December 25, 2014, 11:25:17 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 - Khristo

Pages: [1]
Software & Accessories / Re: Bag that will fit 5D3, 24-70 and 70-200?
« on: December 23, 2014, 09:30:04 PM »
I just checked mine and it is actually the 10 rather than the 7.  But I do use it to carry exactly the gear you specify, and there is also enough room for an additional small lens (I sometimes carry the 5D3 attached to the 20-70, plus the 70-200, and a Samyang 14mm so I'm covered for most situations.)

Software & Accessories / Re: Bag that will fit 5D3, 24-70 and 70-200?
« on: December 23, 2014, 07:27:34 PM »
I have one of these:

and am very happy with it.  Used for when I want to inconspicuously carry camera with lens attached and one or two other lenses. Doesn't look like a camera bag and the best feature is the huge pad on the shoulder strap which makes it very comfortable to carry for long periods.  Very good quality all round.  There are larger and smaller sizes.

Only criticism would be that there are quite a few pockets inside for carrying bits and pieces and they have flaps at the top of each pocket to secure the contents.  These tend to snag a bit on a reversed lens hood when pulling out the lens. Having said that, i wouldn't want to be without the flaps, so just have to be careful when pulling a lens out.

Post Processing / Re: Post processing opinion/advice
« on: November 29, 2014, 09:16:44 PM »
Might as well join the club...

Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8II or F4 for Zoo Shoot
« on: November 25, 2014, 08:23:59 PM »
You will not have a need for f/2.8, so why carry that monster around?

Odd and definitive point of view, others have given good reason to go for the 2.8.

As for the latter half of your statement, "monster"? That lens is hardly a monster lens unless you're Monty Burns... ;)

I don't think it's too odd to say you won't need f/2.8 much. Zoo shots are going to be mostly about up close and recording detail and you could lose a lot of that with shallow DOF.  OOF fur not too interesting!

Depends on the zoo of course, but my last zoo trip was about shooting over fences or through glass - not so much through fences. On that trip I used my 400 f/5.6 and the 70-200 f/2.8.  Having checked those shots, there are a lot with the 400mm, but those with the 70-200 tended to be at 200mm and few at wide apertures.

Only exception was a close up (through glass) of one gorilla grooming another - that was at f/3.2 and did benefit from a portraity shallow DOF.  But definitely the exception.

So, I think there's little to be lost with the f/4, and if it allows you to play with a 24mm f/1.4 as well - bonus!

EOS Bodies / Re: I killed my brand new 7D MK2 today
« on: November 14, 2014, 03:39:15 AM »

CF design does not seem to provide the best opportunities for fool proofing, but there is some, such as the "thicker" edge on the non-pin side.

Having got home to try for myself, I think there is reasonably adequate protection against improper insertion.  You can get it in rotated 90 degrees, but you still have to push a bit and it certainly does not "feel right". This is exactly the same on my 5D3 as my old 40D, so it would seem to be a very standard set up for Canon. I'd doubt the 7D2 would be different, but if so it would be interesting to know.

Based on that though I'd have to call "operator error" - sorry Klaus

EOS Bodies / Re: I killed my brand new 7D MK2 today
« on: November 13, 2014, 10:04:17 PM »
Better design of the CF card could make it easier of course.

In the spirit of internet forums, i wrote without actually trying it myself  ;D , but I think I recall not being able to insert in the 5D3 the wrong way - as others seem to be saying - so the opportunity seems to be there for Canon to do a better job from their side.

(Mind you, I would have tried to insert it with the label towards camera front and the pin edge still pointing towards the pins, not with the pin edge pointing up.  But hey, you can't help bad luck!!)

EOS Bodies / Re: I killed my brand new 7D MK2 today
« on: November 13, 2014, 09:13:44 PM »
It is a Japanese company that should know all about Poka-yoke.

Design fault - yes I'd go that far. They certainly should have developed a design to prevent incorrect insertion if reasonably possible.
Warranty? More debatable.

What I don't get is how this focus shift happens.

Wide open and focussed, all the rays passing through all parts of the lens focus (I think this is a pretty sharp lens?) to a sharp point on the sensor plane.  Occlude some of the rays by stopping down the iris and the unoccluded rays seem to have their paths changed so they focus off the sensor plane.

Don't see how that could happen - maybe there's something different going on.  Can soemone educate me on that?

Sports / Re: Kiteboarding
« on: August 24, 2012, 11:17:30 PM »
Nice shots nitsujwalker.  How natural is the green colour of the surf?

Here's my effort from the more subdued end of the spectrum.

(BTW "subdued" meaning from a more remote perspective rather than referring to colour - I was just interested to know if the green tint was a local phenomenon.)

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Where am I ?
« on: August 18, 2012, 07:33:13 PM »
Never takes more than a moment for people to realise where this is, but it's certainly not the usual view...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: AFMA Callibration - How much is too much?
« on: August 03, 2012, 07:59:04 PM »
"perfect when it came back"

Do you mean after calibration it needed 0 AFMA on both of the cameras?

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 1DX pricing in Australia
« on: January 16, 2012, 03:34:15 AM »

It's advertised for $9,999.00 at

 Hopefully that bodes well for the 1DX price in Australia.  Of course the G1X and 1DX target totally different market segments, so Canon Australia could have totally different pricing strategies for the two.

I hope it bodes well too.....but seems unlikely.  Canon Australia has been forced to reduce prices of the lower end gear to international levels - e.g. I think 60Ds are pretty much the same here as anywhere.  If you go higher up the totem pole the gap is still there. 

Anything up to $1000 you can import grey with no GST - so that makes a big difference which Canon has to fight with more aggressive pricing here. 

I think the most important thing is that if you're buying a "cheap" camera (of course that's relative!!) you might be happy to risk a non-Canon repair if something breaks.  But if you've shelled out big bucks for your dream camera and lens(es) and you're not quite sure if it's working perfectly and you want to be able to take it to Canon and ask them to check it out - well you can't if it's grey.  (For L lenses they will apparently honour international warranty, but not bodies).  You could probably pay for them to check it out, but it's possible that they might just refuse to touch it - they are under no (legal) obligation.

So you can pay a fair (grey market) price and hope for the best, or pay Canon Australia a few hundred (or thousand) $ extra "insurance" for a Canon warranty. 

Or be happy with what you've got and not upgrade at all!

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 1DX pricing in Australia
« on: January 14, 2012, 06:51:27 PM »
Taxes and duties here in Oz have some impact, but there are similar taxes in other countries as well.  Simple fact is that it's a marketing decision taken by Canon to charge more wholesale in Australia than in other markets (obviously pushing up retail and even used prices). 

E.g. if they decided to charge 10% less, they would sell more gear, but they might need to sell something like 25-30% more units to make up the margin $ (plus more because of increased financing and other unit costs).  There are lots of components to the pricing decision (competitors/market share; pro vs consumer; grey market/isolation; warranties etc), but ultimately Canon takes a decision to charge what it thinks will maximise profit in a particular market, and unfortunately we here in Oz have a reputation of being prepared to pay more.  So we get it in the neck on cameras, cars and lots of other stuff.

I downloaded the trials of LR and PS a couple of weeks ago - just to have a play.  Even though it's a download and there are no issues with distribution costs, they still cost hundreds of dollars more here - no reason other than Adobe charging what they think will maximise profit.  So I'll keep on with DPP and GIMP (should get it right in the camera anyway!!!) as a matter of principle.

Canon knows perfectly well that I and others would go out tomorrow and spend $$$$ on new gear if we could get an equitable price - but they would loose on all the pros (who will buy anyway) paying less - it's not personal (even though it feels like it!!!) it's just business.    So, I'll stick with my 40D (good camera!) and Sigma and Tamron lenses - maybe one day it will change (it already is on the lower priced consumer gear - that's pretty much at parity with world pricing.  Just the higher end bodies and L lenses, where the market forces are different.)

Waiting to buy a 5DII (or III?) + 16-35 + 24-70 + 70-210  - as soon as the price is equitable!!!

Pages: [1]