Messages

1

Lenses / Re: Confirmed sightings of 200-400

« on: June 04, 2013, 10:43:50 AM »

Cathay Photo in Singapore received 2 on Thursday, and the first left the store the same day (pre-order).
Friday they still has one. SD16,000+GST I believe.

2

Street & City / Re: How to not get beat up when photographing public places?

« on: May 28, 2013, 05:44:18 AM »

One time I was on a wedding and just taking some food and decoration shots ..and some guy aggressively said something like "don't you take any pictures of me!"
How would you respond to that?

"Sure, I'll make sure not to take any pictures of you".

3

Software & Accessories / Re: New monitor for photo editing and gaming

« on: May 27, 2013, 12:48:02 AM »

I have been looking at the Dell U2412M which seems to fulfill my needs and in general gets good reviews for casual photo editing.

I just bought exactly the U2412M about a month ago (it's getting increasingly harder to find a 16:10 monitor these days). I connect it through DisplayPort to my Lenovo laptop, and it looks real good.

SO far I have just used the calibration values suggested in this review:
Brightness   43
Contrast       75
Skarphed:    50 (not sure what the correct term is in English)
Gamma       PC
R          97
G          92
B          94

HTH.

4

Lenses / Re: Canon 200-400mm review

« on: May 24, 2013, 06:41:49 PM »

http://pixsylated.com/blog/peter-read-miller-canon-200-400mm-london-olympics/

Lol...I was in the audience when this shot was taken and yes I saw this chap with this lens in the Press pit.
Give me a few days and I'll dig out a photo of this very moment from a less ideal spot

Which of the 6 different shots are you talking about?

5

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Need tips for shooting auto racing video

« on: May 19, 2013, 10:45:30 PM »

I've shot onboard videos (motorcycle) with both 720p@60fps and 1080p@30fps, using a ContourHD camera.
My experience was that 60fps gave a better video quality (even when played at 30/25fps).
Since the camera is fully self-contained, I cannot advice on the shutter, beyond guessing that a faster shutter will most likely help.

6

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Lens for European Trip

« on: May 19, 2013, 10:39:17 PM »

To be honest, I bought the 24-105L a few months ago when it was on sale, but have not use it much. I will definitely give it a good test before the trip. Would like to do some video as well, so the IS might come in handy.

I've been contemplating whether to take the 17-40L along or not.

The 17-40L was my first lens (bought for my 10D) and it has been my main 'walk-around' lens on APS-C bodies. With my 5DF3, I tend to use the 24-70 more, but still the 17-40L is an excellent addition for close quarters and when you need to take in the wide views.
Also, the size and weight is really nice 

7

Sports / Re: MotoGP Austin

« on: May 17, 2013, 10:24:12 AM »

Very nice pictures, especially with one of Marc Marquez elbow-scraping.

8

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Lens for European Trip

« on: May 17, 2013, 10:22:31 AM »

I think that you will be fine with either for both cities and landscapes. I would probably choose the 24-105, just from the point of having a bit more focal length to play with.

9

Lenses / Re: Can someone explain the Canon 50mmL f/1.2 "backfocus problem" ?

« on: May 17, 2013, 09:14:36 AM »

http://toothwalker.org/optics/spherical.html

Thanks for the link, neuro, that explained it so even I could understand it 

This might also explain why I see my 70-200IS MkI needs different AFMA at 200mm MFD than at "reasonable" distance. IIRC, there were 6 AFMA points between the best MFD setting and the "normal" setting.

10

HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:

« on: May 16, 2013, 09:45:22 PM »

Can I suggest that you try some HDR on this shot to improve the rather dark areas in the canyon. It could look much better then.

While your improving it you might like to put in a bit of foreground so the river is not clipped at the bottom of the frame. At the moment it looks like the water might leak out and get the viewers feet wet. 

Actually, it wasn't ankorwatt's shot but mine. It is a HDR shot. There's a 300m drop to the Colorado river, so I wasn't prepared to get any closer to the edge than the 0.5m I was.

But thank you to ankorwatt for showing what a bit of "anti-haze" can do to my picture - I've now learned how to do that in PS and it does indeed improve the picture.
Only it didn't look like that when I took the picture

11

HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:

« on: May 07, 2013, 07:30:43 AM »

Horseshoe Bend in Page, AZ. Photos were taken on October 14th last year at around 9:30am.
Details: Canon 5D3 and 17-40mm f/4L at 20mm. Three RAW shots at f/8: 1/30s, 1/125s, and 1/500s.
Merged using DPP and just tweaked a little - I like taking pictures, not PPing

12

Lenses / Re: 300 f/2.8L and 400 f/2.8 at f/2.8

« on: April 27, 2013, 11:21:09 PM »

Quick test: if it's due to a tilted lens element, it should follow the orientation, right?. So shooting the same situation in portrait and landscape should settle whether this is the root cause.

13

Lenses / Re: 300 f/2.8L and 400 f/2.8 at f/2.8

« on: April 27, 2013, 10:33:09 PM »

You're right, that is very strange.  I didn't notice that before.  How do you check it and/or get it fixed?  Thanks.

I was just noticing the same thing, going "that's odd....". My gut feeling is that this could be misalignment of some elements inside the lens.
As for testing it, I guess you could take some shots on a test chart and analyse them with imatest, but I don't expect you to have that available. Baring that, I'd talk to CPS and show them some pictures to explain the issue. From reading Roger Cicala's blog, I understand that it can be difficult to get CPS to fix issues like these unless you show them exact the problem.

14

Lenses / Re: EF 300mm f/2.8 ( non IS ) AF ISSUES

« on: April 27, 2013, 09:06:10 PM »

I think the OP is in Brazil (since he mentions São Paulo), so a US 3rd-party repair center may not help him that much.
Since Canon has stopped servicing them, they might be willing to point to a 3rd party in Brazil that could help.

Mt Spokane: I think the part you linked appears to for the IS MkI version. A focus unit for the non-IS seems to be like $1250:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-CANON-EF-300mm-1-2-8-L-USM-FOCUSING-UNIT-AL-625-/390183359378?pt=Digital_Camera_Accessories&hash=item5ad8bd9392

15

Lenses / Re: Canon L Glass is currently priced at over $1200 / pound

« on: April 25, 2013, 02:22:50 AM »

Always fun with a little data analysis 

A couple of observations from my side and a suggestion for improving the predictions:
- Confining the starting point to zero cost is not realistic - there is a transaction cost (salaries etc), so a positive cost at zero lbs would make more sense to me.
- There seems to be two regimes - one for the light/"cheap" lenses up to about 4 lbs, and the other regime for the Big Whites. It would be interesting if the OP could go back and see how much such a division would effect the outcome ($/lbs).

Maybe add parameters like IS/non-IS and aperture  so see if their impact.