Just ordered, pretty good deal!
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.
It might power up faster from off, but when is a cellphone off? Taking a picture with one is much quicker than using a P&S if you are confronted with a dragon riding shark.
Eye Fi card to what network? You walk around with your laptop constantly powered up in case of flying dragons with shark riders? Well now just find a network and upload it. Or you mean to Eye-Fi's proprietary storage? Well all you need to do now, if you were connected to a network that EyeFi worked with and was registered to, is go online, log in to your EyeFi account, find the folder and image and then forward it. All assuming the EyeFi card didn't flatten your G15 battery hours ago trying to upload crappy images via a non existant connection.
No, I would have taken the picture of the dragon instantly with my phone whilst you waited in vain for your G15 to power up and then fail to achieve AF. Still on my phone I would email the images to a publicist who could maximise the return. You would be searching for a power outlet for your laptop and my images would be on CNN. I would have the scoop, you would have slightly less grainy crap images.
Sounds to me like Canon is in Panic Mode. Lots of new cameras No-One is asking for. First the lack-luster M without an EVF, and now an APS-C Super Zoom (without an EVF). Keep throwing things at the wall, something will stick ... Yeah Right!!
OTOH if you need to have a wide DOF you don't really have a choice
You do - use focus stacking.
so you shouldnt take a photo at f10 for a landscape shot?
i suppose it is the focus, i only used the centre point and recomposed, but so many the focus is off, i was in egypt so light wasnt a problem, and i was also trekking in uganda and the landscape shots just lack punch. the colours and contrast just seem a bit wrong. out of 1000 pictures and some extensive sharpening, there arnt that many im happy with!
id upload a few shots but frankly im embarresed. i feel a bit cheated out of money spent. im gonna have to rent an expensive l lens and compare, but at the moment, im really disheartened.
I really wish i could figure out what he was thinking at this exact moment.
5DIII and 24-70 2.8II at 2.8
Canon cameras contain information about all the EF lenses and the commands to send to them. Third party lenses tell the camera that they are a Canon lens and then translate the command they receive to their lens. This can cause even another step that adds to inaccuracy, but it can be adjusted by AFMA as well.
Its a lot more complex that a person might think.
If you are professional or trying to break into the professional world, NO facebook is not even close, it's not even safe and secure... ANYONE can right click and download your images, and people have been known to steal images and post them as their own on facebook
I believe the lens plays a role - I'm not sure it's really a closed loop with the AF sensor. Roger Cicala's data showing more accurate focusing with the more recent lenses/bodies was supported by the finding of rotational encoders on the USM lens motors. So, with older lenses (pre-2000) we had a basically open loop where the AF sensor determined magnitude and direction of the move and that was transmitted to the lens (look-move) - if the motor moved a ratio slightly off 1:1 from the instructions, AFMA would compensate. The newer lenses+bodies apparently have a closed loop where the encoder reports movement (look-move-confirm). But there may be tolerances in the encoder (e.g. detecting movement as other than a 1:1 ratio) for which AFMA could correct. I'm not positive the loop is closed with the AF sensor, i.e., look-move-confirm-look.
Certainly, a misalignment of the AF sensor with the image sensor is one factor that AFMA corrects. I can personally attest to that - at one point, I dropped my 5DII to the pavement. The camera was perfectly functional, but the sensor alignment changed such that all of my AFMA values (for ~8 lenses) shifted 10 units negative relative to the initial values.