andrewsoem

<p>I do have a couple of questions that I think relate to OP's inquiry above. If they have been discussed before, I apologize.</p>

<p>I am thinking of adding the Dell U2410 as my second monitor to the NEC 2490 w/ Spectraview II. With the Dell U2410 as my wide gamut monitor, will I be able to calibrate it with SVII? If not, with the Dell and NEC monitors both connected to the same graphics card, will using the EyeOne Display screw up the calibration of the NEC monitor (or cause software clash with the SVII)? I assume that unlike the SVII, EyeOne Display calibrates the graphics card instead of the monitor itself...?</p>

<p>Or would I avoid potential headaches if I get another NEC wide gamut monitor such as the P221W or LCD2690 so that I can use the SVII?</p>

<p>I am also thankful for all the posts about monitos and color calibration that have been discussed on photo.net. I have especially found Mr. Rodney's advice to be very helpful...thank you!</p>

<p>Dear Simona, in my humble opinion, the blurred foreground and background in the original picture made the subjects and the surrounding environ look like plastic models. While it is interesting to look at, for me personally the effects take away the humanity out because it looks like a macro shot of little toys. While it may work as a fine art image, my vote is for the revised pictures because they best fit the context of the assignment (i.e. wedding). My most humble 2 cents.</p>

<p>I see the dust is big enough to decapitate the poor guitarist. :)</p>

<p>Seriously, it looks fine to my eyes. Try this trick if you dare: turn the AF off on your 85/1.8, hold the camera upwards, place a dime (or something soft the size of a dime) on the front element of your lens (not on your filter)...do your best to stay the dime in the center and shoot away at something (ceiling, tree leaves, whatever). Look at the pic...voila! No dime, nothing! Here, I just did a minute before I posted this to prove my point. The center is a bit brighter than the edges, but my point is that unless you have a very, very big dust problem in between the elements, chances are they won't affect IQ any bit. <br>

<a href="http://s1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/andrewsoem/?action=view&current=_MG_2541.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/andrewsoem/_MG_2541.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket" /></a></p>

<p>Thank you, Vinny.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=3989561">G Dan Mitchell</a> <a href="/member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/3rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Aug 10, 2009; 11:17 p.m.<br>

For the record, you should generally not consider the wacky blogger who I now only refer to as KR (mentioned in the previous post by name, thus bumping his placement in search engines unfortunately) as much of an expert or authority on these issues. While he occasionally gets something right (like I occasionally get a strike when I bowl), all to often he is just blowing hot air in an apparent attempt to rile folks up and hit the links to his site - all great for his web site, I'm sure, but an old and very transparent publishing trick.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I guess I should have included a disclaimer that I do not know whether the assertion made by a certain K_N R_______L has been proven or disproved.</p>

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=219639">Gary Clark</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"></a>, Aug 05, 2009; 09:57 a.m.</p>

<p >I like the looks of the Canon 5D Mark II and am considering purchasing one.<br />My question is: Will this cameras image quality meet or exceed what I get from my Pentax 67?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I still keep my Pentax 67 system around, but it's collecting dust. I now use my 5D1 daily. Love it. But to be perfectly honest, I still like the look of my Pentax 67 better :)<br /><br />I read somewhere (Ken Rockwell?) that a decent scan of a 35mm film neg/slide is equivalent to about 25MP resolution. Well, 5DII is a 21.1MP. So if this is true, then a decent scan from a 6x7 neg/slide would be tremendously higher in resolution than what 5DII can produce.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Anything old enough to be no longer repairable by Canon or an authorised repairer? Amost certainly not a good idea.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>For what its worth, I LUUURRVE my very old 20-35 2.8L non-USM, and I would even consider getting another used one if this one breaks than replace it with the its successors (17-35 / 16-35). So sharp wide open and such beautiful colors. :)</p>

<p>I think that at any given opportunity, I would put my money on "better" optics than a better body. That is unless the body that you have is inadequate for your current needs. Then again, if the L lens you are considering about is a prime lens, do consider the fact that Canon's non-L prime lenses are in general very good performers. With zooms, L glasses are truly the better investments than the non-L zoom equivalent. My 2 cents.</p>

<p>I'm looking for an intermediate-level Photoshop courses or workshop that is held during the day time in the Los Angeles area. Prefer an independently run courses (not by colleges) with a professional photoshop expert for instructor. Thanks!</p>

<p>Great! I look forward to joining the class!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I'm not saying Canon 50/1.4 is a bad lens, I've taken many great shots with it, often wide open too. Sigma just did extremely good work whereas Canon doesn't show much interest in updating their lower cost primes.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Having owned one before, I agree that Canon's 50/1.4 is a good lens overall. But not only Sigma has given Canon a run for its money, Sigma has outdone Canon in the 50mm 1.4 line. I suspect that Canon is not going to update its 1.4 anytime soon as an improved version could cannibalize the market for their 50/1.2L. My 2 cents.</p>

<p>It is a solidly built lens. The focus mechanism tends to overstep a touch and steps itself back into focus, at least with my copy. This is unlike Canon USM, which almost always arrives at focus confidently.</p>

<p > </p>

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=3688373">Arie Vandervelden</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/1roll.gif" alt="" /></a>, Aug 07, 2009; 11:46 a.m.<br>

Argh! Just when I thought I'd made up my mind, was gonna get the Canon.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think this Sigma is more than worth the $100 price difference of the Canon 1.4 in terms of optics and built quality.</p>

<p>So after a month of being torn on which 50mm lens to get for my 5DI body, I plunged and gambled my way into buying the Sigma 50mm 1.4 EX DG HSM. It arrived yesterday! Would I get a problematic copy? Would I have to return / exchange the lens for a few times before getting a copy that focuses accurately?</p>

<p>I either have lucked out or that Sigma has addressed the issue(s) that so many buyers complain about in various photography fora. My copy doesn't exhibit any visible front/back focus problem as far as I observe from yesterday's test. So happy! :)</p>

<p>Anybody bought a Sigma 50mm 1.4 recently and also did not experience any issue with its focus?</p>

<p>The images below were taken yesterday at a local big box furniture store while shopping and testing my new lens at the same time. Not much thought went into the compostion, color balance, etc. while taking these photos...I was merely testing its focusing accuracy:</p>

<p>ALL SHOT AT F/1.4, unsharpened, focus trained on the center of the images in most<br /><a href="http://s1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/andrewsoem/?action=view&current=_MG_1558.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/andrewsoem/_MG_1558.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket" /></a> <a href="http://s1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/andrewsoem/?action=view&current=_MG_1544.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/andrewsoem/_MG_1544.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket" /></a> <a href="http://s1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/andrewsoem/?action=view&current=_MG_1531.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/andrewsoem/_MG_1531.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket" /></a> <a href="http://s1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/andrewsoem/?action=view&current=_MG_1519.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/andrewsoem/_MG_1519.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket" /></a> <a href="http://s1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/andrewsoem/?action=view&current=_MG_1511.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af300/andrewsoem/_MG_1511.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket" /></a></p>

<p>I myself am torn on choosing which 50mm I should get for my 5D v.1. I've decided to get the Sigma 50 1.4 despite many reported focusing issues and hope for the best. It seems to perform comparably as well as (or as bad as, depending) the EF 1.2L at half the price of the latter. We'll see...</p>

<p>...what Puppy Face said.</p>

<p>Being originally from that part of the world (born and raised in Java), and having been to Bali and Lombok a few times, the advice from fellow posters above are dead-on right. Humidity is well in the 90's % and going to higher elevation you may encounter foggy conditions early and late in the day. The air after a slight drizzle can be very thick and humid, even in the "dry" season.</p>

<p>Having said that, on-field shooting should not be a concern at all...just wipe your equipment well after a long day outside and store it in a dry place (camera bag is fine). You'll only be there for 2 weeks...won't be an issue. Having silica beads in the bag is helpful, and you can always microwave the beads when they are saturated with moisture (they change color). Have a protective filter on to lessen moisture from entering the lens barrel and to keep condensation on the filter if you happen to move from one climate to another quickly (air-conditioned car and outside).</p>

<p>Sorry for beating a dead horse again...</p>

<p>Jeff, thank you for the explanation!</p>

<p>Somewhile ago, I used to own a Canon EOS 5/A2E. I remember that it had a built-in DOF feature. All one had to do was select the primary and secondary subjects/objects that one wanted to be within the DOF (by focusing on both objects consecutively), and the camera would calculate the aperture for you. I myself never used this feature, but in hindsight it was essentially a built-in DOF calculator.<br>

I wonder if this feature is in any of the newer DSLR. I've only owned and used the 5D and it doesn't have it.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>would any know what causes softness in <strong>photos taking pictures of nature</strong>?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Earthquake?</p>

<p>Can someone sane actually justify the cost of the 1.2L over the 1.4?</p>

<p>Ah, as I thought correctly...Canonites are above the mundane stuff :) Thanks for that link, Josh.</p>

<p>Hi, I'm new to this wonderful joint here. I see that there is a weekly photo thread for Nikon users called "Nikon WedNEsDAy PiC #XX". Being a <a href="http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=canonite">Canonite</a> myself, I'm wondering if there is also a similar weekly thread for Canon users. Not wanting to start a Nikon vs. Canon war here...but I have not been able to find the Canon pic thread if there is any (or Pentax, Olympus, Mamiya, etc. for that matter). Or are we Canonites above that mundane stuff? :)</p>