proudfather

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jun 17, 2004
About me:

Canon 5Dmkiii and mkIV
Canon 200/2 with IS
Canon 500/4 with IS
Canon 70-200/2.8 ii with IS
Canon 135/2
Canon 85/1.2 ii
Canon 17-40/4
Canon 400/5.6
Canon 100-400/4-5.6 with IS
Canon 70-300/3.5-5.6L with IS
Canon 24-70/2.8
Canon 100/2.8 Macro
Canon 50/1.4
Canon 16-35/4
Samyang 14/2.8

Comments

Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

Things that strike me as peculiar:

1. Both photographers presumably took dozens if not more images and yet they coincidentally happened to choose the exact same image to edit and post.

2. We are told they are in different locations and would expect slight parallax to occur. And in fact the water angles do change. I would expect the lighthouse and mist angles to change as well, which they do not.

3. They both were shooting 600 mm lenses. OK, that's not so far-fetched and I'll give them that one.

4. The person who originally publicized this coincidence mysteriously removed her post/vanished.

5. Where's the other photographer? I want to see the fact that he, too, possesses a series of RAW files.

If both were shooting ultrawide angle lenses it might be more believable IMO. But at 600 mm, a change in even the slightest angle would have significant impact on composition. So, I don't know, call me pessimistic but I just ain't seeing it.

Link | Posted on Mar 8, 2018 at 03:05 UTC as 28th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

Shlomo Goldwasser: In a world of fake news and people doing everything to gain publicity, one shouldn't jump at believing news like this. The 5-7 fps might sound like a hard one to pull off for the wave timing, but if it was staged and they were synching burst shooting for 5-10 minutes it would be possible to get numerous very close/exact matches.

The very fact the photographer information is tagged to this post makes it smell fishier than the seaside shot would otherwise suggest. I mean, the odds of this happening are even smaller than the post explains. This is an approximate equation:

odds of shooting same object X odds of shooting at same millisecond X odds at using near-identical camera settings X odds of same focal length X odds of nearly exact same perspective X odds of both being professional photographers X odds of both posting it online x odds of someone noticing the similarity x odds of both having websites that could use free publicity

When something is too good to be true, it usually is.

And the person who originally called him out on the carpet about it "mysteriously disappeared," LOL.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 19:39 UTC
In reply to:

Shlomo Goldwasser: In a world of fake news and people doing everything to gain publicity, one shouldn't jump at believing news like this. The 5-7 fps might sound like a hard one to pull off for the wave timing, but if it was staged and they were synching burst shooting for 5-10 minutes it would be possible to get numerous very close/exact matches.

The very fact the photographer information is tagged to this post makes it smell fishier than the seaside shot would otherwise suggest. I mean, the odds of this happening are even smaller than the post explains. This is an approximate equation:

odds of shooting same object X odds of shooting at same millisecond X odds at using near-identical camera settings X odds of same focal length X odds of nearly exact same perspective X odds of both being professional photographers X odds of both posting it online x odds of someone noticing the similarity x odds of both having websites that could use free publicity

When something is too good to be true, it usually is.

Couple that with the fact that both togs must've taken innumerable images. The fact that they just so happened to select the same images out of their sets would be striking as well.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 19:37 UTC

I need to see that the other photographer has his own RAW files for confirmation. Otherwise I have a difficult time believing that the water changed as much as it did while the crashing waves and stationary light house did not.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2018 at 19:13 UTC as 49th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Cariboo: Double Rainbow a "wedding" photo? UGH!!! Poorly composed, nothing burger "wedding" image of a weather event. Put a deer in place of the white dressed person & it's a wildlife image. Replace her with a red car & it's car image. Replace her with tree & it's a landscape. I don't see or get the "wedding" aspect & see it more as just a way to add pseudo drama to a photo of a woman in a white dress. This type of "wedding" imagery is just silly to me & again, to me, it's not even well composed. Many other "better" images in the 9 IMO, but oh well, people like rainbows & fakery.

Definitely subjective. I think it's an ingenious image. Wedding photographers nowadays have to be portrait photographers, sports photographers, landscape photographers, wildlife photographers, child photographers, and macro photographers. And they have to think quick and be creative, not top mention all the technical know-how. The winner took advantage of a beautiful opportunity, one that will last for the couples' enjoyment, which is ultimately the goal....to please the clients.

Link | Posted on Mar 5, 2018 at 20:03 UTC

I'm holding out for an EOS phone.

Link | Posted on Mar 2, 2018 at 18:24 UTC as 99th comment | 1 reply

Does anybody know the slowest shutter that can be used for stills when using drones? For example, could you blur a waterfall?

I have no use for video but have been considering a drone for still photography and this new DJI may be the reason to pursue it.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 20:26 UTC as 1st comment

Why would any photographer put their full resolution images on the web anyway? Especially without watermarking.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2018 at 20:05 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply
On article Kodak shows off Super 8 camera in first sample reel (210 comments in total)

I'm sure you could create that old vintage look in digital at post.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2018 at 22:26 UTC as 79th comment | 1 reply

I don't own a drone but I think it'd be great if this device could also act as a touch-screen device with the DJI App to use while flying as well.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 19:57 UTC as 19th comment
In reply to:

proudfather: It's nice to know my camera will survive. But in those types of conditions I'm more worried about getting water smudges on my front element rather than the camera itself. I've had images ruined because of it. And when it's raining like that, it's tough finding dry material to wipe it clean with. umbrellas are the best bet but they can be cumbersome.

Do they make them for bubble front elements like the 11-24 Canon?

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 22:17 UTC
In reply to:

D200_4me: I always carry a new kitchen garbage bag with me (folded up in my backpack or shoulder bag), despite any manufacturer's claim of water resistance, just in case. I know some people actually making a living from photography may need to be in the rain sometimes, but this is a hobby for me, so when the rain comes down, my umbrella goes up....or my camera goes in the backpack with rain cover or as a last resort, completely wrapped in a plastic bag. It's not worth the risk for me, even with my Nikon DSLR bodies.

I always claim the shower caps when I stay in hotels for that reason.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 22:13 UTC

It's nice to know my camera will survive. But in those types of conditions I'm more worried about getting water smudges on my front element rather than the camera itself. I've had images ruined because of it. And when it's raining like that, it's tough finding dry material to wipe it clean with. umbrellas are the best bet but they can be cumbersome.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 21:57 UTC as 85th comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

proudfather: Maybe Canon, Nikon, and Sony will start making their own phones to include their cameras...or partner with other cell phone manufactures to incorporate their camera technologies into them.

Maybe they'll partner with other cell phone manufacturers, or develop new technologies for themselves. Tech companies have to adapt to changing markets if they intend to survive. Canon & Nikon adapted to digital when film became a thing of the past. Now DSLR's may become a thing of the past (though doubtful in my mind). So they have to respond, which they have already started doing in their efforts with mirrorless.

Think of the many other companies that have either adapted or went bankrupt. Others survive by diversifying such that if one sector fails, they still have the others. Canon and Nikon make a host of optics and computer equipment, not just cameras. GoPro, Kodak, Fuji, etc.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 18:27 UTC
In reply to:

proudfather: Maybe Canon, Nikon, and Sony will start making their own phones to include their cameras...or partner with other cell phone manufactures to incorporate their camera technologies into them.

Maybe Canon and Nikon will start making their own phones to include their cameras...or partner with other cell phone manufactures to incorporate their camera technologies into them.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 15:42 UTC
In reply to:

proudfather: Maybe Canon, Nikon, and Sony will start making their own phones to include their cameras...or partner with other cell phone manufactures to incorporate their camera technologies into them.

Nikon and Canon don't.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 15:01 UTC

Maybe Canon, Nikon, and Sony will start making their own phones to include their cameras...or partner with other cell phone manufactures to incorporate their camera technologies into them.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2018 at 19:05 UTC as 52nd comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

proudfather: Manual focus looks tricky without a distance scale given no focus peaking or viewfinder mag on Canon compared to Sony mirrorless, aside from live view. I have the manual focus Rokinon which is easy given my style of shooting....set it at infinity and forget it.

Yes, I dislike focus by wire. On my 14 mm Rokinon, I have marked the 'true' infinity setting and just leave it there for landscapes, as I do with the Canon 16-35/4. My only gripe with the Rokinon is lack of aperture communication with the body, which is minor but would be nice to have.

Ebrahim, congratulations on your focusing abilities. I'm envious. I am a radiologist though, whose career depends on good vision. So I don't believe my inaccuracies in manual focusing have anything to do with good vision.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2018 at 17:19 UTC

Manual focus looks tricky without a distance scale given no focus peaking or viewfinder mag on Canon compared to Sony mirrorless, aside from live view. I have the manual focus Rokinon which is easy given my style of shooting....set it at infinity and forget it.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2018 at 16:35 UTC as 15th comment | 3 replies
On article Canon EOS M100 review (780 comments in total)

This may be a fine camera but the specs make me appreciate my Sony a6000 even more because, as old as it is, it's cheaper, has an evf, hot shoe, more frames per second, and greater battery life. And I've come to admire Sony sensors for their DR.

In defense of the new Canon, it's a tad smaller, lighter, and has touchscreen.

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2017 at 15:36 UTC as 131st comment | 4 replies
Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »