Jump to content

ricardojmendez

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    524

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by ricardojmendez

    Sigma 20-40

    in Accessories

    Posted

    Hi Josef,

     

    Thanks for the recomendation. I ended up going with a Canon 24mm fixed focal, but I'll keep it in mind. There seems to be a lot of FUD about Sigma on these forums, it's good to have a complementary view of somebody who has used them.

     

     

    Ricardo

    Turn your Digital Rebel into a 10D

    in Canon EOS Mount

    Posted

    As a techno-geek that does know about cameras, I'd like to chime in.

     

    Yes, this does not convert the rebel into a 10D. But it adds features I want - like FEC, RAW+JPG and mirror lock-up - so I went in and updated it.

     

    I don't care for the will-it-cut-on-Canon-market-or-not, is-it-a-10D-or-not discussions. I care if it works or not. And for those 300D users wondering, it does work quite well.

    How to make dramatic images?

    in Street & Documentary

    Posted

    Being the type that often goes to http://dictionary.reference.com/ let me quote:

     

    "A composition, in prose or poetry, accommodated to action, and intended to exhibit a picture of human life, or to depict a series of grave or humorous actions of more than ordinary interest, tending toward some striking result."

     

    That puts it succintly. Yes, "striking" and "more than ordinary interest" are in the eye of the beholder, which is why something that is dramatic for a person is quotidian to another.

    Did any artwork change your life?

    in The History & Philosophy of Photography

    Posted

    I don't think it exactly changed my life, but the first artwork that I remember blowing my mind was when, as a 12-year-old who loved horror films, I went to the theater to watch David Cronenberg's 1986 remake of The Fly. I don't think that at the moment I fully understood why it impressed me so - maybe I was too young to grasp the movie - but with the years I've come to dissect what makes it such a brilliant film:

     

    - However cliched it sounds, it works on many levels. What I saw a as a kid was merely an impressive horror movie, but there's the heart-wrenching love story, the fact that Brundle's turning into a horrible fly-thing could be seen as nothing more than a wasting disease that's also affecting the person's mind, and the realistic relationships between the characters.

     

    - It knows what it wants to be. The Fly didn't ramble, or go for cheap, jump-out-of-your-seat scares. It turned out that what Cronenberg wanted to tell was a love story, with one of the characters being ravaged by disease. Focusing on that made the movie be a superb study of three characters that we get to know: no car chases, no big fights, no going through walls while pursuing the cute girl whose clothes become skimpier and skimpier, no filler.

     

    - It crossed boundaries between genres, mixing a horror movie with a love story and a character study, creating something that I hadn't seen before and couldn't have expected. So far it is the only horror movie that, while filling me with revulsion at the sight of the monster, a being I wouldn't want to have anywhere near me, also managed to make me feel sorry about the creature - enough that I cried at the devastated beast's last gesture.

     

    - It was personal. Cronenberg's obsession with the body (and apparently, the body getting out of control and rebelling against the mind trapped inside) infused the film with a strength it wouldn't have had otherwise.

     

    - It stood on its own merits. I am often unable to enjoy the films by Hayao Miyasaki, because he tends to preach so loudly that his pontificating drowns out the movie. Chricton's novels have become mostly about how dangerous technology is, and it will probably get out of control and kill/drown/eat all of us. The Fly never points the finger at technology, or even at Brundle's own carelessness. You never feel the author tapping you on the shoulder, pointing out the Really Important Stuff that you shouldn't miss.

     

    Now, if only the guy who keeps posting that photography isn't art read that, I'm sure he'll have a seizure.

    EOS 1n or EOS3

    in Canon EOS Mount

    Posted

    I'm with Guhan. I was faced with the same choice as you: between used Eos 1n or Eos 3. I went with the Eos 3 for two main reasons: a) it supported E-TTl, and I planned to do flash-photography with two 420EX's, and b) the Eos 3 45-point eye-controlled focus (to which you can link the spot meter) which some people don't like but that I've found incredibly useful.

     

    During use, I also found about the Eos 3 multi-spot metering, where you take multiple spot-meter reader and the camera averages them for you, and which the Eos 1n doesn't have either. This has turned out to be a great tool when dealing with something as narrow-range as spot metering, and would have been enough to convince me to go for an Eos 3 if the other two issues weren't already.

    Rebel 2000, metering in snow, simple instructions

    in Canon EOS Mount

    Posted

    Amanda,

     

    Yes, I'd suggest increasing exposure from 1-1.5 over what the meter says.

     

    Another trick you can use is (if you're carring a zoom lens) to zoom in as much as possible on what you want to meter, do a partial meter off that, and zoom out for the photo. Partial meter is around 10% of the scene on the Rebel 2000, and zooming in from 28 to 80 would give you just a third of the scene, meaning that you'll be metering about 3% of the whole 28mm-encompassed scene.

     

    It's not perfect, and probably won't be as good as a spot meter, but it can be a helpful trick.

     

    Experiment, and don't be afraid to shoot more than one frame per scene to evaluate which ones give you the best results.

    EOS Rebel 2000 Under exposure

    in Canon EOS Mount

    Posted

    Stephanie,

     

    The snow is fooling your light meter into believing that the scene is brighter than it actually is. I'd suggest getting either the "Kodak Guide to 35MM photography", which goes into some basic issues and also exposure; or Bryan Peterson's "Understanding Exposure" if you're looking for something a bit more focused.

    Has anyone used the GIMP as a photoshop alternative?

    in The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing

    Posted

    Brendan,

     

    I use The VaGimp as my main editing program (aside from things like NeatImage), it's an excellent tool. Main limitations I'm aware of are that it doesn't work with 48-bit images and has no CMYK support.

     

    You can find a link to a site with some really good Gimp tutorials here: http://ricardo.strangevistas.net/archive/000026.html These exemplify perfectly why Gimp does work for photographers.

     

    Also, do a search for "Gimp" on Photo.net. I'm sure you'll find several posts referring to it.

    24 2.8 questions

    in Canon EOS Mount

    Posted

    I just grabbed one of these babies about a month ago from e-Bay. Here are a few answers:

     

    1) Autofocus is pretty quiet, even if a bit sluggish. It isn't as quiet as the USM lens I have, but I seriously doubt that anybody standing a meter from you on the street will be able to hear it.

     

    2) When on autofocus, the focusing ring just spins freely. I don't think there's a chance of messing up the focus - much less the lens - when touching it.

     

    3) Don't know.

     

    4) It handles beautiful. I did some lowlight focusing tests yesterday with my EOS 3 around the house, on a rainy day, at about 5pm, and it always handled well. As I mentioned, autofocus is a bit sluggish - I feel it slower than my 50mm 1.8, which isn't an USM either - but it doesn't bother me because it's not a lens I plan to use on tracking shots of fast moving objects. Manual focusing is precise. The lens is small and light that it's a pleasure to have on my rather heavy EOS 3.

     

     

    Ricardo

×
×
  • Create New...