Messages

106

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III and 300 2.8 II hit rate for sharp pictures very low

« on: December 31, 2012, 11:28:44 AM »

Interesting infos about the 1DX Firmware.
..

What firmware version are you on? The site lists 1.1.1 as the latest version...

Neuroanatomist is correct in what I meant. 
I'm on 1.1.3 (the latest for the 5D3) now.
Also I wonder if they really can be certain that the problem does not occur on other lenses too?
So, yes,  I'm hoping for a new 5D3 FW too sometime.
Cheers Brian

107

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III and 300 2.8 II hit rate for sharp pictures very low

« on: December 31, 2012, 08:37:31 AM »

Interesting infos about the 1DX Firmware.

You can download the software from the Canon website here.

Firmware Version 1.0.6 incorporates the following fixes.

1. Fixes a phenomenon in which the AF Microadjustment cannot be correctly carried out.

2. Fixes a phenomenon such that when using the camera with combinations of certain lens*1) and extender*2), the images captured become back-focused.

*1) EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM or EF200mm f/2L IS USM
*2) Extender EF 1.4x III or Extender EF 2x III

IIRC up till now almost everything concerning AF on the 1Dx also applied to the 5D3.
Been playing with Focal all morning without any improvements.
Cheers Brian

108

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III and *** 70-200 F2.8 II hit rate for sharp pictures very low too

« on: December 30, 2012, 12:07:36 PM »

Hi,
I'd like to hijack this thread. I have the same problem IMHO with a 5D MKIII and a 70-200 F2:8 L IS II USM that I just bought. I have the feeling that I never get the sharpness that I expected when using AF so this may be just a problem of mine. I've posted a few times on CR about my problems, so I wanted some feedback before sending the Camera and Lens to Canon for checking out
I shot about 100 pics using AI Servo today of my Dog Dave, and our lodger Timmy. Most of them the dogs were walking slowly or trotting, so no high speed motion. Light was good, and I guessed that 1/500th should do, and I was using Timer priority. Spot metering. Using Case 1 AF as the dogs are pretty predictable. Zone AF.
As I had the same problems yesterday I did an AFMA on the lens yesterday evening, but I saw no improvement today.
As stated here already,  I too expect this lens to perform OK at 2.8.
FW was at 1.1.2 for these pictures, but I just updated to 1.1.3 just in case.
So looking at this example IMHO I still have a serious back-focus problem on this lens.
Anything else wrong with my setting?

Cheers Brian

109

HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:

« on: December 30, 2012, 01:23:53 AM »

Very nice shot, IMHO a very good example of HDR or EDR maybe?
But I'm jealous, so how come you were there and I wasn't? 

Cheers

110

Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes

« on: December 09, 2012, 11:57:48 AM »

I dunno... I'm thinkin' your colours are off...

Was this an original of yours? If so I have the feeling someone may have copied it 

Cheers Brian

111

Landscape / Re: Seeking sky advice

« on: December 09, 2012, 11:55:49 AM »

As others have explained, the phenomenon you're experiencing is unavoidable much of the time.  But if you don't already shoot RAW and use software to adjust your photos, you may be in for a pleasant surprise; in Lightroom 4 (I used to think DxO was best at this of the various products I've tried, but LR4 seems even better - which isn't to say there isn't software out there that's even better) you can reduce the exposure of the highlights without darkening the rest and, depending on the RAW file (I have no experience with your camera), may be able to restore much or even all of the missing color in the sky - and, in the process, you'll restore definition to the twigs, pine-needles etc. on the edges of the trees.  I'm often amazed by the details LR4 manages to conjure up.

Yep LR4 does pretty well in getting what is there out, but if there is no detail in the RAW then you are screwed.
I bracket if not certain, I did it to have the potential of doing HDR, but have given up on that now.
As soon as I can afford them I'll be getting some grad NDs.

Cheers Brian

112

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Bracketing feature request. Or did I miss something?

« on: November 10, 2012, 12:34:40 PM »

OK, but I was hoping that my expensive Camera and Personal Computer would help me here.
Still,  an elegant, simple and helpful tip.

Cheers Brian

113

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Bracketing feature request. Or did I miss something?

« on: November 10, 2012, 12:08:19 PM »

Hi,
I brought back 30GB of pics from 2 weeks holiday in the UK. Many were bracketed shots. Its been a pain in LR to sort them out into groups containing the different exposures for a single "scene". I know LR can stack them according to time, I wasn't too taken with that feature. But I will admit that I am new to LR so still learning.
In the end I used the time stamp and looking at the shot to identify them.

So anyone have any tips about how to organize bracketed shots?

Would it help if the Camera would name the files so that it would be clear from the file name which shots belong together? BTW. using a 5DIII.

Opinions.

Cheers Brian

114

Animal Kingdom / Re: Red Squirrels and other Scottish Wildlife

« on: November 01, 2012, 07:39:20 AM »

I've spent well over four years trying to get a half decent shot of a red squirrel, but after my last trip to Scotland, I have more than I know what to do with.  I also managed to photogarph another iconic species, the mountain hare, as well as a treecreeper.

Those are great shots. What lens etc. did you use? The 300mm L I assume?
Cheers Brian

115

Software & Accessories / Re: LR noise reduction in comparison to DPP

« on: November 01, 2012, 05:27:29 AM »

(...)
 I did the following, opened the RAW in DDP and applied NR, then saved the RAW again. Then loaded the RAW into LR and developed it there.
(...)

I don't think, that LR takes care about anything corrected first in DPP and the other way as well. LR looks at the source file and interpretes only settings applied in LR. LR uses separate file to store settings applied to a RAW file, while DPP writes it directly to the RAW file, but it doesn't mean, that their are anyhow interpreted by LR.
Think about settings applied in eirher LR or DPP as a "recipe". Converter (either DPP or LR) looks for this recipe each time when you open a file, takes the original file and applies those "recipe settings" to present you the result. If you are happy with the result on preview, and decide to develop the file, then the converter takes this recipe again and applies to the original RAW file to produce the result file, either jpg or tiff.
Noise settings are part of this recipe. Even if LR would read amount of noise reduction set in DPP, it applies it's own algorithm, so the result will be different.

Yeah Brain-Check at my side considering the first point, I didn't know that the DPP "recipe" would be ignored by LR, and vice-versa too probably.
Cheers Brian 

116

Software & Accessories / Re: LR noise reduction in comparison to DPP

« on: November 01, 2012, 05:21:05 AM »

Aah I see.  What software are you using for HDR?  Theoretically, the HDR software should use your underexposed shots to get the highlights (i.e. sky/clouds) and your overexposed shots for the shadows (which should have little noise since they were exposed to the right originally, not pushed in post).

In practice though, it doesn't always come out as expected.  I use HDR Efex, and yeah, sometimes there is noise in the "shadows", even though I can look at the overexposed shots of those areas and see that they're not noisy.  I've always chalked it up to my general inexperience with HDR and possibly not having enough +EV bracketed shots...

Thats what I thought too.  The noise is there, but doesn't matter as it hasn't been pushed.
I've tried with EasyHDR, Photomatix and HDRExpose. As I wasn't happy with the results, and I tried many permutations, I started to look at the source material in more detail.

117

Software & Accessories / Re: LR noise reduction in comparison to DPP

« on: October 31, 2012, 05:55:08 PM »

Also, if I may ask, what was the subject that required exposing -2EV and then pushing it?  That just seems like a recipe for noise...

Hope that helps.

Vlad,
its mainly looking at the very underexposed ends of a bracketed sequence, and seeing that the shots are not usable for making a HDR due to the amount of noise. I find that the HDR process then amplifies the noise and the results are useless. So I need to select very carefully which shots would go into a HDR.
And therefore wondering if its correct that these shots have that much noise?
In fact I have just about given up on HDR now.

I currently have a trial version of Topaz denoise, but I dont find the results that good. Or at least
IMHO not good enough for me to buy it.

Thanks to everyone else who replied.

118

Software & Accessories / LR noise reduction in comparison to DPP

« on: October 31, 2012, 01:03:22 PM »

Hi,
I have a 5DIII and posted a few times lately that I am not happy with the noise visible in shots that are dark or underexposed. Underexposed especially as I took a lot of bracketed shots on my last vacation so many are at -2, -1.5 or -0.5EV. Also bought LR a few weeks ago and am busy trying to learn it.
At a special event yesterday I got a chance to show a Canon guy the noise in a few shots. He suggested the problem is in the RAW converter. So I tried out DPP and seem to have got better results. I did the following, opened the RAW in DDP and applied NR, then saved the RAW again. Then loaded the RAW into LR and developed it there.
So, is this just a fluke? Is the NR (or even the whole support for the 5DIII) better in DPP than in LR?

Also I was wondering in what order settings are applied in LR? If I increase exposure of a shot, do I amplify the noise? If I then add NR, does it apply to the unamplified noise?

Does the order make any difference at all?

Any ideas?

Cheers Brian

119

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits

« on: October 29, 2012, 03:17:51 PM »

Hmm,
well he's not quite as pretty as some of the others shown here, plus I had to shoot through
a fixed-pane window, but still he has a certain charm........

120

Landscape / Re: Beautiful sunsets

« on: October 28, 2012, 01:51:07 PM »

+1.  I am less than impressed with the noise on my 5DIII. I find the 22mpx enough for me, but expected far better low noise performance. Using Topaz denoise doesn't help much either. OTOH the problem is probably behind the Camera.
Cheers

Here is an example 1/4000s, 400mm F5.6 ISO4000, its easy to see in the two squares. Now thats
at ISO4000, so obviously at anything higher its worse. In this case when I tried Topaz denoise
(the example here is the BEFORE state) it worked pretty well.

So, is this too much noise? And its not in the darkest parts

CHeers