September 16, 2014, 05:43:14 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 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 47
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: AF Cases 5d3/1dX
« on: August 30, 2013, 01:11:01 PM »
Hi Viggo,

When shootin portraits i only use single point autofocus and i have no problems, even with my 85 1.2. With my kid running all over the place, i use case 1 and try to keep the focus point on his eyes and everything is fine to. Have you tried to microadjust your lens???? This may be the problem...

Hi thanks, yeah, it's been calibrated by Reikan Focal. And I do get most shots in focus, andeven miss by 2 cm the shot is useless.

I have tried googling about inconsistencies in AF with the 200mm f2.0 and 100% of the hits I find is the opposite, NO inconsistency, incredible accuracy etc etc. And I'm very used to the 1dx, and I had MUCH better hitrate with my 70-200 mk2, so I'm starting to think that there might be something off with my lens...

That's an expensive item to be just a paperweight. Don't think twice. Send it in to Canon for evaluation. Or exchange as defective if it's still in the exchange period.

Mkii lenses incorporate closed loop AF which the 5d3 and 1dx utilize.  Older lenses do not.  I have the same issue and the 70-200 nails AF every time.

For f2 lense you may want to enable only cross type AF points.  Default is to use them all.  I've had better AF luck that way but typically on fast moving objects such as birds.

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: August 29, 2013, 09:09:57 AM »
Thx Kernuak & Romain!

@Kernuak - Haha, I was kinda iffy about the dust texture. Got a few comments saying they liked it and a couple who weren't very fond of it  :o  But this was shot wide open on the 50L @ f/1.2 (with an ND Filter attached), and an Alien Bee AB1600 to the right of the model. Pretty much all!  ;D

I think the dust texture is fine but it would be better if some were blurred a bit more..or less of it.  It's a bit distracting having it all in focus.

1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: August 10, 2013, 12:33:16 AM »
Between all the outstanding photos in this thread and a bit of a windfall coming to me, I confess to being terribly tempted to skip the 5D III and live a little...

I like the way you think Jim!  Good luck!   ;D

I think you should get both!  With a windfall coming you will appreciate the quiet mode of the 5diii shutter.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D or 5D III?
« on: August 10, 2013, 12:29:19 AM »
My opinion is to get the 5diii now and later pick up a 70d or a 7dii when they are released.  The low noise on the 5diii will let you crop more so you don't really lose much vs a crop sensor.  That tide will change later when the next versions come out.

For now, the 5diii is an awesome camera and in some ways better than the 1dx but the two are purpose built for two different types of shootings.  The 7d while still an excellent camera is still a 7d with sensor tech that is many years old now.  I own and use both but tend to use the 5diii at higher iso and lower light conditions.  7d is reserved for daytime use only and iso 400 or less.

Hello, everyone! :D

I've been doing photography for a couple of years now, and I think it's time for me to upgrade in terms of my camera body. I currently use a Canon 1100D (T3), and it's starting to frustrate me. Namely the incredibly slow FPS, and the horrible ISO performance. I just don't know what I should upgrade to- 7D (Plus a lens, maybe), or the 5D III?

I primarily shoot wildlife photos (mostly birds), but I also love landscape shots, and some macro stuff. In short, I love nature.

The thing is, the locations where I shoot are usually somewhat dark, so I need to bump up the ISO. As a result, lots of my photos are unusable because of the noise, but I also lose loads of photos because of the dismal FPS of the 1100D. Should I get the 7D (and probably the 70-200L- or maybe something else? Any advice there?) for it's great 8 FPS, but with not-so-fantastic ISO performance, or should I get the 5D III, which has great ISO performance, but is 2 FPS slower than the 7D? I know that 2 FPS makes all the difference for pros, but will it make that much of a difference for me?

The 5D III also has a superior AF system to the 7D. Is it really THAT much of a difference?

I don't really care about the megapixel difference. I almost never print, and all of my good photos go to my Facebook page, so megapixels don't matter to me.

Also, the 7D is a crop sensor, which means that I will get more reach, but at the cost of DOF. Is that worth its ISO performance?

Thanks! :D

Software & Accessories / Re: Sidekick or Full Wimberly
« on: July 30, 2013, 03:34:11 PM »
Full wimberly.  It is more stable, provides better support, and you will upgrade to the full wimberly anyway.  So just bite it and get what you really want in the first place.  :)

Lenses / Re: Superteles: 300 vs 500
« on: July 27, 2013, 08:05:19 AM »
Eml58, looks like you have used a number of lenses in the past.  I was wondering what your opinion is on using the 300 2.8L II +1.4iii+apc-c compared to a 600 F4L IS mk1+full frame?

Wondering if the new 300 combo on a crop is as good as the old 600 by itself on a full frame?

I'll have one of the new 300s in a couple of weeks for eval and plan to run this comparison through it's paces.

My thoughts based on what I own & have owned.

300/400 f/2.8 Version 1 Lenses, both great, but heavy.

300 & 400 f/2.8 Version 2 Lenses, IQ I feel about the same as the Version 1 Lenses, but 30 percent less weight.

600f/4 Version 2 Lens, lightish, great IQ

200-400f/4 great versatility, great sharpness, but horrible price.

When I purchased the 200-400f/4 I sold the 400f/2.8 as I dont feel I'll use the 400f/2.8 that much anymore.

I kept the 300f/2.8 II & 600f/4 II as they do a different job, 300f/2.8 great for low light, hand holdable, all round in my view the sharpest Lens Canon make, works really well with Series III 1.4x

I kept the 600 f/4 as with the 1.4x gives me some Legs.

If you shoot Birds, at some point you will need good IQ 600 +, the 600f/4 with 1.4x will give you that with spades, clearly seen from Images from people such as Gary Samples with his Eagles.

The 300f/2.8 I will work very well with the Series III 1.4x, But for Birds I think you will find yourself short most of the time.

The 2x Converters are in my opinion almost worthless as they degrade the IQ way too much, but they give you an Image at a price in an emergency.

If you shoot mostly wildlife your 300f/2.8 plus your 1.4x converter should work just fine, look to upgrade at some point when you can afford it to the 600f/4 II if you find your shooting BIF more than other wildlife, the issue is you may then find the 600 is too long for wildlife but just fine for BIF, Life, full of difficult decisions.

Which ever way you go, good luck with the Imaging.

Lenses / Re: Superteles: 300 vs 500
« on: July 27, 2013, 07:41:47 AM »
With todays high MP cameras, you get better IQ using a 1.4x and cropping than using the 2x.  The only use for the 2X is when you need the reach but cant or dont want to lug around the equivalent in a prime.  No one would ever use it as a "primary" solution.

The 2x Converters are in my opinion almost worthless as they degrade the IQ way too much, but they give you an Image at a price in an emergency.

many world renowned wildlife photographers tend to disagree they are useless.

but i guess amateurs have a higher standard....  8)

Lenses / Re: Superteles: 300 vs 500
« on: July 25, 2013, 12:41:20 PM »
I have the 300 2.8 mk1 and the 600 f/4L mk1 and use them on a 5DIII.  With a full frame camera you need to be able to get to 600 one way or another for wildlife.  I've contemplated downsizing to the 500 due to the weight issues but would seriously miss the extra 100mm.  On the 7D, I can use the 300 + 1.4x and get about the same.

I've even considered trading in both the 300 and 600 for the 300mkii if the IQ would stand up with the 1.4iii extender.  I'm about to get one on eval so I can make that decision in a couple of months.

So my friend it's all about what you shoot the most.  with the 500 F/4 you lose one stop over the 300 2.8, you lose some flexibility of being able to use extenders and still get a lot of light, and you probably will lose a little bit of AF speed.  On my 600 the AF speed is ok with the 5DIII but I swear the 300 2.8 +1.4iii AF's faster and more accurately.  The 300 combo also seems to better track eagles flying toward the camera (i.e. more keepers but more cropping required).

I too think the 200-400 would be great but waaaaayyyyyyy out of my price range.  Spending 4k on the 300 2.8 was about my limit and getting the 500 is only feasible by trading the 300 and a wide angle plus putting up a few hundred cash on my end.

Congrats on the 200-400!!!! Especially on a crop body you basically have a 320-896mm zoom....covers pretty much everything

Software & Accessories / Re: How good is Reikan FoCal?
« on: July 24, 2013, 02:29:30 PM »
I guess there is hope still.  :)  I'll give manual mode a shot when I purchase my next lens.  Shouldn't be long now....

I tried manual mode today on my 50 f/1.2 on my 5D Mark III and it worked beautifully.  It's my toughest lens to calibrate and while I wouldn't use manual mode for my 5D Mark II, considering I have to sit there and fool with my 5D Mark III, it was much more efficient.  It took my about 2-3 minutes total to take the shots (2 at each multiple of 5 from -20 to +20) because I didn't have to sit there while it downloaded...and processed...and calculated...

You have to manually enter the AFMA setting, but if you do -20, -20, -15, -15...15, 15, 20, 20 like I did, it's not hard.  It still takes a while to process the RAW files, but overall it's a much more pleasurable experience and all but one of my shots was consistent and I got great results.  No "adding more shots" crap that I get with it tethered, particularly with this lens.

Lenses / Re: What's the Difference: 1.4X EF Extender 2 Vs. 3
« on: July 24, 2013, 01:43:21 PM »
Another difference is that the MKIII extenders have more screws in the mount area providing more support.  I rented a MKII extender before buying my mkIII and I was a bit nervous carrying by the camera with a 300 2.8 attached.  After getting the MKIII I am not concerned with carrying that combo by the body.

It's a small difference and likely less important than IQ but if that kind of thing bothers you than it's something to consider as well toward the upgrade.

One big difference is the AF circuitry, which was optimized to work with the newer MkII supertele lenses to provide faster and more precise AF when using the extender (AF performance with other lenses is the same as the MkII extenders). 

According to Bryan at TDP, the 1.4xIII has less barrel distortion and noticeably less CA.  The 2xIII is slightly sharper in the mid frame and corners, and has slight barrel distortion (whereas the MkII had slight pincushion distortion - which is generally less noticeable than barrel).

Physically, the 2xIII has two more elements and is 22% heavier; the 1.4xIII also has two more elements (grouped differently, so one less group), but the weight is pretty much the same.  The MkIII versions have the fluorine coating on the exposed elements which makes them easier to clean.  Also, the MkIII extenders have the 'new' paint color which matches the MkII superteles, if that sort of thing matters to you...

Lenses / Re: 200mm f/2.8 II vs. 70-200 f/2.8 IS II
« on: July 11, 2013, 04:17:07 PM »
I haven't compared these two spcifically but I definitely notice a difference in light transmittance to the sensor using a prime vs a zoom.  Same F ratio but you may get a slightly faster shutter speed using the  prime in the same shooting conditions.
Someone who has both should be able to easily report the delta.

Seems like some of you can reproduce this problem at will.  You should report it to Canon as it seems others have noticed it.  I for one have not so it's either some combo of firmware settings or an issue with hardware.  The hardest issue to fix is one that's intermittent.  If this is reproducible you should let Canon know so they can try to resolve it for everyone.

The only times I've seen this happen is when 1) my battery door was not closed completely and 2) with the battery grip installed the twist lock for the battery tray had twisted ever so slightly.  There are switches on both that will prevent a power up. 

Other than that I have shot thousands of hours with the 5D3 and never has something happened like that that couldn't be explained.

1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: July 04, 2013, 10:17:35 PM »
Color looks fine.  Its very warm toned likely due to sun angle but I wouldnt call that bad color.  I often find the jpg recompression on these forums are not all that great. 

I just posted the image Great Horned Owl...anyone viewing this, can you tell me if the colours are off? It looks fine on my computer and on my ipad photos folder, but when viewed online on my ipad, they colours are  awful?


Better act quick.  Stock is drying up.  Adorama is already out of stock and last I checked B&H only had the zoom kit left.

I can feel my reaction changing from "resistance" to "black or white?" and "22mm STM or 18-15mm?"

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 47