Posts: sodacreek | Ugly Hedgehog

I have been considering upgrading from my current Canon 50D to the Canon EOS 7D Mark II. I mainly photograph landscapes and wild life. I have read that this camera is great for sports and other fast moving objects like birds.
My question is would it still be a good purchase for landscape photography.
Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.

Go to

Sep 7, 2015 08:52:27 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Moving Lightroom files from computer to External Drive

Thank you very much for the reply. Will work on it today.

Go to

Sep 7, 2015 08:25:17 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Moving Lightroom files from computer to External Drive

I have around 600 RAW/JPEG photos in Lightroom on my Mac laptop. My question is do most folks keep their photos on their computer or is it better to have them on an external drive?
My next question is if I want to remove them from my computer hard drive, do I just use the export function in Lightroom to move the entire folder to the external drive.
Any feedback will be appreciated.

Go to

Dec 28, 2014 18:39:46 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC HSM vs Sigma 10-20 f3.5 EX DC HSM

Carl 383 wrote:

I purchased the Sigma 10-20 f3.5 EX DC HSM two mon... (show quote)

Thank you very much for the response. Based on the feedback, I think I will just stay with my f4-5.6 and rather spend my money on the new Canon 7d Mark II.

Go to

Dec 27, 2014 20:22:15 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC HSM vs Sigma 10-20 f3.5 EX DC HSM

lightcatcher wrote:

Angle of view may be the same, check specs for it. f3.5 will do better in low light.

The f4-5.6 has an angle of view of 102-54 degrees with the f3.5 at 103-64 degrees.

Go to

Dec 27, 2014 19:11:33 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC HSM vs Sigma 10-20 f3.5 EX DC HSM

I presently have a Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 lens that I use on my Canon 50D. My question is just what will the 10-20 f3.5 give me that I do not get with the f4-5.6 lens.
I mainly shoot landscape and would like to get an even wider perspective.
Please excuse my ignorance as I am still learning about lenses.

Go to

Nov 13, 2014 19:41:12 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Matt or Glossy

Nikon_DonB wrote:

I personally like Satin finish. The images look great when framed under glass and don't reflect like glossy. Matte looks kind of dull and better suited for B & W.

Thank you.

Go to

Nov 13, 2014 19:26:15 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

Matt or Glossy

Normally I have my photos printed on matt rather than glossy.
Was wondering what others do and if there are certain instances you would want to choose either.
As always I appreciate any feedback.

Go to

Nov 3, 2014 17:36:51 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

What Type of File for Print

MT Shooter wrote:

Larger file size and a lot more available data for large prints. I have had JPGs exhibit pixelization as small as 24x36, but have printed TIFFs as large as 48x72 with no pixelization at all, same camera, same files. With JPG files the compression is the detail killer.

Thank you.
I thought that was what I had heard.

Go to

Nov 3, 2014 17:24:31 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

What Type of File for Print

MT Shooter wrote:

I usually print from a JPG file up to 16x24. When I am printing larger I almost always print from a TIFF file format. Just my preference though.

Just what is the benifit of the TIFF over the Jpeg?

Go to

Nov 3, 2014 16:21:57 #

(Main Photography Discussion)

What Type of File for Print

I shoot in manual capturing both Jpeg and Raw formats.
My question is after post processing,what type of file do most use to take to a photoshop for printing. Normally I use a Jpeg format but have heard it may not be the best file format.
Any advise is appreciated.

Go to

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>

Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections

UglyHedgehog.com - Forum