February 28, 2015, 10:00:00 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 - chris_w_digits

Pages: [1] 2
EOS Bodies / Re: B&H Photo Hands-On With the EOS 7D Mark II
« on: October 09, 2014, 10:42:35 AM »
It does seem like it's going to be a wonderful camera, and I'm considering getting one since it would make a great second camera to the 5D3 (backup camera and for use where more "reach" is needed).   However, this video still has the feel of a marketing brochure rather than a true review.   B&H is in the business to sell cameras, so of course they want to sell 7D2s and say good things about them.   I'm eager to see neutral parties get their hands on this camera and test it.   That's when we'll really know its true quality.   I'm sure it is going to be great, but that real "review time" hasn't yet come.

EOS Bodies / Re: Video Review: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 02:58:20 PM »
I'm eager to see a real review comparing it to the 70D and 7D (sensor differences, improvements in high ISO noise, etc.).  These are not reviews but are "marketing brochures".

Site Information / Re: Noisy obtrusive ads
« on: September 15, 2014, 02:47:36 PM »
It's almost unthinkable that anyone this day and age would be using a browser without AdBlock and NoScript (I use them under Firefox).   The web is practically unusable without them, and quite dangerous.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X Troubles (not funny)
« on: April 24, 2014, 03:59:26 PM »
I find number 10 funny since it happened to me and the first time I accidentally moved that button, I could not figure out how to undo it.   I'd been using a T2i for many months, so when I got the 5D3, I was able to immediately use it due to familiarity with the Canon control layout.   The T2i video stuff is different, though, and that level or button I accidentally moved wasn't on the T2i, and I hadn't yet learned all the differences in the cameras.   I did it about an hour before I was going to be shooting and had to scramble to learn what the heck I'd done and it took me a bit even after reading since I didn't know that button moved that way.  :-)   

EOS Bodies / Re: Evolution or the murder of art?
« on: March 18, 2014, 03:38:50 PM »
As technology improves, it is inevitable that this will become the case.   I'm not saying it will happen quickly, but if technology advances to where the frame rate can be 24 fps and a full RAW image can be captured for each frame, we'll be there.   For the masses, once everything is shooting 1920x1080, stills from that are good enough for the masses.   The disadvantage is you can't make better adjustments like you can with RAW and the frame will be from a compressed video stream which hurts the quality more, but still, we're talking about the masses who are content with the generally bad quality of phone cameras and who are content with the 612 by 612 low quality shots using Instagram.    For professional use, it's a long way off -- maybe 10 years or more.

Lenses / Re: A tip of the hat to Canon Customer Service
« on: February 13, 2014, 01:30:18 PM »
You probably are.  I got mine mailed off on the 3rd.   Always read all the fine print and be sure you follow every instruction to the letter.   If you don't, they can use it as an excuse not to give you the rebate.   I pre-submitted online and they've received mine.   I really wish they'd do away with mail-in rebates and just let the retailer charge the lower proce directly.

Lenses / Re: A tip of the hat to Canon Customer Service
« on: January 16, 2014, 02:27:53 PM »
I haven't sent in my rebate thing for the 24-70 f/2.8L II that I recently purchased yet, but I hope I don't have any difficulty with it.   I've had bad luck in the past with trying to get rebates from other companies.

It's never bothered me if people notice my camera, find it interesting, and mention it.   Since the venue I shoot in a lot is large and I need close-ups and head and guitar shots, the 70-200mm f/2.8L zoom is on my camera most of the time.  It's large.   The camera doesn't get their attention -- the lens does, and people think it's a permanent part of the camera and say "That's a nice camera!" and compliment me on the pictures (sometimes me and sometimes the camera).   They just assume that a bigger lens and better camera are going to take better pictures.   Most people wouldn't know a 5D3 from a T2i unless they have some knowledge about cameras.   Most people just find it something to start a conversation about and that's preferable to not saying anything.   I prefer the friendliness and willingness to start a conversation.   I don't consider myself a professional photographer and don't want to be "that photographer" who gets upset about things of this nature.   Nothing is more of a turnoff than getting jumped on for saying something the wrong way in an attempt to talk to or be friendly to a photographer.    There is no sense in getting upset with people for saying things about something they don't understand.

EOS Bodies / Re: Auto Focus: 5D, Mark III, Photographing in Dark Clubs
« on: November 14, 2013, 11:08:32 AM »
I shoot a lot of bands and musicians under stage lighting, but sometimes the stage lighting is in a constantly flashing or changing mode.  I'd imagine that the types of shooting you're doing would be more like trying to get pictures of the crowd away from the stage lights, which is harder.   I find that with my 5D3, with the performers themselves, just using the center focus point with 1/160 shutter speed works wonderfully.   I run my lens wide open and put what I want it to focus on in the center and that works quite reliably, even when the performers are moving around.   It breaks down when they're doing a lot of quick movement but backing off and getting a wider shot helps it a lot.   A lot of my photos are facial close-ups of the performers while performing, and head and guitar shots, taken with the 70-200mm f/2.8L run wide open.   The 1/160 freezes the performers unless there is something in fast motion and it gives that part a nice visible motion blur (drumsticks are a great example, and hair flying in a "headbanging" motion).

When there's not hardly any light hitting the people I'm wanting to photograph, the 70-200mm f/2.8L doesn't give good results and I often switch to the Sigma 85mm f/1.4.   If it will autofocus, the results are a good bit better due to 4 times the light being captured.   That's the problem, though -- if the light is too low, autofocus breaks down (it's slower anyway with that lens) and my vision isn't good enough to focus through the viewfinder (heck, I can't even see and detail what I'm shooting through the viewfinder if it's too dim to autofocus in a lot of cases).   The 135 f/2L is a fast autofocusing lens and sometimes works well in dim light, and has allowed me to shoot in dim light and get decent results.   In once case in a parking lot (outdoor show), it was the only lens that would work for me since I had no flash.   The 50mm f/1.4 is another choice but it just can't seem to focus sharply in a reliable way with autofocus, plus it's a bit wider shot than I usually take.   Take a lot of extras to be sure you get some in focus if you use that one.

The only good way to get good photos in your case may be to use the Speedlight flash units.    If the venue is going to be dimly lit, like the venue I shoot in was for Halloween, I'll carry 2 Speedlights and the transmitter and bounce the light off the ceiling.  The indirect light avoids redeye and harsh shadows and doesn't blind people so badly.  If your venue doesn't tolerate flash, then you're out of luck with that approach.   Just experiment and see what works best for you.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Talk [CR1]
« on: October 16, 2013, 02:15:25 PM »
regnwaldo, your top bird picture with the "streaking" in the background almost looks as if the out-of-focus background was separated from the in-focus foreground and some kind variant of inverse filtering or reconstruction was attempted on it to remove motion blur or defocus, then placed back in the image behind the foreground.   It looks a bit puzzling.

EOS Bodies / Re: Wait for the Canon 5D Mark IV or get the Mark III?
« on: October 11, 2013, 02:03:14 PM »
I got the 5D Mark III about a year ago and have been extremely pleased with it.   If you have the 5D3 and a good set of lenses specific to your shooting needs, you'll really enjoy the camera.

Lenses / Re: Movement in the mounting with 70-200mm f2.8L IS II on 7D
« on: September 09, 2013, 07:09:29 PM »
My 70-200 non-IS f/2.8L does this on my 5D Mark III and I've never had any problems due to it.   I was a bit relieved a while back when this issue was mentioned in another thread so that I know it's "normal".

Lenses / Re: Canon 135mm F/2
« on: August 19, 2013, 02:25:31 PM »
You will probably find some situations where the 135 f/2L will allow you to get shots you might not get with an 85mm since the 135L is FAST autofocusing and does well at f/2.   I've been in a couple of situations where the 135 f/2L was the ONLY lens I have that would allow me to get closeups in low light situations without a flash.   To me, it's a must to have with me, since it's saved me a couple of times.    I shot an outdoor show with several bands and once it got dark enough, my 70-200 f/2.8L simply stopped being able to autofucus.   The event was lit by one sodium vapor parking lot light.   The 135 f/2L allowed me to keep shooting and it allowed me to get some fantastic shots, even though I had to get a little closer to the performers to get the facial close-ups.   My Sigma 85mm f/1.4 would have been far too slow autofocusing to get many of the shots that I got, where the 135L didn't struggle at all.   I was shooting with the 5D mark III.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Strange Image Artifact on my new 5D III
« on: August 06, 2013, 11:31:53 AM »
I've had a similar artifact on exactly one image I've taken with my 5D Mark III over the past 10 months.   It caused a rectangular area of the image to be corrupted in a manner similar to this.    I've filled the memory card that was in use to capacity on several occasions since it happened and it's never happened again.   I now have 3 cards instead of 1 and rotate between them (Sandisk brand).

I've often wondered the same thing.   I have 28, 50, 85, 135, and 200 primes.   Macros tend to be 50 and 100 though.    I noticed the trend of going up by 1.6, roughly the ratio of crop to full frame, so it was easy to think "just go one focal length up on a full frame from what I used on a crop".    Why go up by 1.6 rather than, say, the square root of 2?

Pages: [1] 2