August 21, 2014, 11:03:17 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 - Quackator

Pages: 1 [2] 3
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: I'm returning my Sigma 35 1.4
« on: June 05, 2013, 06:51:12 PM »
I'm leaning towards keeping the 35L. There is quite a bit of work to remove CA in LR, but maybe I'll live with that.

Try DPP. Digital Lens Optimizer and lens aberration correction make it simple.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5DM3 Firmware Update
« on: April 12, 2013, 02:05:59 AM »
The only downside to the coming firmware is that it will kick
Magic Lantern back again, and will likely postpone the date
it gets out of its Alpha stadium, even temporarily render it
useless on the 5D MkIII.

Hoping that Canon copies all the useful tools in it might be
twisting fates arm too much.

Lenses / Re: New 14 and 135 mm cinema EOS lenses announced
« on: January 11, 2013, 04:42:59 AM »
With a cinema mount they have to be parfocal in their construction,
which in turn means they have to be new constructions.

Lenses / Re: Post your wishlist for to-be-released lenses
« on: November 05, 2012, 08:06:06 PM »
A reworked 1.8/50mm III or 1.4/50mm II with IS and STM for sub 500 USD.
1.4/35mm L II with less CA, better bokeh.
More lenses with hard stops left and right for follow focus filming.

Lenses / Re: Opinion: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS
« on: November 05, 2012, 11:13:34 AM »
Another voice for renting the 24-105. I have had a hard time fighting for a decision
about buying either the EF 2.8/24-70 L OR the EF 4.0/24-105 IS L.
I rented both several times, and sort of hated both.

The 24-70 had no IS, not enough reach on the long end and the bigger diameter
made it harder to handle. Also, the rented sample was badly decentered one time.

The 24-105 had the reach, had IS, was nicer to handle, was more compact.
But it didn't offer the max aperture, and was badly prone to suffer from backlight.

In the end handling, reach and IS were the key reasons to finally buy the 24-105.
With a grumpy feeling about the lack of speed and the weak backlight performance.

So.... without the reach I am not a fan of the 4.0/24-70. I would have preferred a
2.8/24-70 with IS. Also I think that my next 35mm will be the Samyang/Rokinon
T1.5/35mm rather than the new 2.0/35mm.

It's great to get an HDMI output. But comparing it to an Alexa is going a bit too far...

Is it? 
Revenge of the Great Camera Shootout 2012 - Part One: Starting With Darkness on Vimeo Small | Large

I agree with you on the grading part, and definitely an iphone 4s requires much more effort
to deliver anything usable. But "revenge of the great Zacuto shootout" shows very well that
the camera is nothing without the talent driving it.

Don't see the need for uncompressed hdmi - (...)

Have you ever tried to pull focus manually on an external monitor?

With 480p that works much less than with 1080p.
I use a digital TV with a 22" screen for focus pulling,
and I look forward very much to this release.

Lenses / Re: 85 1.2 L2 not sharp at 1.2
« on: October 23, 2012, 08:31:26 PM »
Also the 1.2/85mm L in both versions suffers badly from chromatic aberrations wide open.
They disappear almost completely at f=2.0 and above.

Use DPP to remove CA and use it for lens optimization.

Lenses / Re: Canon Announcements Next Week? [CR1]
« on: October 17, 2012, 02:15:41 PM »
I'd be much happier for a 1.8/50mm with IS and STM......

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: The Three Best Lenses for Filmmaking?
« on: October 09, 2012, 09:29:10 PM »
You may yawn, but he is right.

(Where'd you buy that degree from?)

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: The Three Best Lenses for Filmmaking?
« on: October 08, 2012, 01:58:22 PM »
There are a number of features to look for in lenses for filming:
1) A long angle for focussing in order to precisely focus when wide open.
2) Hard stops at both ends for focussing. Without that you can't calibrate a focus puller.
3) Floating elements that prevent the lens from breathing while focussing.
4) Clickfree aperture for smooth fading and small exposure corrections that don't jump
    at the viewer.
5) Standard toothing on aperture ring, zoom ring and focus ring to directly match
    standard follow focus appliances.
6) All scales to the side where the assistant/focus puller can better see them.
7) Aperture markings in T-stops, not f-stops.

All these features are contradictory to what AF lenses dedicated for still photography
are optimized for

Except for point 3 ("breathing"), the Samyang/Rokinon VDSLR lenses master all these
requirements. The Zeiss/Arri Master Primes obviously master all these requirements, but
looking at their suggested retail prices is not for the faint of heart.

Lenses / Re: If you could only have 2 lenses for a wedding...
« on: October 05, 2012, 06:33:25 AM »
The 24-105 is my major workhorse, and I love adding the 1.8/200 to that.
Two lenses, there.

As far as primes are considered, I don't like the bokeh of the 1.4/35mm, would either
recommend to wait what the MkII version will be like, or grab the 1.4/24mm MkII instead.
That's far more pleasing in it's bokeh.

I have the 1.2/85, and while this is a good lens, it is also a diva.
Buying again from scratch I'd rather buy the 1.8/85 AND the 2/135mm
instead. And still save money.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D3 Second Curtain Sync - Design Flaw?
« on: September 10, 2012, 10:03:23 AM »
Reading through that tutorial, the shot calls for second curtain sync. 

Not for me. You want the flash to fire when they are in their final position.
What is wrong with starting 1st sync in that final position (and thus be sure
about the exact posing and point in time when triggering) and then double use
the flash as signal to the couple to start light painting?

With 2nd sync you have to hope that the couple is in a perfect position after
exactly six seconds (or whatever your exposure is). With 1st sync you *know*
that they are.

Pages: 1 [2] 3