March 03, 2015, 11:37:17 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.

Topics - bdunbar79

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Lenses / 400 f/2.8L II IS on sunny days and white jerseys
« on: September 24, 2014, 05:56:25 PM »
Has anyone noticed a decrease in AF accuracy on bright sunny days where your team is wearing white jerseys.  I am often disappointed in the keeper rate in these situations where the camera/lens seems to focus nowhere in particular even though it says you've locked on the player.  I noticed it seems to be worse with the 400 than with the 300 I used to own.  Does the bright white fool the AF system?  Just wondering if anyone else had some of these troubles over time.  Sunday the soccer game was at 1pm and it was particularly bad.  I post an example:  1st frame shows the blurry jersey and face, 2nd is better.  3rd frame I can't figure out but the "brightness" made the AF jumpy I recall.  I didn't keep any of these for submission obviously.


Lenses / 400 f/2.8L II IS: Took the plunge...
« on: August 26, 2014, 07:12:45 PM »
Well, it's time to upgrade again.  I sold my 300 f/2.8L I IS and 400 f/2.8L I IS lenses (because I don't really need the 300 anymore) and bought a 400 f/2.8L II IS for sports all next year. 

Anyone using this lens currently?  I was really amazed how much lighter it felt vs. the version I and I'm also expecting slightly faster AF with the 1Dx.  It'll arrive about September 2, just in time for my first weekend of sports this fall, 9/6-9/7. 

Thanks for any input.

Canon General / DOF and Sensor Size
« on: July 01, 2014, 10:03:34 AM »
Sorry guys, I tried to search for this topic on here and I couldn't really get exactly what I needed so I will post the question but if you know the link to another thread that already discussed this thoroughly I would really appreciate that too. 

I'm very familiar with the mathematics behind focal length, aperture, DOF, and CoC.  However, I keep getting the question on whether sensor size really does affect DOF objectively.  I don't think it does, in that I think it is a subjective matter, but I cannot answer them succinctly. 

I don't want to take up too much of anyone's time explaining this, but I would really love to hear someone else's technical explanation of this or at least be linked to one, preferably from this site since the knowledge on here is incredible. 


Canon General / New Term
« on: June 27, 2014, 02:35:34 PM »
We all know what gear heads are, or at least the typical definition of a "gear head" but I had another thought.  I've been dealing with a lot of people who are absolute in their views of "gear doesn't matter at all, in any situation" and people who feel as though they are better and had it rougher and tougher back in the film days and how all digital photographers are lazy.  I was thinking "Film Heads" but I'm still thinking.

Just a "light" humor thread for a Friday afternoon.

Canon General / Why does this happen?
« on: June 13, 2014, 04:59:41 PM »
So I was over on LinkedIn in a Canon group discussion and someone posted which was better, the 85 f/1.2L II or the 85 f/1.8?  First response was "Get the Sigma" but you know I really expected that one, someone always says something like that.  Then it got into zoom lenses, etc. 

Finally, someone suggested that the only way to step up your game in photography is to shoot with all primes.  He suggested that the OP's goal should be to acquire the 24L, 35L, 50L, 85L, and 135L. 

My question is, why do people say such stupid things?

Secondly, why do I do this to myself?  At first I wanted to slap the guy, but then I thought, maybe I should just slap myself for even reading the post and worse, responding to it.  Yes I admittedly responded to him. 

My real issue here is that the OP mainly does portraits.  He already has the 70-200 f/2.8L II IS lens so I suggested the 24-70 f/2.8L II is pretty much sharper than any prime in that range.  Then the "only primes" post.  I didn't think my suggestion of spending $2299ish was out of line considering the total price of the primes he listed. 

Why do some people feel as though to do well in photography, you must be a purist?  It's like if you don't shoot in M mode, manual focus, and use an L prime, you're not doing it right.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / 1Dx EC in Manual Mode Question
« on: April 14, 2014, 11:41:44 AM »
Excuse my ignorance (not just on this topic, but everything else too). 

I noticed recently that having been shooting in Tv mode with a +2/3 EC, I must have changed some setting where it obeys the EC setting in Manual.  Not full manual obviously, but when using auto ISO.  So for instance if I shoot at 1/500s, +2/3 EC in Tv mode, then switch to M mode and set 1/500s, f/4, auto ISO, the +2/3 EC still remains and it adjusts accordingly.  Previously, when I switched from Av or Tv mode back to M mode, the EC bar was never there and I couldn't do it.  I wonder what I did?  I'll check through my settings more but could it be from the newest firmware version where you CAN do EC in M mode and I just didn't know it?  Thanks.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / 1DX Question from a friend of mine...
« on: February 24, 2014, 10:53:44 AM »
He posed the following questions.  We would really appreciate any help!

Although I haven't had time do more than minimal processing, I'm pretty pleased with the results and with the camera in general. I'm puzzled by two issues - probably due to lack of knowledge about the camera settings. I've searched through the manual without success. Perhaps you know where these functions can be found.

1. I get no audible beeps for either of the self timer functions. I often use the 2 sec self timer for long lens tripod shots in lieu of the remote cable release. But the camera doesn't give me the audible tones I'm used to as it counts down.

2. I often shoot with spot metering in manual mode to give me full control over changing conditions. But the top-side display doesn't provide active meter readings in "M" mode regardless which meter mode I select. The viewfinder DOES provide a meter reading that changes with the lighting but neither the top-side display nor the live view display show active meter readings.

Canon General / Just For Fun!
« on: July 13, 2013, 05:22:44 PM »
I thought just for fun I'd post the top things I'm sick of hearing in the world of photography.  Here are some that come to mind:

1.  You can shoot better shots with a P&S than a 1Dx if you understand lighting
2.  Gear doesn't matter, it's the photographer
3.  Well, back in the film days...
4.  RAW is a crutch
5.  If you get it right in camera you don't need to do post-processing
6.  Canon's falling way behind in sales because of the D800 and DR
7.  L-glass is ALWAYS better than non-L

That's all I had right now.

Thought of another one:
8.  If you have to ask questions about the <insert gear>, then you don't need it.

Reviews / Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II vs. Sigma 24-70
« on: June 09, 2013, 09:49:03 PM »
I told a group of people that the Canon performed better opitcally, based upon REAL comparisons.  Not to mention the price difference.  I was told that I was wrong and the testing and reviews had to be wrong, because the Sigma is better.  Why did I get this response?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« on: May 20, 2013, 05:46:35 PM »
I have heard, increasingly lately, that 1DX RAW files are better than 5D3.  I have noticed myself, in other posts, that they tend to be able to be pushed farther.  Why is this?  Thanks for any insight. 

Lenses / 400 f/2.8L IS I vs. 400 f/2.8L IS II
« on: May 19, 2013, 11:55:09 AM »
I am only curious, but has anyone ever really done a true comparison in performance between these two lenses (and the 300's as well)?  I just wonder if there are actually any in-the-field performance differences.  The ISO comparion charts look very similar.  I was just curious.  Thanks.

Lenses / 300 f/2.8L and 400 f/2.8 at f/2.8
« on: April 14, 2013, 11:11:40 AM »
I have a technical question to ask the forum.  I already have some ideas on what is going on, but I don't really know for sure and wanted to ask, since many of you are so knowledgeable.  In advance, thanks.

I tested my 300 f/2.8L I IS vs. my 400 f/2.8L I IS yesterday at a track meet.  I felt that I had more OOF shots with my 400 and wanted to see if that was really true or not.  So I set up at the end of the back straightaway, and shot runners running towards me (from curve up to about 20-30 yards away from me).  I set the lenses both to f/2.8.

I shot with the 300 and the hit rate was unbelieveable.  The faces were razor sharp almost everytime.  My settings were 1/5000, f/2.8, auto ISO.  I was in Servo mode on a 1DX.

I then shot the same settings and the hit rate was much less with the 400.  A lot of the focus was missed (can see another area in focus just slightly to the right or left on another runner) or the faces were just soft and there was no real apparent focal point anywhere in the photo.  However, it did hit a lot of photos, and again, those were incredibly sharp.

I did realize of course that with the 300 the runners are closer to me when I fire the shutter, vs. the 400, which could matter. 

Is DOF (f/2.8 is pretty thin) more difficult to manage at longer focal lengths?  Remember up until this year I had only used a 300 for sports and didn't buy the 400 until last July.  Is IS more of an issue, even at 1/5000?  Does the lens focus slower or not as accurately as the 300?  I was thinking it's not AFMA since when I shoot golf with it I never have any OOF shots, ever.  Of course they are not moving much in golf, so I'm afraid the track problem could be my bad technique with the 400. 

Just thought I'd ask since of course as you can imagine, it's sort of frustrating.  Thanks a lot!

Lenses / Tilt Shift Lenses: 17 or 24
« on: March 29, 2013, 05:21:32 PM »
Hello everyone,

Now it's time I ask a question.  I am going to get either the 17 or 24 TS lens.  I'm leaning towards the 17 because I'm interested in a lens that wide, but I suppose it doesn't matter.  I know the perspective is different (7 mm that wide is a lot), but do either have any optical advantages over the other?  Thank you so much.

Third Party Manufacturers / Olympus OM-D E-M5
« on: March 23, 2013, 12:13:28 AM »
Is anybody considering purchasing this camera with a good lens?  I am certainly considering it myself.  Thanks.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4