April 23, 2014, 05:22:35 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 - photonius

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
1
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samyang 650-1300mm
« on: April 14, 2014, 11:52:27 AM »
Lots of hate towards this lens (rightly so perhaps) but not many suggestions other then buying another camera or just using a 300m and cropping.

Are there no other decent long lens/scope alternatives to consider?

The new Tamron 150-600 is your best bet

2
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samyang 650-1300mm
« on: April 13, 2014, 05:44:44 PM »
Hi All, has anyone used a Samyang 650-1300mm lens,

http://www.samyang.co.uk/index.php/t-mount-lenses/samyang-650-1300mm

I'm just after an opinion if it's good/bad?   :-\


one thing to remember about this lens and the catadioptric ones from samyang: they are from the area before they started to release the well received new primes for dSLRs  (85mm, 35mm, 14mm, 8mm fish eye and more). so they are not in the same category

3
I haven't made a living by photography in a very long time (I find more joy in being a hobby shooter) but it seems to me that you were present at the wedding as a guest of the contracted photographer for a learning experience.  I sense an ethical dilemma in "poaching" sales even though the bride preferred your shots.  In fact, I would have turned down her request to view them.  If you had been a guest of the bride or groom at the wedding then I wouldn't see the same problem.

I agree. This is an ethics problem.

You are going to have to chalk this up to being a learning experience... if you are doing a job, find out what your responsibilities are beforehand and who your images belong to....

There are two big questions here that will decide your actions:

1) Do the images that you shot belong to you, or do they belong to the event photographer?
2) Will you be taking money away from the event photographer? Should you be sharing the revenue from any extra work with them, and in what proportion?

In the end... the bride MUST get the pictures, regardless of who she has to pay or even if it is free. The last thing you want is to have your name attached to an angry bride who has been denied pictures of her wedding day. This will create a situation that can destroy any good will and reputation that you are trying to build... even if you have to give them away for free, chalk it up to good marketing....

Right, the last thing you want to do is deny the photos to the bridge, that would just be atrocious

4
Is it just me, or does this press release sound like an April Fool's post? 

"enables shots to be taken four centimeters closer than with rival lens models, an advantage for camera operators working in tight locations such as studio spaces or on-site home-improvement reality television locations"

"enables news shooters to capture “head and shoulders” shots from distances further away than previously possible"

"Other important changes in the Canon HJ18ex7.6B portable HD zoom lens that further enhance user convenience include . . . deletion of the glossy logo plate"

well, the glossy logo plate could be annoying if the sun reflects off it and blinds the cameraman, or newscaster.

5
Here is what the same scene from each image looks like when enlarged to the same size.... SX-50, Tamron 150-600, and Tamron 150-600 and 1.4X teleconverter.

In this case, it seems like the Tamron with the teleconverter resolves the most detail, the bare Tamron is second, and the SX-50 comes in last.... but when you consider I paid $300 for the SX-50 on sale and it fits into a coat pocket, it is a surprisingly good performance for such a camera.

Nice comparison. I've always been wondering about such comparisons, even just to a Canon 100-400 (before the Tamron came along).
An important aspect - or problem - of the bridge cameras is the small sensor and the aperture (usually 5.6 or even less) at the long end. It means that diffraction is already well into affecting image quality no matter how good the bridge lens is. Rough calculations suggest that at f6.3 or so, a resolution limit of  ~ 2Mp is obtained for this sensor size. Thus a bridge camera is not as effective as the equivalent focal length would suggest.

6
Hi all, I'm an amateur photographer in the us. I will be heading to India and China and need some advice on a new camera. I've never owned an dslr and not so sure the weight is something I want to tackle right now. Not to mention any security issues, I don't want to lose my first dslr.

Anyway I'm looking to take some great photos while I am there. I really want the quality and ease of use. Something I can transport and pull out at a moments notice.  I'd use my cell phone but I'm just not over impressed with the image quality.  I've got a cheap point and shoot. But I'm looking for something more. GPS, image quality, low light, and colors will be very important (especially in india). I could be talked into a dslr but again this is my first. I've had time to use my cousins 7D but noticed it was very heavy. I do like the way it fit in my hand And made me want to take pictures. Something about the right camera that says use me.

Do you have any advice for me on what to buy?  Thanks.

Mike

How much time do you have left??  A dSLR might take a bit of time to learn.  Too many people buy a dSLR and treat it like a P&S and are disappointed, because they don't take into account shutter speed (to take an image without hand shake), DOF (depth of field, is much shallower on dSLR, giving the impression that the image may not be sharp in many places, but that's the whole point of dSLR), the right focus point (because of the narrower DOF, focus needs to be on the right spot, the full automatic on a camera does not allows select the right focus point, leading to the main subject being out of focus).  Then there is the issue of focal range, usually you have to change lenses to cover a decent range. If you have something like a Canon SX50, (24-1200mm focal range) you cover most of what you would ever need.
 Another point: Most dSLRs still don't have GPS (Not sure why, since many P&S have it).

As to weight for a dSLR, look at the Canon SL1, the lightest dSLR there is.  Some light lenses that go well along with it, are the 18-55 STM, and the 55-250 STM.  They are not fast (don't have large aperture), so you might have to complement with a faster prime, if you want that, e.g. a 35mm f2, or 50mm f1.8. You might also want wider angle, then a Canon 10-22 would be a good addition.

If that travel set above spooks you and you don't have time to practice a bit with it, you might be better of with a bridge camera (e.g. Canon sx50) for a large focal range, but with a small sensor. Or you could go with e.g.  something like a Canon 1GX, or G16,  they have faster lenses, but less focal range.


7
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Patent: Tamron 10mm f/2.8 Fisheye
« on: March 28, 2014, 03:16:23 PM »
"Vibration control" ?
A stabilised fisheye ? That's funny.


Maybe for video?

Even for video one would not pan/move around the scenery with a fish eye lens because it severely distorts the scenery ... panning/moving with a fish-eye lens would make the video footage look silly and unappealing ... I'm sure a few might use it on rare occasions to get some funky video footage, but generally fish-eye lens would be used for footage that is recorded on a tripod.


there are quite a few movies out there with the 8mm Samyang (e.g.
Le Parkour with Samyang 8mm fisheye lens made with Nikon D5000 Small | Large
).  seems that the camera is often stationary though, even when filming from within a car, the camera is stationary, just the car moving.


8
Another achievement by the world’s first camera manufacturer.

World's first camera manufacturer? I don't think so.

maybe bad translation,   "leading",  or   "first in sales" (as per the other article), etc.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L IS
« on: March 12, 2014, 11:29:22 AM »
<div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><g:plusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/03/patent-canon-ef-180mm-f3-5l-is/\"></g:plusone></div><div style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a href=\"https://twitter.com/share\" class=\"twitter-share-button\" data-count=\"vertical\" data-url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/03/patent-canon-ef-180mm-f3-5l-is/\">Tweet</a></div>
More Canon lens patents have shown up. This time we get some macro patents that also include hybrid IS. We’ve been told that the <a href=\"http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/112541-USA/Canon_2539A007_Telephoto_EF_180mm_f_3_5L.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296\" target=\"_blank\">180mm f/3.5L macro</a> is on its way out, and this could be the direction Canon takes it.</p>
<p>A few other focal lengths also appear in the patent as well such as 200mm & 300mm versions with hybrid IS.</p>
<p>The information below is a Google translation.</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Patent Publication No. 2014-41224</strong>
<ul>
<li><span>Publication date 2014.3.6</span></li>
<li><span>Filing date 2012.8.22</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><strong>Example 1</strong>
<ul>
<li><span>Zoom ratio 1.37</span></li>
<li><span>Focal length f = 180.03-167.06-131.08mm</span></li>
<li><span>Fno (3.6-4.8-5.8 actual aperture). 3.6-3.3-2.59</span></li>
<li><span>Half angle ω = 6.85-7.38-9.37 °</span></li>
<li><span>Image height 21.64mm</span></li>
<li><span>The overall length of the lens 228.39mm</span></li>
<li><span>BF 68.14mm</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><strong>Example 2</strong>
<ul>
<li><span>Zoom ratio 1.58</span></li>
<li><span>Focal length f = 198.49-164.7-125.48mm</span></li>
<li><span>Fno (3.6-4.8-5.8 actual aperture). 3.6-2.99-2.28</span></li>
<li><span>Half angle ω = 6.22-7.48-9.78 °</span></li>
<li><span>Image height 21.64mm</span></li>
<li><span>The overall length of the lens 231.65mm</span></li>
<li><span>BF 71.4mm</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><strong>Example 3</strong>
<ul>
<li><span>Zoom ratio 1.92</span></li>
<li><span>Focal length f = 289.97-213.39-151.33mm</span></li>
<li><span>Fno (3.6-4.8-5.8 actual aperture). 3.6-2.65-2.21</span></li>
<li><span>Half angle ω = 4.27-5.79-8.14 °</span></li>
<li><span>Image height 21.64mm</span></li>
<li><span>The overall length of the lens 294.36mm</span></li>
<li><span>BF 68.05mm</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><strong>Canon patents</strong>
<ul>
<li><span>Inner focus</span></li>
<li><span>(Part of the fourth lens group) antivibration</span></li>
<li><span>Supports Shifutobure (???)</span></li>
<li><span>Floating</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<p>Source: [<a href=\"http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2014-03-12\" target=\"_blank\">EG</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">c</span>r</strong></p>



These are zooms, that would tie in with earlier rumors about a zoom macro (no focal length was specified there).

I speculated as follows then:
"a say, 135 (150) - 200mm (or 180mm) macro with 1:1 at 200mm and IS does not sound implausible."

anyway, 2 of them seem very close to what I speculated, i.e. a 130-180 mm macro, and a 125-200mm macro.


10
Lighting / Re: Whitebalance with grey card seems red?
« on: March 07, 2014, 05:27:37 AM »
Hello folks,

I recently set my white balance using a new grey card. After that all my pictures seem to have a red tint to them.
I'm using a Canon 600D with Elinchrom flash units and a Mennon  grey card.
Before using the grey card i just used a piece of paper for setting white ballance. Seems like i get pretty much identical results with paper and the grey card. - When using the paper I manually added blue in the camera settings to compensate for the red tint. - looks like I have to do the same when using the grey card (somehow makes sense  ;) )
When I open the files with the grey card in it and hold my eyedropper on it in photoshop, the color in the card is perfect grey (identical RGB values) - but everything looks reddish???
Just calibrated my screen with no improvement.
Same result on 3 different cameras and different monitors.
Any ideas? Does the background have a red tint or is the balance off?

measuring this picture over here, it does have more red in the RGB, so the background is not neutral,

11
EOS Bodies / Re: What Happened to the Photography Industry in 2013?
« on: March 06, 2014, 06:04:50 AM »
IMHO, we should also be looking at what happened in the years up to the peak.

In 2000, Canon wasn't selling any DSLRs. In 2010 Canon was selling the 5Dmk2, an FF DSLR that can shoot video at an attractive price point. Point being, people were moving from film to digital, and that helped sales. Now that the market has reached maturity, it's only natural sales would slow down, and smartphones & the economy just help to roll sales down the hill.

My guess is the new non-L 24mm, 28mm, & 35mm IS USM are first signs of Canon realizing it has to tap the lower end DSLR market to make money, as in most rebel owners aren't going to upgrade to FF or buy L lenses.


Exactly, the missing point 4 in the analysis.
THe market is maturing, saturating, and stabilizing. There was a huge transition from film to digital. Now digital is at the point where you don't need to buy a new camera every year.
And at present there is no further revolution in sight, where everybody suddenly thinks they have to go out and buy new gear.

A new stimulus could come from things like 3D imaging,
http://www.pelicanimaging.com/technology/index.html
http://www.technologyreview.com/news/519546/depth-sensing-cameras-head-to-mobile-devices/


12
EOS Bodies / Re: UPDATE: EOS M2 Not Coming to North America
« on: March 02, 2014, 10:22:25 AM »

If canon were smart, they'd make the Rebel line mirrorless.

It won't happen until the AF is there. Even with the 70D sensor it's not there yet.

13
Canon General / Re: $4 Million Photograph
« on: February 24, 2014, 02:19:24 PM »
I hope the picture you posted is not the original Gursky, because a huge portion of the lower right corner is very obviously clone-stamped.

Oh it is def. a bad photoshop job... see it in the original image... check out the large version at this link and you can easily see the same grass pattern repeated in lower right corner...

http://c4gallery.com/artist/database/andreas-gursky/andreas-gursky-the-rhein-II.jpg

...and yet he left some orange piece of garbage near the water and a set of stairs(?) on the opposite bank in the photo.


that's the art part....  :)

14
Has it ever been rumored for their to be prototypes in testing of what would essentially be a physical 1.6x crop of a FF sensor, allowing the ISO capabilities of the 6D/5D3 in, say, an EOS M or xxD body?

I'd love me an EOS M with 6-9 megapixels of low light goodness!

Thoughts?

Would this be stupid-expensive to develop? I can imagine the right advertising campaign could sell the concept of fewer pixels for low light, arty, shallow DoF shooting with the 22mm f/2 with results that're still 2-4x larger than necessary for Facebook ;)

I don't think it will happen, and is not really necessary either. What you are proposing is basically downsampling a 18 MP sensor by a factor of 2. With good software you are essentially binning 2 pixels into one, and thus reducing noise. It's perhaps not as effective as a hardware 9 MP sensor, but it sure will not be a quantum leap better. The lower DR of the smaller pixels still exists though, but you were asking about low light.


15
EOS-M / Re: Is the canon eos-m a dead end system?
« on: February 17, 2014, 10:02:17 AM »
What killed the first EOS-M for me was that it couldn't be used in tethered mode. I'm not sure why that was not possible - unless it was done on purpose to not compete with the dSLRs. The EOS-M2 supposedly can do it, but not sold. I think it would make a great camera for remote control (with an external power supply). Ok, it's a niche market perhaps, but each feature one eliminates results in more lost sales.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9