Messages

1

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Shutter sounds (burst shooting) of Canon DSLRs

« on: May 19, 2013, 01:14:53 PM »

I love the silent shooting available on the Dmk3. This illustrates perfectly the distraction the average DSLR creates in most shooting situations (except, of course, sports)

2

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Magic Lantern... CONTINUOUS raw recording @ 24fps on 5D3

« on: May 18, 2013, 05:22:00 PM »

How long does it take for LR to apply the edit done to the initial .dng to the rest of the batch?

AE seems to be pretty slow at this (like 45 minutes for 49 second long clip or in that ballparl).

In LR the edits are applied super fast... it's the export of the edited RAWs to JPG that takes the time.
In my experience the more local adjustments one does (burning, dodging, gradients etc.) the longer the rendering of JPGs. As long as you have a reasonably powerful machine with adequate RAM and fast HDs it doesn't take too long per image.

3

Lenses / Re: How do you determine the focal length you use most often?

« on: May 15, 2013, 04:38:27 PM »

I use LR to do this.
In the library view I choose the metadata tag at the top of the page and I can see in an instant what the distribution of FLs for a set of images.
I used this to justify NOT buying a lens when I see that I rarely use a certain FL in a zoom.

As for Bridge, it will show the info (I think)in the sidebar at the left.
Like this below.

4

Lenses / Re: EF 24-70mm F2.8 L ver 2 or 3 Prime Lens

« on: May 15, 2013, 12:42:27 PM »

As someone else noted, it depends on what the OP wants to do.
The 24-70 is, inarguably, a superb lens. However, they may want a faster lens for the DOF aspect although I feel the Canon 50's are poor value in terms of optical quality (for the 1.4) and cost (for the 1.2).
 The 100 is a tack sharp optic that offers a FL the zoom does not.

But.... for me the zoom offers the unassailable advantage of being at the FL I need instantly. I shoot events and lifestyle. I do not want to be fussing with a lens change when I need to shoot NOW. It was bad enough in the film days but with digital sensors and their sensitivity to dust, I will do anything to not change lenses. All the putative advantages of primes go out the window when I don't have a shot.

5

Lighting / Re: Bowens Prolite 82 and 41 for approx 430 USD. Should i go for it?

« on: May 12, 2013, 09:08:46 PM »

They are the immediate predecessor to the Esprit line and are very similar. AFAIK they are almost identical.

I use Bowens and have been very happy with them. Very solid units with complete reliability. The S mount for modifiers is very good as there is an astronomical amount of stuff available for it online as the Chinese have adopted it as a de facto open standard.
The fact that they seem to come with reflectors for the umbrellas is good as those reflectors are significantly more expensive than the regular ones.

Good product it seems. Fair price. Not screaming deal you may be able to get a bit better.

6

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: [advice] My last tripod

« on: May 12, 2013, 08:59:58 PM »

A vote for Gitzo 5 series tripod legs here. Thumping strong and stable and still less money than  RRS. (not by much though).
Arca Swiss head.

RRS is great stuff and so is Gitzo. If at all possible, try to test them.

7

Software & Accessories / Re: Feisol CT-3441S ... can any one share opinion on this

« on: May 09, 2013, 12:40:23 AM »

I have an earlier Feisol Classic with the rotating legs. Non-rotating legs are a huge improvement.

The issue I have with my Feisol (and with current models) is the leg diameter is insufficient for real rigidity. The tripods are plenty light but I find the legs will flex and I feel the unit is insufficient for supporting my 5Dmk3 and 70-200 2.8L combination.
It does fold up nicely and comes with a bag and is a light load to lug up a mountain. The problem is that once up the mountain the support is not what I feel I need.

I recently added a Gitzo series 5 tripod that is titanically solid but I noticed the the smaller Gitzos were far sturdier than the Feisol.

8

Software & Accessories / Re: Alternatives to Adobe Software

« on: May 09, 2013, 12:31:13 AM »

The rant thread about Adobe's new subscription model is 6 pages long and growing fast. The thread about alternatives is a mere four posts long, only one of which actually names any software.  Makes it pretty clear that no matter how much ranting there is, Adobe can do what they like.

+1
Many have spoken boldly about switching but I have yet to see a SW list that is credible.
The alternatives I would guess at are:

Capture One or Aperture to replace LR (though I understand one will still be able to buy boxed versions of this indefinitely)

And maybe Paintshop Pro to replace PS? The Gimp is also suggested but again I hear very few reports from actual users.
Of course there is always Snapseed and Picasa.

9

Software & Accessories / Re: Honda to start selling ONLY stretch limos

« on: May 07, 2013, 11:51:35 PM »

If they outsell the competition, then why not

+1
If the shareholders are happy Adobe doesn't care.

10

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software

« on: May 07, 2013, 11:49:29 PM »

So.... all the outrage will get everyone jumping ship to what?


Every upgrade cycle there is a chorus of complaint about the greedy so and so's at Adobe and how they are going to switch. Yet they never do because the alternatives are just not as good overall and we all know it. If there were credible competitors they would have real market share. There would be discussion groups that discuss something other than LR and PS.

There are alternatives but they haven't stopped the Adobe party despite some apps being free.

Adobe has handled the transition poorly but at bottom they will hold on to a lot of users and in fact other software vendors may adopt the same policy by virtue of Adobe taking the flak for them. The predictions of their demise are premature.

11

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe to Stop Making Packaged Software

« on: May 07, 2013, 06:35:02 PM »

I can understand the annoyance or even outrage of many who object to this change by Adobe. However it has been hinted at for several years through the gradual adoption of more cloud services and subscription.

I was even told earlier this year that a sale of full, boxed copies of PS CS6 for $200 each through B&H was a push to clear out physical inventory in anticipation of the change.
That said, we have to take emotionalism out of the discussion and make a decision for our business.
The technical details about connectivity to the 'net are valid and I am sure Adobe will have answers for that if it doesn't have them already.

Full disclosure: I have not read every bitt of info about the subscription service so I don't have answers for everything.

A few observations:

First: Photoshop has always branded itself a tool for professionals who, in theory, use top quality tools, are professionally trained and carry a certain business overhead as a consequence of that professionalism. The price of subscription is less than one tank of gas per month. If your business cannot handle that maybe you need to think about whether you have a real business. If you are a hobbyist see items three and four below.

Second: Ownership. When you buy a tank of gas you own it. When you use it ,you exchange it for transportation that (I hope) was useful or profitable to you. You rent a motel room and got something for a short period of time that was of value. I buy a new piece of gear on whether it makes money for me or not.

I buy toys that make me happy but I do not pretend that it is critical to my life.

The same for software. You rent PS and, as a pro, you use it create unique profitable image that the amateur with Picasa cannot. Then you can deduct it as an expense from the increased revenue like a real business would.
If you are a hobbyist, see below.

Third: Stick with what you have. Many are still using PS CS2. CS6 is wonderful but I scratch only the surface of the program and I am a fairly adept user. This is where Windows users benefit as they can use a huge range of versions whereas Mac users are stuck where their HW/SW combinations leave them.

Fourth: There are alternatives to PS and LR that permit ownership of the app. If you wish you can switch. Of course that entails cost, effort, and time but you are free of Adobe. Furthermore, Adobe will get your message if enough of you do switch.
Aperture is cheap and Apple may be persuaded to pour some resources into it should they sense an opportunity. Of course Apple was the first mass implementer of the  cloud business model so you may find no love there.

12

Lighting / Re: Full length portraits at indoor event - best lighting solution?

« on: May 03, 2013, 10:16:31 AM »

I shoot this sort of thing with some frequency and I use umbrellas and a hair light.
One umbrella set up at f11 camera left approx 30-40 degrees off the center line.
One umbrella set at f8 just slightly camera right for fill.
Both umbrellas should be set up with the shaft at least eye level or a bit higher.
Too high and face shadows get too long. Too low and the subjects look like a horror show.

One light on stand with a small soft box over the top of the background for hair light.

With luck you will have enough space to pull the people at least 4 feet in front of the background to let the shadows fall below their heads.
Test before hand.

This is a fairly low contrast setup to ensure that both subjects are evenly lit yet still have enough dimension to show texture. This will produce a very appealing event portrait lighting.

If you wish to get just  a bit more adventurous you can use a white BG and us two lights to light up the BG to an exposure of f16. Lose the hair light and you now have a very contemporary high fashion look.

good luck.
 

13

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm 1.4 AF issues question

« on: April 27, 2013, 07:03:58 PM »

The sigma 50mm AF is in-consistant. It will lock fine on one shot then the next shot it's completely erratic. Atleast the 50L is predictable in its behavior, but his sigma needs to be revamped to the art series.

I am wondering why this is so? I was led to believe that the lens was controlled by the AF module in the camera where there was an iterative process that ceased when focus was achieved.
Or is it a matter of calculation about the amount OOF and then a signal sent to the lens to move to a predetermined position? If so why do they hunt?

At any rate my Sigma 50 was a pile of stinking manure when it arrived. I sent it to Sigma who repaired it noting that an element was loose (!!???!!). It is now razor sharp but can skunk me on focus every once in a while.
OTOH I went through 3 Canon 50 f1.4s that all exhibited AF issues on all my bodies. I am wondering if the focal length is cursed.

14

Software & Accessories / Re: NOT happy with Lexar at this time!!!

« on: April 11, 2013, 12:17:02 AM »

FWIW, I have been buying and using CF cards since 2002 and the only cards to give me any trouble have been Lexar and Sandisk. I have Transcend and Kingston and have never had a failure. I have one other 4GB card but can' tell what brand it is because I have run it through my washer and dryer twice and the label has come off. It works perfectly.

15

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: The Blackmagic Production Camera 4K

« on: April 09, 2013, 09:43:28 PM »

Bravo to BlackMagic for showing the big boys how it's done. This is the company that RED Digital Cinema should have been but alas they've become just like all the rest.

Is it possible that they underestimated how expensive it is to innovate?
We have all had conversations about "how cheap the parts for gear are and how come someone doesn't put it together and show the big boys"
When the real world intrudes one finds things are priced where they are for a reason.