July 23, 2014, 04:32:50 PM

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 ... 590 591 [592] 593 594 ... 891
8866
EOS Bodies / Re: B&H 1DX Order Fulfillment Tracking
« on: July 06, 2012, 12:36:06 PM »
So Canon is sending out boxes of very expensive cameras to suppliers and the suppliers don't know if they should expect some or not?? So if you stand outside the suppliers store and sign for the delivery of a box full of cameras as if you owned the store, the supplier will never know because they weren't expecting a shipment???

Don't worry, Mr. UPS Freight driver, sir.  We're just transferring this pallet of cameras to another warehouse for distribution.  That's it...just put it right in my unmarked truck...

8867
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Pancake Gallery
« on: July 06, 2012, 12:06:45 PM »
Kids playing with new toys on the 4th, shot with the EF 40mm f/2.8 STM on a 5DII:

8868
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Macbook pro retina advice
« on: July 06, 2012, 12:03:41 PM »
I was on the apple store and checked my website and all the pics look weird.


Define 'weird'...

Have you used a Mac before?  Safari (the default browser) respects the embedded ICC profiles, most other browsers do not.  You can test yours here.

8869
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS [CR2]
« on: July 06, 2012, 07:54:16 AM »
I am waiting for this new verson with my patience. 2000USD is my budget.

Fortunately, it likely won't come out soon - which may be good, in that it'll give you time to save for it, as I think it will likely be in the ~$2500 range...

8870
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Macbook pro retina advice
« on: July 06, 2012, 07:03:45 AM »
I do hope they eventually bring out a 17" screen again.  I don't care how high they can get the rez, I still want a big screen(I travel with my laptop, so an external monitor isn't a real solution unless I'm at home).

Ditto.  I like the idea of a retina very high-res (let's call it what it is instead of coining new terms) display, but IMO the 15" MBP is a compromise - too big to really be portable for travel, too small when I'm willing to sacrifice portability.  Sort of like a G1 X  ;) - if I want to travel light, I take my S100 (aka my 13" MacBook Air), if I give up traveling light, I take a dSLR and lenses (aka my 17" MBP).   Fortunately, my 17" is only 1.5 years old, hopefully Apple will bring back that size before I need a new one...

8871
Lenses / Re: Which lenses to pick up next?
« on: July 05, 2012, 06:12:01 PM »
The old version of the 100mm is NOT compatible with the 1.4 x and 2x extenders.!! (i dont know about the new ones)

The MP-E 65mm 1-5x Macro will give you 5 x magnification, you will need to get VERY close and you will
also need a ringflash.

The 100L Macro isn't compatible with the Canon extenders, either.  Only primes of 135mm and longer.

The MP-E 65mm is a great lens (one of my favorites!), but it's definitely not a casual-use macro lens.  I agree that a macro flash is a big help - I have the MT24-EX (although I have done flower shots with lighting from a handheld LED flashlight).

8872
So it doesn't have any option to show the dof below 2,8?

That was one of the reasons I wanted the X and not the 5d3. I guess the 5d3 is giving more and more value for money then, lol.

According to one poster here, who has posted it about a half dozen times. I could find nothing from ANY other source to confirm that. So, until such times as there is some sort of official or reliable confirmation. Look at the title of the site, and consider it an unsubstantiated rumor.

Technically true - the specifications of the EC-CV are not published as yet.  But FYI, the 'V' in EC-CV is a Roman numeral designation following on from previous 1-series bodies (i.e., EC-CIII, EC-CIV were the predecessors, and a new one is needed because the AF area has changed).  The Ec-S screen is 'brighter' than the EC-CIV (which is, in turn, a little brighter than the -A screens for other cameras).  The EC-CIV does not show the true DoF for lenses faster than f/2.8, and therefore it seems very unlikely that the EC-CV will be any different.

But, I've emailed Chuck Westfall for clarification.

...and, here is Mr. Westfall's vacation-delayed response, confirming my previous statements that the stock Ec-C V focusing screen in the 1D X provides no additional DoF accuracy than the stock screens in previous cameras, including the 5DII and 5DIII:

Quote from: Chuck Westfall
The Ec-C V screen depicts depth of field accurately to apertures of approximately f/4 and smaller. It's very similar to the "A" screens on cameras like the 5D Mark II, etc.

In response to an additional question, Mr. Westfall did indicate that it would be possible to add metering support for the Ec-S screen to the 1D X via a firmware update, although of course he acknowledged there is no guarantee that Canon will ever do so.

8873
Lenses / Re: Which lenses to pick up next?
« on: July 05, 2012, 04:11:33 PM »
But that is 1:1 magnification not the 0.25 you mention ...

True - not claiming it's a macro lens.  It comes down to whether or not you need 1:1 magnification for your subjects, and if, at 1:1, you can get sufficient DoF (do butterflies sit still for focus stacking?).

8874
Lenses / Re: Filters for TS lenses
« on: July 05, 2012, 04:00:33 PM »
Yes. It's a 24mm lens with an 82mm filter thread - 4x6" filters in a holder with an 82mm adapter will work. Personally, I use round/threaded filters with mine - a B+W Käsemann CPL and a Schneider Optics (parent company of B+W) 10-stop ND.  I go with rectangular filters for grad ND.

8875
Lenses / Re: Which lenses to pick up next?
« on: July 05, 2012, 03:54:04 PM »
Obviously working distance is not an issue when shooting flowers - I get that.
However, I do really want to get some nice butterfly photos.

Hate to make your choices more difficult, but a macro lens isn't usually needed for butterfly pics, and not for most flowers, either.  Usually, a 0.25x or so magnification is sufficient for butterflies - what you really need is working distance, and the 9.5" with the 180L often isn't enough.  At 4-5 feet distance, you'll get higher mag with the 300/4L IS (0.24x maximum magnification, great for flowers and butterflies).

With all due respect - I believe the minimum focussing distance on the 180 is about 18 inches - and that is for 1:1 magnification  ;) ;) ;)

Yes, but also with all due respect, I didn't state the minimum focus distance is 9.5", I stated that is the minimum working distance.  MFD is measured from the sensor, ignoring the physical length of the lens. Working distance is measured from the front element - in my experience, butterflies don't get startled and fly away because the sensor is 18" away, they fly off because the business end of the lens is even closer...  :P

8876
EOS Bodies / Re: B&H 1DX Order Fulfillment Tracking
« on: July 05, 2012, 03:41:59 PM »
darn it, i wonder how to guage phone orders...=((

I am no expert on B&H ordering system, but I would imagine it should be the same as ordering online. When you call and place an order, your order goes into their order queue. Did you receive an email confirmation? If you did, use the timestamp of the order confirmation. If you did not, I would just try to remember when you called and use this thread as a guide.

The numbering scheme for phone orders seems different - one digit, and no obvious relationship between the two numbering schemes.

8877
Lenses / Re: Owning the Canon 200-400 f/4L Vs 400 f/2.8L II
« on: July 05, 2012, 03:36:27 PM »
Let me rephrase the original question:  "Help me decide between buying the 2013 Porsche Carrera S and the Honda Hybrid Self-Driving Hovercar."  Given Canon's recent track record of lens delays, we may actually see that hovercar before the 200-400mm lens.

8878
Lenses / Re: Which lenses to pick up next?
« on: July 05, 2012, 02:09:33 PM »
Obviously working distance is not an issue when shooting flowers - I get that.
However, I do really want to get some nice butterfly photos.

Hate to make your choices more difficult, but a macro lens isn't usually needed for butterfly pics, and not for most flowers, either.  Usually, a 0.25x or so magnification is sufficient for butterflies - what you really need is working distance, and the 9.5" with the 180L often isn't enough.  At 4-5 feet distance, you'll get higher mag with the 300/4L IS (0.24x maximum magnification, great for flowers and butterflies).

8879
EOS Bodies / Re: B&H 1DX Order Fulfillment Tracking
« on: July 05, 2012, 01:28:33 PM »
March 14th, 6 PM Eastern.  Was told my order should ship end of this week or early next week.

8880
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Delayed Again
« on: July 05, 2012, 10:52:59 AM »
If i need low light, bump up the ISO…with the good performance of these cameras..shooting at F4 is almost good in any condition i feel…unlike the older cameras where f2.8 is a must..i just feel you don't really need it these days..

What if you need the flexibility of a zoom and the thinner DoF of f/2.8 vs. f/4?

Pages: 1 ... 590 591 [592] 593 594 ... 891