May 19, 2013, 03:23:22 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 - koolkurkle

Pages: [1] 2
1
"As for gear, Belanger said his "go-to camera" right now is Canon's 5D Mark III fitted with a 24-70mm f/2.8 lens. He touts the zoom lens' shallow depth of field when wide open, a plus for his brand of product portraiture work."

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/05/08/apples-product-photographer-discusses-inspiration-tradecraft-and-gear


2
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: GP-E1 Time Accuracy
« on: November 01, 2012, 06:17:43 PM »
Almost a month to the day of receiving my GP-E1 for repair, a Canon supervisor called me today.  It took a while, but the personal service from Canon was really outstanding.  There is a known (but apparently not yet publicized) bug with the GP-E1/E2 and the leap second (http://maia.usno.navy.mil/ser7/series14.txt) that was implemented by IERS June 2012.  This is the cause of the 1 second discrepancy I was experiencing.  The current temporary fix involves 1) Disabling auto power down, 2) Selecting a 1 second update interval and 3) Waiting 15 MINUTES before force updating the camera time to GPS time.  This doesn't sound nearly as bad as it could have been and a firmware update seems likely. 

3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Adobe RGB or sRGB please?
« on: October 05, 2012, 07:07:57 PM »
"However, if you are planning to print high-end, then shoot raw in AdobeRGB which gives you the option to convert later when printing yourself or working with a professional lab that has printers that can print the entire color gamut of aRGB."

Incorrect with regards to RAW.  You can set any white balance, and use either sRGB or AdobeRGB and there is no effect on the RAW file.  If you shoot Jpeg, you can select AdobeRGB instead of sRGB, but I don't know why anyone would do this instead of just shooting RAW and developing to AdobeRGB.  As I mentioned in my earlier post, there is one good reason to select AdobeRGB; to make the histogram more useful for determining correct exposure.

4
Lenses / Re: Canon 500 availability ?
« on: October 04, 2012, 03:45:34 AM »
Anyone ever heard of Lens Horizon ?

<link removed by mod>

Sounds too good to be true.


Ya think?  Run from anyone who doesn't take credit cards.
http://www.scambook.com/report/view/163671/Lens-Horizon-360-Designation-Complaint-163671-for-$1,200.00

5
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Adobe RGB or sRGB please?
« on: September 30, 2012, 05:40:28 AM »
Actually, if shooting in Adobe RGB matters, you've already dumbed it down a lot, because that means you're shooting JPG.  If you're shooting RAW, color space is irrelevant - you can set it later.


You are right, I set mine to Adobe RGB but use raw, so it really made no difference.  I use Lightroom 4 which has a prophoto gamut that is even wider.
 I can do a soft proofing to my printer / paper profile and bring the colors into gamut as required.


You know, this has me thinking (a dangerous pasttime, I know...).  I've often made the argument that the in-camera jpg settings do matter if you shoot RAW, indirectly, because the in-camera settings are applied to the JPG preview image that's reviewed on the LCD and used to generate the histograms.  So, to the extent that you make exposure decisions based on the preview image, histograms, or blinking highlight alert, those JPG settings matter. 

I wonder...what is the gamut of the camera's LCD, would sRGB vs. Adobe RGB make a difference in color channel saturation, a difference in the histogram or highlight alert calls, etc.?


I shoot RAW and use UniWB.  Adobe RGB is important for those who use UniWB because sRGB shows inaccurate highlight clipping.  For anything you could ever want to know about the histogram on the back of your camera, go to http://www.rawdigger.com/houtouse/beware-histogram

This quote below from the above link is what got me interested in UniWB, which is also explained by the article. (Minor thread hijack to follow...)

"In standard (i.e. corresponding to the shooting conditions) white balance settings, the camera histogram and the camera overexposure indicator cannot be used to control overexposure."

For anyone who wants to skip the "why" and just try UniWB (like ETTR, but better), here is the quick and dirty.  I don't claim to be a UniWB expert, and there are different ways to go about the process, but I have had excellent results with the following technique. (This only works for RAW shooting)

1.  Cover the eyepiece and take a picture with lens cap on (I know what you're thinking) at the fastest shutter and smallest aperture.
2.  Set your custom white balance to the picture you took in "1."
3.  In picture style, set maximum saturation and max contrast
4.  Set colorspace to Adobe RGB

Increase exposure compensation until you get blinking highlights, then backoff a third of a stop.  The previews on the camera LCD will have a green cast and look terrible.  Process in ACR and use Auto WB to get in the ballpark.  YMMV, but I am a happy convert.


6
Lenses / Re: Minimum Aperture
« on: September 30, 2012, 05:22:00 AM »
There is a pretty good explanation of diffraction for photographers at http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm.

7
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: GP-E1 Time Accuracy
« on: September 30, 2012, 05:13:08 AM »
I just wanted to verify that was the case. There is a degree of latency with any satellite communication. Could that latency be the issue? Even at the speed of light, there is at least a fraction of a second difference in time between when the satellite sends its response and the GPS receiver gets it.
In short, no. The GPS system maintains ephemeris data for each satellite and the delays through space and the atmosphere are accounted for as part of the model. There are errors for sure, such as delays caused by different ionspheric conditions, but internally any receiver will typically be accurate to well under a microsecond. Light travels about 300m in that distance, so you can imagine the accuracy if it was worse.

More likely is something funky in Canon's implementation, maybe it does something like get the time when constructing the EXIF data after the image is taken rather than when the shutter opens. Or maybe it gets the time over the serial link to the GPS and doesn't take the latency into account. Or it might be a straight bug, or some combination of all the above. To get accurate time from a GPS you normally need to use a seperate hardware PPS (pulse per second) line rather than read the serial data alone, maybe they don't do that.

Actually it's useful to know for future reference, a few times in the past I've taken a photo of a time reference and moving objects to verify the accuracy of GPS systems. While not an issue for most users it means it wouldn't be useful for that, at least not without determining the time offset in advance if it is 100% repetable.

I think PeterJ nailed it.  I sent it back for "repair", and I guess we'll see what they say.  It probably is fixable in firmware, but the number of units sold may not justify the investment in correcting an issue most people probably wouldn't even notice.

8
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / GP-E1 Time Accuracy
« on: September 26, 2012, 05:21:44 AM »
     I just measured the time accuracy of my newly purchased GP-E1.  The advertised accuracy as shown on the Canon USA website is +/- .01 sec.  I installed an NTP time app on my iPhone (Emerald Time), which claims a corrected time to the nearest tenth of a second.  (I verified Emerald Time's accuracy by calling the NIST time recording at 303-499-7111.)  Below is a photo of Emerald Time and the associated exif time data. The GP-E1 was more than a second off.  I force-updated the camera's clock off the GPS multiple times and the results were consistent and repeatable.



9
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50 F1.2L And EF 35 F1.4L Sharpest Settings
« on: September 20, 2012, 01:40:06 PM »
Neuro said,

"The 50L has focus shift - as you stop down from wide open, if back focuses, but at some point (which is dependent on subject distance) the thicker DoF overcomes the back focus.  So, if plotting the sharpness of the 50/1.2L based on autofocus (assuming it's AFMA'd normally, i.e. at f/1.2), I'd expect it to be sharp at f/1.2, then get progressively softer as you stop down until somewhere in the f/2.2-f/3.5 range, then get progressively sharper again, peaking at f/4 or f/5.6 then dropping again after f/11 when diffraction sets in."

So Neuro, here's the question, and I'm just spitballing.  Is there a workaround for the 50 1.2L's focus shift?  Have you ever AFMA'd your 50 1.2L at other apertures than f/1.2?  It seems you could generate a lens adjustment lookup table for the lens based on f-stop to squeeze the most sharpness from the lens.  I know you said it depends on subject distance, but the DIGIC knows what that is and could factor it in.  If there is utility in this approach, the next logical step would be convincing Canon to provide the capability to enter lens adjustment values based on f-stop.

10
Abstract / Re: Light Painting!
« on: August 27, 2012, 08:43:53 PM »
Here's some hardcore light painting

Small | Large

11
Software & Accessories / Re: Are lens skins worth it?
« on: July 29, 2012, 02:48:58 AM »
I have one for my 300 2.8 which I use mostly on the vast open spaces of the soccer field sidelines.  The main utility for me is it keeps the lens considerably cooler.

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Availability in North America
« on: July 07, 2012, 02:53:58 PM »
Quote
Quote from: Crapking on Today at 09:28:48 AM

    Quote from: koolkurkle on July 04, 2012, 05:09:11 PM

        Just got an email from B&H, my 1DX web order 10198871xx (3/14/12 ~2:30pm eastern) has shipped


    Has the shipping info been updated?
    On 7/4 my info said shipped, but the tracking info only has the Origin scan and nothing else.  Is it actually en route?


UPDATE 7/7 AM:
MY order was in fact picked up from B/H by UPS on 7/4, but they were 'closed' for the holiday so not actually processed until 7/5, and it is now officially en route (Philadelphia) for a Pittsburgh delivery.  Somewhat frustrating that I paid for NEXT Day air and it won't come for 5 days later.  I didn't pay for next 'business' day, and if I did, that should still have been 7/6 not 7/9.  Anyways, what's 5 days when we have been waiting 7 months since announcement....

This is the same thing that happened to me.  I get an email saying my order 10198871xx "has shipped", but since it was a holiday, not until the next day.  It will arrive Monday.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X Availability in North America
« on: July 04, 2012, 05:09:11 PM »
Just got an email from B&H, my 1DX web order 10198871xx (3/14/12 ~2:30pm eastern) has shipped

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Why so many different camera bodies?
« on: June 29, 2012, 04:58:12 PM »
Is this too many?


15
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X - June 20, 2012 in Japan
« on: June 13, 2012, 04:31:00 PM »
clicstudio said "I placed my pre-order on B&H on March 13... That's exactly 3 months today!"

I thought the first day they had them was the 14th when I ordered mine.  My order # is 10198871xx, what is yours?

Pages: [1] 2