Messages

61

Lenses / Re: Canon 24-105 f/4 L IS vs. Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 IS vs. Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II

« on: February 15, 2013, 10:31:17 AM »

Heptagon, I sold my 24-105 in favor of the Tamron last month. You don't say which body you will use it on, but I had to AFMA the Tamron on my Mk3 where-as the 24-105 was spot on out of the box.

62

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deals: Apple Retina MacBook Pro & MacBook Air at B&H Photo

« on: February 13, 2013, 05:04:33 PM »

And this is a Canon rumour because..............?

Because it's B&H selling 'em maybe.

63

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d Mark iii noise at 1600

« on: February 12, 2013, 04:49:14 PM »

The dog picture has been resized down to 900px wide. You really aren't going to see any noise in an image resized that small anyway.

64

Lenses / Re: EF 85mm f1.2 ii - Dust Issues?

« on: February 12, 2013, 04:44:52 PM »

I had one and it got a noticeable amount of dust inside the rear element after use outside on a windy day. The gap is quite large between the lens body and and the barrel containing the front element. This barrel is what moves in and out when you focus. I was able to clean the rear element* and decided to sell it in favor of the Sigma. I don't regret this decision at all. The Sigma was roughly half the cost, had much better AF, and with a UV filter on the focusing barrel is contained.


*the rear element is mounted to the lens mount, so removing the four screws holding the lens mount in place will allow you to pivot it out where you can blow off the dust. I did this while wearing a dust mask and un-powdered latex gloves to avoid adding anything worse to the situation. It came out looking like new, but the whole process made me quite nervous.

65

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d Mark iii noise at 1600

« on: February 11, 2013, 04:54:30 PM »

I haven't read through this whole thread, so I don't know what was previously discussed, but I've found the default lightroom sharpening to be too agressive... accentuating high-iso noise. Also, under Camera Calibration:Profile, try Camera Faithful or Camera Neutral...it may give you a better rendering than Adobe Standard depending on what you are going for. Let me know if any of that helps you out. I'm genuinely curious.

66

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: jpg vs. RAW...

« on: February 07, 2013, 02:58:07 PM »

Is there a rule of thumb about how many frames per second you want to be shooting?

There are two formulas I use depending on the situation. If you know you want to speed up reality 10x it means you will need 1/10 the number of frames per second. If your final video is 24fps, this means you need to capture 2.4 frames per second. My intervalometer only goes down to 1fps, which means the least amount I can speed up reality is 24x, assuming 24fps playback.

On the other hand, if you know that you want to make a 30 second clip that plays at 24fps,  you know you will need 30*24 or 720 total frames. If you know that you want to capture 1 hour of reality (3600 seconds), you're interval would be 3600 seconds/720 frames or 5 seconds between frames(interval).

67

Lenses / Re: I can't stop thinking about A MONSTER!

« on: February 07, 2013, 10:00:57 AM »

the 400 f2.8 IS is like 5,4 KG?

Yes, it would be trading weight for cost and focal length. Adding a 1.4 extender would get him a 560mm f/4. I agree that before he spends that kind of money, he should buy the 100-400 or 400 5.6 and only consider going bigger if those lenses truly don't meet his needs.

68

Lenses / Re: I can't stop thinking about A MONSTER!

« on: February 07, 2013, 09:47:57 AM »

Don't overlook the 400mm 2.8 L IS as a much cheaper alternative.

69

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Panasonic's new color splitting method increases sensor efficiency

« on: February 05, 2013, 03:00:14 PM »

I feel like they wouldn't have presented it to a scientific journal if their claims weren't accurate.

I'm always very excited to read about these kinds of breakthroughs.

70

Street & City / Re: Your best street shots of any kind.

« on: January 22, 2013, 04:40:57 PM »

a beggar by bchernicoff, on Flickr

71

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Have a NEX body? Make your EF lenses sharper and faster! - apparantly

« on: January 14, 2013, 04:18:09 PM »

Sorry, but not the same thing for me: one reduces the image circle, the other enlarges it.

Which are you saying enlarges the image circle? This adapter and what I described take a full-frame image circle and concentrates onto a smaller area (the size of a crop sensor). This has two effects: the light circle is brighter, and the crop sensor now has a similar angle of view through that lens as if it were a full-frame sensor.

.71x focal length means the focal length is 71% what it was before.

72

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Have a NEX body? Make your EF lenses sharper and faster! - apparantly

« on: January 14, 2013, 03:12:27 PM »

This makes me happy. I wondered in a post on this forum if such a thing were possible and now some one has gone and done it. I must be a smart guy! ;-)

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=4529.msg91834#msg91834

73

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D weatherproofness, tested.

« on: January 14, 2013, 01:18:27 PM »

I used my 5D Mk III and 24-105 in light to medium rain for over an hour with no problems.

74

United States / Re: warehouse space for photography in DC/MD/VA?

« on: January 14, 2013, 10:38:00 AM »

good luck with your own shoot, bchernicoff!

Thanks. When I got there we ended spending most of our time talking about what he wants to do long term. He's interested in portraits as well as shooting his work and wants to convert one of the rooms in his workshop into a small photography studio. The room is large enough and has a high, matte-black ceiling, so it's perfect. We're going to work to get it setup over the next couple of weeks. I'll let you know how it goes. I did mention that there were probably other people in the area that would pay to use it, so we'll see what he thinks.

75

United Kingdom & Ireland / Re: Jessops close to administration?

« on: January 11, 2013, 04:52:48 PM »

It's not just Canon. When my father owned a camera store in the late 90's he could buy Kodak film at Sam's Club cheaper than he could get it from his Kodak rep. Volume based price discounting has killed small retailers.