not enough.
Go to
Jun 20, 2017 18:29:08   #
I think of RAW as a "digital negative" and jpg as a developed RAW. I shoot Large RAW + small jpg(1920x1280). 1920x1280 is big enough to fill a computer screen but not too big to share and upload. YMMV depending on what camera you use. There are times when I don't like how the camera processes the jpg so I re-develop the jpg from the RAW (digital negative) using software. Also if want to print a large photo, I'll re-develop the RAW into the largest jpg or tiff file. Shooting without RAW to me is like not having any negatives. Shooting jpg's is for instant results and sharing. If it's not important for you to keep your negative, your short on memory space or you haven't developed your post processing skills yet, shoot jpg only.

Everyone has their own opinion of RAW vs. jpg. It's a personal choice. Shoot what suits you the best. If you're not sure, shoot RAW + jpg. You'll have your bases covered with only the expense of using more memory space. Personally, I have to have a large RAW to fall back on when I need it. I use the small jpg for the convenience of sharing.
Go to
Jun 16, 2017 20:26:01   #
After buying the Eclipse cleaning fluid and cleaning swabs, I was able to clean my sensor. This was the first time I've ever tried this. It was really easy. I won't hesitate to do this again whenever it's needed. Here are the before and after shots of the sky. It took two applications or attempts.

Thanks for all of your responses.

before

(Download)

after

(Download)
Go to
Jun 15, 2017 19:16:33   #
Tracy B. wrote:
The lead singer in my Husband's band asked for me to do a photo shoot of them. I'm excited and nervous. I was thinking of having them hold they're instruments for one pose. The singer can hold the mic, but do you think it is enough for the drummer to just hold his sticks? Any other suggestions are appreciated. Three are average height and thin. One is short and heavier. Any ideas of posing them? In case any grumpies read this: Yes, I have looked on line. I also have a few example pictures. I just wanted to, for my research, reach out to this group also.
The lead singer in my Husband's band asked for me ... (show quote)


Capture them in their natural setting while they're playing on stage! Try to capture their emotions while they're playing. Here's an example I shot during the bass player's solo.


Go to
Jun 11, 2017 18:22:02   #
Jim Bob wrote:
Agree or disagree?


I chimp from time to time, especially if it's a crucial shot or a great shot. It also gives me verification that I got the shot. All it takes is a glance. If I'm a chump for chimping, call me what you want. I don't care. I'm not perfect and neither is my equipment. I have come to terms with that. To err is human. I have no problem checking myself from time to time. My errors keep me humble. Hopefully I can learn from them.
Go to
Jun 10, 2017 01:43:20   #
Gene51 wrote:
I've done it using the Eclipse and Visible dust cleaners, but I get the best results when I bring it into a camera repair tech and let them do it. If they scratch the filter that covers the sensor, it's on their dime that I get a new one.


I don't doubt that, but I want to do the cleaning myself rather than rely on someone else. I'll just make sure I don't do any scrubbing.
Go to
Jun 10, 2017 01:34:14   #
SS319 wrote:
Of course, the questions are: Is your camera under a warrantee plan or a maintenance plan? Does the Owners manual provide direction on using solvents to clean the sensor? What would the cost be for a trained and bonded professional to clean your camera?

Of separate interest, how did you get oil or any other liquid or semi-liquid into your camera and onto the sensor? I always ensure when changing lenses that the oncoming lens is clean and ready before I take the current lens off and then try an limit the exposed time for the camera interiors to less than 1-2 seconds. Nothing but a camera cap or a clean lens ever comes near the camera flange.
Of course, the questions are: Is your camera unde... (show quote)


I bought a used camera so no warranty or maintenance plan.

Like you, I'm very conscious about not keeping the inside of the body exposed to dust and dirt. After reading this thread I'm glad I bought the bottle of Eclipse along with the swabs. mborn mentioned a 2 oz. bottle will last forever. I'm not worried about cleaning my sensor as long as I have the right tools. It shouldn't be any problem. Cleaning a sensor on DSLR comes with the territory. That's the price we pay for having interchangeable lenses.
Go to
Jun 9, 2017 00:12:09   #
joer wrote:
I have used Isopropyl Alcohol 99% and it works well and is inexpensive.


Good to know. Thanks
Go to
Jun 9, 2017 00:10:58   #
mas24 wrote:
I would just buy a sensor cleaning kit with the proper fluid and swabs. They are not expensive. If you damage you sensor, experimenting doing it cheaply, you're looking at a very expensive repair. Any camera outlet sells the kits.



The expensive repair crossed my mind. That's why I ordered the Eclipse cleaning fluid along with some swabs first. Hopefully the 2 oz. bottle will last since it only used a few drops at a time.
Go to
Jun 8, 2017 22:23:08   #
I'm going to wet clean the sensor in one of my cameras. It looks like it has two round oil spots. Someone told me to use 90% grade alcohol. I didn't know if that would suffice so I bought a 2 oz. bottle of Eclipse sensor cleaning fluid just to be on the safe side. So my question is has anyone used alcohol instead with satisfying results?
Go to
May 20, 2017 17:15:08   #
Sandroots wrote:
Am using a Canon 55mm-250mm lens to photo seabirds but not able to get close enough to get meaningful shots. Please advise what type of lens I should get and should it be a zoom or prime. Thanks, Sandroots


Canon 100-400mm mark II would be a great lens. It has great image quality and it's easier to track BIF while zoomed out. Once you find the bird you can zoom in all the way to 400mm.

If you feel confident about tracking BIF you won't need a zoom. In this case a 400mm prime would be a good choice for a lot less money. It will also be lighter. I find when I'm using a long lens I'm all the way at 400mm 95% of the time anyway. The disadvantage would be finding and tracking the bird with a narrow field of view.

250mm-300mm is not significant enough for you to invest into a new lens. If you're going to spend the money 300mm isn't worth it. You will be happier with 400mm or more.
Go to
May 3, 2017 02:20:02   #
Erik_H wrote:
A quick show of hands please. How many photographers here are also musicians? I find it interesting that so many people who are "artistic" often are so in more than one discipline. Ansel Adams was also a classically trained pianist, you have Ralph Gibson, and more recently people like Brian Adams, Nikki Sixx (no joke!), and Graham Nash. All are well known musicians and are also Photogs. My father was a photographer and jazz drummer who must have rubbed off on me because I'm also a musician in addition to being a photographer. My eldest son, who plays multiple instruments, also has a keen eye for photography.
I'm sure that there have been many studies on this, but I'm just wondering how many in our little community practice both arts.
A quick show of hands please. How many photographe... (show quote)


I play in a couple of jazz bands and teach guitar. Music has always been my passion. I also record and produce for other musicians. I was a Technical Director at a TV station. That was my day job for 26 years, although I worked swing shift. Being a techie and maybe "artistic" naturally led me to photography. I guess I like using the right and left side of my brain.
Go to
Apr 26, 2017 16:04:00   #
qualtalk wrote:
I've been watching some of the threads about selecting a wide-angle lens to use with an APS-C camera.

One suggestion I've seen is to take several overlapping images and then stitch them together in post.

I'm shooting with a Nikon D3300 which has a built-in Panorama mode, and my question is whether capturing the image in this mode would produce a better image than stitching together several images in post.

Thanks in advance for your suggestions!


I just shot this one two days ago. I used PS photomerge with raw files. The PSD file is 762mg. That's the only drawback I don't have a pano mode in my camera but I'm willing to bet there's not as much flexibility in working you're pano in the camera itself. I used 9 vertical images to stitch together wondering how well my PC could handle them. It obviously took longer to merge, approximately 2 minutes.

One of the 9 frames

(Download)

Final product

(Download)
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 25 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.