April 21, 2014, 06:19:37 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 - neuroanatomist

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 843
Photography Technique / Re: Panning
« on: April 20, 2014, 11:06:15 PM »
Slower is better.    At f/2.8, you're getting both motion blur and OOF blur in the background.  Here's one from a sunny day where I should have brought an ND filter, 70mm (with the 24-70 II), 1/40 s and f/18 (so the blur is all motion).

Both are great for portraits, the 85mm focal length is more versatile, IMO.  135mm is good for individual headshots.  Your signature indicates you have the 70-200 II, f/2 is close, f/1.2 isn't so close.

85L II.

EOS Bodies / Re: Petition to Canon regarding the EOS 5D Mark III
« on: April 19, 2014, 10:33:23 PM »
1-2-3 buy a 1D X.   ::)

Lenses / Re: Bought the 300mm 2.8 ii and think its huge
« on: April 19, 2014, 06:41:06 PM »
No but i have been doing indoor high school sports and getting into wildlife. Thought I would try is it aince my 70-200 makes me crop too much. I bought it for that purpose but just trying to justify if its worth it or if I should get the 300mm f4 which is cheaper.

You have a 70-200/2.8 II.  The 70-200/4L IS is cheaper, smaller and lighter.  It's also f/4.  Do you need the extra stop or not?

Lenses / Re: Bought the 300mm 2.8 ii and think its huge
« on: April 19, 2014, 06:28:11 PM »
I tried out a 300/2.8L IS II the other day, it was in the rentals section of a 'going out of business' Calumet location.  I was amazed at how small and light it felt. 

Of course, I've been using a 600/4L IS II for 1.5 years now.  :)

I pulled out my debit card when the guy told me it was $3600, but he needed to check with the liquidation manager if that was the MkI or MkII price, and the manager said rentals weren't for sale.  Damn!

Software & Accessories / Re: Wrist Strap for Canon EOS 5D III
« on: April 19, 2014, 01:58:40 PM »
The E2 is a hand strap, not a wrist strap.  If you're looking for a wrist strap, where the camera dangles free from a loop around your wrist, Op-Tech makes one. 

A hand strap wraps around the back of your hand for some extra support while shooting, and also makes it more secure to hold/carry the camera one-handed.  With the battery grip, you don't need the tripod socket attachment that comes with the E2, since the battery grip provides the lower lug for the strap.

Canon General / Re: "MAP" pricing....How long will it last????
« on: April 19, 2014, 11:16:20 AM »
I do not say that I have the answer to the original question, but as very often in this forum, the discussion tends to focus around the US. The US customers have had, and still have really cheap prices offered for Canon gear.  I just got back from NYC and bought two 600ex rt plus a st e3 at full price at B&H, and that price is two thirds of the price in Norway. Before the limit on price was put in effect, a professional nature photographer could get the 800mm for approx 3000 USD less than in Norway, which meant that you could fly over and have a weekend there, and still save money. Thus I argue that the camera stores catering to the professionals in other countries than the US had a really hard time staying in business when B&H decided to lower the prices.

Does Norway have import duties?  I could have driven from Boston to Toronto in a few hours, and bought a 600 II for a couple thousand less than at B&H.  But the import duties when bringing the lens back into the US would have been significant.

Which is the whole point.  With the 5D3/1Dx/1D4/1Ds3 etc., you don't have to use focus/recompose.  Focus/recompose sucks hardcore.

Unless you're the mythical SuperCarl, who's X-ray vision allows him to see through facts as if they aren't even there, and who's powerful lungs can blow hot air all day long.  SuperCarl, who can bend felt with his bare hands, leap tall golfballs in a single bound, and has a 6D that defies the principles of geometry and optical physics. 

We have an almost 2-year-old toddler who can move about as quickly and randomly as these piggies, and the AF with my 6D and 50 f/1.4 and 85 1.8 does just fine under f/2.0 using the center point.  Overall, my hit rate for moving kid shots is in the 75-80% range, and I'm happy with that.  I know a 5D3 or 1Dx would do much better, but for my overall use (kids/landscapes/portraits/macro and a little high school golf and cross country) the 6D is a great camera.

That's very similar to my experience the 5DII, although the hit rate dropped noticeably when the subject was moving toward/away from the camera, or when trying to track moving subjects in lower light.  For example, kids coming down a slide at an indoor 'bouncy house' (4-6 EV lighting), the 6D I had borrowed locked on initially at the top, but couldn't keep up with tracking.  My 1D X tracks the whole way down, either following the kid with the center point, or using auto point selection and letting the system hand off focus from one AF point to the next.  The 7D's AF system would do a decent job, but the need for a fast shutter speed in low light pushes the ISO beyond the 7D's usable range (in some cases, even beyond the highest available setting!).

What does that say about the validity of your statements regarding the 5DIII and 1D X?

I don't go into the 1DX thread and spew hatred for the 1DX.  Yet you and your butt kissers feel the need to come into a 6D thread to bash it.  What does that say about you?

I wasn't passing off the image as "usable", as in professional quality.  It was merely an experiment.  Only a fool would imply otherwise.  No need to get defensive just because the experiment worked.  At the very least I would have used exposure compensation and shot in RAW, if it were meant to be printed or something (and yes that would have pushed to ISO 50k or higher).  When I have said in the past, that the 6D's center AF point aids tremendously in low light autofocusing, I'm using positive exposure compensation (usually a full stop, sometimes more), in order to get the RGB curve to go farther toward the right side.  And in those situations, the ISO I would consider "usable" for good professional quality, is not above 10,000.  "Usable" for acceptable pro quality, could be 20,000, but not 25,600.  If that means the available light I'm shooting in, is brighter than -3 EV, so be it.  But that alone, does not mean this center point, is not still very usable, when compared to an autofocus point that is only rated for -2 EV.  It just means that for a "normal exposure" at -3 EV (as in, a very black image), the necessary ISO combined with the lack of any significant recorded signal in the entire upper half of the RGB curve...there is not significant dynamic range from the sensor, or the file's 14 bit format itself, to produce anything other than a dark noisy image.  Again though, digital photographers learn early on, that you look at the RGB curve, and expose for that.  I deliberately did not do that in this case, because I wanted it to look similarly dark to what my eye saw.  It still looks brighter than what my eye saw, though.

The back half of the bubble level, is within the focus plane.  The index mark you keep harping on, is ABOVE the plane of the plate that the bubble is mounted in.  And the camera, is angled diagonally to the plane the plate exists in, both left-right and front-back axis.  Stop ignoring that.  That alone explains why the index mark is near the plane of focus.  What about the right side of the plate?  It's in the focus plane.  Draw a diagonal line perpendicular to the sensor, and it runs right through the rear half of the bubble level.  You can say it's not because the focus plane is "infinitely small", and thus exists between the subatomic particles that make up the atoms of the plastic of the bubble.  But that just smacks of desperation.  The plane of focus is effectively more than 1 pixel in width on this sensor (due to the limited resolution of the lens itself, but also the high ISO).  And since there is motion blur, it's more like 4 pixels in width.  That's a lot bigger than "infinitely small".  I know one thing that's infinitely small though, and you keep compensating for it, lol.

Since you say your 1DX could autofocus in -2EV light (as you claim this was)...how about trying it on a similar black object with a tiny light colored object for contrast, and posting the results?  Make sure to shoot only as a jpeg (with no in-camera NR), that the exposure is not faster than 1/13 second, there's no image stabilization, and that you are hand-holding it while bending over a bit, and that your subject distance is ONLY 4 inches in front of the front lens element.  Also, make sure to select ONLY THE OUTERMOST side autofocus point (don't use any groupings).  Your results had better be better than mine, because you won't be needing to focus recompose.  Make sure the available light in the room, is equal to 3 lit candles (with no reflectors), placed 8 feet away from the camera.

You're suggesting that I post an image?  I'm still waiting for you to post even a single image, of the hundreds you must have if you're correct in your claim that the -3 EV AF sensitivity of the 6D is, "...very useful in the majority of situations where you are shooting wildlife (or people) around, before, or after sunset."  Instead, you provide an image of a ballhead in a dark room, and even that was at -2 EV, not -3 EV.

Thanks for your reply above, which demonstrates the following:

  • You don't understand the concept of a focal plane.
  • You are unable to admit your mistakes.
  • You have the emotional maturity of a preadolescent boy.

Software & Accessories / Re: Chuck a 5dmk iii in a rucksack
« on: April 18, 2014, 08:33:03 PM »
What about the LensCoat BodyBag - it says it fits the 5DIII and they have ones that cover the lens (regular or telephoto, too, and ones that cover the body with any lens.  See here

I have a couple of the Pro versions for my 1D X, one for the body only (works with the 40/2.8 'body cap'), and one standard zoom for body with 24-70 II.  They work well.

Software & Accessories / Re: The best tripod ...
« on: April 18, 2014, 08:21:47 PM »
I'm in the same boat. I want a new tripod to hold the gear I'm using but I seems to not be able to find the balance between lightweight and holding capacity and price. Although all of these combined usually equal expensive.

Stable. Lightweight. Inexpensive. You can have up to two of those characteristics in a tripod, but not all three. 

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Calumet Store Closing Sale
« on: April 18, 2014, 06:27:16 PM »
The guy is losing his job anyway... the least he could do is throw you a bone.

The first guy is...the 'manager' is employed by the holding company that's doing the asset liquidation. 

To clarify, "Best at FL+aperture" refers to the Lens Score, which is based primarily on 'performance in 150 lux illumination' (like a dimly lit warehouse).  The Lens Score is only secondarily influenced by the optical metrics (sharpness, CA, etc.), despite those metrics being listed under the Score. That's why almost all lenses are 'best' wide open, even though the optical metrics are rarely highest at max aperture.

Consider that the Sigma 50/1.4 A is not 'best at 50mm f/1.4', but at f/2.  Since giving up a full stop of light is obviously not better for 'performance in 150 lux' that suggests that one or more of the secondary factors measured for the Sigma 50/1.4 A at f/1.4 were sufficiently bad to counteract the loss of a stop of light.  Or it could be that DxO just screwed up their testing, it certainly wouldn't be the first time.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 843