Messages

991

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II for Photokina? [CR1]

« on: January 02, 2012, 09:34:34 PM »

No one is suggesting that the 7D becomes a APS-H. What is being suggested is that APS-H is not dead and will be in the natural upgrade for the 7D - the so called 3D.
No sign of any reference about APS-H being killed off - sounds like another myth that is being perpetrated

Thanks Brian, as usual you've made some good points.

Personally I don't own an APS-C body or any EF-S glass but can empathize with the handful of xxD and Rebel owners who may feel as though they have painted themselves into a corner with a constrained upgrade path with their 100% EF-S kit.

APS-H? I've valued the format since the original 1D and currently the 1D4. Yep, I do hope it's not being killed off.

Paul Wright

992

EOS Bodies / Re: tips on getting started shooting in raw?

« on: January 02, 2012, 09:07:23 PM »

I've always shot in JPEG. Any tips/resources on getting started in shooting in raw?

On the occasions I need to go back to my archive images and see that the files pre-date my switch to shooting 100% RAW (approx 2002) I get that sinking feeling of having to deal with a JPEG. The factors that delayed my switch to RAW were an ignorance of the facts, laziness and a very poor choice of software to do the RAW conversions. Like a lot of photographers I got on board the RAW workflow with Capture One Pro. Right now I convert in Lightroom.

Every single digital camera from the cheapest point & shoot makes a RAW file that is converted in-camera to make your JPEG file. At it's most basic level it's a simple algorithm that takes a broad based guess at what's best. Consumer DSLR's have "Picture Styles" or other menu settings  that with deliver a different look JPEG. In perfect conditions they can be quite adequate.

The benefits of shooting RAW over JPEG are thoroughly documented. If in-camera JPEG's delivered perfect files, professional photographers would shoot JPEG. But a straw poll would reveal that an extremely high percentage of professionals and advanced amateurs will shoot 100% RAW. Why do you suppose this is? It's more work but once mastered the results are comprehensively improved.

Yes, your buffer depth is reduced when shooting RAW compared to JPEG, and this can be overcome on a camera like the 1D4 which can shoot highly useable commercial quality files on the medium RAW setting. It's a reduced file size which extends the buffer depth a lot. I sometimes switch when shooting swimming or track & field events.

Just jump in the deep end. You'll quickly see it's easy going and find your photography a great deal more satisfying. DPP's GUI looks cute but is very clunky if processing a large number of RAW files. Canon don't make great software. If you have Photoshop there's the very well sorted ACR, or Lightroom is an inexpensive, highly flexible program. A few years ago I test drove every RAW converter on the planet and with hindsight it was a monumental waste of time. Each program has its strengths and weaknesses. Some people will be dogmatic that their choice of RAW converter is the best. Yawn...

My experience has shown that Lightroom is fast and flexible and delivers files I'm happy to send out to clients. Others will have their equally valid favourite. If your volume is low and there are financial constraints, DPP will deliver beautiful conversions. Just do it.

Paul Wright

993

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II for Photokina? [CR1]

« on: January 02, 2012, 05:14:25 PM »

A perfect way for Canon to alienate 7D owners who have a bag full of EF-S glass would be to ship the 7DII with an APS-H sensor.

They won't do it.

Paul Wright

994

Lenses / Re: Lens recommendations for real estate interior photography please

« on: December 27, 2011, 02:00:11 AM »

17-40 or 16-35 are flexible and do most of what you want if you're talking basic RE. A Sigma 12-24 is occasionally a godsend for those ridiculously tight corners.

But for more considered work the 17 & 24 TS lenses will be a must.

Paul Wright

995

EOS Bodies / Re: Quick question about 5D mark II

« on: December 23, 2011, 05:48:30 PM »

Every camera I have ever owned, including 6-7 Canon DSLR's have all made a distinctively different shutter sound. Years ago I was appalled with the  rowdy clunk my then new Canon 20D made after the quiet snick of the previous D60 (no not 60D).

In noise sensitive situations something I love about the 1D4 is the option of the "silent" shutter option. It's not silent of course, but spreads the sound out over a longer period. Not exactly sure how this achieved, someone may post how it's done, but it is FAR less obtrusive than the regular release sound.

No, there is nothing wrong with your excellent new camera. You won't even notice it after a day or so.

Paul Wright

996

United States / Re: Prime lenses you currently own or on your wishlist.

« on: December 20, 2011, 09:55:45 PM »

If Santa has room in the sack for a 135 f/2 & a 400 f/2.8 I'll be good as gold for all of 2012.

But seriously, the 400 f/2.8 will be a somewhat reluctant purchase to go with the 1DX.

With the 300 f/2.8 on the APS-H Mk4 with 1.3X you get 390mm. I'm not prepared to give away that reach with the full frame 1DX. I think Canon will see a spike in 400 f/2.8 sales once the 1DX starts shipping.

If the Mk4 is the last APS-H Canon, there may be unusual demand for them in the second hand market for the next few years.

The 135 f/2? Hell, I just want one!

Paul Wright

997

Lenses / Re: Prime Lenses

« on: December 20, 2011, 08:08:25 PM »

I think that Flake and PWP misunderstood the nature of my question.  I own the 40D, 70-200 L 2.8 IS II, 24-70 L 2.8, and 50 1.4.  I'm looking to upgrade my camera to the 5DM3 once it's available and then upgrade my APS-C to the 7D.  I have several years of experience with this equipment (70-200 since it's release) and a great deal of technical knowledge regarding the features of my camera and lenses.  Since I do not own the primes I mentioned I was asking about the performance of those lenses against one another.  I understand my style and how close I'd like to be to my subjects.

OK my apologies. It can be dangerous to read between the lines! You clearly are in a far more experienced position than I interpreted from your first post.

One great way of assessing whether a new lens is a good fit with your shooting style is to rent for a weekend. My local dealer is also a lens rental outlet and will zero the lens rental amount if I go ahead and buy the lens.

Or buy second hand and lose almost nothing on the deal if it's not working for you.

Paul Wright

998

Lenses / Re: Prime Lenses

« on: December 20, 2011, 05:53:04 PM »

Reading between the lines here I see a need to develop your fundamental photography skills and see what direction that takes you. Primes are nice but there is a fundamental trade-off with them...the fixed focal length.

A high percentage of professional photographers will regard the classic zoom trifecta, that is the 16-35 f/2.8, the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8isII as the core kit which will do most of the work. Why do you suppose this is?

Primes will come into the picture for specialized shooting or shooting environments such as 300 f/2.8 and 400 f/2.8 for action sports, macro, tilt-shift for architecture and landscapes, ultrawides for interiors, 85 f/1.2 for specialized portraiture etc. But these purchases often come later as needs and shooting styles evolve, and as income increases!

Take care not to paint yourself into a corner with narrow choices that could ultimately disappoint. The 35 f/1.4 is probably the most useful and definitely the fastest focusing of these three lenses. But seriously...don't believe all the hype about zooms being inferior. Most times they'll help get you the best shots. Cheap zooms can be awful, yet good copies are plentiful. The L zooms probably account for a very high percentage of all published (Canon shot) photos on the planet.

The update 24-70 f/2.8II may be announced in the new year. It's got your name all over it.

Paul Wright

999

Lenses / Re: 85mm f/1.8 or 300mm f/4 for baby photos

« on: December 20, 2011, 05:27:04 PM »

300 f/4 for babies? Twins! Hmmm, it would be very limited although there may be some suitable moments.

85 f/1.8 will be a lot more useful if a little long, but this sort of shooting environment sounds like zoom territory to me. 24-70 f/2.8 would free you up enormously. I like being close enough to small babies to touch them while I'm shooting...this is 24mm territory.

Long lenses create a sort of detachment from the subject which is often useful, but for babies? Shooting newborn twins is a great opportunity. It's tender, intimate and up close where you'll get the shots that will differ from the straight up shots your relatives may come up with. Don't shoot in a room full of people, keep it to an absolute minimum. Use window light.

If your sister lives nearby, this is a great opportunity to shoot twins across the years or decades...properly handled you could come up with a unique body of work. Shoot them as often as practical. Your best shots will come later on. That may be time to pull out the 300!

Leave your extension tubes in the bag.

Paul Wright

1000

Canon General / Re: TRIPODS

« on: December 20, 2011, 07:04:32 AM »

NEED ADVISE RE; BUYING UPGRADE NEW TRIPOD
ALSO BEEN LOOKING AT INDURO BRAND AS WELL BUT NOT READILY AVAILABLE IN AUSTRALIA

Welcome to CR forums. Maybe you get the prevailing feelings about caps lock? Think about this for your future posts. But keep posting!

This was an easy find...http://www.lapfoto.com.au/products_list.cfm?Cat=17
L&P is the Induro agent in Sydney. Is this near you?

Induro make nice legs, but be very careful of their ball heads. At full lock it is very easy to induce "creep", even with their biggest models. With a 1-Series body and a 300 f/2.8 you'd need a fairly solid foundation. 99% of the time when I use this lens/body combination it is with a monopod. When I do choose the tripod for long exposures, my heavy Manfrotto is prefereable to my lighter Gitzo Reporter, similar weight to 055 Manfrotto.

But yes, definitely skip the Velbon.

Paul Wright

1001

EOS Bodies / Re: any flaws in the canon 60d?

« on: December 19, 2011, 02:22:49 AM »

the biggest flaw in the 60D is that it does not have micro adjust AF
The 600D, 60D and the 7D all have the same sensor so there is no difference in image quality between them.

Wickedwombat makes a good point...microadjust is a VERY cool feature. On my 1D4 this function has brought more than one of my lenses back from virtual uselessness to highly useable. I wouldn't buy another body without it.

Which leads us to the 7D....do it if you have the $$.

Paul Wright

1002

PowerShot Cameras / Re: How many happy S100 owners are out there?

« on: December 19, 2011, 01:22:45 AM »

I had pretty much decided on the S100 as my next compact camera, but then my father-in-law bought me the Fujifilm X10 for Christmas instead... I'm not complaining though...!

To those that have used the S100 - how good is the super slow-motion feature?

Lucky you with the X10.

The super slowmo genuinely surprised me. I though it would just be a modestly performing gimmick.
Wait... it is a gimmick, but a pleasingly useful/effective one. Just keep in perspective this is a little camera bought for a few hundred dollars...it's certainly no C300!

Paul Wright

1003

EOS Bodies / Re: any flaws in the canon 60d?

« on: December 19, 2011, 01:06:49 AM »

Are there any flaws with the canon 60d? I know it's getting old...

Old? This camera was announced Aug 26, 2010 and shipped some time after that. Personally I'd prefer slowed down model cycles which I have no doubt are driven by the marketing departments. They feed on our insatiable appetite for the latest.

A bit over a year in the marketplace will reveal any 60D specific issues, but overall it's a solid performer in its price bracket. There was a perception that there was a quality drop after the metal body 50D gave way to the plastic body 60D, but in reality this makes little difference. They needed to make a tangible points of difference between the xxD series and the more upmarket 7D and body material was an obvious pickup.

Most 60D owners couldn't be happier. A few will have bought a 60D with unrealistic expectations and a few will have had the rotten luck of scoring a lemon. These will be a tiny minority. It's the same with any mass manufactured goods.


Read some well thought out reviews....
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos60D/
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E60D/E60DA.HTM
http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/canon_eos_60d_review/
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-60D-DSLR-Camera-Review.aspx
http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=4644&review=canon+eos+60d

And should you get a 60D? Absolutely!

Paul Wright

1004

Canon General / Re: Has Canon received the memo about small mirrorless cameras yet?

« on: December 18, 2011, 11:53:50 PM »

If they have they are keeping it pretty quiet!  My guess is they really dont take Sony as serious competition. 

Canon are the equal of Apple at keeping things quiet. They must include a "death by a thousand cuts" clause in their non disclosure agreements.

Sony are a remarkably resourceful company capable of taking a long term view. Canon, or any other of their competitors should underate Sony's potential at their peril.

Kings don't live forever. Kodak?

Paul Wright

1005

PowerShot Cameras / Re: How many happy S100 owners are out there?

« on: December 18, 2011, 09:20:55 PM »

Had the good fortune to spend a day with a borrowed S100. Nothing prepared me for how small it is. It takes up as much room in your pocket as a smartphone.

It's reviewed all over the place so I won't go into the details. I loved it.
Santa, are you listening? December 25 and I'll be good all year.

Paul Wright