January 25, 2015, 01:52:15 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 - Stu_bert

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 18
1
Finally something about LR6. Nice to hear that it will be coming and (as I read the post) it will not be cloud-only.  :)

+1. There must be some significant changes for the gestation to be this long, both under the hood and in terms of features. Fingers X that the SDK finally allows developers to do more than import/export. Either that or all the dev's were tied up with the mobile versions which non-cloud users cant experience  :-[

We've not even had a beta, and I would be very surprised if we did not have a 3 month iterative release cycle, and thus a final release in May/June.

2
I think the article was intentionally controversial to make people step back and think about what is or is not important, and this thread is indeed indicative of that. This site understandably is focused more on gear talk, but the members have grown it into a community which discusses far more, which is why i personally still visit.

Ultimately, everyone needs to decide what works best for them, based on what they're trying to achieve with the time and budget they have. I think the article is good as it provokes discussion and personal reflection. But just like my post, it's just someone's personal view....

Thank to OP for posting, and for everyone else's views.

3
Much thanks!

I tried your tipps, but it did not work. Still the white point on the lower edge for one second. Fully charged battery, everything removed, fresh formatted card,....
And there was no moisture....

I phoned with the Canon support (2 min before closing), and the employee told me to send it to the German Canon service departement. He thinks the main processor is broken - maybe as an result of the fw-upgrade (then there will be NO warranty).  :-[

If you still have the Firmware which you downloaded on a CF, send it with the camera along with the explanation. The processor is unlikely to be broken. I'm no expert, but it sounds more like corruption in the firmware - and now, when the camera powers up, loading the firmware, it's not loading fully and it never gets to start. I've never heard of a firmware upgrade that breaks a processor, nor a camera failing right after an upgrade.

As mentioned, I would let them fix the camera first, and then suggest that you followed Canon's process for upgrading the firmware and therefore any fix should be gratis. I'd definitely appeal to their good customer service, before arguing warranty.

If you concur with others, then don't even mention the firmware upgrade. Just state it stopped working and go for warranty.

Best of luck.

4
Sounds not so good!

What I would do:
1. Don't try to downgrade again. That might make it worse.
2. Take out the battery for at least 10 minutes. Put it in and look how the 6D reacts.
3. If it still does not react normal, try to contact Canon service via e-mail or phone.
4. If they can't help you, send it in.

Hope that helps.
Great minds  :D

5
Hi there, sorry to hear. I would try the obvious. Remove all memory cards, remove lens, remove battery. Wait for a minute. Ensure you have a well charged battery, if not charge. Then just re-insert battery, leave card / lenses off.

If that doesnt do it (and I highly suspect it wont), then try contacting Canon support before CPS. In Europe there are email or phone contact methods, I'm sure therefore it's replicated elsewhere, and they may be able to talk you through something - especially if you explain the firmware upgrade. Failing that, then yes, CPS is your only solution.

Hope it goes well.

6
Photography Technique / Re: Share 3x your own advice to yourself!
« on: November 27, 2014, 10:47:50 AM »
Great idea

  • Research your location before, long before you get there
  • Don't take the first shot you see, stop, look, listen, think about your location, then compose, shoot & review, repeat
  • don't use f/22 or greater - they were wrong!

7
Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8II or F4 for Zoo Shoot
« on: November 26, 2014, 07:36:38 PM »
I just did Loro Parque in Tenerife (Canary Islands). Most of the enclosures where i wanted to shoot were glass fortunately. The problem I find with fences is that the larger glass does not lose the fence enough. I've done a private zoo in the UK (big cats mostly), and the 300 f/4 was more practical as you could get it in-between without issue.

In Tenerife, based on the predominancy of glass enclosures, the 300 MK II and the 70-200 MK II sat on 2 bodies the whole day, and I preferred the flexibility in some lighting conditions rather than adjust ISO but that's a personal thing. Based on distance to most subjects the DOF didn't impact sharpness. I also just preferred the speed as there were a number of shows worth capturing. Only once or twice did I need to step back to mitigate wider than 70mm, most of the time I shot at the 200-300mm with an occasional 1.4x or 2x converter (reptiles) but that's just my preference...

8
Also just installed on my laptop and pleased the current version supports 1DX :)

Thank you Mt Spokane.

9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The structure of a CR2 file
« on: November 16, 2014, 06:09:51 AM »
Thanks for posting  :)

10
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 09, 2014, 06:55:36 AM »
If Canon allow extenders on this and not on the 70-300 L that will be interesting. I think, but hope I am wrong, that Canon may limit teleconverters to avoid encroaching too much on the 200-400. But as others have said, I also will think about a "trade in" against my 70-300 if it matches it optically, unless the Sigma provides comparable in the same range, leaving the 400-600 as a "bonus"

Good that Canon have finally announced it - but a little bizarre they didn't announce it with the 7d mk ii - agree it looks like a great pairing...

11
Seemed a reasonably fair assessment given she uses Canon kit and in her job. A couple of comments are clearly job specific but I think Canon would be happy with her review (given they want pros to use 1dx), and amateurs in the same "shooting category" as the reviewer would be encouraged by her comments...

12
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera to Come in Two Variants? [CR1]
« on: October 10, 2014, 04:43:09 PM »

LOL, does he *make* you read this forum? Does he force you to respond to every comment he makes? And if he is making so many people's live a misery then I worry for those people. This site exists based on us coming here, griping, guessing, waxing lyrical, discussing, sharing, informing. I think you need to read your first sentence - this forum is indeed a compromise and if the balance is not to your liking, seek alternative forums or scroll past the postings you don't like..... But please let's avoid the personal stuff...

No.

No, and I don't.

Sure, take the forum for what it is, or make it what it is. Personally I believe the tone has been lowered immeasurably by the constant hijacking, lengthy repetitive posts with bad manners, bad diction, and lots of shouting from the DRoners.

I am not anti jrista nor, at it's core, his point, despite his loathsome cries of persecution I have tried to engage with him seriously in several threads specifically about DR. I am anti the over the top way he broadcasts his opinion, I am anti the shouting and inflammatory way he goes about sharing that opinion, I am against his inconsistency, his rewriting history, his constant hijacking, and his overwhelmingly self righteous belief that anybody that doesn't agree with him is either uneducated, delusional or deluded. I have huge differences of opinion with him on what he considers acceptable IQ, which is funny because it appears my standards are actually higher than his. He strikes me as a really smart guy who over thinks a lot of stuff and gets very committed to a solution he thinks is right whilst being resistant to adjustments to that solution when it is shown to not be quite right or that clearly make it better, easier, faster or more useful.

I have many faults too, I respect jristas opinion at its core, I will happily take more DR when it gets here, and I get as over enthusiastic about rebuttals as he does about his opinion on occasions.

I wish the mods, who do a hell of a good job, would ease back on my culling and warnings a little and increase those on jrista to contain the DR "issue" within a small series of threads truthfully devoted to it, not any and every thread that offers the slightest tangential attachment to it.

I have to admit I drop in and out of this site, especially the forums. There is a whole bunch of good info I have gained from the people here, so I still come back.

But my personal advice, re individuals who just get to you is just "walk away" - whether that is permanent, or just from that thread. Maybe that reflects more on me than you both, I don't know. I enjoy people passionately discussing topics, even if they disagree in the right way. When it stops being nice, then I just get bored....

The Mods are there to hopefully stop the personal comments. If people want to bang on about the same topic, then the rest of the forum members will chose what they want to do regarding those individuals. I dont think the mods should do that.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera to Come in Two Variants? [CR1]
« on: October 10, 2014, 03:47:54 PM »
...
I'd jump ship if I could take my lenses with me. It's really difficult when you have some $18,000 invested in lenses that can only be used on Canon equipment. That's also a critical source of frustration for me. I really want better IQ for my landscape photography...and I'd also love some fast UWA lenses that perform as well as the Nikon 14-24mm (the 16-35/4 might be an answer to that, although I do like the f/2.8 aperture of my 16-35 L II).

I often feel I'm STUCK with Canon because of my lens investment. To really get the best of the alternatives that exist right now, adding the D810 and a couple UWA lenses like the 14-24 is an extremely costly endeavor as well...nearly $6000 with just the one lens, over if you get any other lenses. The A7r (or it's successor, which will hopefully be released early 2015 and bring some much needed improvements for AF and other features with it) is a very viable middle-ground option, and I'm very thankful it exists.

You don't need a UWA lens for landscape photography, in fact relatively recently I could have very handily used a 500mm or 600mm zoom lens ...

I've shot landscapes with telephoto lenses before. It's possible, and can be used to good effect. For example, this:

...
And this:
...
are telephoto panoramas, created with my 100-400mm lens (from a very great distance).

However, for the kind of compositions I really like, sweeping scenes with close, highly detailed foreground objects back to distant mountain scapes or something like that, UWA is the only option. You simply cannot do that with a 500mm or 600mm lens. The ultra wide field of view is what I want, because it lets me do things like this:
...
I could even use a couple mm wider FoV than the 16-35mm. The beauty of UWA is you can get within a mere foot of your key foreground subject, and still bring in a massively expansive landscape behind it. And still have the whole thing pretty sharp (or, if your using a T/S lens, you can have the entire thing super sharp throughout the entire field.) That's a unique capability.

Let me give you a quick critique. What are those two wide angle shots about? The mountain and its reflect or what's under the water? There are two completely different parts of that image and I'm not sure that joining them makes it better. For example, if you crop all of the bottom under water bit off the first, how does it look? Stronger image. What does the rock add to the image? If you cropped it out, would it be better or worse? Wide angle for landscape is hugely over hyped. Wide angle shooting people at events where you can't get far away from people without risk of disturbance is another matter.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20990.msg448151#msg448151

yes but if Jrista wants a zoom UWA wider than 16mm and allows him to take shots of what he likes, in a way that he likes, isn't that ok? I don't believe he's saying *all* his landscapes would be this way, just he would like that option....

Then he needs to come to terms with the unavoidable fact that life is a series of compromises, and always will be. He can use a Canon with native Canon lenses, he can use a Canon with third party lenses, he can use Canon lenses on third party bodies, he can use third party lenses on third party bodies, it isn't like he is stuck for choice, he just wants what isn't currently available and rather than acknowledge that and take the best option for him, he wants to make all our lives a misery.

<snip>

LOL, does he *make* you read this forum? Does he force you to respond to every comment he makes? And if he is making so many people's live a misery then I worry for those people. This site exists based on us coming here, griping, guessing, waxing lyrical, discussing, sharing, informing. I think you need to read your first sentence - this forum is indeed a compromise and if the balance is not to your liking, seek alternative forums or scroll past the postings you don't like..... But please let's avoid the personal stuff...

14
EOS Bodies / Re: High Megapixel Camera to Come in Two Variants? [CR1]
« on: October 10, 2014, 02:45:09 PM »
...
I'd jump ship if I could take my lenses with me. It's really difficult when you have some $18,000 invested in lenses that can only be used on Canon equipment. That's also a critical source of frustration for me. I really want better IQ for my landscape photography...and I'd also love some fast UWA lenses that perform as well as the Nikon 14-24mm (the 16-35/4 might be an answer to that, although I do like the f/2.8 aperture of my 16-35 L II).

I often feel I'm STUCK with Canon because of my lens investment. To really get the best of the alternatives that exist right now, adding the D810 and a couple UWA lenses like the 14-24 is an extremely costly endeavor as well...nearly $6000 with just the one lens, over if you get any other lenses. The A7r (or it's successor, which will hopefully be released early 2015 and bring some much needed improvements for AF and other features with it) is a very viable middle-ground option, and I'm very thankful it exists.

You don't need a UWA lens for landscape photography, in fact relatively recently I could have very handily used a 500mm or 600mm zoom lens ...

I've shot landscapes with telephoto lenses before. It's possible, and can be used to good effect. For example, this:

...
And this:
...
are telephoto panoramas, created with my 100-400mm lens (from a very great distance).

However, for the kind of compositions I really like, sweeping scenes with close, highly detailed foreground objects back to distant mountain scapes or something like that, UWA is the only option. You simply cannot do that with a 500mm or 600mm lens. The ultra wide field of view is what I want, because it lets me do things like this:
...
I could even use a couple mm wider FoV than the 16-35mm. The beauty of UWA is you can get within a mere foot of your key foreground subject, and still bring in a massively expansive landscape behind it. And still have the whole thing pretty sharp (or, if your using a T/S lens, you can have the entire thing super sharp throughout the entire field.) That's a unique capability.

Let me give you a quick critique. What are those two wide angle shots about? The mountain and its reflect or what's under the water? There are two completely different parts of that image and I'm not sure that joining them makes it better. For example, if you crop all of the bottom under water bit off the first, how does it look? Stronger image. What does the rock add to the image? If you cropped it out, would it be better or worse? Wide angle for landscape is hugely over hyped. Wide angle shooting people at events where you can't get far away from people without risk of disturbance is another matter.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20990.msg448151#msg448151

yes but if Jrista wants a zoom UWA wider than 16mm and allows him to take shots of what he likes, in a way that he likes, isn't that ok? I don't believe he's saying *all* his landscapes would be this way, just he would like that option....

15
PowerShot / Re: Official: Canon PowerShot G7 X
« on: September 15, 2014, 04:19:06 PM »
I wish they'd use a DPAF sensor in this little cameras. The little cameras frequently have focusing issues, especially for video.
Video performance will be the deciding factor for me on this one. The Sony RX100 mkIII apparently nails video

If it's a sony sensor, then they'd need to license DPAF from Canon :(

I would expect the AF from Canon to be as good as the Sony.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 18