August 01, 2014, 07:23:53 PM

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 ... 39
346
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark II composition movement
« on: July 21, 2013, 10:16:52 AM »
I wish I could show you how much it is shifting when looking through the viewfinder
If you tripod mount the camera, remove the eyecup and hold something like an iphone up flat against it, you can take an in-focus image of the entire viewfinder. That and a shot taken with the 5D2 from that same tripod position will do it.

However, that gets you nowhere other than satisfaction of proof. Taking it back to the shop as you've already arranged is the best course of action.

347
Software & Accessories / Re: PC Monitor for photo editing
« on: July 21, 2013, 07:23:25 AM »
The most important aspect of using a monitor for photo editing is accuracy. Which means that no matter what you buy, if you want to know its a good reference point, you'll have to calibrate it. And you'll also need a monitor which provides consistency when you view it off angle, otherwise that calibration means nothing.

Set aside some of your budget for a calibration kit, such as this one for £90.

When calibrated and viewed in the best light (no direct light on the screen, ideally controlled colour temperature and brightness in the room), you'll be able to get an accurate idea about black and white points, as well as colour.

However, if you use a monitor such as your existing Samsung, the moment you move your head, the colours and brightness shifts. That is because it is has a TN panel, and like all TN panels it has narrow viewing angles. Stand up and everything will look brighter (in extreme cases, bright whites turn to mid grey), lower your seat and blacks will turn to mid grey. And move left or right and the colours shift. So it doesn't matter how much you calibrate a display like that, you'll never know if what you're seeing from whatever angle you're at is correct. While there are good and bad TN displays, even the very best fall a long way short of the accuracy photo editing demands.

Buying a monitor using display technology such as IPS is a good way of almost completely eliminating this effect. Backlight technology isn't too important, although many white LED backlights can have a cold blue tint, and not much in the way of red or green gamut. RGB LED backlights are very expensive but can give a very wide gamut, so old fashioned and much cheaper CCFL backlights might be your best bet, if you can find any around. Laptop displays tend to be worse off-angle than desktop displays due to the backlight diffuser concentrating the light straight on to improve battery life, while desktop displays tend to use a more powerful light and spread it wider.

Budget lines of IPS monitors tend to be the Dell Ultrasharp range, HP make some too, and various cheap brands which use the rejected IPS panels from the big manufacturers, such as Hazro. At the price point you're looking at, wide gamut isn't really an option.

TFT central is a great review site. http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/

Something like this 27" IPS screen from Dell just about scrapes into your price range even when you add the cost of calibration kit. But there do seem to be bad user reviews about backlight bleed.

Your best bet is to read the reviews on TFT central and other sites to work out what compromise you personally want to reach on size/quality/price.

348
Tempted to pick up a 5dc for myself and rig it up as a remote camera trap for wildlife. Similarly tempted by a 40D for its FPS and to use it as an optically perfect teleconverter for distant wildlife. How long before a 7D can be picked up for less than 500 pounds? If only lenses depreciated in this way huh!
I have a 5D mk II and a 40D, and I never find myself picking up the 40D when I want more reach. The 5D2 when cropped down to an APS-C field of view lands 8.2MP across the frame - which is just over 90% of the horizontal and vertical resolution of the 40D. I find that the lower noise and weaker AA filter compensate enough to make the cropped 5D2 images better than what comes out of the 40D. And I get better results again if instead of cropping I use a 1.4x TC between the 5D2 and 70-200 II.

If I owned a 70D instead of the 40D, I'd probably be giving a different story about using a crop camera as an alternative to a TC. A used 7D when the price drops could be a good call as you also make much bigger gains in AF and FPS over the 40D.

As my widest EF lens only zooms out to 24mm and I own an EF-S 10-22, my 40D gets used primarily for wide shots.

I retrospect, when it comes to passing lenses down to your brother (and no doubt sharing the use of everything you'll carry on the trip), having the same sensor size between the two of you does make a lot of sense. A 5Dc, new battery and a clean up of the sensor could be good. That is only if video is not important. If it is, follow Paul13's excellent advice.

349
This is a difficult balancing act between ergonomics and the latest tech. I usually would opt for a camera with a top LCD and rear dial, but for taking to places where a big camera could attract more unwanted attention, a smaller body has advantages. Also, a beginner would more likely appreciate the lack of weight of a rebel over lugging around a magnesium bodied camera for a new hobby they're not too sure about.

It's not buying into the great Canon EOS system, but what about a second hand Fuji X100? To the untrained eye it just looks like an old film camera, and its small, light, cheap, and great quality.

350
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark II composition movement
« on: July 19, 2013, 09:19:30 AM »
As others have said, the 5D II has only a 98% viewfinder. The main reason for not having a 100% viewfinder isn't the cost of making it bigger, but the cost of aligning it accurately. Missing out 2% allows for some minor misalignment without the viewfinder seeing part of the frame beyond what the sensor would capture.

Are you able to see part of the frame in the viewfinder which is not captured by the sensor? If so, it suggests the alignment is out beyond the manufacturing tolerances, whereas if everything you see in the viewfinder is in the final image, just with an uneven amount of extra on the sides/above/below, then it is within spec, and something you'll probably have to learn to put up with.

Liveview uses the sensor exactly as taking the photo does - so no mirror/pentaprism/focus screen involved, and no chance of any alignment issues.

As you say the misalignment in the viewfinder is not varying from shot to shot, its unlikely to be anything loose, instead it will be something that's shifted. The user replaceable focusing screen might be out of place. What about re-seating that? If that doesn't work, has your second hand 5D mk II got any signs of drop damage, especially around the pentaprism? If so, you could try getting a quote out of Canon.

351
This is a confusing topic because the term "1.6 x crop" is a bit confusing to some. You hear that when you mount a 100mm lens on an APS-C camera it behaves like a 160MM lens on a FF camera. Really, what it means is that the field of view is the same as if you had a 160m lens on a crop camera, but it does not mean you have a 160mm lens.

The lens remains a 100mm lens. It's optical qualities do not change, it's depth of field does not change, it's aperture does not change. When you mount that lens on an APS-C camera you are using a sensor that will only sample the center 40% of the image ( 1/(1.6^2)).

If you were to use a FF sensor with 46Mpixels that was built with the same technology as an 18Mpixel APS-C sensor, the center part of the FF image capture would be ABSOLUTELY identical to that of the APS-C image.

So, sensor size has no effect on DOF or aperture.
That is all absolutely correct, except for one thing - in reality, if you moved from a crop system to a full frame system, you wouldn't take photos of the same scene from the same location with the same lens to end up with what is a wider framed photo.

As you say, if you do that and you crop it down, its identical to taking it with a crop camera.

But if you frame up the shot as you envisioned, either approximating it by altering your perspective by getting close, or ideally by keeping your perspective the same with a longer lens, presuming the aperture remains the same, the DoF is narrower with FF.

352
Another way of looking at it is to exaggerate and think of a very small sensor camera (iPhone) vs very large sensor camera (medium format). If both are equipped with a lens to give the same angle of view, then other than scale, they do pretty much the same thing.

Image a scene with a subject at about 2m and a background at about 10m away.

The phone sees that scene in front of it as being relatively massive - almost like how an insect would see it - so anything beyond about a metre is effectively infinity, meaning its pretty much all in focus. Put that same scene in front of the medium format camera, and everything is much smaller relatively speaking to the camera - so none of it gets close to infinity (more like a macro shot), so the depth of field is much narrower.

It's a little bit like taking a photo of a really scaled down version of that scene in macro mode with the iPhone.

Obviously the differences are much less when comparing FF and APS-C, but the differences are still there. 

353
As higher pixel density sensors and faster lenses seem like a bad combination according to this, I wonder if it makes small sensor high MP bodies such as the OM-D E-M5 with lenses such as the SLR Magic 50/0.95 hyperprime not all as advertised?

With the pixel density of a 16MP m4/3 body (pixel pitch equal to a 64MP FF body) it is probably a long way off the f0.95 light capturing levels it claims. Could this effect make it nearer to f2.8?

354
Software & Accessories / Re: Benefits of using a grip?
« on: July 12, 2013, 05:04:25 PM »
I have them on both my bodies. With my large hands, I find even a large camera like the 5D2 only sits in part of my right hand - only three of my fingers comfortably fit on the grip, and a large part of my palm isn't in contact with anything. With the grip, all my hand has something to grip onto. Even though the camera weighs more with the grip, the extra stability the grip gives makes it easier to handle. With larger lenses such as the 70-200 II, it makes a world of difference.

Other advantages include vertical shooting is greatly simplified, the ability to use AA batteries should you end up on a long trip away from the mains (or if you want to pack a set of cheap duracells for backup at an event), and also a worry free way of putting the camera down on whatever surface you want, such as rocks. This means only the grip and lens hood are likely to take the brunt of your carelessness - the cheaper to replace parts of the camera/lens system.

355
Well I decided to rent the Canon 6D and shot with it at a car show today using my old 28-80 L lenses. Wow, did the pictures stink! Vignetting on almost all the pictures and none of the images were really "sharp". I have the camera until Monday and will continue to test it with my other lenses on Sunday.

I was really hoping I wouldn't have to replace my 28-80 L with a newer L lens. It's great on a APS-C body but is horrible on a FF camera.


Did you run AFMA on this lens/body combination?  If not that might help.  There are a number of good on-line instructions on how to perform this.


What is AFMA?

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/photography-tips/AF-Microadjustment-Tips.aspx

356
EOS Bodies / Re: A bit confused on what to buy!
« on: July 12, 2013, 10:59:16 AM »
I am looking for something that will be able to get these shots in focus, have better low light focusing, and possibly better low light performance.

I have considered the following:
Don't do anything at all! (Parents would love this!  ::) )
Purchase a few fast primes. (Sigma 50mm f1.4)
Buy a Fujifilm X-E1 due to it's size and low light performance. Then down the road, buy a 7D Mark II or some "upgrade" to my T2i. <--- Most money spent here
Buy a Canon 70D during black friday. (No tax day at two of my local camera stores)
Wait for a 7D replacement
Low light AF of stationary subjects is very different to low light AF of moving subjects. For that reason, I'd stay clear of anything which can't keep up with very rapid moving subjects, which means forget the X-E1 and the Sigma 50/1.4 as they'll both give worse performance that your current kit. (I have a good copy of the Sigma 50/1.4 which AF's very accurately. However, AF is slow, and in AI Servo mode, just forget it)

I'd recommend a fast focusing lens of at least f2.8 - if you stick with crop, the Canon 17-55/2.8 IS springs to mind, or the 24-70 II if you have money to burn and something like a 5D3 might be on the horizon soon. Both give very fast and accurate AF, even in challenging conditions. If you're after a fast prime, steer clear of slow focusing lenses like the Sigma 50/1.4 or 85L.

As for the body, the 70D with what appears to be an inherited 7D AF system should be a huge step up from your 550D. While rumours suggest the 7D mk II will have an even better AF system, that is largely an unknown at the moment. However, a camera with a good AF system still can't operate at its best with an f4 lens or with a painfully slow focusing lens such as the Sigma 50/1.4.

If a 7D mk II is potentially just about affordable for you, what about instead getting a 70D and 17-55? The combination of lens and body will bring big benefits to you.

357
Well I decided to rent the Canon 6D and shot with it at a car show today using my old 28-80 L lenses. Wow, did the pictures stink! Vignetting on almost all the pictures and none of the images were really "sharp". I have the camera until Monday and will continue to test it with my other lenses on Sunday.

I was really hoping I wouldn't have to replace my 28-80 L with a newer L lens. It's great on a APS-C body but is horrible on a FF camera.
Are you shooting jpeg? If so, there might be a lens profile you could install on the camera to sort out vignetting and CA. Use the free Canon EOS utility, plugged into the camera to update it. If you're shooting raw, try the same automatic lens correction in LR or whatever you're using. It might well tidy it up quite bit.

Also remember to feel free to stop it down about one a third stops beyond what you'd use on crop - that way you maintain the same DoF, and the lower noise levels of the FF sensor will allow you to boost the ISO to shoot in the same low light situations (or even darker). Stopping it down will reduce these issues you've noticed. If you want to open it up, just remember you're in territory that the crop camera couldn't go to.

358
EOS Bodies / Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« on: July 08, 2013, 11:09:07 AM »

I'm guessing this whole telecompressor thing is a stepping stone to Canon fitting a FF sensor in an EOS-M sized body. If they believe there's a market for people to mount FF glass on a mirrorless, why not make the body/adapter smaller and optically better by fitting a bigger sensor in leu of the glass - and then native wide angle FF glass can be made to take advantage of the shorter flange distance. If a crop dual pixel sensor is possible, so is a FF version.

If your proposed system allowed EF lenses to be mounted at a shorter flange distance, wouldn't it require sensors larger than our FF sensors? Sounds like a challenging and expensive proposition! Not an unwelcome one though.  ;)
I was thinking of using a glass-free tube, much like the current EF to EF-M adapter to use FF glass on a FF sensor and retain the normal focus range. Focal lengths above about 40mm can't really be made smaller with a reduction in the flange distance (just look at the shorty forty), so just use EF glass with a tube adapter. But the EF-M flange distance lends itself well to shorter lenses such as 22mm pancakes. There's little reason why a similar sized 22mm pancake couldn't have a larger imaging circle for FF. That would make it more compact than even a crop M for wide angle.

359
EOS Bodies / Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« on: July 08, 2013, 10:51:48 AM »
BTW ...

How about focus peaking and a swivel screen ?
With on chip PDAF covering the whole area, I see no reason why canon couldn't do on-screen split focus, as Fuji have implemented with the X100S. But with Canons resistance so far to implement focus peaking, I'm guessing neither will appear anytime soon

360
EOS Bodies / Re: The Next EOS M Camera(s) [CR1]
« on: July 08, 2013, 09:36:03 AM »
The easiest way to think of what a speedbooster does to your sensor size and focal length is the following:

When you don't use a speedbooster, you constantly multiply your focal lengths by 1.6 to get the "equivalent focal length". With a speedbooster that is no longer necessary.

WITH A SPEEDBOOSTER, YOUR APS-C CAMERA JUST BECAME A FULLFRAME CAMERA, AND ISO IS ACTUALLY TWICE AS HIGH AS WHAT THE CAMERA SAYS

So, when I use a 50mm on my NEX-5N with a speedbooster, set at f/1.4 and with ISO 200, I get an image with the same field of view, depth of field, and exposure, as I'd get with that same 50mm on a 5D3, set at f/1.4 and with ISO 400.
There, no more math. It becomes a FF camera, end of story.

That's the exact way Nikon did it with its E series DSLR's. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_E_series). Built in 4x telecompressor, with a sensor to match. The tiny sensor started at ISO 50, but the camera instead called it ISO 800 so it could report the lenses aperture and focal length in 35mm units.

I don't know whether Canon will do it that way (which in many ways makes the most sense), or let it report these compressed imaging circles with their brighter f numbers and shorter focal lengths instead.

I'm guessing this whole telecompressor thing is a stepping stone to Canon fitting a FF sensor in an EOS-M sized body. If they believe there's a market for people to mount FF glass on a mirrorless, why not make the body/adapter smaller and optically better by fitting a bigger sensor in leu of the glass - and then native wide angle FF glass can be made to take advantage of the shorter flange distance. If a crop dual pixel sensor is possible, so is a FF version.

Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 ... 39