January 31, 2015, 11:39:47 PM

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 - infared

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 70
1
EOS Bodies / Re: POLL: How many mp do you want anyway?
« on: Today at 08:33:57 AM »
25MB is fine with me...I just want black blacks, and increase DR.
I have a 5DIII....I will not be buying one of the 50MP cameras...and I doubt that I see a 5DIV in my future.
The camera I own is REALLY quite suitable for my needs.   Does it compare to some newer offerings out there...no..but at this point if you have a good photograph...no one is really going to notice!
...but that is no excuse for Canon not to improve.

2
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Firmware: EOS 5D Mark III Version 1.3.3
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:55:08 PM »
I'm concerned about what Canon are doing in the background with this f/w "upgrade", what they aren't saying. Alarms for me include the fact that it's something you can't unroll, once this is in, that's it. No going back.

I also read somewhere that they are taking a hard line with third party batteries - has anyone spotted anything weird with using them after this update has been applied? I have six batteries and three of them are (good quality) third party units from Calumet and Hahnel. I don't want them mucking around with what battery I choose to put in my camera.
Just checked with the new firmware installed on my 5D III.
I have 3rd-party batteries and they work fine.  I get the same message that I always got... "! Cannot Communicate with this battery. Use this battery?" . ...to which I reply OK and the battery then operates the camera perfectly but I do not get read out of the charge on the battery..that is the only downside but that is the way my 3rd-party batteries have always operated with my camera.

3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Firmware: EOS 5D Mark III Version 1.3.3
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:50:39 PM »
The Canon website says the firmware file specifically will be 18.94MB.

Does the firmware totally replace the previous firmware or is this 19mb just an update?  That's a lot of data

I never realized these firmware files were so big.

That is what their website and my computer say for the file size.
Replacing or updating the firmware...I have no idea....it just changes to the new version.

4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Firmware: EOS 5D Mark III Version 1.3.3
« on: January 29, 2015, 11:59:46 AM »
FYI ...I do not use ML (too afraid   :P)...so I updated my 5DMarkIII using a CF card. I use Mac operating system.  I downloaded the update and followed the instructions in the instruction file...but Canon has it wrong, (at least to my reckoning). You would think that they could get something this simple right. The instructions say to download the version 1.3.3. I use OS 10.9.5.
The Canon instructions say to check the file size of the downloaded file on your desktop with the specification for the file size on the Canon website. Just so you know...they do not match up.  At least they did not on my iMac. The Canon website says the firmware file specifically will be 18.94MB. My firmware update file was 17.99MB.   So if you are detail oriented...don't be alarmed...Canon is off by 1MB on the file size.   I thought that maybe Canon was referring to the whole download, which includes the instruction file...but that doesn't match up either!  LOL! The whole download (firmware and instruction file) is 19.9MB.
So if the actual firmware file that you load on the CF card "5D300133.FIR" is 17.99MB rounded off to 18MB..you are good to go.
If anyone even reads the instructions anyway!!!! LOL!  :D

5
Photography Technique / Re: Which eye do you use?
« on: January 29, 2015, 05:51:19 AM »
Well...I am a proponent of using the eye that you have with you. ::)

6
Reviews / Re: Review: Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/15mm
« on: January 26, 2015, 06:59:53 PM »
I know that the Zeiss is an incredible lens...and that everything that Dustin says about it is true as I researched it thoroughly.  Brilliant optic!  I pained over whether to purchase it or not and in the end I purchased the Canon 17mm TSE f/4 II. I could not justify owning both....and even though the coverage was not as wide* as the Zeiss 15mm,  with the TSE 17mm II option, which has comparable sharpness and contrast to the Zeiss.  It also has a lower cost and of course complete tilt/shift capabilities...so I decided to go that route. I do not do any astro photography so the f/2.8 of the Zeiss was not that much of a draw for my decision. The good thing is, I still get to drool over the Zeiss because I do not have one! LOL!

*the coverage can actually be wider and have less distortion with the TSE 17mm II if you bracket your shots while using the shift capability of the lens and then construct (stitch) the image with software.  Another plus that I found for my uses too, is that I can connect my 1.4x III to the lens 24mm f/5.6 TSE lens. (with a very slight degradation in image quality). I would never have considered adding a tele-extender to a UWA lens... but it works quite well and the image quality is very good..much better than I expected!  I already had the 1.4x III so the TSE 17mm II just became a much more versatile purchase for my photographic needs.

7
Sports / Re: Motion Blur (on purpose) in Sports Photos
« on: January 26, 2015, 07:15:38 AM »
I shot this image at a Graffiti Art Installation at The Museum of the City of New York (sorry. It's not sports)...those are all spray-paint cans in the background. I also did not shoot this with my Canon system.
I shot it with a camera with IBIS. IBIS was on. I think that the IBIS caused the effect on the subject as it is not a straight "expected" blur... Interesting though. I shot slow and the IBIS froze the paint cans...but it gave this wonderful "rubberized" effect to my dapper subject!

8
Lenses / Re: Prime vs zoom for landscape?
« on: January 26, 2015, 05:15:54 AM »
What do you guys prefer? The IQ of a prime is hard to beat, but the flexibility of a zoom seems more practical, especially since it's harder to zoom in and out w/ just your feet in the wilderness. Is the IQ of a wideangle prime worth it vs the flexibility of a wideangle zoom?
I don't think you're going to find much that will beat the 16-35 f/4 IS these days - at least on anything but distortion, which isn't all that important for landscape.

I have to agree...I sold my 16-35 f/2.8II to buy the 16-35 f/4 IS.  (Even wash financially...for ONCE, LOL!). It's a killer lens for the money...so much so that I sold my beloved 21mm Zeiss 2.8. I just stopped using it. I felt that the image quality was comparable, and with the Canon I had a full range zoom,  AF and IS.  I don't miss the extra f stop..and to talk about low DOF on lenses in this range is just silly in my book. That was a lot of cash tied up in something I had to let go of.  I know that some purists would find that to be blasphemous! LOL! ...but it's just silly not to grab the new Canon...there is just so much more lens in your hand for less money.   THAT NEVER HAPPENS!

9
Lenses / Re: Auto Focus MicroAdjust--Why the Stigma?
« on: January 25, 2015, 07:20:49 AM »
Oh..oh...oh..I misunderstood the topic..I thought it said:

Re: Auto Focus MicroAdjust--Why the Sigma?

  :P

(Couldn't resist, it was just too tempting! I am actually a fan of, and own the Sigma 50mm and 35mm Arts).

Yes ...mine are both adjusted via the Stigma Dock.  8)

I am a fan of AFMA ...it's just another tool to get us where we need to be. It's all good. Take it or leave it.
WARNING: Yes...it can get complicated and take untold amounts of time out of your life AND sometimes not provide a complete solution to to the problem.
Good luck with your journey.

10
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG Art
« on: January 23, 2015, 09:21:06 AM »
And I could always use my 40mm if I want something light.

I still don't "get" the 40. I mean, I own it. I've used it. But it mostly sits on my desk. Just not my thing, but if I was walking around a lot more yeah, it's a no-brainer to drop in the bag or even a pocket!

To be honest, 40mm is not my thing but there are certain days that a dslr is just heavy to have, those days are the days i take my 40mm just in case i need to take some photo.

On those days I just leave the beast at home and take my MicroFourThirds Kit. It's pure fun. ;D

11
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG Art
« on: January 23, 2015, 09:18:41 AM »
The sigma 50art was voted lens of the year by the dpreview Readers choice
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8136019716/2014-readers-polls-the-results-are-in?slide=3


I assume it is voted by people that actually used it...

I use it, love it AND cast my vote for it on DPReview!  :-X
GREAT lens.

12
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG Art
« on: January 21, 2015, 11:43:13 AM »

4. I think Dustin Abbott does great reviews. I have complemented him on every review he has done...but ...on this one...it was extremely short and based on all of his other reviews he has done I think this one was half-hearted.  No harm... no foul...I just think that to avoid all the controversy regarding this lens's AF etc. and to touch on the attributes...he decided to stick his foot in the water and then just get out. That's OK..this lens is complicated on many levels.


This review is made by Justin VanLeeuwen and not by Dustin Abbott (whose reviews are on his own blog)

Best

Whoa...thanks for correcting me!...I will fix that...no wonder I thought I was different! DUH

Dustin...Justin... what's confusing about that ;D

Sorry about that buddy.  Actually, I thought it was your review, but something seemed off!  LOL! Sorry about that.
I am old and confused!  I will have to pay more attention in the future.  I now recall that you have already reviewed the lens, THOROUGHLY.   :-[  (egg on face for me!)

13
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG Art
« on: January 21, 2015, 10:34:06 AM »

4. I think Dustin Abbott does great reviews. I have complemented him on every review he has done...but ...on this one...it was extremely short and based on all of his other reviews he has done I think this one was half-hearted.  No harm... no foul...I just think that to avoid all the controversy regarding this lens's AF etc. and to touch on the attributes...he decided to stick his foot in the water and then just get out. That's OK..this lens is complicated on many levels.


This review is made by Justin VanLeeuwen and not by Dustin Abbott (whose reviews are on his own blog)

Best

Whoa...thanks for correcting me!...I will fix that...no wonder I thought I was different! DUH

14
Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG Art
« on: January 21, 2015, 03:16:58 AM »
I have to say that I love my Sigma 50mm Art. Well my second copy, with Sigma Doc and some patience. Most everyone interested in this lens is aware of the controversy surrounding it. Right?   I found my experience to be a buying "process" (most unusual experience purchasing a lens at this cost...but for me it was worth it).
Some observations of the comments here:
1.This is a relatively expensive lens ($950),   This is a large 50mm. It's not waterproof.  It is not light (1.8 lbs). It has 13 elements for God sake...most people check specs and read reviews, for a purchase like this. Within the 1st 60sec. of looking into the lens I would think that if you want a small light lens..then..OBVIOUSLY this is not the lens for you.  If you want a lens with weather sealing this is not the lens for you. If you want a cheap lens then this is not the lens for you. These things are more than obvious right away.
2. The iPhone comment should be deleted. It's just stupid.
3. Before I went on my Sigma Sojourn I was aware that this was not going to be a regular lens buying experience...but at my level of involvement in photography the lens had enough promises for image-making to jump in and give it a shot. (I owned a sigma 50mm EX and I own the Sigma 35mm Art...so I knew what I was in for with this purchase)
4. The lens copies are inconsistent with AF.  I sent my first one back. It was ALL OVER THE PLACE with focus. I had a Sigma Doc. ...there was no correcting it. My second copy was much better out of the box and I was able to calibrate it and it works extremely well for me...right now...although...I have read reports that is could change over time...I will see.  I knew going in that the lens experience was not going to be a normal one. I was on a quest for excellence in 50mm.  Why bitch and moan...I know what I was getting into!  LOL! (Its like dating!)
5. I owned a good copy of the Sigma 50mm EX f/1.4. I sold it to buy this. This is about twice the size...I knew that going in..I was looking for sharpness across the plane to the corners.  There is no comparison in the two lenses.  (although the size, and rendering of the EX makes it a very great lens for portraiture..its forgiving and I would say tons better than the Canon 50mm f1.8 and f1.4...and built way better as well...but again that is just my opinion and I had a very good copy...that I sold to a friend (gulp!) and he is VERY happy with it.)

So...this lens is interesting...and "for me" it has such a WOW factor...that it was kind of worth all the BS I went through to get a decently calibrated copy on the front of my 5D3.  (time and money).  The experience is not for everyone...but for the people that it is for ...their mouths can occasionally drop open when opening files in post...and goosebumps can run down your neck sometimes. That made it worthwhile for me.  If you are looking for something exciting ...and you have some PATIENCE and some photography experience and ability...jump in ....I  If not...I would advise you to stay away from this beast.  :o
t's definitely not for everyone. its an interesting experience, though.

15
Photography Technique / Re: Aperture for total sharpness?
« on: January 18, 2015, 08:34:03 AM »
Every lens is different.
I find that it is good to check reviews on each lens that I own so that I can check on its particular characteristics.
For instance...my Sigma 50mm Art is really tact sharp from wide open and only increases very slightly up to f/4.
Most lense are not like that...so it pays to study your equipment.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 70