August 01, 2014, 03:53:41 AM

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 - infared

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 55
541
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Canon 5DIII and Media Cards...
« on: January 04, 2013, 08:19:43 AM »
I know that this is an old discussion topic...but I just am trying to clarify things for my (old) brain.
Regarding how the 5DIII records to to the two different card types, my readings and my own findings with my
camera tell me that:
1. If I write to the CF Card ONLY  the write speed will be native to that card (with or without an SD card in the camera). i.e. a 600X card will record at or about 45MB/sec.
2. If I write to the SD Card ONLY the camera can only write up to 20MB/sec regardless as to the write-speed of the SD card that I put in the card slot. i.e. If I put a 600x SD card in the slot with 45MB/sec rated speed, the Camera will only be able to write to that card at 20MB/sec.
3. If I have a CF card and an SD card in each slot, both rated at 45MB/sec and set the camera to write to both cards simultaneously, in the same image type to each card (i.e. RAW, Jpeg, etc.),  when I record an image, both cards will be written to at the slower, 20MB sec rate.
4. If I set the camera to write to both cards with different imaged types (i.e. write RAW to the CF and Jpeg to the SD, or visca-versa the writing will take a longer time than if the camera was set to write the same type of image to each card as in #3 above.
Question:
What is the fastest CF card that the camera can write to at the cards native write speed? i.e. how fast can the camera write to a CF card?
Any input to confirm 1-4 above or to increase my understanding of my camera would be welcome...I think I have it correct..but I could be wrong.
Thanks.
 

542
Pricewatch Deals / Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS in Stock at B&H Photo
« on: January 04, 2013, 04:14:22 AM »
Wait a month: $1100.

543
Lenses / Re: Soon to be Launched EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« on: January 03, 2013, 11:10:57 AM »
$11,000....WOW!
I would expect image quality to be "stunning" even with the extender in place. I know it is just me...but I do not "get" a lens of this configuration at this cost factor. I guess it gives pros good versatility in certain situations.
...but at that cost with an extender switch..sounds like the lens could be open to some serious maintenance situations down the road.   Not trying to be negative...just standing back and scratching my head, based on what I know about photography. It is interesting, to say the least.

actually, I know a lot of bird and sports shooters that would love to have this lens.  it's pretty much the ultimate long lens in terms of flexibility, first between having the 200-400 zoom range, and then being able to throw in a 1.4x extender without having to unmount the camera, attach the extender, and then remount the camera.

yeah...it is not something I could ever afford to buy...but I am REALLY interested to see a review of the lens, as it is quite complicated, to see how it performs. ...I get the flexibility part...but $11 GRAND!!!! WOW!.

544
Lenses / Re: Soon to be Launched EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x
« on: January 03, 2013, 09:34:49 AM »
$11,000....WOW!
I would expect image quality to be "stunning" even with the extender in place. I know it is just me...but I do not "get" a lens of this configuration at this cost factor. I guess it gives pros good versatility in certain situations.
...but at that cost with an extender switch..sounds like the lens could be open to some serious maintenance situations down the road.   Not trying to be negative...just standing back and scratching my head, based on what I know about photography. It is interesting, to say the least.

545
Lenses / Re: Prime Lens for 6D
« on: January 02, 2013, 08:31:04 PM »
How about the 35mm f/1.4 Sigma...? That looks like a killer lens. I own the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 and LOVE it. Low depth of field and incredible bokeh with fast focus. All my other lenses are Canon "L" glass (and one Zeiss) but I broke protocol with the Sigma because I just believe it offers more than Canon in that area at the right price. I do not own the Sigma 35mm ...but again, I think Sigma has trumped Canon once again with quality, style and price.
Either one of those lenses would be a great cost-effective way to get your feet wet with a fast bokeh-licious prime in the normal or slightly wide lens range.

546
Portrait / Re: Post your best portraits(street, studio, candid etc...).
« on: December 31, 2012, 07:24:02 PM »
 8)

547
@infared: Thanks a lot. Yes, time will tell us. So, while the 16-35 is out there, that's a way to go. I wouldn't buy the nikon plus adapter. So I might purchase the classic L WA by summer and see what happens. If I wanna go UW for stars, there is still an 14 f/2.8 MF Samyang at a decent price, to provide as much as exposure value as possible while applying 500/600 rule for moonless nightsky shots.

Wow...if you want it for shooting stars the Sam Yang could be a great way to go for you...you get a LOT for that price...you can always sell it later.
If the Canon SWZ actually materializes AND is as good as the Nikon I plan on selling my 16-35mm L and my Zeiss 21mm..I might even have a little $ left over after the purchase!!!! LOL!

548
Pedro,I find the 14-24mm "rumor" to be quite exciting. It gives hope that FF Canon owners will have:
1. A relatively fast ultra-wide angle lens that would fill the slot for the ultimate triade of lenses. (Coupled with the 24-70mm f/2.8L II & 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II)
2. Finally, a high-performing Ultra-wide-angle zoom

Number 2 above is the tough one for me, as Canon is definitely unproven in this lens area. The Nikon UWZ is the benchmark.Canon has not come close to this, no doubt....but based on recent lens offerings I am hopeful that Canon will compete in this area as well especially given the recent improvements in the 24-70mm f/2.8L II & 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II lenses.

But, since the Tsunami Canon has still not resumed their prior manufacturing capabilities AND Canon has instituted irrattic pricing guidelines.

So moving forward...this new Golden Fleece is just a rumor...if announced it is a long way off (I site the massive delays from the announcement date for the 24-70mm II), and you can bet your babushka that this Golden Fleece will be expensive (I site the intro pricing on the 24-70mm II). IF this lens is produced, and IF it is of the quality that we are hoping for it will be intro priced in the mid $2000's. No doubt about that. (Yes...I know I am speculating...about a "rumored" lens. LOL!). Again, based on post-Tsunami pricing policies. Canon shooters have been waiting years for this lens..expect to pay dearly for it.

I am encouraged that this lens will be built, as I think Canon is preparing its whole lens line-up to get the most out of the upcoming megapixel body that we keep hearing about. So it makes sense that this lens will materialize.

Until then...I plan to keep using my 16-35 II ( when I need auto-focus) and my Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 ZE (for when it really matters to me :-))...and during the long wait...I may pick up the new Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 ZE ( for when it really, really matters!)....but I am still on the fence about that because of the cost (ouch!).

I hope Canon makes this lens and that it is all that we hope for...time will tell.

549
This is ALL great advise East Wind for Flo. You covered it all and I bet there is a solution within your suggestions.
For those that are suggesting that Flo stop down his aperture that is certainly not warranted for this image if all equipment is operating correctly and the focus point is on the lion's head...
Having to stop down defeats the purpose of spending all of that money on a 2.8 lens in the first place?
This shot should be fine at 2.8 at this distance with a sharp subject an the rest of the image going soft, calling your attention to the king!

 
First thing you need to do is get your lens and camera up to the latest firmware.  The lens has to be sent back to canon for the fw upgrade but I would say its mandatory.  The image does look like the camera has front focused quite a bit.  The front face of the rock seems pretty good.   Overall I agree with others that a little post sharpening in DPP or photoshop would fix this image right up.  At ISO 100 you can sharpen quite a bit and lot lose IQ.

Regarding DOF,  that lens should be tack sharp wide open regardless.  Stopping down some can help mask focus errors.  Camera AF systems have improved but accuracy is not 100%.  When you can stop down a little, do it to improve your keeper rate.  I still have to shoot 6 shots or so and pick the sharpest one out of the batch.

Regardless of that the image here should be much more in focus.  Send the camera and lens back to canon and let them iron it out.  For those of us that are nit picky about focus there is a great tool called Reikan FoCal which will allow you to do your own focus calibration.  I use it with all of my lenses and it works quite well.  The pro version gives you nice charts and reports as well as the ability to run aperture sharpness tests so you will know at what aperture produces the highest resolution.

You have a great set up.  I'm sure the fw fix will take care of the problem as it addresses some AF issues.

Hello,

I have a 5d III and the 300mm 2.8 II.
According to test this combination should crate fantastic sharp photos, but I have really big problem that to get sharp pictures.

I normally use the center focus point as single focus point.
I realized that objets that are more than 10 - 15 meters away the hit rate is very low.
I did go through the AF menu from A-Z but I found no solution. AFMA made everything only worse.

I attached one picture of many, that are all no really sharp. ISO 100, 2.8 1/4000

Does anyone of you has similar problems. With my other lenses I never had such problems (70-200 2.8 II, 24-105 4, ...)

Thank you.

Best Regards,
Flo

550
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Shooting With the EOS 6D Part 2: Costa Rica
« on: December 30, 2012, 05:29:42 AM »
<p>I still don’t like the EF 24-70 f/2.8L II on the EOS 6D. Mainly because of the bulk of the lens compared to the body. The results are terrific, it just doesn’t balance well.

I played with the 6D for 2 days, from 1st patch copies....I shared the same thoughts with CRs members about the 6D chassis with L lenses. Some members didn't take it very well. They thought I was being negative on the 6D over 5D III. Especially people from crop to 6D....oh well

Still...it's a great FF entry camera

Handled one with battery grip, it feels much better even with a heavy lens like a 100mm macro usm.  If I eventually buy it, i'll be sure to add a battery grip immediately.  Try it... You might like it.

This sounds like a camera body with a lot of compromises....so at this price level it would seem to make sense to save a little more money and find a bargain 5DIII on eBay...then there are no regrets. Unless you just have to have battery-draining wifi and/or GPS.
(So I am guessing that none of you would be a fan of the "M" from at least a balance standpoint?    ::) ::) ::) )

551
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D II or 5D III or 6D?
« on: December 28, 2012, 09:46:28 AM »
5DIII has bracketing features to support HDR...it is the only reason I sold my 5DII. I paid full price for the III because I was so frustrated that the II did not have $10 worth of software in it. Did I get ripped-off??? YES. Do I regret the purchase? No. (I WAS able to sell my 5 DII back then for $2100..so it kind of evens out).
The new camera is a joy to use. Truly.
Now you can pick up the body for $2600-$2800...It's a no-brainer!
In the end it is all about what you need for your style and involvement in photography. Photography means so much to me that I find a way to purchase what I need to keep improving and moving forward. I think that is called passion......

552
Lenses / Re: Bokeh confusion.
« on: December 27, 2012, 08:30:57 AM »
My two cents:
I LOVE my Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. ...It has incredible sharpness for a Zoom Lens. Incredible.  That being said...the trade-off is that the bokeh is less than creamy smooth. (alas...photography is a world of compromises). The bokeh with any lens will ALWAYS look better when you are up close, with much lower DOF that allows the background go much more out of focus because it is way out of your in-focus DOF area. Your shot of the glasses shows this.
The things that effect DOF are f/stop, focal length and closeness to the subject. You want the background as far out of your relative focusing DOF as possible.
The bathtub image is shot from a greater distance at the same focal length as the shot of the glasses..but the background is "relatively" much closer to your in-focus DOF for the image. This particular lens is not that kind with the bokeh in these situations...but damn is it sharp.
I think you could try a 1.4xIII and keep the framing the same it might help somewhat to separate the background out and make it smear more although your effective focal length is then 280mm and you have to move back to get the more compression that is attained with that setup......or go to another lens which is known for its bokeh, like the 85mmL or 135L with a converter or a 200mm f/2L etc to get the image more bokehlicious.  (Don't know how the zoom would compare to the 200mm f/2.8L...be interesting to see tho, perhaps someone with more experience can enlighten us here!).
Hope that helped a little.

553
(I chose MFT...you could purchase an incredible MFT intrchangeable-lens camera with kit zoom lens and money left over to buy another lens for the $800 Canon introduced the G1X at. I wonder why it didn't sell?)

Exactly, MFT has a better offer for the same or lower price, even though the sensor es a bit smaller, if you're in the market for a "compact" camera with SLR-like features, you know there will be compromise. Their cameras are a lot smaller and some are even pocketable.

18-70 f2.8-6? Trends are going into fast lenses on compacts now (thank god), and you give us f6? No way José.
I think the sensors of the G1X and MFT are VERY close in size...and the new Sony sensor that is in the Olympus OMD and EPL-5 is excellent for noise and dynamic range. The Oly cameras all have IBIS which really ads another dimension. It's as if Canon lives in its own little world putting a newer sensor in a totally antquated body style. And then the price tag attached to a camera of thAt genre made it doomed from the ...
This new patent is kind of odd.

554
I don't get this: "the G1X concept didn't catch on, so we'll built more of the same"?

Strange thinking.  If anything, the G1X failed to catch on because it was:

a) too big
b) too expensive for what it was
c) too limited in its capabilities

How would an APS-C version improve upon any of those issues?

You forgot to mention that incredible viewfinder!
...and the new patent for an f/2.8-6?   F/6.0? Really? WOW!

I agree with everything you wrote above...especially the comment about the RX1.
For me the market has split in two...FF and quality compact full-system camera. (I chose MFT...you could purchase an incredible MFT intrchangeable-lens camera with kit zoom lens and money left over to buy another lens for the $800 Canon introduced the G1X at. I wonder why it didn't sell?)

555
I think I must have clicked the wrong link... Is this Nikon Rumors?  :P

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 55