January 27, 2015, 02:05:57 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 - mackguyver

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 213
EOS Bodies / Re: Big Announcements Coming Next Week [CR3]
« on: Today at 12:56:13 PM »
+1.  I've taken to using my 5D3 with the battery pack removed (Try that with a 1Dx.)

This is exactly why I have acquired both  8) It was either that, or take a hacksaw to the 1dx  ::)
+1 and why I sold my battery grip when I bought the 1D X.  No regrets.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Photographs taken in my yard
« on: Today at 12:21:14 PM »
Great shots, Larry, and I'll tell my pals over at FWC to leave you alone :).  I'm just kidding, but I do work with those guys a fair bit in my role working with law enforcement.  I'm glad to hear that they were cool.

I love the stroller cart, too, that's great!  I've been thinking about doing something similar with a beach cart...

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Announcements Coming Next Week [CR3]
« on: Today at 12:14:39 PM »
EF-M lenses were designed to mount to EOS-M directly, no adaptor needed.

For Canon shooters, standard EF and L lenses are as good as gold. These lenses can still be used with EOS-M system with an adaptor, however, AF speed becomes slower.

The EOS M doesn't have a dedicated PDAF sensor, and it doesn't focus as fast as a dSLR.  Compare AF speed with live view vs. PDAF on your dSLR (using Live AF, not Quick AF which uses the PDAF sensor...and note that it's even called Quick AF to differentiate it!) - that's why the M is slower.  Even the 70D with on-CMOS DPAF focuses faster using the dedicated PDAF sensor. 

AFAIK, the adapter has nothing to do with it.  The native M lenses are also all STM, which is slower than USM.  When I mount a fast-focusing L-series lens with ring USM (24-70 II, 70-200 II) on the EOS M via the Canon adapter, it focuses faster than my M22/2 or M18-55...have you had a different experience?
I don't have the adapter, but I know that Sony's adapter which costs a lot more, has PDAF built into it, which is pretty cool.  I think I read some review that says it works quite well, though not as fast as a dedicated DSLR.

Alas, a lot of people don't seem to care if there's a really "wild" background, it looks like in a zoo/tropical garden or if it's shot in a studio :-\
I have no idea what you're talking about - surely people like National Geographic don't share that opinion:

2012 Nat Geo Photo Contest Winners - Grand Prize Winner
Should Photographs Captured in Zoos Be Considered Legitimate ‘Nature’ Pics?

Software & Accessories / Re: 10 bit graphics card ??
« on: Today at 10:54:30 AM »
.....Upgraded to CC.......

In LightRoom is the ability to soft proof for printing, does PS CC offer the same?
I have never heard of Zoner, so I can't speak for that, but yes, PS has everything LR has other than the ability to do catalogs and some of that kind of thing, but Bridge (which comes with PS) does quite a bit of that.  PS also gives you native layer capabilities and a ton of things that LR lacks.  And, using ACR, you can edit multiple photos at once and synchronize adjustments.  It's not as elegant as LR, but is something that seems to be really misunderstood.

Reviews / Re: Review: Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/15mm
« on: Today at 10:42:39 AM »
I'd hesitate to drop this kind of coin on this focal length - I find the 15mm is often not wide enough. At a similar price point, the rumored 11-24/4 I could justify.

Ok that's my only excuse, in reality, I'm drooling over this lens.

That's interesting, because I have a 14mm lens and I can't imagine wanting a wider focal length than that.  I have a 12mm crop sensor lens (about 19mm equiv), and it is actually a very nice landscape focal length.  Composition would become really difficult at 11mm, and you would literally have to watch out for your feet getting into all your photos.
First of all, thank you for another great review that goes way beyond the wall charts.  I am personally very excited for the 11-24 as it really opens up a whole new world of creativity.  It is very difficult to use lenses that wide, but as the title of your review says, "High Challenge, High Reward."  I have owned the Sigma 12-24II and used it almost exclusively at 12mm (which gives you around 1/3 more FOV than a 14mm).  I didn't have it long enough to create anything epic, but I have a lot of cool shots that the other wides can't touch.

Photography Technique / Re: Which eye do you use?
« on: Today at 10:31:34 AM »
Left eye dominant, right handed, but I shoot a rifle with my left and a handgun with my right, so I'm semi-ambidextrous.  I typically use my left eye in the VF, but feel pretty comfortable with my right as well.

I have my eye on getting a 7DII at some point, so I wanted to know if any of you have run into the issue that Arthur Morris is talking about:

The Canon EOS-7D Mark II AF Grid Void

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Announcements Coming Next Week [CR3]
« on: Today at 10:20:08 AM »
In the age of extremely high quality zooms, prime lenses are so esoteric that they are positively elitist.
Yes, the 50 f/1.8 is certainly an elitist and esoteric lens ;D

EOS Bodies / Re: Big Announcements Coming Next Week [CR3]
« on: Today at 09:46:21 AM »
The M3 could be interesting for me, depends on the specs.   Possibly the 11-24/4 at some point, too.
I agree about the M3, especially if it's like this one:
It would be a great match for my imported 11-22, but I wonder if it will even be sold in the US:

The 11-24 f/4 is on my purchase list for the year.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: One single reason to never buy Nikon DSLR
« on: January 26, 2015, 01:45:00 PM »
Personally I despise the 3-pin cable interface on the current Canon Prosumer & Pro SLRs.  The simple headphone jack plug in the consumer line is so much better.  The 3-pin connector breaks very easily - I have had to repair my connection twice now in two different 5-series cameras, and it is so easy to disconnect while walking around with the camera, even if the plug is still in the socket.  It's like you're supposed to remove the connector every time you reposition your tripod... 

Sadly, the Vello intervalometer release I'm using now with a cheap plastic connector works far better than the overpriced cable release from Canon.  I wish Canon would ditch this and replace it with something that is reliable and robust.

Marsu42: A tent.  Hmm...this one:


Would add 3.5 lbs. to my pack.  But for flowers close to the road it could be ideal, if it doesn't crush the surrounding vegetation.  A good thought.

And BTW, I collect only weeds (like Small White Asters), nothing else.  Except some Crane's Fly Orchids that were about to be destroyed in a development.  Those I transplanted to my back natural area, where they seem quite happy.

And I never chill or freeze insects.
I think that light tent has a bottom, but I'm sure you could remove or cut it out.  If you try it, let us know how it works out.

Also, glad to hear you're a responsible nature photographer :)  My pet peeve (after those items) is when people shoot flowers in a studio or trained/captive animals and act like they were wild...but that's a subject for a whole other thread...

Software & Accessories / Re: 10 bit graphics card ??
« on: January 26, 2015, 11:26:01 AM »
I hate to tell you this, but LR doesn't support 10-bit, at least not yet.  The only Photo software I'm aware of is PhotoShop CS5 & higher.  Here's some more information I just found:


You hate to tell, I hate to learn that even more. Oh carp.
Looks like time to step up and pay Adobe's monthly baksheesh.
Looked at Zoner's website, some script crashed FireFox, um, if they can't even code a stable web presence well, makes me skeptical regarding their software package's code.
Don't feel bad, that sums up my 30-bit journey as well - bought monitor, needed cable.  Bought Displayport cable, realized that wasn't going to work with my GeForce card.  Bought reasonable Quadro card, wasn't happy with performance - returned it.  Spent way more than I wanted on higher end card, but PS CS5 support was lousy.  Upgraded to CC...and in the end, I really don't know if it makes a whole of difference.  I guess there are worse and far more expensive journeys to take in photography.

I have a Lastolite TriGrip Diffuser but never tried it for flowers. It's possible to hold the diffuser in one hand (it has a handle or "grip" and is triangular in shape) and the camera in your right hand. It would be less than ideal though as you'd have limited range and movability. But what it would let you do is get a quick idea of how the flower would look with some test shots before setting up a tripod.

It also folds up fairly small. A bit expensive though and tbh I haven't really used it much. Seemed like a good idea at the time .... Hmmmm maybe I should try this flower thing.
That's exactly what I use - I have large two stop version and a smaller difflector version that also serves as a reflector.  The bigger version is nice because it blocks a bigger area, but I wish it was the 1 stop version as the light tends to get a little flat with it.  Alas, I needed the 2-stop version for mid-day portraits, which is what I bought it for...

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Difference in image from APS-C to FF
« on: January 26, 2015, 10:38:28 AM »
Here's one big difference between APS-C & FF - the pixel density really brings out the flaws in lenses - check out the purple fringing in the 7DII vs. 1DsIII from the latest test on TDP - yikes:

Is that pixel density doing that or distance from the chart ? I presume these are shot on the same framing so the 7DII will be further away.

I think TDP is a very useful and well executed resource, but I'm not sure allowing direct comparisons between APS and FF reflects real world results.
I'm no optical expert, but I would think that the abberations would improve the closer you get towards infinity focus, so I would think it's the pixel density.  I noticed this same phenomenon with my fast lenses, particularly with the 24L II and 50L when I was shooting with a crop sensor.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 213