Messages

3091

Technical Support / Re: This Cant be Correct? Huge AFMA.

« on: October 19, 2012, 09:35:39 PM »

I found that from the screenshot you show, waiting a couple of spinning-Ajax-wheel minutes (feels like an eternity), the body ID and the firmware version show up, and the Connect button becomes clickable. But clicking it triggered a force quit for me, every time.

Please let me know what they say.  Thanks!

3092

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Need help deleting a memorized AF point on a 5dmk3

« on: October 19, 2012, 09:26:29 PM »

Press the AF point selection button and the ISO/FEC button together. It's on p.324 of the manual.

3093

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon

« on: October 19, 2012, 09:16:19 PM »

neuroanatomist


 how about to receive 4 raw files  from me and  5dmk2 and d800,  same parameters regarding time, f-stop and base iso and test for your self how it looks regarding DR, noise, or it to much work for you ?
And the same with 1dx and d800 regarding noise/banding  in lower levels. ( I am calling your cards  neuroanatomist and I will do that as long you are ridicules DXO or my findings regarding sensors DR, noise,QE and FWC. And the same to you Jrista) Im shore that this will be  a new experience for you both here at CR.

You claim that you've been shooting professionally since 1984.  Since he died in 1980, and Sweden is ~1200 km from Austria, I presume you've never met Dr. Hans Asperger.  I wonder if you're familiar with the syndrome he described - the hallmarks are perseveration and poor social skills.  Sorry, these non sequiturs slip out from time to time.

Clearly, you are failing to understand my point. Let me try one more time, despite the foreknowledge that it's almost certainly a futile effort.  I don't want your RAW files.  I don't need to be convinced that the D800 has broader DR than the 5DIII or 1D X - it does, no question. Whether its 1.5-stops or 3-stops isn't relevant to me - more is more, and I'm not ridiculing anything.  My point is there is more to a good image than broad dynamic range.  Does it help, for certain scenes? Yes. Is it necessary for every scene?  No.  Is it meaningless in some scenes? Yes.  Would I like it if Canon sensors had more DR?  Yes.  Does that disadvantage outweigh all of the advantages that the Canon system has for me? No.

I believe that covers the salient points. Feel free to continue perseverating on this issue. I'm out.

3094

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon

« on: October 19, 2012, 04:14:42 PM »

OK, Here is the ISO 100 image. I is better than others so I think I am surely not doing something you guys are doing. Sorry but can you tell me the "exact" steps to repro the problem? Obviously shooting a decent exposure is not working...

You're shooting the metered exposure?  If so, that's the problem... or rather that's why there is no problem.   If you want to create the problem, you must underexpose by four stops or so (your image should be nearly all black), then push the exposure back up by those four stops in post. Oh, and be sure to take the absolute darkest part of that image, and view that at 100%.  And that's all you have to do to see horrible noise and banding in your images. It's just that easy.

3095

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon

« on: October 19, 2012, 03:18:48 PM »

But this thread is about low ISO DR.

Is it?  Why?  Is it because everyone shoots at ISO 100 all the time?  Or because DxO bases their Score on ISO 100?   

3096

EOS Bodies / Re: Why are flash sync shutter speeds getting worse?

« on: October 19, 2012, 02:20:56 PM »

That is what affects the sync speed because the entire frame needs to be exposed during the short burst of light provided by the flash.  I would assume that the sync speeds listed above are the shortest intervals each camera is able to have the whole frame exposed prior to the dropping of the upper blade.

Absolutely correct. 

3097

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Full Frame Sharper Than Crop?

« on: October 19, 2012, 02:17:36 PM »

TI've been doing some portrait work as of late and given the same framing between the two formate, full frame would be the way to go for sharper images

Indeed.  Even from the same distance with a different lens.  I've compared the 7D + 85L II to the 5DII + 135L, the latter wins.

3098

Technical Support / Re: This Cant be Correct? Huge AFMA.

« on: October 19, 2012, 01:54:41 PM »

I tried the current Mac beta on two different Macs, one with 10.6 the other with 10.7.  In both cases, the software recognizes the 1D X, but trying to connect to it force-quits the program.  Do note that there's a quirk (detailed in the instructions) that you must select either Canon or Nikon in the Preferences - even though Canon is the default setting, you must actually re-select it.  Before doing that, it wouldn't recognize the camera at all.

I will troubleshoot further when I have time, but it's not high on my list of priorities - the 1D X must be run in manual settings change mode anyway, so for me it's just as easy to shoot a series of AFMA shots (I take 83 of them, 2 shots every 2 units from |20| to |12| and 3 shots every unit from -10 to +10, and that takes about 10 minutes).  I then analyze them with FoCal in Manual Mode, and that runs fine on the Mac.

3099

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Full Frame Sharper Than Crop?

« on: October 19, 2012, 01:40:45 PM »

FF will deliver sharper results than crop in a situation like this one, where with the same lens the subject is shot from a greater distance with the APS-C camera.  If the test was designed such that the camera-to-target distance was the same, and the target filled the APS-C frame but the FF image had to be cropped down by 1.6x, the APS-C image would be a little bit sharper.

But charts aside, I find that FF images are generally better than APS-C, for many reasons.

3100

Lenses / Re: Should I sell my 70-200L vii for the 85mm 1.2?

« on: October 19, 2012, 01:28:06 PM »

I use my 70-200 II more than my 85L II.  But....

The 70-200 is great and all, I just never use it...

Few things make less sense than hanging onto a lens you don't ever use.  If that's the case, I'd say swap it for the 85L II.

3101

Software & Accessories / Re: "Best" budget filters?

« on: October 19, 2012, 12:28:58 PM »

And I'll take that as a sign that I'm making a good choice with B&W.

You are, but FYI for the linked item above, the filter doesn't match the picture.  May not be a big deal to you, but you'll get a chrome-ringed filter, not black (B+W's 'Digital Pro' line is chrome-finished).  More importantly, the one you linked is multi-coated meaning good optics, but doesn't have the 'resistant' part of the MRC coating that makes the filter much easier to clean.

IMO, you want this one: http://www.adorama.com/BW58XSPUV.html
...or this one: http://www.adorama.com/BW58XSP7N.html

Those are the same price, the main difference is the mount, first one is standard thickness, second is a thinner mount that still has front threads (they're shorter than the standard, there will be a little gap between filter and lens cap, but the cap will go on fine.

Personally, I'd go with the XS-Pro Nano in the second link.

3102

Lenses / Re: 100mm f/2.8L IS vs 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II for Macro

« on: October 19, 2012, 11:37:47 AM »

Since I don't do marco regularly (just need the occasional detail/jewelry shot), and I already have tye 70-200 f/2.8L II and 2x III, this thread has me seriously thinking about trying out the 77mm 500D.

It would be good for that.  The biggest issue with the 500D lens is the fixed working distance, but if you are shooting in a controlled environment, it's not a big issue.

3103

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: The Canon EOS-1D C is Different Than the EOS-1D X on the Inside

« on: October 19, 2012, 11:36:00 AM »

A chimpanzee using a 5DIII or a professional photographer with 30 years of experience using a 5DIII. The only difference is the programming.

That and a few million years of evolution.  Fortunately for us, Canon and Adobe write code much faster than nature.

3104

Lenses / Re: Offer on Amazon

« on: October 19, 2012, 10:50:15 AM »

Apparently, someone tried to purchase this from Amazon to get the screen shot that was attached to previous post.

Nope, didn't really try to purchase it, I know it's a scam.  Just added it to my cart and hit checkout then picked a shipping address - the error message came up before the payment screen, no risk there.

3105

EOS Bodies / Re: do crop sensors really add reach?

« on: October 19, 2012, 10:22:54 AM »

And the 1D IV vs......

It lost its f/8 edge over the 1D X. 
So now it comes down to an extra stop of usable ISO vs a 1.3 crop factor?
The reasons I haven't upgraded are becoming fewer.
Against the 5DIII I would think the 1D IV would be preferred.

For birds/wildlife, I'd take a 1DIV over a 5DIII, and a 1D X over a 1DIV.  Initially, I had been considering replacing my 7D with a refurb 1DIV.  But after shooting for a while with the 1D X, I dont' really see the point...