|
I'm not saying its a bad shot, and I'm not tearing the guy up for that. He's just insufferable about his expensive camera set to A for Awesome and how his $5000 investment makes him a true photographer. I wanted to take him down a notch by pointing out that his bokehs he was so proud of were the result of his photoshoppery, not any special quality of his kit as I'd never seen bokeh quite like that in an image. If you're telling me that's fully possible, I'll just call him a dick next time I see it and be done with it.
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2012 22:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:37 |
|
|
Don't let it get to you about how he acts or whatever. Whatever camera he has doesn't change who you are as a photographer. I have a friend who always shits on me for not having a camera that scores highly on charts but I'm a working professional photographer and he takes pictures of branches to show how sharp his d800 is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2012 22:39
|
|
|
If you want to feel humbled, go look up some lovely camera on Flickr and be amazed by the amazing photos that people using even the first generation digital cameras took. It's all about the photographer. The reality is that I will likely never actually need more camera than my D200 can provide, which is why I've decided to just keep it instead of playing the forever-upgrading game. If I do anything, I will probably get a mirrorless to supplement it, like a NEX-5N.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2012 22:49
|
|
|
You should spend $6000 on a camera setup, that will show him!
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2012 22:57
|
|
|
rio posted:You should spend $6000 on a camera setup, that will show him! Awwww poo poo son! I'm all over this! Though, I have seen some pretty drat amazing cell phone pictures, so maybe I should see if Lecia makes a camera phone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 03:52
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:Awwww poo poo son! I'm all over this! Apple makes a phone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 03:59
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:Awwww poo poo son! I'm all over this! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 04:01
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:Awwww poo poo son! I'm all over this! Have you considered showing him up with a Pentax ME Super.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 07:14
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Have you considered showing him up with a Pentax ME Super. I have now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
Somebody went and compared the iPhone 5 to a 5d MkIII, and found there wasn't much difference when taking a street shot in the middle of the day: http://dcurt.is/iphone-5-vs-5d-mark-iii Except if you ignore the huge purple smear across the iPhone shot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 05:01
|
|
|
And how the 5d has nearly three times the pixels recorded. I guess if you just want instagram filters that's one thing, but I'll take the bigger resolution for real editing later.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 05:13
|
|
|
I know we know this, but the camera doesn't make the photos. Say what you want about super styled shoots, but here is a session some friends of mine did with an iPhone (probably a 4s) that will wreck most folks efforts with any camera known to man: http://www.mcgowanimages.com/blog/?p=10405
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 05:41
|
|
|
I love that album as a whole, and the fact that it was taken with an iPhone really does show how much more the photographer matters compared to the camera. It's just no matter how skilled you are, a lot of those shots are way too distracting with a fully in-focus background. It's an unfortunate physical limitation but props to your friends regardless.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 06:16
|
|
|
It's a ridiculous comparison, because the 5D3 can't make phone calls or run Angry Birds. I don't know why Canon even bother trying to compete with the iPhone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 06:35
|
|
|
Pretty much any camera can take good daylight photos of still objects. I don't know why everyone uses that for comparisons. It's like a car test where they drive 30mph and make gentle turns then proclaim a Honda Civic is just as good as a Ferrari.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 06:44
|
|
|
Agree. That said, on the other side of it, the iphone is 100% of the cameras plenty of people will ever have and it's a pretty good one. I doubt I'll ever lose a wedding booking to a dude with an iPhone. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 06:50
|
|
|
What the christ is it with photogs doing huge digital artistic scenes of post apocalyptic wastelands with a great model in the scene, then having absolutely no in-shot reason for the lighting. FutureSoldier#1 standing in front of a sunset looks great. FutureSoldier#1 standing in front of a sunset with obvious strobe lighting (unbalanced, of course) and obvious shadows in completely the wrong place turns the whole piece into crap.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 07:01
|
|
|
Gravitom posted:Pretty much any camera can take good daylight photos of still objects. I don't know why everyone uses that for comparisons. It's like a car test where they drive 30mph and make gentle turns then proclaim a Honda Civic is just as good as a Ferrari. Not to mention that all of the cellphone to DSLR comparisons I see are online and at full frame. No 100% crops or prints. That being said, cellphone cameras have come an amazingly long way in the last few years and a good photographer will always be able to to use a bad (or mediocre) camera to produce good work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 07:47
|
|
|
In an age where 95% of photographs end up only on facebook smartphone cameras are going to be enough for a vast majority of people. Convenience of having the camera with you and being able to instantaneously share images is going to trump quality for the most part. All that phones need is to be "good enough"
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 11:42
|
|
|
Paragon8 posted:In an age where 95% of photographs end up only on facebook smartphone cameras are going to be enough for a vast majority of people. Convenience of having the camera with you and being able to instantaneously share images is going to trump quality for the most part. All that phones need is to be "good enough" Absolutely this. Most cell phone shots (in good light) are perfect for Facebook, and most will be good enough for a 4x6" print if they really want it. Outside of that, most people aren't going to care too much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 13:26
|
|
|
The big thing will be when camera manufacturers acknowledge that point and shoots are essentially a dead market and work with cell phone companies to bring branded optics like sony does with zeiss. Although with how strong phone brands are now, I don't see there being much of a gain having nikon/canon involved. I could totally see there being a ridiculous leica phone though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 13:39
|
|
|
I know sensors in phone cameras will steadily get better, where I think there's still a bit of a concern is in the battery. This is why I still have a separate P&S from my phone, I don't run MP3s on my phone, and don't watch movies or stuff on it. All those things can hammer a phone's battery. E: I'm probably overthinking that though. Most folks are probably taking 2-3 photos at most on their phones per day, at most.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 13:54
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Absolutely this. Most cell phone shots (in good light) are perfect for Facebook, and most will be good enough for a 4x6" print if they really want it. Outside of that, most people aren't going to care too much. (edit) this one  Smoky Sunset by NoneMoreNegative, on Flickr Hardly high-art, but a nice reminder of a good holiday
NoneMoreNegative fucked around with this message at 15:14 on Sep 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 14:13
|
|
|
NoneMoreNegative posted:I had a coupon for a cheap 30x20inch canvas boxframe print needed using, so I sent off a nice sunset shot I'd grabbed with my iPhone; came out lovely (if a bit darker, but that's ok for a sight-unseen printer setup). I think the roughness of the canvas can hide a fair bit of cellphone quality Dang, that's pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 14:40
|
|
|
Agreed. For any photo I share on FB, 50% of the time it came from my phone, and I have a guck load of gear.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 15:58
|
|
|
Elite Taco posted:Agreed. Do you carry that guck load with you at all times? Point being, it has less to do with the quality of the camera in the phone and more to do with the fact that it's the one you have available when something happens. That phones are starting to get decent sensors is just a side benefit. When I carry a backpack, I plug a nifty fifty on my T1i and wrap it in a towel. It's nice always having it on hand just in case. I've been considering getting the pancake 40mm for an even smaller option.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 16:08
|
|
|
Haha at guck load. I usually have a 5Dc + 40mm in my bag, but the phone is just faster. I love how good they are at this point, as it is cool to see what my friends are up to. I agree that the comparison between the two is orthogonal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2012 16:22
|
|
|
By the by, watch a video about Hasselblads by the digitalrev guys https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50UmC6uutMo
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 02:46
|
|
|
By far the best blad on the market.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 04:12
|
|
|
Looks hella clunky though
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 04:25
|
|
|
I cringed so hard when he was holding it in the crook of his arm while loading the film. So hard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 06:04
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I cringed so hard when he was holding it in the crook of his arm while loading the film. If I was Mark I would have run over to grab it from him but he just stood away smoking his cigarette and thinking of how to troll Kai later.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 07:17
|
|
|
I hold mine like that all the time when reloading.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 07:40
|
|
|
Lookit all deez plebs carrying no spare mags.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 08:45
|
|
|
That looks less fun than loading a Bronica, I was just waiting for everything to go bouncing down the pavement.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 11:41
|
|
|
What made me cringe was the way he just slammed the back back onto the body. I handle all my cameras like they're made of 1mm sheet of glasss. Sheesh
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 13:09
|
|
|
You don't slam the back on the body, you have to press the magazine release button when putting the magazine back on so you don't wear out the teeth that hold it on  Also, "When you think of Hasselblad, you probably think of the H-series" - guess again 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 13:50
|
|
|
That guy always looks like he's one stumble away from destroying whatever piece of gear he's carrying. Part of this could be because he quite frequently does destroy photography gear, but also he's got that 'two year old who just learned to walk' aura going on. You just know if you watch long enough he's going to fall over.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 14:32
|
|
|
I just found a Canon EF 100 f2.8 macro in a charity shop. However, they wanted £200 for it - which is a good price, but I had no body to test it with and I'm not about to drop that kind of money on a gamble. Still thinking about it...probably would have been worth a punt, but I'm feeling chicken.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 17:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:37 |
|
|
Sooooo bring a body and flip it if you don't like it? It's like free rental if the price is so good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2012 17:55
|
|