August 01, 2014, 07:33:24 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 - sagittariansrock

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 79
1
Canon General / Re: Neutral Density Filters - HELP !
« on: Today at 02:44:00 AM »
Hi there
Looking at buying my first batch of ND filters. Thought that a Hoya 3 stop and 6 stop would be a good start. My question is - can I stack these to achieve 9 stops using either a 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM or  EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM.

I understand that the 16-35mm might vignette badly with stacked filters. Does anyone have experience with this ?
Also that many lenses you can't actually go up to 9 stops as wide angle lenses sometimes will give you an x in your image at much lower than 9 stops.

Help and feedback please. Maybe the slim B+W might be an option, but any better with vignetting ?  Can u stack a hoya + a slim B+W on top (as I understand the slim B+W doesnt have the thread on top)

Hello PikkieChick

You do not get an X with regular ND filters (as you suggest stacking), whatever the focal length. Those "Maltese crosses" are exclusive to Variable ND filters as some of the member have mentioned.

I use the vaunted Lee system, but sometimes all you need is a quick reduction in light so you can shoot wide open. In that case. there is no real problem to stacking two ND filters, provided the following:

1. Buy good quality filters with minimal color cast- B+W or Heliopan, ideally. Top quality Hoya should be fine, too.
2. Make sure the filters work with your widest lens (in this case you're buying for 82mm filter threads, so that's fine).
3. Try to see if you can find slim mounts.
4. Make sure you have filter wrenches, cost only a few bucks.
5. Don't overtighten.
6. Expect some mechanical vignetting (no light due to the rim of the filters obscuring) up to 17-18mm, and probably some optical vignetting (reduced light due to reduced transmission in filter periphery) up to 20mm (probably correctable in post).

Now, if you find you are using 9 stops pretty frequently, or feel the need for graduated ND filters, then moving to the excellent Lee system makes a lot of sense. However, the Lee system is more bulky, expensive and the glass Big Stopper makes me nervous the minute I take it out of its tin.
So I would go ahead with the Hoya filters for now and maybe make a decision on the Lee system down the road if necessary.

2
Canon General / Re: What do you Cheap Out On?
« on: July 31, 2014, 01:49:03 PM »

2. Intervalometer - I had the Canon release (only) and it sucks, so I bought the Vello intervalometer and it works perfectly for $30


Dear Mackguyver, I've been thinking about getting an intervalometer and I also don't want to spend a lot on it. Would you mind posting the model number?

Thanks!

Vivid
Sure, it's the Vello Shutterboss Version II Timer Remote Switch for Canon with 3-Pin Connection.  I paid $37.50 for it - just a bit better than the $169 Canon price :)  Make sure you get version II.

Have the same one. Like it a lot.

Thank you for the confirmation!

Actually I'd recommend getting the Phottix aeon or Hahnel Giga T instead. For a few more dollars (still half that of Canon) you'd get an RF intervalometer, or you can connect it directly if you want more reliability. The wireless option provides you with a great remote trigger so you can be in the pics.
Just doubles the versatility.
Makes sense - though it's nice to have something cheap that I won't cry about if I lose it or break it :)

Well I bought my Phottix used for $50, so that wouldn't hurt me too much I guess.
What I wanted to say is its a good idea to just buy one radio-controlled intervalometer than a regular one AND a remote trigger, IMO.

3
Canon General / Re: What do you Cheap Out On?
« on: July 31, 2014, 09:35:59 AM »

2. Intervalometer - I had the Canon release (only) and it sucks, so I bought the Vello intervalometer and it works perfectly for $30


Dear Mackguyver, I've been thinking about getting an intervalometer and I also don't want to spend a lot on it. Would you mind posting the model number?

Thanks!

Vivid
Sure, it's the Vello Shutterboss Version II Timer Remote Switch for Canon with 3-Pin Connection.  I paid $37.50 for it - just a bit better than the $169 Canon price :)  Make sure you get version II.

Have the same one. Like it a lot.

Thank you for the confirmation!

Actually I'd recommend getting the Phottix aeon or Hahnel Giga T instead. For a few more dollars (still half that of Canon) you'd get an RF intervalometer, or you can connect it directly if you want more reliability. The wireless option provides you with a great remote trigger so you can be in the pics.
Just doubles the versatility.

4
Technical Support / Re: Flaws on the rear element
« on: July 30, 2014, 08:02:05 PM »
@LTRLI: They are tiny pin points. I shall test them under a microscope, but in general they reflect light only when lit from an angle and are too tiny to photograph.
@Aglet: I do see some dust between the elements when held up to the sun, but these spots are not visible. They are visible only when light is shone on them.
@MTS: I got the lens, otherwise perfect with box and OEM hood and accessories, for $ 350. I felt that is a really good price. I also tested the images with my limited experience- I couldn't find anything obvious even when I pixel peeped. So I am wondering which way to go.

While I am leery of buying something with a potential problem, it seems unwise to let go of a nice deal, especially when I can't visualize the problem.  :-\

5
I will second the idea of the Paragon software, however I did not buy it as a standalone. I am not even sure all hard drives will work with it.
I always use Seagate HDDs that COME with the software driver. All you have to do is install the software (free!) on your Mac and it will work with all NTFS-formatted Seagate HDDs. Probably with all NTFS HDDs whether Seagate or not- but I haven't bought a non-Seagate one to find out (especially, the hard way)

6
Lenses / Re: Why are Cine Lenses so expensive?
« on: July 30, 2014, 01:27:37 AM »
Longer throw for focus
Manual aperture ring
Both rings above accurately calibrated for distance and aperture, respectively
Better build quality, usually a bigger front opening
More aperture blades
No focus breathing (angle of view doesn't change with focus)
Parfocal (plane of focus doesn't change with focal length)

There might be some more differences, but AFAIK these are the main ones.

7
Canon General / Re: What do you Cheap Out On?
« on: July 28, 2014, 11:06:45 PM »
1. Bought the MeFoto tripod.
2. Some eBay strobe gel cases for $ 2 apiece.
3. Rosco gel set for $ 8 (thanks, PBD).
4. DIY-ing a light box for product photography with foamcore boards and a fluorescent light tube.
5. Using my floor lamp stands for flash stands (without any modifiers) for now.
6. Used a modified Optech USA strap instead of Blackrapid, just recently upgraded.
- I realized most of my cheaping out involves my light modifiers...  ::)

8
Technical Support / Re: Flaws on the rear element
« on: July 28, 2014, 10:35:39 PM »
Thanks for the posts Graham.
However, I am wondering what changes in the images should I look for, in case of miniscule flaws (or, as they say, cleaning marks). I am sure they won't be as dramatic as so much dust or a sticky!
Mt Spokane, you say it is easy to test out- my question is how do I test it? What should I look for? Thanks in advance!


9
Technical Support / Flaws on the rear element
« on: July 28, 2014, 06:36:18 PM »
Hi all
I just purchased an EF 100mm Macro USM (non-L) from a member on FredMiranda. The lens has very tiny pin-point flaws on both the front and rear elements, visible when a flashlight is pointed at them. They don't look like scratches, they are too small and superficial to be scratches- and they might only affect the coatings and not the glass. There are about half a dozen, and they are midway between the center and the edge on both elements.
My question is, will these affect the image, and if so, how can I test for it? The seller has agreed to take it back for a full refund but I don't want to return it unless I really see an adverse effect. Can someone please guide me on what to look for?
Thanks in advance.

10
I have a question: in the link posted http://petapixel.com/2012/12/24/how-to-scan-your-film-using-a-digital-camera-and-macro-lens/
the author says 4-6 shots are required for a 35mm image, but he is using a Zeiss Makro Planar, and a 1:3 magnification.
What I don't understand is, unless the magnification is greater than 1:1, why would I need to take multiple images and stitch. Can someone clarify?
Thanks!


Ah

The author is stitching multiple photos in order to extract the most detail from each negative/slide.  The explanation:

"Using an higher reproduction ratio is more time consuming (you’ll need more shots to cover the same area), but as a result you will be able to extract the most detail from the film. Here are some examples showing my Canon setup at various reproduction ratios, compared to the results of a well-respected flatbed scanner, the Epson v700..."

The exact numbers depend on the size of the negative/slide compared to the size of the digital sensor.  Using 1:1 for a 35mm negative would require stitching multiple shots on an APS-C sensor camera, or just a single shot on a full-frame digital camera.


Ah, 35mm film on an aps-c camera- that makes sense!
Thanks for the clarification :)

11
Lenses / Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« on: July 27, 2014, 02:11:12 AM »
85L II + 135L are both wonderful lenses. If money is not an issue, 85L II is the way to go for portrait. The 85L II has earned the title "King of Portrait".

Photo below was taken with 85L II @ f1.2.

As someone who loves bokeh (and to whom money might not be a huge issue), you should definitely try out the 200/2 IS. I did when I visited B&H recently, and I was blown away.
I took some very uninspiring photos within the camera shop, but reviewing them in my computer I was just awestruck- in spite of having ogled at online galleries of the lens. So try it out if you can. Kids playing outdoors- will give you plenty of room, AF is lightning fast for action too, and IS helps with indoor concerts and school plays etc.; plus you can relive having your 300/2.8 with a 1.4x TC III.

Bad idea, my G.A.S is bad as many CR members here ;D

About this: 24-70 II + 135L + 200 f2 + 300 f2.8 IS II + rumor 100-400 or Tammy 150-600 for outdoor :P

I agree with you 100%, the 200 f2 is simply awesome. As of right now, I LOVE what I have. Shooting with 2 bodies, missing shots is almost impossible.

It's not G.A.S. if you use it. You have plenty of room to use a 200/2. ;)
And we will get to see pics ;)

+1.

Re 200 2.0 - You know you want one Dylan777 ;)
I'm officially broke after 400mm + 1dx. I've declared that I'm done for 2014  ;D

I will hope for your sake that they don't release the 12/4-24 until 2015 then... ;)

12
Lenses / Re: Brenizer Method Photos/Tips
« on: July 26, 2014, 05:58:48 PM »
Hi everyone, I've only recently begun shooting with this method, and I'm totally LOVING the results I'm getting!

I'm wondering, however:  I shoot using my 135L on a 5DM3.  Does anyone here use the 85mm?  I've noticed that with the 135, I'm shooting probably more photos than I need to, but that's because I'm scared I'm going to miss an area (those of you who shoot these photos know what I'm referring to). 

Should I get an 85L just for this type of shot?  I actually don't have one, but I'd love to have one.  Maybe this is the catalyst to push me into that camp.

I've also tried it with my 70-200mm 2.8L m2 at approximately 85mm, but I'm more nervous because of the zoom ring.

Thoughts?  Also, if you have good Brenizer Method photos, please share!

One of the things Brenizer suggests is making sure you have the entire primary subject in one of the shots. This prevents any stitching issues within the main subject. It is very difficult to achieve that with the 135mm. So yes, I think an 85mm FL is necessary. You might be able to make do with a 50/1.2 or even better, the Sigma 85/1.4.
I am waiting for Canon to come up with the 85/1.4 USM (day-dreaming...)

I'm with you there.  I've noticed that it's tough to NOT include the subject in the follow-up shots when using the 135L.  That's the primary reason I'm getting that 85.

One of the reasons I'm holding off slightly is to see what Sigma comes out with.  Their new 50 and 35 are awesome (I use both and love them deeply), so I'm kinda holding out for their rumored 85 1.4 Art.

I'm sure the 85 Art will be awesome. The Sigma 85 is already pretty great, adding firmware support to resolve focusing errors will remove the one Achilles heel.

13
Lenses / Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« on: July 26, 2014, 05:57:00 PM »
85L II + 135L are both wonderful lenses. If money is not an issue, 85L II is the way to go for portrait. The 85L II has earned the title "King of Portrait".

Photo below was taken with 85L II @ f1.2.

As someone who loves bokeh (and to whom money might not be a huge issue), you should definitely try out the 200/2 IS. I did when I visited B&H recently, and I was blown away.
I took some very uninspiring photos within the camera shop, but reviewing them in my computer I was just awestruck- in spite of having ogled at online galleries of the lens. So try it out if you can. Kids playing outdoors- will give you plenty of room, AF is lightning fast for action too, and IS helps with indoor concerts and school plays etc.; plus you can relive having your 300/2.8 with a 1.4x TC III.

Bad idea, my G.A.S is bad as many CR members here ;D

About this: 24-70 II + 135L + 200 f2 + 300 f2.8 IS II + rumor 100-400 or Tammy 150-600 for outdoor :P

I agree with you 100%, the 200 f2 is simply awesome. As of right now, I LOVE what I have. Shooting with 2 bodies, missing shots is almost impossible.

It's not G.A.S. if you use it. You have plenty of room to use a 200/2. ;)
And we will get to see pics ;)

14
Lenses / Re: Brenizer Method Photos/Tips
« on: July 26, 2014, 03:42:18 PM »
Hi everyone, I've only recently begun shooting with this method, and I'm totally LOVING the results I'm getting!

I'm wondering, however:  I shoot using my 135L on a 5DM3.  Does anyone here use the 85mm?  I've noticed that with the 135, I'm shooting probably more photos than I need to, but that's because I'm scared I'm going to miss an area (those of you who shoot these photos know what I'm referring to). 

Should I get an 85L just for this type of shot?  I actually don't have one, but I'd love to have one.  Maybe this is the catalyst to push me into that camp.

I've also tried it with my 70-200mm 2.8L m2 at approximately 85mm, but I'm more nervous because of the zoom ring.

Thoughts?  Also, if you have good Brenizer Method photos, please share!

One of the things Brenizer suggests is making sure you have the entire primary subject in one of the shots. This prevents any stitching issues within the main subject. It is very difficult to achieve that with the 135mm. So yes, I think an 85mm FL is necessary. You might be able to make do with a 50/1.2 or even better, the Sigma 85/1.4.
I am waiting for Canon to come up with the 85/1.4 USM (day-dreaming...)

15
Lenses / Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« on: July 26, 2014, 03:39:42 PM »
85L II + 135L are both wonderful lenses. If money is not an issue, 85L II is the way to go for portrait. The 85L II has earned the title "King of Portrait".

Photo below was taken with 85L II @ f1.2.

As someone who loves bokeh (and to whom money might not be a huge issue), you should definitely try out the 200/2 IS. I did when I visited B&H recently, and I was blown away.
I took some very uninspiring photos within the camera shop, but reviewing them in my computer I was just awestruck- in spite of having ogled at online galleries of the lens. So try it out if you can. Kids playing outdoors- will give you plenty of room, AF is lightning fast for action too, and IS helps with indoor concerts and school plays etc.; plus you can relive having your 300/2.8 with a 1.4x TC III.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 79