October 02, 2014, 03:03:36 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
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.

2
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.

3
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.


4
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.

5
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.  :)

6
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.

7
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

8
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.

9
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.  ;)

10
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.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Am I the only one excited about the new 7D mk2?
« on: September 22, 2014, 04:40:45 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.

Actually the 70-200 IS II focuses faster than the 300 IS II. And I can not notice any focusing slowdown on the 300 IS II even with 2x converter. The 70-200 however is slooooow with the 2x. This is my experience with both 5DIII and 1DX, the 1DX is slightly faster with both lenses.

So apparently (wether its true or not) the af speed is supposed to be the same with or without the converters.  Af has to move less distance with the converters attached so time to reach focus is about the same.  Now getting a lock at f5.6 or f8 is another story

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Official: Canon EOS 7D Mark II
« on: September 21, 2014, 10:45:33 AM »
I kind of agree with you.  If people are ready to jump ship to someone other than Canon due to read noise they are blindly ignoring the other aspects of Canon cameras that makes them far better than the competition.

I for one wont invest in Nikon due to their consistent unreliability.  They are fine for consumers who use them for fun but when your livelihood and reputation are on the line you want equipment that will not break down in the harshest of conditions.

If the shots you are taking as so specialized that read noise is deal breaker then maybe you should be looking at some other technology that involves chip cooling and other technologies specifically designed for low light, high gain, photography.

No one likes noise in their images but don't ignore the other aspects that make Canon a better choice.

Those that speak for others on this forum are completely out of line.  Some of the images that are posted are better than top of the class and to say they are "impatient" with Canons noise progress is pretty ridiculous and invalidates most of their points and consideration here.




Wouldn't this whole sensor read noise debate not be better served over at http://forums.usa.canon.com
They do actually have Canon people participating in those forums, ineffective? Certainly no less so than here!

13
So here's a question, how can one determine if an affected model has already had the new firmware installed?  This would be more relevant for those that have picked up the MKII used.

14
Reviews / Re: Canon EOS 7D MK II Field Review of THE APS-C DSLR KING .
« on: September 15, 2014, 10:15:06 PM »
Yeah he doesn't even mention the EXIF info so this is more of a "how it feels/democratic" view.  I could have provided a much better review shooting high school football at night with stadium lighting.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Time wasted... re: 7D Mark II
« on: September 15, 2014, 12:46:16 PM »
I consider this forum noise.  For 1800.00 and a better sensor than the old 7D, it was worth waiting for.  The only reason I perused these forums was to find out when the pre-orders were starting.


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 48