October 24, 2014, 03:52:11 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 - East Wind Photography

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 48
1
LOL - Love part of this - "I was shooting running horses and maybe 3 out of 300 images were out of focus"

Now can't wait to see the Tony Northrup review...

"to test the sports AF capabilities, we will shoot my GF walking towards me... The 7D MK II only performed so so getting 6 out of 10 images in focus" 

ROFLMAO


That AF test still bothers the hell out of me.  I have no trouble believing that the D810 can track better than the 5D3 in that scenario as Nikon seems to have gone all out with the AF on the D810 and now D750, but that the 5D3 was only hitting 60% makes no sense.

Too me it comes down to one of two things - Incompetence or dishonesty.

He either did not know how to use the camera or he was dishonest.  40% OOF is really bad especially for the type of shooting he was doing.

more likely he just had a lens with an AF motor problem.

2
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Shipping October 30, 2014
« on: October 18, 2014, 08:56:52 AM »
On Oct 8 I posted that Bestbuy.com updated their shipping to Oct 30th :)
Wait...Best Buy will be carrying it also! What! Game changer since I have a Best Buy ten minutes driving distance from my house than the 45 minute Express Bus Ride to B&H. Thank You for posting this!  ;D

Last I checked, BB had a 15% restocking fee for all returns.  I would take the 45 minute ride just to have that safety net in case it wasnt what you expected.

3
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Shipping October 30, 2014
« on: October 17, 2014, 06:03:08 PM »
Seems this rumor is about as good as the one we got when the 7DII was supposed to have wifi.

Likely just a ploy to steal orders from everyone else.

4
Lenses / Re: Is FoCal worth ~$150?
« on: October 07, 2014, 08:56:45 PM »
The whole process of using such software seems such an exercise in spurious precision...

Perhaps.  However, AFMA affects every AF shot you take, so doing it incorrectly can be problematic.  I've run across many people who have done AFMA incorrectly (e.g. testing at the MFD for a lens commonly used at a much greater distance). 

Honestly, it doesn't matter how you arrive at the correct value for your lens(es), as long as you do arrive at that correct value.  Sort of like driving a car with a manual transmission vs. automatic - both will get you there, but if you don't knw how to drive a stick shift, you're in for a jerky, bumpy, gear-grinding ride.

Actually I think there is no correct value other than the one you need at the distance you are shooting, the light intensity you have, and the type/color/temperature of the lighting on game day.  Even ambient temperature can change your afma.  To say there is an absolute correct afma setting for all circumstances is a bit of a stretch.

I've also seen some canon lenses straight out of the box that will not focus at infinity if you afma using the FoCal guidelines.  Surely you could find one out of a batch that needs adjustment but I've seen it with several copies on different lenses.  Could be bad lens design but the variability is there.  You need to afma at different focus distances and choose the correct one for your shooting conditions....or just keep a notebook and switch your settings when doing close ups then landscapes.

Wether or not you trust focal to get you that optimal afma setting, it will reveal these inconsistencies so you can decide wether to sell or return that new lens for something else.

5
Lenses / Re: Is FoCal worth ~$150?
« on: October 07, 2014, 08:37:13 PM »
It is worth 150.00 but not for the reason that you think.  As far as a tool for calculating your optimal afma, it's not worth it.  In order to accurately calculate afma, you have to have near perfect calibration conditions which most people don't have unless you have a studio, 300w halogen lights, and perhaps a football field to run your tests.  The real value in foCal are the other features which allow you to calculate which f stop yields the highest resolution of fine detail, identifies inconsistencies in your lens af system, and finally which of your af points are out of spec with the center point.

I personally set my afma manually using a newspaper on a wall and then review which afma settings yield the best results.  I then tweak it a little in the field depending on lighting, distance, etc.  After a bit it becomes very easy to determine which setting is best.

The other features though are much more difficult to do manually and are best suited for the software.

One thing to consider with focal is the hit it takes on your shutter.  I've had enough issues trying too get afma set right using the software that I easily added 2000+ shutter actuations to each of my cameras.  If you want to go that route, I would suggest using the software in manual afma mode and import the photos into the software rejecting the outliers.

It is a very useful piece of software but you need to determine your needs before purchasing as it may not live up to your expectations as a primary afma tool.  There are other means of doing it which for me have produced better results.


6
Canon General / Re: Unable to format Canon memory card
« on: October 01, 2014, 06:09:40 PM »


Plenty of options posted here for image recovery.  In the future it's always best to reformat the memory card after you copy the images off.  Dont just delete them.  This helps with a lot of issues including recovering images from the card should something happens to it.

A regular format of a card does nothing except mark the images as deleted in the fat table, no different than deleting them individually.  A Low level format must be done to actually clear a card.  The option to low level format a SD card exists in most recent Canon cameras, but a low level format or erase of a CF card must be done in a computer.

Excellent clarification.  Yes  SD cards require a low level format, not just a format.  Otherwise the camera must erase the memory location prior to writing data to it.  If the card is low level formatted, the camera can skip that step.  One could assume that over time the card could become quite "noisy" and cause problems, even a readability problem.

7
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon's 2.300$ D750 said to best 5DIII
« on: September 30, 2014, 10:37:12 PM »
http://www.rossharvey.com/reviews/nikon-d750-review

Quite an excited review of the Nikon D750. Sample pictures look really great. Especially high iso looks impressive. Says he also worked with the 5DIII and that it does not compare for his work (weddings).

Agree with reviewer that Canon has work cut out for them selves trying to make the 5DIV competitive (either by slashing the price range or jumping the specs).

All the better for us that Canon is under stiff pressure to deliver this time around. This time there will no excuse that Nikon pulled a rabbit.

Well that D750 will only be king for about 6 months when the shutter starts getting sloppy and he finds that grease splatter on the sensor has ruined his 2000.00 wedding shoot.  Personally I will never touch nikon again.  Canon gear has never let me down.  This case is closed for me.

8
Canon General / Re: Unable to format Canon memory card
« on: September 27, 2014, 10:56:40 PM »
Hey, you guys think whether I should format my Canon memory card? In fact, last Monday, after shooting many activity photos, I just started to upload them to my laptop for sharing. But, when I attached it to my laptop as usual, the Windows just asked me to format before accessing this card there. But, these newly captured photos had not been backed up well. The formatting process would let them all gone, right? Do I have to format this memory card? Is there any way for me to rescue these photos back at first? Thank you for any suggestion here!

Plenty of options posted here for image recovery.  In the future it's always best to reformat the memory card after you copy the images off.  Dont just delete them.  This helps with a lot of issues including recovering images from the card should something happens to it.


9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Why haven't you left canon?
« on: September 27, 2014, 08:36:46 PM »
Most durable and reliable products made.  Period.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II: More High ISO Samples
« on: September 27, 2014, 08:27:40 PM »
I have been excited with the specs since before the announcement.  IQ is fine with me.  Pixel peepers have their reasons for doing so but it's a huge upgrade over the 7D and the extra 1DX type features just send this over the top.  Hope they start shipping them ahead of schedule so I can go out and start gloating while those that didn't pre-order get jealous for not doing so.  :)

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 27, 2014, 05:27:23 PM »
Does the 7d mark 2 have auto lens calibration or do you still need a program like FoCal Plus for that?

You need to perform AFMA yourself, manually or via other software (e.g. FoCal).

IF the 7DII is/will be supported by FoCal.  So for now its a manual effort.

12
Site Information / Re: Canon Rumors Site & iOS 8 Issues
« on: September 24, 2014, 04:54:41 PM »
Still not working right.  Lost the nav bar at the top

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 22, 2014, 09:13:24 PM »
lamenting Canon's supposed lack of DR and extolling the virtues of Exmor

See there you go again. Here you try to bring up doubt that Canon is behind in DR or that even if they are that it could ever mean anything. And yet when you finally get called out and backed into a corner as in your post later on, you are like "who me? fanboy? nobody here ever tries to admit that Exmor doesn't have more DR"

So which is it??? You try to have it both ways for everything.

There is a difference between 'Exmor has more DR than Canon' and 'Canon doesn't deliver enough DR'.  There's a difference between 'Exmor allows better low ISO shadow pushing than Canon' and 'Canon sensors deliver poor IQ'. In each case, the former is a statement of fact that is generally accepted here, the latter is a judgement based on an individual's personal needs and values.  Some people just can't understand or accept that their own needs and values aren't statements of fact with which everyone must agree. 

That's not 'having it both ways', that's the ability to distinguish between fact and opinion.

suuuure

and don't forget your buddy Keith today was posting all over here today in other threads about how the extra DR is a joke and is only needed by incompetent photographers who always miss the exposure and who have no post-processing skills and that the only point and use for more DR is to overcome poor photography skills of incompetent users.

Aye. I don't much appreciate Keith's assumptions that all problems are the result of idiot photographers who don't know how to take a photo or process one in post, or that no one has ever tried Capture One or more advanced NR tools and techniques.

One thing we can assume is that our chances are better at taking a once in a lifetime photograph if we weren't here reading and posting on these forums.  ;)

Indeed. They are also better when it isn't rainy and stormy outside. :P Which, as it so happens, has been the case for several days here in Colorado now. When it's clear, I'm out doing photography, one way or another. It's just been a crazy year for weather, and a poor year for birds. Wildlife has still panned out pretty well, though.

Sounds like you are ready for a high iso, weather sealed, high frame rate camera so you can go out in that weather and take photos!  :)  I would be more inclined to take a 1700.00 camera out in it than a 6000.00 one.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 22, 2014, 04:58:03 PM »
lamenting Canon's supposed lack of DR and extolling the virtues of Exmor

See there you go again. Here you try to bring up doubt that Canon is behind in DR or that even if they are that it could ever mean anything. And yet when you finally get called out and backed into a corner as in your post later on, you are like "who me? fanboy? nobody here ever tries to admit that Exmor doesn't have more DR"

So which is it??? You try to have it both ways for everything.

There is a difference between 'Exmor has more DR than Canon' and 'Canon doesn't deliver enough DR'.  There's a difference between 'Exmor allows better low ISO shadow pushing than Canon' and 'Canon sensors deliver poor IQ'. In each case, the former is a statement of fact that is generally accepted here, the latter is a judgement based on an individual's personal needs and values.  Some people just can't understand or accept that their own needs and values aren't statements of fact with which everyone must agree. 

That's not 'having it both ways', that's the ability to distinguish between fact and opinion.

suuuure

and don't forget your buddy Keith today was posting all over here today in other threads about how the extra DR is a joke and is only needed by incompetent photographers who always miss the exposure and who have no post-processing skills and that the only point and use for more DR is to overcome poor photography skills of incompetent users.

Aye. I don't much appreciate Keith's assumptions that all problems are the result of idiot photographers who don't know how to take a photo or process one in post, or that no one has ever tried Capture One or more advanced NR tools and techniques.

One thing we can assume is that our chances are better at taking a once in a lifetime photograph if we weren't here reading and posting on these forums.  ;)

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Am I the only one excited about the new 7D mk2?
« on: September 22, 2014, 04:53:38 PM »
They are all cross type, however Canon throttles AF speed at f/5.6 relative to f/4 or f/2.8. Even on the 61pt system, even when using only the center points, AF speed slows when I slap on a 1.4x TC onto my 600/4, vs. just using the 600/4. Additionally, at f/5.6, the chances of "hunting" increase. Canon's AF system caters towards looking for a closer subject first when the scene is out of focus by more than a certain (unspecified) amount. So, if I need to photograph a bird in flight, it's FAR better to use an f/4 lens, which is likely to lock on directly immediately, than f/5.6, which is going to hunt forward first if I'm not already close to focus on the bird.

Maybe the 65pt system changes that, but it looks like the same general firmware as the 5D III and 1D X, so I suspect it'll behave the same.

No, Canon does not throttle AF speed at f/5.6 relative to f/4 or f/2.8.  Yes, when you put the 1.4x TC behind your 600/4, AF slows down.  But that's not because the combo is f/5.6, it's because of the TC.  By design (firmware), a 1.4x TC drops AF speed by 50%, and a 2x TC drops it by 75%.  If you put the 1.4x behind the 200mm f/2, you'll have a 280mm f/2.8 lens that activates all 61 AF points including the 5 dual-cross points on the 5DIII/1D X...and still focuses 50% slower. 

The 'hunting' you describe also appears to not be specific to the max aperture or the AF points, but rather to lens or TC combo.  For example, the 100-400L @ 400/5.6 hunts with a busy background, whereas the 400/5.6L locks on much more effectively in that scenario.

Hmm, curious. When I rent the 300 f/2.8 II, and use the 1.4x TC, it still seems to focus extremely fast. Faster than the 600/4 with the same TC.

Maybe it's just the design of the 100-400, but that lens doesn't focus fast, period, as far as I can tell. I haven't used the 400/5.6 with the 61pt system, so I can't speak to it.

The 300/2.8 II is arguably Canon's fastest-focusing lens.  The focusing group in the 600/4 II is ~25% more massive than that in the 300/2.8 II.  The bare 300 II focuses faster than the bare 600 II, so the former will be faster with the same TC.  I suspect the 300/2.8 II is just so fast to begin with that you don't notice the AF speed reduction as much.

Here's the relevant bit from Canon:

Quote from: Canon DLC
As with previous EF Extenders, usage of Series III EF Extenders lowers AF drive speed to improve AF performance. When Extender EF 1.4X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 50%. When Extender EF 2X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 75%. This may seem like a drawback, but in reality subject tracking performance remains quite high when Series III Extenders are used with IS II lenses. This is due to improvements in AF precision made possible by the new microcomputer in the extenders.

The 100-400L focuses noticeably slower than the 400/5.6, as well, even though both are 400mm f/5.6.

400 f5.6 also has better contrast lines wide open than the 100-400 wide open.  Part of the noisy background hunting issue is due to the coma which blurs the lines between black and white.  How a lens looks wide open is a great indicator of how well and how quickly it will get a lock.  Now there is a real reason to pixel peep prior to purchasing a lens.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 48