Messages

31

Lenses / Re: Did you use a UV filter on 70-200 f2.8L IS (I or II) during its last use? (Poll)

« on: December 14, 2012, 06:12:17 AM »

I use plastic cling wrap. Apart from protecting the lens it seems to have good static properties that draw the dust out of my lens. Plus from experience growing up it kept fungus out of my lunch so I think same applies for a lens, my sardine sandwiches never went green even if I didn't fancy them for a few days.

32

EOS Bodies / Re: 6d aus release?

« on: December 13, 2012, 07:02:36 AM »

As Hillsilly said CameraPro have in stock, plus a few grey importers have had them a while. No real point buying from a chain store, it's not like they'll give you any decent support themselves and if you go with a company that sells things with a Canon Australia warranty I can't think of much disadvantage buying interstate. If you do want decent local support (not just warranty) maybe try a few smaller local independent Canon dealers.

33

EOS Bodies / Re: Frimware on 7D version 7.7.7??

« on: December 12, 2012, 04:48:07 AM »

Internal test version no doubt as a few other noted. Depending on whether you can be bothered and how quickly you need to get back to using it:

Have a hunt around through the menus and see if you can find anything interesting / different and share.

I'm not sure if the Magic Lantern team have a 'turnkey' firmware downloader for the 7D or not but they might be interested in examining what is different.

34

Technical Support / Re: Possibility to recover overwritten images on harddisk?

« on: December 11, 2012, 08:24:13 AM »

Be aware too of 'snake oil' in the data recovery business too. Maybe someone can prove me wrong but I'm not aware of a single case ever with a modern HDD where data has ever been recovered by anyone if the actual data has been overwritten even once.

That's a lot different to an 'oops' moment where you realise soon after you've deleted the file so it's flagged as deleted but the orignal data is still on the disk. I guess being a backup drive it was pretty full and has had plenty of writes over the data, so based on your results from those tools unfotunately suspect you'll be out of luck.

35

Lenses / Re: History Lesson: Canon FDn 1200 f/5.6L 1.4x Lens Images

« on: December 10, 2012, 07:29:21 AM »

It's interesting the size of the bulge on the teleconverter, looking at that I can see how the converter could easily be moved out of the way. Anyone know how it works internally on the new 200-400? That's quite small by comparison but I thought being at the rear the teleconverter elements would have to be about the same for any focal length.

Uh, what? The 200-400 has a similar bulge, and it apparently drew the ire of Canon's testers, according to a previous post here.

I think he means the bulge on the 200-400 is significantly smaller, and it is.  If you picture a whole 1.4X converter swapping in and out, you would need a big bulge.  But of course most of a normal 1.4X is just the lens tube, the structure that holds the camera and larger lens.  The actual glass elements are way smeller.

Indeed that's what I meant, and taking a look at my extender see what Tex means so I should be more observant. Kind of disappointing though, I'd hoped Canon had developed some sort of TARDIS-like technology  .

36

Lenses / Re: History Lesson: Canon FDn 1200 f/5.6L 1.4x Lens Images

« on: December 09, 2012, 01:10:38 AM »

It's interesting the size of the bulge on the teleconverter, looking at that I can see how the converter could easily be moved out of the way. Anyone know how it works internally on the new 200-400? That's quite small by comparison but I thought being at the rear the teleconverter elements would have to be about the same for any focal length.

37

Lenses / Re: 17-40L vs 24-105L

« on: December 08, 2012, 02:27:58 AM »

Mind sharing the Australian retailer? I just ordered a 24-105 for $150 more only last night so still have time to cancel. I can't give any advice on your question not owning either before, but am going for the 24-105 because I don't shoot extra wide so am going to use it as a bit of an allrounder.

38

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What is white balance and what's the correct way to use it?

« on: December 05, 2012, 06:42:12 AM »

B&W and be there

39

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1DX "Caution 02" Warnings AND Filthy Sensor.

« on: December 04, 2012, 05:52:09 AM »

My battery doesn't actually lose power- and doesn't indicate it's losing power incamera- which is what's got me puzzled about it- Your definately soiunded like a faulty battery though- My caution 02 messages coem with either of my two btteries- one htat came with hte camera, and one that I bought extra- maybe both are faulty, but again, there seems to be no rhym or reason as to when hte error happens, coudl happen on a full charge, 1/2 charged, or low battery- It's just a wierd situation

Not speaking from 1DX experience but general Li-Ion experience, I don't suppose you happen to be in a cold climate and have you noticed a correlation between the temperature and when it happens? Batteries can deliver lower peak current at low temperatures so just an idea I thought I'd put out there.

Also I've never actually read this anywhere or know an explanation but I was working on a project a while ago and observed through repeated controlled tests that units with a new battery would perform best after the batteries had been through 2-3 dishcarge / recharge cycles. It was something with a somewhat similar current profile to a camera too, sitting fairly idle most of the time but firing up a transmitter every 5 seconds that caused a peak.

40

Canon General / Re: soon to be a 'Canon/DSLR newbie' here!

« on: December 03, 2012, 01:08:33 AM »

I'd agree with advice so far of the 18-135mm for versatility and a 50/1.8. The other thing would be to get the zoom first, dial-in to 50mm and see how you like that focal length. My first DSLR was was a 450D with a kit lens and I used that to work out which focal lengths I liked before bankrupting myself on other lenses . Personally I did really like 50mm on a crop, and a 50/1.4 was my first non-kit lens but I wouldn't have been happy with it as a single lens.

For low-light you could also consider a Yongnuo flash which is roughly similar cost to the 50/1.8. I've only used Canon flashes myself but a lot of people here seem to be enthusiastic about them, especially considering the cost versus a Canon speedlite.

41

Portrait / Re: Opinion needed - Portrait post processing

« on: December 02, 2012, 07:05:42 AM »

I probably prefer #2 by a small margin, but that area in the lower left corner is blown out and very distracting. It's really where my eyes went first despite the very attractive model. I'm far from a trained eye only an amateur myself but probably your composition / light control needs more practice than the processing, which really looks reasonable across all 3 shots.

42

Technical Support / Re: 5D Mark 111 and Lightroom 3 compatability issue?

« on: December 02, 2012, 04:28:52 AM »

I'm 99% sure only LR 4.x has any 5D3 RAW support. I'm on LR 4.2 and no problems, but remember the only reason I went from 3 to 4 was to get Mk III support.

ETA - Your post made me wonder what the new naming standard is about with the characters out the front. On page 152 of the manual it mentions they are set at the factory and unique to the camera, but can be changed from the menu. Guess not a bad feature for anyone with a few cameras to avoid duplicate names.

43

EOS Bodies / Re: Just ordered a 6D...

« on: December 02, 2012, 02:12:38 AM »

H&B has not shipped my camera. Why is that? Is it just me?

How long is it gonna take for them?

Yes just you, I ordered mine around the same time and it's already turned up in Australia and I've been taking some fantastic shots all weekend, so awesome I won't post because it will make 1DX owners want to jump off a bridge .

But seriously unless I'm missing something with the timezones wouldn't you have ordered it something like 6:00PM Friday New York time? Assuming you meant 'just ordered' as in the past hour or two since your original post.

44

Software & Accessories / Re: Mini Tripod?

« on: December 02, 2012, 12:23:27 AM »

My budget is aroubnd ~50$ maximum. I start to think I wont get anything i will enjoy for years with this budget...

If you've already got a head of some form what I've sometimes done is put a 3/8" bolt in the bottom and then secured that into a vice. Obviously less convenient but virtually free if you already have a vice and you can just stick it on top of a few phone books or similar to get additional height.

45

Lenses / Re: 70-200 is I vs ii:tc usage

« on: December 01, 2012, 10:50:39 PM »

1. Would the version ii 70-200 work with version ii converters

Yes - in fact the iii extender became available well after the lens was released.

2. Would the version ii converters work better with the 70-200 mark I

Not 100% sure on that, but I believe they did make some optical improvements so I'd expect so.

3. Is it important to purchase mark iii converters for the 70-200 ii

The mark iii has weather sealing and is a little better optically. It has some AF speed improvements with newer super-teles but I don't think those changes make a difference on the 70-200. Guess it's up to you if the extra $$$ are worth a small improvement, but either will work fine.

As for your main question I think the 70-200 II is considered to have better IQ than the 70-200 I in just about all regards, so the same will apply when using an extender even more so. The II version also has faster autofocus which will help when using an extender, which slows down AF.