Upgrading to Canon! Lenses?

[prodigy2k7]

Yea I like how he starts going into brand vs brand again...

 

[inTempus]

...and can anyone name one of the most popular wedding cameras on the market right now?

Yup, the 5D2.

Rumor has it that it still out sells the D700. If it doesn't out sell it, it certainly keeps pace with it.

Gee, I wonder why that is. Could it be a gaggle of incompetent photographers that don't know any better and need to read Derrel's rambling diatribes against it, or could it be the camera performs admirably and thus is so popular?

 

[inTempus]

Yea I like how he starts going into brand vs brand again...

He's a one trick pony.

Notice how he avoided answering my question about his "bad technique" comment. I think I stumped him. Now that I've called him out on it, he'll have to dream something up. I can't wait to read it.

 

[Derrel]

The key here is "Personal Decision"

Velocity = distance / time

Whether a particular person is a fast or a slow runner, the formula doesn't change... the outcome does. The faster or slower the bride... the equipment.. the reaction time of the photographer... As you pointed out, there are always variables .... variables unforeseen.



Hence..

If I can shoot roughly 80% of the time using the method and achieve proper focus, I see no issue with using the method.

These are just numbers... whether or not it matters enough to worry about is a personal decision. (I'll keep mine to myself)

That's the beauty of human skill and intelligence... If everything fit nicely into a formula, then life would be boring and photography would be as easy as aiming at the toilet.


Still the same old place around here... eh.

Man, and I was hoping you'd show off those impressive mathematics skills one more time, to prove how your theory works out in the real world. Man, you disappointed us all...sob,sob. I'm so sad that you decided to keep your opinion to yourself. I was hoping for a huge dose of enlightenment, as well as some more dazzling by your incredible skills with number-crunching.

 

[usayit]

Man, and I was hoping you'd show off those impressive mathematics skills one more time, to prove how your theory works out in the real world. Man, you disappointed us all...sob,sob. I'm so sad that you decided to keep your opinion to yourself. I was hoping for a huge dose of enlightenment, as well as some more dazzling by your incredible skills with number-crunching.

Whatever man...... you completely missed the point. Mathematically and in practice (as InTempus pointed out) focus-recompose is a viable method if used properly... with clear knowledgeable intent.

Its easier to argue black or white rather than shades of grey... its exactly why you do it all the time. Its why you always link those sites that make a definite statement that backs just your argument while ignoring all others.. (including my mathematical explanation). You are unwilling to discuss further so you belittle it... just like you do with other threads which some users disagree with you.

Nothing in life is 100%.. especially a subjective matter as photography and art. It pisses you off when someone else disagrees with you because they live in a different shade of grey and you... black or white... wrong or right... MTFs vs Photos..

Reason why I don't give you my opinion on said subject is because (just like in the past) it exposes one to your belittling arguments and distracts from the whole point of the discussion (I recall the "fanboy" thread...) It sucks the enjoyment of having such discussions.

So just in past threads... I end with.... simply

Get A Life.





Oh btw... If the focus error is a few cm, some talented photographers simply lean back a little when they recompose... ooooOOooo.. another shade of grey.