August 01, 2014, 04:46:52 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - neuroanatomist

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 898
Canon General / Re: What do you Cheap Out On?
« on: July 31, 2014, 07:25:58 PM »
Actually I'd recommend getting the Phottix aeon or Hahnel Giga T instead. For a few more dollars (still half that of Canon) you'd get an RF intervalometer, or you can connect it directly if you want more reliability. The wireless option provides you with a great remote trigger so you can be in the pics.
Just doubles the versatility.


I have the hähnel Giga T Pro II and it's excellent.  Vello has a wireless version of the ShutterBoss, but I went with the hähnel version ofer the other options for the small size of the transmitter.  It's certainly not my little Canon RC-1, but that doesn't work with the 1D X  :'( .  The hähnel RF release is the only transmitter small enough to conceal in my hand if I'm in the shot.

Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: July 31, 2014, 07:20:21 PM »
That's a tough call.  Right now, I'd say the least-used piece of kit (counting only items of significant cost, so that eliminates things like a ColorRight WB filter, the spiked feet for my RRS TVC-33, etc.) would be my PocketWizard setup - MiniTT1, pair of FlexTT5's, AC3, and a PowerMC2. 

Generally, if I'm not using it and don't plan on using it in the future, I sell it.  Putting my money where my mouth is (or rather, in my wallet where it belongs), I'm sitting in a Starbucks finishing my mocha after selling a couple of surplus Wimberley P-20 lens plates to a Craigslist buyer 5 minutes ago.  I had planned on keeping one of them (I don't plan on buying the new 100-400L if it shows up, but who knows?!).  However, I've got RRS L84 plates instead of the Wimberley versions for my 70-200 II and 70-300L, and they're a bit lighter and have a 1/4"-20 socket (which came in handy once), so if I do get another lens which needs that size, I'll just order the RRS plate.

To that some point soon I'll take some product pics of the PW set, and sell that.

Of gear that I intend to be part of my active kit....EF 40 mm f/2.8 pancake.

I use mine fairly frequently.  Often I find myself going to an event expecting to be a bit distant from much of the action,  and bringing the 70-200 II.  I could bring the 24-70 II, but that would mean wearing the lens on a belt pouch or going back to a backback left at a seat.  Instead, I slip the 40/2.8 into a pocket - the camera + 70-200 is on a BR strap connected to the lens plate, and if I need a wider AoV than 70mm, I just leave the telezoom hanging from the strap and use the pancake lens.

Photo backpack.  It just sits in the closet because it's too cumbersome to shoot out of, and I never find myself in a position to carry everything I own.
Interesting - that's probably the one piece of (non-Canon) gear I use the most.  I have a shoulder bag for street / studio shooting, but my Lowepro Flipside 400AW is my constant companion when I shoot outdoors.

I lost you at backpack.  Singular.  Maybe any one of my many backpacks and bags would fall into the 'least used' categoty by itself (probably the Lowepro Toploader Pro 70 AW, since that works with the 70-300L but all my other body+lens combos fit in the shorter 65 AW or the longer 75 AW).  That's why I have so many bags/packs.

I also agree that if a user sees something like C+3+2 illuminated together and he must interpret this as C5, then this seem a pretty clumsy solution for a body like 1Dx.

But I would love to see more C modes

Exactly - if Canon is going to implement more than three customers, they will want a specific display by number for each of them.  It's worth noting that the 1D X is the first 1-series body to offer C# modes.

Absolutely agree that more would be better…

EOS Bodies / Re: One other hoped-for feature on the 7D2
« on: July 31, 2014, 04:48:28 PM »
...perhaps a better name could be AvTv, but it is rather called M in the past as there was no auto-iso at the moment the industry called this M

Pentax has a TAv mode (Av + Tv), as someone else pointed out in this thread or another, in addition to M mode.

Personally, I don't care what it's called (Nikon uses different symbols for Av and Tv), as long as the mode is available!

+1 on more C# modes. And yes they could solve that on the 1Dx as it there is fully digital, so only software and not depending on a dial button with fix choices on top. The display issue could be solved as follow:
1: C1
2: C2
3: C3
4: C3+C1
5: C3+C2
6: C3+C2+C1

That seems logical to me to follow, and is a changement that just would need only a firmware modification.

Sorry, but that's not the case (as I stated above).  It's not 'fully digital' as the digits used for the Cn settings are not the variable 7-segment numerals used for exposure settings, etc.   The mode indicators in the VF are dedicated illuminated 'cut-outs' for Av, Tv, M, P, and a C with three separate numerals (1,2,3) under it. 

Similarly, the mode display on the top LCD is 'baked in' to the hardware.  Only on the main LCD (where images are displayed) could additional settings be shown, but that would obviously lead to confusion.

I do get what you're saying (1+3=4) but it won't happen.  The 1-series is all about usability, a kludge like lighting up the C and more than one of the numerals simply won't fly.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 30, 2014, 09:47:12 PM »
This conflicts with the whole idea of having ISO anyway (the "s" being for standardization). If it were different between film and digital, light meters, etc. wouldn't work properly.

You might think so, but in fact, they are governor by different standards (which is actually what the 'S' stands for, lots of different standards for lots of different things).  ISO 6, ISO 2240, and ISO 5800 define speed for B&W negative, color reversal, and color negative film, respectively.  ISO 12232 governs sensitivity for digital sensors.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 30, 2014, 03:06:14 PM »
... I guess I should be shooting the subject a 1/3 second....

That might work...if you're a pro.  Are you a pro?  Are you??

I am a pro..... just not a photography pro...

You caught me in an edit…  :)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 30, 2014, 02:50:41 PM »
... I guess I should be shooting the subject a 1/3 second....

That might work...if you're a pro who earns his living from photography.  Are you a pro?  Are you??


EOS Bodies / Re: Canon to Make a Big Splash at Photokina? [CR2]
« on: July 30, 2014, 02:13:57 PM »
Yes, but this doesn't preclude EF lenses being 'cropped'. Would be nice as a type of digital TC. However knowing Canon's marketing policies, it's almost definitely not going to happen.

A 'digital TC'?  Nope.  Canon has very nice optical TCs they'll happily sell you for a few hundred bucks.  It's likely Canon will put f/8 AF into the 7DII, the better to induce people to buy a TC to go with their 100-400L... 

EOS Bodies / Re: One other hoped-for feature on the 7D2
« on: July 30, 2014, 01:50:52 PM »
This is kinda schisophrenic, to put some of settings in manual mode to auto mode, and then still with manual mode wanting other settings to compensate for this mixture. You really don´t know what you want, right?
You can do what you want in AV or TV modes. With manual, you are in charge, you have nothing to compensate, and if they allowed some glitch or stupid customers request of auto ISO at manual mode, than it will be everything messed up.

Couldn't disagree more.  M mode with Auto ISO is like aperture and shutter priority.  I select the DoF I need and the necessary shutter speed to stop (or show) motion, and I get a metered exposure in rapidly changing light.  Being able to apply EC to bias the metering is plus.

No, I actually understand your needs, would be happy to have this program in machines, but why in the world should this be in Manual mode? Manual is called manual, because it actually IS manual. I´d add your needs to some other program. Messing it all with EC + auto ISO is really wicked to want in manual mode.

And why not remove the metering indicator and focus confirmation in M mode while we're at it, eh? Hey why not have it disable ALL electronics while in M mode after all it should be pure manual, right??  :P

This is very low. You're making it extreme. I just want it to work as manual program. The metering is there to show what camera thinks of the scene. Not what you have to do. With manual mode and even other modes I rely more on histogram than on exposure meter. Automatic is not manual any more. It deserves to fall under program mode.

Wicked?   :o

Simple solution for you – don't set the ISO to Auto. It's not like that's mandatory.  Since Auto ISO is available in the other modes, why not M?  Or perhaps do away with Auto the good old days of interchangeable sensors, a different one for every ISO and WB, and a limited number of exposures per sensor.  What was that called again?   ;)

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 30, 2014, 01:35:49 PM »
"What should I have done to have avoided using ISO12800?" The only advice I got from anyone is to get a camera that shoots better at high ISO.... so if 12800 is bad, then 25,600 must be evil and 51,200 would make me the spawn of Satan...

so perhaps someone else can answer this question.... Why does my use of technology to shoot at ISO12800 make me a bad photographer, yet someone else`s use of technology to shoot with an additional 2 stops of DR make them a great photographer?

The one answer you got for your first question – get a camera with better high ISO performance, is one reasonable answer (even if only renting to meet an occasional need).  With a current Canon FF body you could shoot at ISO 25600 and still have less noise, allowing you an extra stop to 'spend' on shutter speed or DoF.  Depending on your RAW conversion software (I know you said that was SOOC JPG, but you also shoot RAW), with the 60D you could have underexposed by a stop or so, pushed in post, and used the best available NR tools (DxO PRIME, for example), and that might have been better, but might not.

As to your second question, the answer is bias - if you think more DR at low ISO is important to you (especially if you spent a lot of money to get it), but you don't shoot at high ISO, then more DR is critical for your professional photography, but less noise and more DR at very high ISO is a technological crutch for unskilled amatur pichur takers like us.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon to Make a Big Splash at Photokina? [CR2]
« on: July 30, 2014, 12:47:34 PM »
Hey neuroanatomist, do you handhold your 600mm f/4 L II IS?

Reasonably often, yes.  I walk/hike with the lens carried on a BR strap, and shoot as I walk.  I usually have a monopod clipped to my belt, so if I'm going to be stationary for a while I'll use that to support the lens.  That sort of thing is primarily spring/summer/fall.  In winter, when I'm shooting raptors, I usually pick a spot and set up the tripod and gimbal head.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 30, 2014, 11:47:22 AM »
Would I for performances? Yes, and I have, but 12800 as a requirement to get good shots? Are you kidding me?

A requirement, for all performance photography?  Who suggested that?  Don Haines posted a shot, and asked what you would do to avoid using ISO 12800 under those conditions.  So, as the expert, highly compensated photographer you claim to be, what would you have done in 1.33 EV of lighting at f/1.4, with your shutter speed already down to 1/25 s?   Your pithy answer?  "Learn how to do a job right... Don't use current tech to make up for not knowing what you're doing."  Nice.  Helpful, too.

I still haven't seen your work, your site

Is one mouse click really so challenging?  That's a pretty sad excuse.

I have a job to do, and I'lll get back to it.

Where have I read that before?

All the best.

Same to you.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: DXO uh-oh?
« on: July 30, 2014, 11:33:08 AM »
That's the 'I don't want to shoot what you shoot, so why should you?' non-argument. Shooting under cloudy conditions is one example - not the only one (in dense woodland is another I've given). Shooting in overcast conditions can actually be more visually appealing, depending on a lot of things - it's lower contrast (we don't all like high contrast all the time) and the colours are generally less tinted (the light being whiter than direct sunlight, especially at the ends of the day). That's obviously my opinion, but your statement is just as subjective. Basically, we don't all have the same tastes, so if some of us want cameras to do something better for what we want, who are you to call it invalid?

Does anyone shoot flying birds in cloudy conditions besides me?  A few other photographers, apparently, and some in more interesting locations than places to which I can drag my three kids.  But, they shoot for NatGeo, so what do they know?   ::)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon to Make a Big Splash at Photokina? [CR2]
« on: July 30, 2014, 11:17:39 AM »
Two years ago, I was salivating for a new 100-400L.  Now, I'm not sure I'll buy one even if it comes out. I recently sold my 100-400 due to lack of use.  The 70-300L delivers excellent IQ and is a very convenient size for travel.  When I need a longer focal length, I use the 600/4L IS II. 

But, I hope Canon releases a new 100-400L - when the current was my primary birding lens, I was very happy with it.

The more "1DX" they put into the 7D Mark II, the more I will like it!   8)

What if most of what the 1D X they put in the 7DII is retail cost?   :o  ;)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 898