March 03, 2015, 07:12:51 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 - AUGS

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Lenses / Re: Using filters from a video camera with the 5DM3?
« on: November 26, 2014, 08:51:21 PM »
Yes, you can.  All you would need is a square 4" filter holder and the respective lens adapter(s) for it.
I use a Formatt-Hitech filter holder that can be adjusted to take filters up to 4mm thick.
I'm sure the other major manufacturers such as Lee, Singh-Ray, and Cokin (Z Series) all make filter holders that will suit your purpose, too - you'd just have to check they can take the thicker filters.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D & 1.4X -or- 7D Mk II?
« on: November 15, 2014, 07:31:44 PM »
For image quality, which would you prefer/recommend: 6D (FF & low-light capability) with a 1.4X converter or the new 7D2 (at native resolution, without a converter).
I have the 300/4L, 135/2L & 50/1.4 - it is the 50mm performance that I am most interested in (70mm @ 2.0 with converter, versus effective 80mm @ 1.4).
{content removed}
Many thanks.
Just a word of warning, you wont be able to use the 1.4x with the 50/1.4.  From Canon website for the 1.4xIII:
Note: This lens is only compatible with fixed focal length L-series lenses 135mm and over, as well as the EF 70-200/2.8L, EF 70-200/2.8L IS, EF 70-200/4L, and EF 100-400/4.5-5.6L.
To get a focal length around 70-80mm you will need to get a new lens for a full frame camera - if that is what you want or need.  This may be a factor in your final decision which body to purchase.

EOS Bodies / Re: do you hope for sony sensors in the 5D MK 4?
« on: November 07, 2014, 06:45:25 AM »
I absolutely hope Canon do NOT use an external sensor in their dSLRs.
1.  Competition is good for everyone.
2.  Outsourcing only provides short-term relief, and rarely long term gain.
3.  Would you prefer to be independent in your development cycle or rely on someone else?
4.  Sony is hemorrhaging cash at the moment.  Would you rely on that source for your parts?  What if Sony decided to sell off the sensor division while it was worth something?  Where would that place the 5D5 or ongoing production support for the 5D4?  You have just outsourced your expertise and potentially jeopardized that camera development - and possibly every other one too.  Will you ever recover?

No, I love my 5D3 and what Canon currently offers is perfectly okay with me.  Canon should stick with Canon sensors.

Lenses / Re: First Image of the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II Lens
« on: November 07, 2014, 06:07:43 AM »
So it is true!
Interesting to see the "EOS 7D Mark II" text in the top right corner of the new (second) image.

Canon General / Re:
« on: October 07, 2014, 02:17:25 AM »
For everyone who says the countdown timer is showing up wrong, is the time zone on your device set wrong? This page uses a client side script based on UTC - if your clock is correct but the time zone is wrong, UTC must be set incorrectly.
Actually, the script doesn't use UTC, therein lies the problem.  It only calculates the time difference between 07 Oct 2014, 9:00am and your local computer time.  There is no UTC component.
The expectation is that it is New York time, so another 7 hours.

Canon General / Re:
« on: October 05, 2014, 10:14:59 PM »
Nothing is IMPOSSIBLE. Says Canon. They can already see it. Even if we cannot see it.  ;D

You can see it tomorrow.  8)

I see 37+ hours on the countdown timer, which makes it the day after tomorrow (Tuesday).  Are we seeing different times in different locations around the world?

I guess so.  Here in Australia it says 19:45 to go.  I'm guessing its just a dumb script that takes the local computer time difference.

Canon General / Re:
« on: October 05, 2014, 09:12:25 PM »
It is the replacement to Ron Howards Imaginat10n project.

Yeah, a Dynamo and David Copperfield special shot on a 6D.

Canon General / Re:
« on: October 05, 2014, 08:22:47 PM »
As this is predominantly a camera site (CR), my heart is saying this could be:
- a new high megapixel camera with sensor bells and whistles (seeing detail previously thought impossible)
- a new macro lens (with tilt-shift?)  (seeing detail previously thought impossible)
- a new camera with a true live EVF....
These have previously been rumored, but are too specialized for the advertising space and method used to my thinking anyway.

If you do a Google search for "see impossible" you get a list of pages about color.  So it could be a new printer with an extended color gamut.  Metallic inks?

But my head is saying this is something for the masses.  It makes sense if this announcement is to combat the loss of compact camera sales to smartphones.  The wording of the ad (Apple-like), the full page ad in the NYT, makes it seem like this will be a "smart-camera" feature - "Share" your photos directly from your camera?? It would remove one of the roadblocks that make people use their phone instead of their camera - straight to Facebook. That's why this post resonates with me.
If it was a full spread in New York Times, I would expect it to be a product for the masses. (Just my hunch). Definitely not a high MP pro body, because that is a limited market and the people who would buy it will be all over the news without need of an expensive ad like this.
My fear is it is some kind of camera phone gimmick or perhaps mirrorless or perhaps large sensor compact. Or as someone else has said it may not even be camera related at all.

I sincerely hope its the former, but feel it will be one of the latter.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon
« on: September 25, 2014, 04:03:12 AM »
A very wise man once said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.

Sadly, I think its time some people on these forums had a look at what they are doing with respect to their posts.

I agree.  I just spent 4 months driving around Australia (I'm Australian), and used the GP-E2 all the time.  I find it useful to actually locate where the photos were taken.  One day I must have photographed 6 waterfalls and they all start to look the same.  To remember which is which is hard without writing down all the details as you go, but the GPS data just means I have to look it up.  The battery in the GP-E2 (lithium AA) lasted about 10 days (100 hrs).  I'm possibly going to start selling some of my landscape photos in the near future, so having a location is important - to me.

I also use a GPS tracker (Amod 3080 - US$50) and GeoSetter software (free last time I checked).  The Amod device uses 3 AAA batteries (which last about 20-30hrs tracking) and creates a text file that you can download to your computer using a USB port.  All you have to do is ensure you have the camera set to the correct local time to synchronise your photos in the GeoSetter software.  It is especially useful to track how you got to that special location too.  I used as a bit of redundancy on my trip.

Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: March 14, 2014, 06:03:20 AM »
The f stop value of a lens is defined by the focal length of the lens divided by the diameter of the objective lens (front element). so a 300mm lens with a 100mm front element has an f stop value of f2.8. That's how it works.
I'm not sure you are correct.  By this formula, the new 24-70LII has an f stop of about 24/64 = 0.375.  But its a 2.8 lens.  While the approximation approaches this as the focal length gets longer and the angle of view becomes narrower (telephotos and telescopes), it is not true for all focal lengths, and especially the wide angles.
My understanding is the f stop is calculated from the focal length divided by the apparent iris aperture via the optical formula of the lens (which includes all the magnifications of the optics).
I may be wrong, so I'd be happy to be corrected.

How many images do you need to capture in a session/day/whatever?   Personally, with cameras that have a single card slot, I have two equal-sized cards, when one is full I swap them, transfer the images to the computer, and leave them on the second card until they're backed up from the computer. That means have two copies of each image from the time I first transfer them.  I format each card when it goes back in the camera.  That way, I also have an emergency extra card.

So, if 16 GB covers a shooting period, IMO 2 x 16 GB is better.

As Neuro said, it really depends on what you shoot, its "value" to you and how much you shoot between download opportunities.

I have only ever had one card issue, but multiple cards means you can still get on with your shoot even if it means being a bit more conservative with your shots.  Only after I have multiple "off-card" copies do I even consider re-using the card.

There actually can be degradation of a digital file... And far faster than analog. The best way to ensure archival of a photo remains a print and a negative. I heard a few years back that Hollywood briefly attempted to archive via digital format only until they lost a whole film. The response was to reverse course and make an analog master print of every movie made (including ones shot digitally) to ensure future revenue years down the line.

The archival standard in photography is at least 100 years of durability. Digital has yet to be proven by this standard. Burning to DVDs, maintaining RAID drives, or even storing on SSD are all rife with potential failure and loss of data. Each successive copy made over the years increases the likelihood of a corruption of data and loss of access to your images.

I have yet to gain faith in the likelihood of my digital images being around in 100 years but I remain confident that my negatives will.

Back in 1859 there was a solar flare from the sun which was so big and catastrophic that it destroyed most of the world's power stations. Anything with a coil, capacitor or tuning circuit just melted or fried. It was the largest solar flare in recorded history. It's been widely considered that if such an event occurred today, there would be little of today's technology which would survive. Anything with a micro chip, silicon, or tuning circuit would literally burn out. Every computer hard drive would be wiped, every laptop battery would fail, every TV screen would burnout, every CPU would frazzle, every car would fail, every power station would melt...society would roll back to the 18th century over night. Our beloved digital files would go the way of lost static and the cameras would become empty shells. It's not possible to shield against such a huge electromagnetic wave of this magnitude.
So I think that if and when such an event occurs again (it may not be in our lifetime) and all of our digital history and data is lost, old fashioned photographs may be the only record of our society left.

And yet even if there are not cataclysmic events, and even if the data survives on the media, will there be supported devices to read that media anyway?

In 1986 a 20Megabyte hard-disk was considered big, 5.25 (360kb) inch floppy disk drives were common, and 3.5 inch floppy (720kb and 1.44Mb) drives on the horizon.
Jump to 2014.  I'd fill that 20MB disk with a single frame from my 5D3 (RAW, of course!).  Many laptops don't come with CD drives as standard, and floppy disk drives are a thing of the past.  Where will you read your CDs and DVDs, BlueRays of today in 2024, let alone 2114.  Will hard-disks be like last generation vinyl records?

The only obvious longevity plan is keep transferring the digital data to the latest technology to at least give it a fighting chance.

Maybe film and archival prints are best after all??

Canon General / Re: Why Scott Kelby Switched to Canon
« on: January 21, 2014, 01:34:29 AM »
And just maybe he has a little advanced notice of what is coming down the road in a private meeting. Who knows? Maybe 45+ to 75 MP are not just a rumor.
This is very optimistic, but could be very much true following Kelby's move. If Canon does have plans producing a new sensor with more DR and megapixels, they'll benefit more from testers that stayed with Nikon due to those features.
I was told by a Canon dealer that there was a 75MP body under field test. It was eating  batteries like a kid M&M's. Is that true. I have no clue. I'd like to believe it. What's a few extra batteries for the best IQ in the land? If indeed it turns out true there will be some restless nights in the land of medium format 80MP bodies and backs that sold for 40k+ with very limited lens coverage.
I don't see why a 75mp sensor would "eat batteries". The power required to read out the sensor is minimal, a fraction of what is required to drive the lens, and still quite a bit less than what is required to move the mirror and actuate the shutter. There is more data to transfer, but assuming Canon has updated DIGIC accordingly, it should be able to process faster at lower power than DIGIC 5+, so I still don't think the increase in megapixel count is going to result in such a massive increase in power usage as to "eat batteries".
Not sure if it was directly related to the 75Mpix reference above by MovingViolations, but this did appear back in September 2013 regarding the High Megapixel camera:
It was eating batteries in 4K video mode.  Maybe there is an element of truth to all the rumours.

I agree with Neuro and others to head towards a quality system.  All ND filters have some colour cast, and Cokin has the most.  I personally use HiTech (Formatt) and Lee.

You asked about hard and soft edge filters.  It really depends on what you are shooting.  If it has a definite straight separation I will use a hard edge.  If it doesn't, say like a mountain range, I'll lean towards a soft edge.  I also find I'm using the 2 and 3 stop filters the most, but I shoot sunrise and sunset landscapes.  I rarely use the 1-stop versions.

An anecdote on a holder or hand-holding.  I was shooting a seascape a few weeks back and decided to change lenses.  In doing that, I dropped and lost my adapter ring.    :-[  So I left the UV filter on the lens and used chewing gum to hold the filter in place for my 30 second exposure.  I wouldn't recommend it as a permanent strategy, but I got my shots.  I now carry a small ball of blue-tak in my kit just in case.  The holder is best solution, but you can survive without it.

So my recommendation would be to get a 2 stop hard and/or a 2 stop soft edge Lee or Hi-Tech filter in a 4inch (100mm) wide system and worry about the holder at a later date.

Hope this helps.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5