October 23, 2014, 02:06:58 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 - jeff92k7

Pages: [1] 2
1
Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: March 22, 2014, 12:44:32 PM »
My puppy over the last few months....

2
Canon General / Top Gear
« on: March 07, 2014, 03:38:45 PM »
I was watching Top Gear's Sunday show (UK version, US airing is this coming Monday, I believe) and in one shot, I could very clearly see a typical Canon white lens attached to a pretty fancy rig.  I couldn't get a good view of the camera body, but it appeared to be some sort of video camera body and not a typical DSLR body.

Does anyone here know what kind of camera that was?  Is that typical of what they're using to film most of their segments with now?

I must say, I am very impressed with the very cinematic look of a couple of their recent stories.  I noticed it a week or so ago, and then again in this episode - specifically where Richard is driving the Porsche Hybrid around the racetrac.  Some of the shots look very, very nice.  They look much nicer than I'm used to seeing on most TV shows.  They almost look like film with the dynamic range in them, but I seriously doubt they are shooting film.

3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon T2i/550d write speed n Burst mode
« on: July 01, 2013, 03:35:07 PM »
First of all, your Sandisk card isn't writing anywhere near 45MBps.  That rating is for read speed under certain circumstances.  Write speed will be closer to 12MBps.

The different classes of cards will indicate the approximate write speed.  Class 4 will write at approximately 4MBps.  Class 6 at 6MBps.  Class 10 at 10MBps.

Read and write speeds also vary dramatically by card manufacturer.  I.e. I have the same Sandisk card that you mentioned and get about 12MBps write/42MBps read speeds.  I also have a Sony that runs at 8MBps write/92MBps read.  Every card is different.  I have found that my Sandisk card performs the best in camera.  If you want to be happy, get another Sandisk card like you already have.

The burst speed has less to do with the card as it does the internal camera memory buffer.  Think of the buffer like a bathtub and the data from the sensor coming in like water from a fire hose.  It's going to fill up pretty fast.  The output to your card is like the bathtub drain.  It will never drain anywhere near as fast as the bathtub fills up.  A faster card may give a slightly bigger drain size, but it's marginal at best and will never make a noticeable difference in burst performance.

Stick with name brand class 10 cards and get rid of the class 4.  That's about as good as you'll get.

4
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L Non-IS Discontinued?
« on: June 13, 2013, 04:17:17 PM »
I'm a little disappointed, but not really surprised.  I'm starting to seriously consider getting one of the 70-200's and have been leaning towards different ones depending on the day of the week.  The 2.8 IS II is way too overpriced for my mainly hobbyist budget, so I've been looking at around the $1g mark.  That leaves three options: the f4 at $650, the f4 IS at ~1000, and the f2.8 at ~1000.  I tend to lean away from the f4 since I really want IS at that aperture, but have had a hard time deciding between the f4 IS or the f2.8.

At the same price, it's tough to decide between a 3-stop IS system (steady shots at slower shutter), or a 1-stop faster aperture (faster moving subjects)

With the f2.8 being discontinued, that pretty much makes up my mind for me.  Now to find the money....

5
By the way, I'm just using a normal 55mm lens for my video. While I pan in the forest, it's blurry. Is it the lens or shutter speed that I should use/change? Does that have to do anything with my setting of 720p?

Depends on a lot of things:  Is your aperture narrow enough to keep a deep depth of field?  Is your shutter speed 1/125 or higher?  Is the lens focused properly?  Is the lens a good quality lens?  And perhaps most importantly... How fast are you panning?

With settings of say, f16, 1/125, properly set focus, and a slow pan speed, the shot should come out pretty sharp.  Of course, this all assumes bright sunlight or adequate light.  If you're in a dark forest, then jacking up the ISO too high can introduce softness.

Also, what picture style are you using?  If using Neutral (recommended), then there is no in-camera sharpening being applied.  You need to add sharpening in post production.

720p really has almost nothing to do with a blurry shot.

6
1080p/30 gives higher static resolution but lower temporal resolution. At certain rates of camera or subject motion, the effective resolution of 1080p/30 will drop below 720p/60.

Is this due to rolling shutter, or something else?

Fast motion.  Rolling shutter becomes visible with fast motion, but the temporal resolution doesn't really have anything to do with rolling shutters.

For typical results, you shoot with a shutter speed of double your frame rate.  For 30p, you use a 1/60 shutter speed.  For 60p, you would use a 1/120 (1/125 is close enough with DSLRs) shutter speed.  The faster shutter speed gives a clearer image with fast moving subjects and thus provides a higher perceived resolution.

1080i60 (1080p30) still has higher resolution, but you lose details in fast moving content due to the motion blur of the slower shutter speed.

7
The TV networks ABC, FOX, ESPN and A&E use only 720p/60. Most others use 1080/30. So both 1080/30 and 720p/60 are truly HD and both part of the ATSC HD standard.

Correction:  1080i60 and 720p60 are both part of the ATSC standard.  There is no 1080p format in the ATSC standard.

If outputting to 1080i60 (blu-ray or ATSC broadcast), then film in 1080p30.  That will perfectly interlace into 1080i60 which will then be later deinterlaced on the display back into 1080p30.  Your net result is the same.  Its really just semantics at that point.

However, many TV shows and nearly all films are shot at 24p (24 full frames per second) and then converted to 720p60 or 1080i60 for ATSC broadcast.  If you want the final result to have identical cadence to most top TV shows and hollywood films, then film it at 1080p24 and output to 1080p24 on a Blu-ray disc (1080p24 is part of the Bu-ray spec).  Even if the final TV doesn't show true 24p content, it will still have the same cadence of the TV shows/movies on the same TV.

All acronyms aside, shoot in whatever works best for your intended viewing experience.  I tend to shoot almost all my videos in 1080p30 since they will either be output to web or shown on other computer devices.  It also will interlace to 1080i60 just fine, as I mentioned above, in case of the need to show in an ATSC compatible format.  If my videos were intended for theatrical release, then I would shoot in 24p.  The goal is to avoid as many frame rate and resolution conversions as possible from start to finish.  If you can shoot, edit, and render all in the frame rate and resolution of your final display device, then that is ideal.

8
Canon General / Re: EOS 5D Mark III w/24-70 f/4L IS Kit Coming Soon
« on: June 05, 2013, 03:44:27 PM »
I still don't get the point of the 24-70 f4 lens.  It's more expensive than the 24-105, has less focal length range, and is comparable in optical quality.  Why?  Just why?   If you want noticeably better optical quality, then go for the 24-70 f2.8.  Otherwise, you're better off with the 24-105 for less money.

If you're right and Canon is going to discontinue the 24-105, then will they bring something to replace it or do they want to force users to a smaller focal length range so that users spend even more money to add a 70-200 version to make up for it?

9
I started out with a Canon Vixia camcorder when I needed a good video camera for a decent price.  The Canon got consistently higher reviews over the competing models in the same price range.  A couple of years later, I wanted another video camera so I could use multiple cameras on projects.   With an increased budget, I reviewed the available options.  Again, the Canon cameras came out on top because of the video capabilities of the Canon DSLR's.  I purchased a T2i and a few lenses, installed magic lantern, and have never regretted it.

Now I spend more time doing still photos than I do with video, and still find Canon cameras (and glass) to be well worth the cost.

10
Lenses / Re: Concert haze causing out of focus pictures
« on: March 06, 2013, 04:57:39 PM »
If nothing else was in the region of your AF points, I think you've kind of answered your own question, that the environmentals used at the concert are messing with the AF.

That's kind of what I figured, but being a newbie photographer, I'm always second guessing myself.  Multiple Google and forum searches were no help, so I was hoping to find someone with experience here that could say that they have experienced similar issues, or that they never had any issues like that (indicating that my cheap lens isn't focusing right at long distances).

I do appreciate everyone's responses.

11
Lenses / Re: Concert haze causing out of focus pictures
« on: March 06, 2013, 04:53:18 PM »
"mix position" is called Front of house, or FOH. The "Haze" you are referring to is from a fogger, this isn't just water mist though, it's a chemical mix that is slightly opaque to create that "beam" effect with the lights, so it's not as simple as filtering because the fog itself is not transparent.

Yeah, I've been an audio engineer for over 20 years.  I've mixed FOH and monitors regularly since I was a teenager.  I also have quite a few years experience in event production and currently serve at my church as the Technical Director overseeing a team who handle all aspects of technical production.   I only recently (last year) got interested in photography.  I used "Mix position" as a generic term since I doubt as many photographers would understand the FOH acronym.

This "haze" was actually haze.   Fog uses a different chemical solution and is a much heavier, short term effect.  Haze (oil based solution) is a different chemical mix that is designed to last a lot longer and "hang" in the air to help produce those lighting beam effects that everyone likes to do now.  I don't want to bore anyone with the technical details though.

I don't even know how many concerts and events I've photographed in the past year, but this was actually the first where haze was being used (and quite heavily).  I'm a newbie photographer, and as such, have never run into this issue before, so I surmised that the haze may have caused the focus issues and thought I'd ask the professionals here before I write it off to cheap equipment.

I suppose it is a little reassuring that you have experienced similar issues.  At least that points to the haze/smoke/fog as being at least partly responsible.

12
The best thing I have found when shooting concerts is to go to manual mode for pretty much everything.  Set the aperture, shutter, and ISO where you need them for good pictures under most lighting colors.  When the bands do all red lights, then you just keep shooting with the manual settings.  Solid red lights, mainly from LEDs now, will throw off the camera if it is in any auto mode.

Also, if you're shooting RAW, then you have some flexibility afterwards in recovering shadow detail or pulling back highlights.

13
Lenses / Re: Concert haze causing out of focus pictures
« on: March 06, 2013, 04:26:03 PM »
Why not just use manual focus?

That's always an option, but my post is less an issue of manual vs auto focus as it is an issue of whether haze (or other particles in the air like smoke, fog, etc) will throw off auto focus.  Besides, have you ever tried to manual focus with the 50 1.8?  The focus ring is impossibly small and not very smooth.

14
Lenses / Re: Concert haze causing out of focus pictures
« on: March 06, 2013, 02:57:15 PM »
What auto-focus settings are you using?  I've been shooting with single-point expanded, mostly on one shot.

I use AI Servo with Back button control and center focus point only for the shots in question. (T2i) (Press and release focus button and it works the same as one-shot - for anyone unfamiliar with back button focus modes.)

You are correct that the haze does make all the images a little soft and reduces contrast, but in the pictures from the back, it is very obvious, even without pixel peeping, that the focus is way off.  The audio mix position (about 1/3 back into the room is sharper than anything on the stage, and from the audience silhouettes, it appears that the focal plane was about one row in front of the mix position.  These were some of the very few pictures I took with my 50 1.8.  I have never taken pictures at that distance with that lens before, but thought I would try it since it framed the stage well and gave a good indication of the crowd size, as well as providing a fairly shallow depth of field that would have looked great had the focus actually been on the stage.

15
Lenses / Re: Concert haze causing out of focus pictures
« on: March 06, 2013, 10:05:08 AM »
So I guess that since no one has replied to this that I'm the only one to ever experience this issue?

Pages: [1] 2