February 28, 2015, 12:25:16 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 - rs

Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 ... 49
346
Canon General / Re: Useless or absurd accessories
« on: December 09, 2013, 04:29:00 PM »
Tied with the "tripod" that has flexible legs and can supposedly wrap around a fence post or branch.
I really hope I am not the only one who fell for that, this thing can barely carry its own weight, but it really reminded me of the "buy cheap, pay double" saying :-\
I tried one in store and could not get it to hold onto anything.....

With the model I know they're smart enough to put it into a tight casing so you have to buy it before realizing that it's no good ... and in addition to that I ordered mine online, not a large loss of $$$ mind you but that's probably just what keeps them going.

Love mine.  Holds my 5diii with grip and 16-35/24-105/100 IS with no problems.  Much easier to hike with than a full size tripod.
It largely depends on the model. I had the SLR Zoom version for some time - it worked within its limits. However, one of the plastic cups broke (its quite a common problem), and from then on, not only wouldn't it grip onto anything, but it couldn't even hold its own weight up when using it as a mini tripod. I now have the focus version (with metal cups in the legs), and it is good for what it is. However, if wrapping around something to mount a camera for any long duration (more than a few minutes), I'd only consider using it in combination with a good buckle strap tightly wrapped around the legs.

My preferred long term mount of choice is the Manfrotto Magic Arm with a Super Clamp.

347
So, my question from the original post, again: Is the sensor in the Samsung NX300 or NX1000, the same sensor as found in the Sony RX100?  Really the NX1000 is more appealing to me, as it is sale-priced down to around $355, including a 20-50 zoom lens (the NX300 is about the same price as RX100).  Is this not also the same sensor as found in one of the Sony Nex models?
The RX100 has a 2.7x crop sensor (so called 1", same size as in the a Nikon 1 range), and Samsung ILC's have 1.5x crop APS-C sensors. I have a vague memory that Samsung make their own sensors, but don't quote me on this.

348
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Get a new camera every 150,000 pictures?
« on: December 08, 2013, 04:34:29 AM »
Or, read this to get an idea how long your shutter could last: http://petapixel.com/2012/12/22/look-up-your-cameras-lifespan-with-the-shutter-life-expectancy-database/

Interesting read, looking at the 40d,50d,550d models it seems that if your shutter survives longer than the estimated rating (100k), it is likely to survive even much, much longer. The big question would be why - either these people got "lucky" and their hardware is better, or they shoot at lower shutter speeds or whatnot and there is a cause and effect.
I'd guess environmental conditions play their part. Extreme temperatures push tolerances nearer their limits. Also situations like fast frame rates take their hit on the shutter due to some minor heat build up. However, time lapses might be one of the biggest killers, especially at reasonably fast rates such as two shots per second. After a typical time lapse of many hours, the heat build up, especially in high ambient conditions could really take their toll on the shutter.

The camera will be aimed at a particular market, and the components will be designed and engineered around that typical perceived usage. Step outside of that (such as with heavy timelapse usage with a rebel), and you're in uncharted territory.

349
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Get a new camera every 150,000 pictures?
« on: December 08, 2013, 03:54:18 AM »
Shutter life is rated based on previous product history for items with a similar design.  I haven't seen any authoritative info on the T3i shutter life, but most of the Rebels were up to 100,000 actuations.  They last a little longer because they are limited to 1/4000 sec, otherwise I'd expect a shorter life.
In reality, a shutter may die after 1 use, or last for 10 million.  I wouldn't worry about it, all indications are that it might go for a million or more.  The ones that were going to fail have already failed.
If the camera industry is anything like the automotive industry, any new components (or systems) which are to make it into production will be subjected to a key life test. Basically, a pass/fail standard (including cycle counts) will be predefined, and an automated test procedure designed to replicate normal usage (I guess in the case of a shutter, the odd burst at the cameras max frame rate, many single shots, and a variety of typical shutter speeds, no doubt at various predefined environmental conditions), all with enough time to allow the system to cool/settle sufficiently between cycles. This will only take a couple of weeks to test. Any failure will result in going back to the drawing board. And as the design progresses, later builds which are a closer approximation to the production model might emerge, which should be subject to the same testing procedure.

So the shutter count is just a way of quantifying what the shutter is designed, engineered and tested to. It's a typical usage minimum, not a maximum.

Or, read this to get an idea how long your shutter could last: http://petapixel.com/2012/12/22/look-up-your-cameras-lifespan-with-the-shutter-life-expectancy-database/

350
Lighting / Re: 600EX-RT: Viability as a remote shutter release?
« on: December 04, 2013, 04:10:11 PM »
I think you misunderstand what I'm trying to find.  Almost all regular shutter releases can do the two functions I asked about.  What I'm trying to find is a wireless shutter release with the two functions that also doesn't preclude me from being able to mount a speedlight to the hotshoe.

My hähnel Giga T Pro II does half-press half press for AF, full press for release or continuous burst.  It connects to the remote port, so while the receiver can be mounted in the hotshoe, it doesn't need to be (which is good, as that's where the ST-E3-RT sits.

When your ST-E3-RT is on the hotshoe, do you just have your hahnel receiver dangling from a wire off the 3-pin port or something?
If you're worried about vibrations caused by the very light receiver hanging from the port and swinging in the wind, you can velcro it to a tripod leg or mount:

Or if you get really anal, you can use the thread in the base of the receiver and mount it with a more solid option:

Such as clamping it onto a tripod leg:

351
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk III - Anything better than RC-6 remote?
« on: December 04, 2013, 01:13:12 AM »
Wire free, the RT flash system will allow remote camera triggering of later cameras such as the 5D mk III as far as I know.

So basically I need:
600EX-RT (x2) or
600EX-RT + ST-E3-RT

What you're saying is that one of the units sits on the hotshoe, and I use the second unit as the remote.  I'm looking through http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2013/remote_camera_firing_speedlite600exrt.htmlp and it doesn't seem like the remote trigger has a half-press AF feature though?

In any case, this seems like complete overkill for what I'm looking for.
You asked for wire free. As far as I know, that's the only option other than the RC-6. I have no experience with it. I do agree it appears to be far from perfect, not to mention complete overkill if you don't need the remote triggering of flashes too.

I don't understand your aversion to a unit which sits with the camera and plugs into the remote port of the body? The Giga T Pro II comes with cables to plug into either the Canon N3 and E3 sockets. Both my cameras have the N3 connector, but I've borrowed Canon bodies of both types for remote shooting - I just put on the 10-22, plug in the remote, and mount the camera out of reach to something suitable in the venue. For me, not being a specific design for any particular type of Canon camera is great, although I should really get another body to stop all of this borrowing.

352
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Go-Pro-like DSLR chest strap/harness
« on: December 03, 2013, 07:24:08 PM »
POVERTY images? What's that?

Do you want stills or video? If it's stills, you need to use the shutter button, so why not just hold the camera? You can always use the neck strap? AF will be an issue; why not get a 70D with its flip out screen and DPAF? Or failing that, squat down?

If it's video you're after, DSLR's have a much narrower DoF than a GoPro. You'd need a very wide angle an exceptional video AF system to match a GoPro. I have a feeling a 70D with an 8-15 wouldn't keep up. Not to mention the sheer logistics of having that sort of weight strapped to you. It'd bounce around all over the place, winding you left right and centre unless you have a mount so tight that you can't breath.

Just get a GoPro.

353
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk III - Anything better than RC-6 remote?
« on: December 03, 2013, 07:05:19 PM »
Wire free, the RT flash system will allow remote camera triggering of later cameras such as the 5D mk III as far as I know.

I use the Hahnel Giga T Pro II for remote shooting. It does have a receiver which typically mounts in the hotshoe (but it has a 1/4" thread, or could even be velcroed to the camera/tripod/mounting arm), and it does have an 'annoying' wire which runs from the receiver to the remote trigger socket on the camera. I find its great. RF with great range, and the camera can go into standby, and get woken up by the remote shutter button instantly. Half press AF and all that. I use it regularly at all day events with no battery or range issues. However, the transmitter does go into standby after a short time, which is no big problem once you get used to it.

354
EOS Bodies / Re: Just Touching the Surface of Dual Pixel Technology? [CR1]
« on: November 28, 2013, 03:37:40 PM »
I actually don't understand why this aspect has not yet been discussed - not here, nor an Facebook, but eventually I am just wrong:

If you have phase detection capability on *every* pixel of your sensor, which means for *every* pixel in the final picture, it should be easy to get a 3D image from it.

As I understand phase detection AF, you can actually get the *distance* from just one metering.
Buffer the readout of *ALL* dual pixels, render the image from the light, save a "debth map" document alongside to the image and let the software on a PC render the scene in 3D. Or let the camera do it. There are even 3D capable displays that could be used in camera.

What did I overlook on the technical side?

I think, THIS would be a HUGE step in photography. Although I am completely happy with 2D, but 3D movies and TVs showed us where things could lead us. Then 3D images for everyone were just a logical step.

Any thoughts on this?
http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/smart-camera-camcorder/lenses/special-purpose-lenses/EX-S45ADW

Different way of accomplishing what you're after. Both will suffer from nasty looking half cut bokeh from each of the two images used to make up the stereoscopic image, but they go about achieving the same end result in a different way - one blocks off half the lens, the other blocks off half of each pixel.

355
EOS Bodies / Re: L Lenses for crop bodies
« on: November 25, 2013, 06:39:07 PM »
how about the sigma 18-35 f/1.8? what do you think that would compare to on ff?
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=854&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=786&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Even the cheap sub-standard Sigma 24-70 has the 18-35 beaten at some settings. This Tamron adds VC at a similar price, and the Canon is optically even better. All three have a broader zoom range.

356
EOS Bodies / Re: L Lenses for crop bodies
« on: November 25, 2013, 06:26:41 PM »
okay sounds reasonable. how about if we look at a real world example like the sigma 120-300 but we think its a bit short for a wildlife lens on a ff camera so instead of cropping or using a tc, lets we put it on a crop body instead. how about this also, if an image cropped from a ff body can be similar to one taken with the same lens on a crop body then is it possible that an image taken with a sharper faster but shorter lens on a crop body could be similar to one taken with a longer not quite as sharp or fast lens on a ff body?
Like comparing the excellent 135/2 lens on crop (equivalent to a 216/3.2) to the cheaper 200/2.8 on FF?

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=108&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=245&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

No ;)

357
EOS Bodies / Re: Just Touching the Surface of Dual Pixel Technology? [CR1]
« on: November 25, 2013, 06:05:23 PM »
I would use the dual pixels for a more compact RGBG pixel layout with better colour accuracy, but that's just halfway to increasing resolution by 4 times and getting a perfect RGB signal per pixel (counting four photosites as one pixel).
It would be nice if camera companies would just switch to the same standards as display companies use and count groupings of three sub-pixels as one pixel.
Nice idea, but that's presuming you want to display the image on screen at 1:1 using a current generation display. The problem is people print, people display at other sizes than 1:1, and display technology changes. Compare colour CRT's with their seemingly unrelated pixel and RGB layout, LCD's with predictable pixel to RGB layout, pentile displays etc.

Take video for example. Rolling shutter is a very real problem, but roll back the clock to the very first video camera and TV - a one pixel camera with a spinning Nipkow disk. It had zero rolling shutter because the display device was a single light lit by the electrical output of the single pixel, and another Nipkow disk. Great system, but only good when matched with a specific output system.

The best is surely to get the recorded image as close to theoretically perfect as possible, then as output devices mature (by chasing that same goal), it all looks good regardless. However, with retina displays, high DPI printers and high MP cameras most of us have within reach now, the detailed arrangement of how prime colours are individually captured and reproduced has become almost meaningless.

358
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Canon 6D video feed to projector?
« on: November 24, 2013, 02:54:22 AM »
The projector has a USB input for video? If it does have a USB input, chances are it's just for slide shows of jpg and ppt files, and also the odd firmware update.

Judging by the frame rate you get with live view over wifi into a mobile device, I can't imagine that side of the planned connection producing good results for video.

I'd have thought your best bet would be to find a projector with a HDMI input, and plug the 6D directly in. Some HDMI cables are longer than a couple of metres, and if you really want range, HDMI extenders over CAT5 allow for a range of up to 250m, and then there are optical and wireless extenders too if that's not flexible enough.

359
EOS Bodies / Re: L Lenses for crop bodies
« on: November 23, 2013, 10:03:27 AM »
Are you saying thats a 1x vs 1.6x crop?
Not at all; its just to illustrate that different fields of view (whether via a different crop or a different focal length) produce a different composition.
Composition means more than framing.
I fully agree. However, all I'm trying to illustrate is field of view is one of the elements which make up composition.

I'll re-quote myself:
Without changing the elements that make up the scene, composition is purely a combination of camera placement and field of view. To keep the composition the same, those two elements have to stay the same. Which means if you switch sensor size, the focal length has to change accordingly to maintain the composition.

360
EOS Bodies / Re: L Lenses for crop bodies
« on: November 23, 2013, 09:09:15 AM »

Without changing the elements that make up the scene, composition is purely a combination of camera placement and field of view. To keep the composition the same, those two elements have to stay the same. Which means if you switch sensor size, the focal length has to change accordingly to maintain the composition.

No.  When you change ONLY the focal length, only the field of view changes.  The perspective is unaltered.  Perspective is a spatial relationship between objects and the camera.  By changing lenses or body you may change the crop of the scene, but you won't affect composition at all.
So are you saying these two images have the same composition?





source: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-18-135mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-Lens-Review.aspx

Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 ... 49