ok guys thanks for your pm's! i thought id give some more info here for all to read... the big day is september 30th at the manor house in the north ranch at ken carl. the wedding will be around 4 or 5pm. with the reception to fallow there. so regular deal, ceremony, reception, dance, cake cutting and candid of guest. we dont plan to have more than 100 guest. the wedding party will be small like 6 peeps. hope this helps!
thanks, johnny!
Guys lemme know if you need a second shooter.
When life throws you curves, aim for the apex
Current stable: 09 Thruxton \ 09 FZ6S2 Sold List: 97 Ninja500R, 03 SV650K3, 01 Ducati 750Sport, 73 CB350/4, 03 F650GSA, 08 Gixxer600, 03 Gixxer600, 91 VFR750F, 09 KLX250, 06 Thruxton 900, 02 VFR800, 08 Spyder RS, 12 Street TripleR, 09 KLX250S, 16 KTMRC390, 10 F650GS
my Facebook, SpeedShotsOriginally Posted by salsashark
... and you have ANOTHER PM sir!
...Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose, so let me simply add that it's my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V.
Current Ride: 2005 Ducati ST3
Went out to garden of the gods today and snapped a few of my friends evo 10.
Last edited by Matheo; Tue Mar 6th, 2012 at 03:01 AM.
-K7 GSXR 1000-
Few goodies here and there
10.03 @ 147 1.74 60'
Looks cool I like it , watch out on the direct sun shots
Okay opinions on the canon t3i?
www.mo-door.com
https://64degreeracing.com/
2003 VFR800
2007 GSX-R600
2007 R1
2003 R6 Race bike
2010 Ducati SF1098
2016 60th R1
2018 Aprilia Tuono V4 1100RR
2024 Aprilia Tuono Factory Ultra Gold
T3i owns. You might be able to score a deal when the rumored T4i drops.
Have you looked at the nikon D5100?
Edit: Having just read some comparisons, the lack of a internal motor killing the use of AF-S lenses really hurts the 5100 imho, I think I might go canon for this one. Pains me to say it.
Last edited by laspariahs; Tue Mar 6th, 2012 at 08:59 AM.
Why does it pain you to say it?
In all honesty - the current line-up of pro and even enthusiast camera bodies being offered by both Nikon and Canon are pretty much a wash. People who try to have pissing contests over which is better might as well be pissing in the wind - because they offer almost identical high-end quality - just in separate packages.
People are already trying to demonstrate how the new 5D Mark III images can compete with the Nikon D4 by doing frickin' ADU test comparisons on sample portions of test images. I mean... really? When it comes down to "I can't tell the difference without doing a mathematical test"... who gives a crap?
It really comes down to usage/features. Do you need high ISO or high burst? Do you want high MP or lower MP and better detail? Both Canon and Nikon have bodies that fit most markets (outside of medium format) and most budgets. Canon bodies typically cost a little more out of the gate, but their glass is cheaper. Nikon bodies are often cheaper at retail but you'll spend more on glass.
Pick your poison. They both make insanely good products that will take awesome photos.
Another vote for the T3i. I have the T2i and love it!
And now, for those NOT on my Facebook Fanpage (now would be an awesome time to join!) here are a few from my boudoir sessions.
~ Mrs. Pissy Pants ~"Saw It, Wanted It, Had a Fit, Got it!"1998 Grand Cherokee ~ 4.5" lift on 33'sThe Poserific Mall Crawler~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~
2001 Kawi ATV (Da dirty dirty-Sold) ~ 2006 GSXR 600 (Sold) ~ 1998 FZR 600 (Sold) Even the Jeep has been sold. feck.
RIP Gene, 502
Find me on Facebook!
I took a few shots at Benihanas Monday with my friend's t3i and I'm impressed with it.
www.mo-door.com
https://64degreeracing.com/
2003 VFR800
2007 GSX-R600
2007 R1
2003 R6 Race bike
2010 Ducati SF1098
2016 60th R1
2018 Aprilia Tuono V4 1100RR
2024 Aprilia Tuono Factory Ultra Gold
I just prefer Nikon for the most part, the way the bodies handle and feel in my had is better, I cant stand the controls on a canon camera, and I started out on a canon film camera many years ago. Just as you seem to prefer Canon. Also it annoys me that nikon made a camera with out the AF motor, why would they do that? That cuts my lens selection in half.
Nikon glass costs more because it's better, imho.
That's kind of funny to me because even the pros I know who shoot Nikon don't hesitate to concede Canon glass is superior (in fact one of the best known / published wedding photographers in Colorado recently switched from Nikon to Canon for just that reason). It is Nikon's ISO control / lack of grain that they love as a rule comparative to Canon (well, until the 5D MkIII that is).
...Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose, so let me simply add that it's my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V.
Current Ride: 2005 Ducati ST3
Canon has a better selection of lenses, perhaps that's what they mean.
No - pretty sure it was quality.
One pro photog I know who switched said the only thing they've found better than Canon glass was Zeiss in their professional assessment... but Zeiss is just ridiculous stuff when it comes to quality control and perfection in general.
...Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose, so let me simply add that it's my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V.
Current Ride: 2005 Ducati ST3
I doubt that.
Anyways, for some more empirical data here are two reviews of the 24-70 canon/nikkor lenses:
http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/456..._28_ff?start=2
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff...0f28ff?start=2The Nikkor AF-S 24-70 is an impressive standard zooms lens that delivers very sharp and contrasty images. With its fast aperture it allows for low light shooting or alternatively object separation with limited depth of field, where it delivers an unusually smooth bokeh for a zoom lens in this focal range. It is built as solid as you'd expect a pro grade lens to be and its sonic wave driven AF is very fast and silent.
It's not without flaws, though. Distortions are very high at the wide end, but at least they are of uniform shape and thus can be corrected in software if required. CAs are very high, too, but just like distortions can easily be corrected in software (in fact most current Nikon DSLRs do this already if you shoot JPGs). The wavy image field at the low end might be an issue if you shoot flat objects and last but not least the lens is not exactly cheap.
However, in summary the Nikkor 24-70 currently sets the benchmark for F-mount FX standard zoom lenses.
And they rate the nikkor higher in every category. It's just one lens though, though it happens to be my favorite. They even rate the price/performance ratio higher on the nikkor and it does cost 500 more.The Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 USM L is an impressive zoom lens upon first contact but it stayed somewhat short of the high expectations with respect to its optical characteristics. It can certainly produce sharp images if you know how to handle it but the pronounced field curvature at the wide end is a faux-pas which can often spoil the game. The vignetting and distortion characteristic is above average for a lens in this class. Lateral CAs are surprisingly well controlled and not field relevant. The quality of the bokeh is usually decent but not without flaws in certain situations.
A shining aspect is the mechanical quality of the lens but you expect no less from such a professional grade lens (optical sample variations seem to be an issue though). The AF is also highly impressive in terms of speed and also accuracy.
All-in-all we'd say that Canon should think about an update - it terms of price/performance it's not really an obvious choice on a full format DSLR.
Last edited by laspariahs; Thu Mar 8th, 2012 at 10:40 AM.
I'm just the messenger man... not the pros who I know who have made the switch and what they told me as to the why of it.
I guess it's like motorcycles... you find your brand and you stick to it. I've been a Canon user since my AE1 days to my EOS 650 to my current one... I've always loved their glass quality. Never failed me to date.
...Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose, so let me simply add that it's my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V.
Current Ride: 2005 Ducati ST3
It's cool I started off with an Elan II, switched to a used nikon F5 and never looked back.
The high ISO/low noise performance of the new Nikon bodies are amazing. A few years ago with my low end D50 body I would consider ISO 800 to be high, my D7000 doesn't even show grain at 1600.
When life throws you curves, aim for the apex
Current stable: 09 Thruxton \ 09 FZ6S2 Sold List: 97 Ninja500R, 03 SV650K3, 01 Ducati 750Sport, 73 CB350/4, 03 F650GSA, 08 Gixxer600, 03 Gixxer600, 91 VFR750F, 09 KLX250, 06 Thruxton 900, 02 VFR800, 08 Spyder RS, 12 Street TripleR, 09 KLX250S, 16 KTMRC390, 10 F650GS
my Facebook, SpeedShots
Hahaha. Another Nikon/Canon battle?
Seriously - you guys need a new hobby. And who are "they" anyway? Do your own comparisons kids...
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ple-Crops.aspx
Besides, no crop sensor or FF body currently in the pro-sumer market has the resolving power to decipher nominal optical flaws between the luxury lenses made by either manufacturer. MF bodies are a different story - but since neither Canon or Nikon make them, the point is moot. Furthermore, none of us is the caliber of photographer to make such claims as "Your Nikon shots suck - my Canon photos are better cause of mAH LEET GLASS!"
Go take photos. Chose whatever brand you want, and stop pretending it's "better" than the competition's version. Seriously - this brand superiority crap is really getting tired.
Photos talk - and bullshit posts smack on internet forums.
Well I just looked myself, and I think the nikkor is notably sharper with less distortion.Hahaha. Another Nikon/Canon battle?
Seriously - you guys need a new hobby. And who are "they" anyway? Do your own comparisons kids...
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ple-Crops.aspx
Besides, no crop sensor or FF body currently in the pro-sumer market has the resolving power to decipher nominal optical flaws between the luxury lenses made by either manufacturer. MF bodies are a different story - but since neither Canon or Nikon make them, the point is moot. Furthermore, none of us is the caliber of photographer to make such claims as "Your Nikon shots suck - my Canon photos are better cause of mAH LEET GLASS!"
Go take photos. Chose whatever brand you want, and stop pretending it's "better" than the competition's version. Seriously - this brand superiority crap is really getting tired.
Photos talk - and bullshit posts smack on internet forums.
WTF else are we supposed to argue about when we are bored? This is an internet forum.
Nikon4lyfehahahahha
Plus all this from the guy who posted the "d800" video? Really, no place to talk.
Meh - not really an accurate statement. I prefer whatever suits my needs at a given time. My primary shooting requirements are astrophotography and high-ISO for event work like weddings, and other low-light projects. From my personal research (not blogs or forums), I found the noise levels in the 5D2 (and now 5D3) to be better than the Nikon equivalent.
I honestly was a mouse-click away from making a d800 preorder, but some of the higher ISO shots trickling out had me a little worried.
I think I'm pretty objective in my analysis of photo gear - and I can honestly say the detail in the lower ISO sample photos coming from the d800 pretty much blow away anything I've seen in the class/price-range. But when pushed beyond ISO 800, the samples leave a lot to be desired. The old pixel-pack vs. noise control issue really starts to rear it's head.
That said, it's stellar low ISO performance will make the d800 a leader in studio photography in the near future (at least in my opinion). Canon will need to step it up if they want to compete in that market, especially at $2,999.
Well I bought the D700 because from my personal research it was better than the 5dmII at high iso....
Also the D800's high iso performance bothers you? Seriously? I was worried, but after looking at the photos I've seen I'm no longer concerned at all and pulled the trigger on the amazon preorder today when it popped up. In fact some people are claiming when it's downsampled to 16mp like the D4, it's almost as good, 1/3rd stop worse. I don't know about that though, nikon is claiming at 36mp it's as good as the D700, which if true will be astounding, imho.
Anyways.
Last edited by laspariahs; Thu Mar 8th, 2012 at 06:27 PM.
Just "bothers me" in that I like detail in low light situations. As (subjective) tests show - the 5D3 is more on par with the d4 than the d800...
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7205/6...741e0853_o.jpg
The 5D3 is about a half-stop behind the d4 -a little less at certain ISOs. The fact that it can hold up against Nikon's flagship $6000 body says a lot in my book.
Are you saying the d800 is better than the d4? Curious.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
