Messages

181

Lighting / Re: Input on macro flashes (Canon MR-14EX / MT-24EX)

« on: January 17, 2012, 07:38:47 PM »

I use my MT-24EX almost always with my MP-E 65 and occasionally with my 100/2.8 IS.  Personally, I far prefer the MT-24EX over the MR-14EX. With the two flash heads you have far more possiblities and I find the results from the MR-14EX to look a bit flat. While I must admit I have never used the MR-14EX myself, I would suspect it is an easier flash for those getting into macro photography. While I do prefer the MT-24EX, you'll likely mess up a number of shots before really getting the hang of it.

The following may also help.

- I'm sure you already know, but you'll need an adapter to get it to work with the 100/2.8.
- For all practical purposes you'll need to diffuse the heads of the MT-24EX. I use Stofen diffusers though you can certainly make your own.
- Canon makes a specialty head for the MP-E 65 + MT-24EX that prevents some light from reflecting into the lens. I highly recommend it.
- Some subjects will be tricky with reflecting light. I have a pair of Wimberley macro brackets I use for especially tricky subjects - in particular water drops and some beetles.

That being said, I almost never use the MT-24EX with my 100/2.8 IS. Most of my subjects with that lens are flowers and small objects that tend to look worse with flash. For those subjects I stick to ambient light. For insects the MT-24EX is great in providing detail of the eyes and body.

Here is an example shot with the MP-E 65 + MT-24EX.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/calevphoto/6046280004/

Here's an example showing the issue you can run into with reflections on some surfaces

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kirispupis/2197050103/

Here's an example where I fixed it using the Wimberley macro brackets (reflections still there but now easily removable with content aware fill)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kirispupis/3130457506/

Here's the 100/2.8 with the MT-24EX. I was too lazy at the time to attach the Wimberley brackets.

http://500px.com/photo/4354171

Finally, depending on your macro subject you may not need a macro flash at all. This one used two 580EX's. I use this setup for high speed photos.

http://500px.com/photo/4227516

182

Lenses / Re: Suggestions for macro zoom lens

« on: January 16, 2012, 07:06:11 PM »

To answer the original poster, I believe you are misunderstanding macro lenses. You change the magnification of any macro lens by changing the focus.  To focus, you move the camera back and forth. Generally as a rule you should not use AF with macro subjects because the camera has no way of knowing what magnification you desire.

In terms of which lens to use for macro there are a number of possibilities.  I wrote a guest blog for a friend on the different ones I use -http://www.ronmartblog.com/2011/11/today-im-happy-to-have-blog-reader.html

For your needs though the Canon 100 macro sounds like the way to go.

183

Lenses / Re: TS-E 17mm weird mini-flare on edges?

« on: January 11, 2012, 11:43:26 AM »

I have the TS-E 17 and yes it is prone to flare.  You need to be very cautious when using this lens to photograph outdoors, because if there are any light sources just out of the frame they will cause flare.

For this reason I typically use my TS-E 24 II when photographing outdoors as it does not have this problem.  The TS-E 17 is usually too wide for the task anyways (though it looks very fitting for your example).  I use my TS-E 17 much more often for interiors where the issue is rarer.

184

Lenses / Re: A new SIGMA macro lens announced

« on: January 11, 2012, 11:39:07 AM »

Personally, I owned the Canon 180 and never liked it.  At least my copy was nowhere near as sharp as my 100/2.8 IS or MP-E 65.

On paper this Sigma lens dominates it.  It is faster, has IS (though Sigma's IS is not macro specific like Canon's), one more blade for better bokeh, and appears to be a more advanced lens optically.

Of course, Sigma has a reputation for creating very intriguing lenses that ultimately disappoint quality-wise.  I started out with Sigma lenses and have long since sold all of them.

Still, I have to admit that this lens is very intriguing. Sigma often takes quite some time to get a lens to market so who knows when it will actually be available, but I will be very interested to see the reviews and comparisons when it is released.

Who knows, by the time Sigma releases it and decent reviews exist Canon may finally announce their own update.

185

Lenses / Re: 14 mm EF II - Filter ideas anyone ??

« on: January 11, 2012, 11:34:25 AM »

There are ways to do this, but none of them are cheap.  One of my friends has a TS-E 17 and 14/2.8 and uses a Cokin-Z Pro filter holder with it.  I believe he uses a flash bracket to hold the filter holder in front of the lens.  Another solution is the Lee SW150.  It's actually designed for the Nikon 14-24 but as I understand it is not difficult to get it to work with the TS-E 17 or 14/2.8.  Of course, given the state of things for Lee it will likely take some time to get ahold of one.

The big issue cost wise is you need 150x150 filters for this to work (100x150 for Cokin-Z).  I have a TS-E 17 but all of my filters are 84x120 and I am not about to buy a complete set of new ones.  The 150x150 filters are over double the price ($225 vs $99 for a SR 2 or 3 stop GR hard or soft grad).

Personally, I just accept the fact that the TS-E 17 does not take filters and use my 16-35 or TS-E 24 II when I need them.

186

EOS Bodies / Re: Why aren't there full-res 1Dx samples?

« on: January 08, 2012, 08:25:32 PM »

I am a bit doubtful of the truth of this but I thought I would pass it on.  This weekend I visited a large camera store here in Seattle and a representative there told me that Canon has told them to expect the 1D-X to release at the end of February.  I asked him if he didn't have this confused with the D4 and he said no - that Canon was releasing earlier because of the D4 release. He added that Canon has not yet set a price though.

Personally I doubt this but it's at least wishful thinking...

In terms of sample images, I know someone who has had a chance to play with the camera, but couldn't examine the images in detail. From what he could tell on the camera the images looked about two stops better than the 1D4 - but it's too difficult to tell much from the camera.

I'm not sure why Canon hasn't been more open with images. When they announced the 1D4 sample images were available within days - but then the camera was released a lot sooner.  Perhaps they wanted to see what Nikon can do first - then add a few tweaks...

IMHO they did make one mistake with announcing the camera and its details so early.  They gave Nikon marketing the opportunity to widely broadcast the F8 AF of the D4.

187

Lenses / Re: Does anyone here have a sigmonster?

« on: January 08, 2012, 08:09:27 PM »

I must admit that I have never used this lens, but I have looked into it.  Personally I would prefer any of the Canon supertelephotos over this lens for the following reasons.

• The image comparisons I have seen showed that this lens is very soft compared to the Canon 500 or 600.
• At 800mm, image stabilization really helps and this lens doesn't have it
• Sigma is not known for quality telephotos. They have had serious problems with quality in recent years
• It is a stop slower than the 500 or 600. If you're going on safari, the best time to see the animals is often when the light isn't so great
• The Sigma lacks the focus limiter and preset functionality that all of the Canon supertelephotos have

188

Macro / Re: Water macro

« on: January 06, 2012, 09:37:37 PM »

Here's another one I did today

189

PowerShot Cameras / Re: X10 vs s100

« on: January 06, 2012, 10:45:14 AM »

That review is Suspect.. Why would he use IS on a camera mounted on a tripod when it should be turnbed off? -Its almost like he wanted the camera to fail. Most manuals would tell you to turn IS off if on a tripod, correct??

If you believe this is the case, bring this up to him yourself by commenting on his blog.  He is usually quite responsive to rational comments.  I have found faults with his posts in the past as well and have brought them to his attention.

In terms of the X10, I prefer to go by pictures taken in a real life situation rather than a review.  I have taken both the G11 and the X10 to DisneyWorld.  In the case of the G11 I found it did not meet my needs and took my 5D2 to my next Disney trip.  With the X10 I no longer feel it is necessary to take my 5D2.

Certainly the 5D2 blows away the X10 in terms of image quality and many other features.  The 7D also outperforms it in many ways and I do not intend the X10 to replace either.  However for an out and about camera where I do not want to carry a lot of gear it is currently the best thing out there.

190

PowerShot Cameras / Re: *UPDATE 3* Canon PowerShot G1X Revealed

« on: January 05, 2012, 08:46:45 PM »

Dear Canon,

I am a huge fan of your cameras and currently own a 5D2, 7D, and G11.  I also have a 1D-X on preorder.  I never bought the G12 because it did not appear to be a huge step up from the G11 and rececently I picked up the X10 finally to replace it.  At the time I was a bit worried that Canon would release some 'supercompact' in the G12 space that would make me regret picking up the X10.

After the news on the GX1 today, I no longer regret my choice.  From the specs the X10 still appears superior in almost every way.

When I was growing up I lived in the same town as Eastman Kodak.  Many of my friends' parents worked there and we used to tour the factory every year as kids.  It is very sad that due to management oversight they will likely no longer exist by the end of the year.

Please wake up and look at what your competition is doing out there.  Do not become another Kodak.

191

PowerShot Cameras / Re: X10 vs s100

« on: January 05, 2012, 08:36:57 PM »

Some answers on X10 questions.

- All of my shots were done hand held. I believe most of Ron's shots were hand held as well - though he occasionally uses a tripod for panos.
- All of my shots are JPG.  I typically shoot in RAW but this was Disneyworld.  I was looking for keepsakes - not images that I will turn into giant prints on my walls.

I still have a 7D and a 5D2.  The X10 will not change this (though the upcoming 1D-X will).  I bring the X10 when I go somewhere where I do not want to haul all of that equipment and am not planning to take serious pictures in the first place.

192

PowerShot Cameras / Re: X10 vs s100

« on: January 04, 2012, 08:06:52 PM »

I can't really directly compare them, but I have the X10 and when compared with images I have seen others produce from the S100 the X10 wins hands down.  A friend of mine had the opportunity to use both cameras and wrote reviews on them

S100 - http://www.ronmartblog.com/2011/11/review-canon-powershot-s100.html
X10 - http://www.ronmartblog.com/2011/12/review-fujifilm-x10-2011-point-shoot-of.html

He wound up returning the S100 and purchasing the X10.

I recently took my X10 to Disneyworld and took this gallery of photos there - http://www.flickr.com/photos/calevphoto/sets/72157628607245971/

I pushed the camera quite hard while I was there and IMHO the results are pretty indicative of the capabilities of the camera.

193

Lenses / Re: lenses for neotropical rainforest

« on: January 04, 2012, 01:52:36 PM »

It depends on what you want to photograph and what type of trip you are taking.

I'll generally assume you want to photograph wildlife.  Insects are certainly the most common and there are many unique ones there.  At minimum you will need a 100mm macro to photograph them.  If you're serious about insects, an MP-E 65 is also a good route.  Note that realistically you will only have time to photograph insects around your camp (but they'll still be abundant and easy to find).  When I went there the tour guide and others in the group were not willing to wait for the lone insect photographer.  Better yet if you want to photograph insects take a private tour.

You'll also see a lot of birds, monkeys, peccaries, agoutis, and other critters.  When I went to Manu, Peru I also saw giant otters, caiman (black and white), a tapir, and a jaguar.  What type of lens you need depends on how you will be seeing them.
- By far the most effective way to see wildlife is by river.  In Manu we travelled by motorized canoe for long periods of time and sat on a raft in an oxbow lake.  The oxbow lake was absolutely incredible and every way you turned there was something interesting.  A 100-400 would work very well there because some animals came very close (giant otters) while others were further away (monkeys).
- When travelling by canoe, basically the longer the telephoto the better.  Many subjects were quite far away - though there were a few exceptions (we came close to a family of capybara).  When I go back some day I would certainly want a 500/600 lens + extenders or at least the new 200-400/1.4x.
- At other times you will be in one place as the animals will come to you.  We used this to view the macaw lek, cock-of-the-rock, and the tapir.  For the macaws and cock-of-the-rock a 400mm lens would still be very useful as they were still quite far away.  A zoom lens may give more flexibility.  The tapir came quite close and could be reached with a normal lens - but it came at night so you'll need a camera that can handle high ISO and a fast lens.
- When walking in the jungle, you can generally forget about getting a good shot off.  Most wildlife tends not to stick around very long when spotted so you're not likely to have the chance.  The exception are some of the monkeys - and you'll need a long and reasonably fast lens to reach them.  Be advised that if you approach too closely they may urinate or throw things at you.  I did have more success walking alone on the paths around our camp - where I had a lengthy encounter with an agouti and several wooly monkeys and very brief encounters with a snake and a jaguar.  To be honest I would spend more time photographing the insects and the trees/plants as few critters will give you the chance.
- Sunsets on the river and mist.  Bring a decent WA lens for these situations as they can be absolutely magical.  This is a shot I took when I went - before I got into photography at all or had an SLR.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kirispupis/93468554/in/set-72057594067259015/

Weather sealing is a concern.  Remember that they call it the rainforest for a reason.  Regardless whether your equipment is weather sealed I would bring rain covers for you camera + lenses.  Also note that if you cannot afford some of the larger lenses, renting is still an option.

Note that this advice applies mainly to neotropical jungles.  If you are travelling to more open areas in SA - notably Los Llanos or the Pantanal - they aren't as applicable.

194

Software & Accessories / Re: ANOTHER tripod topic!

« on: January 03, 2012, 07:52:50 PM »

Personally I have two Gitzo tripods and I am very pleased with them.  I originally bought a 1348 because I did not want a center column and needed something very stable and that can go quite high (because I am tall).  It was purchased with the idea of using it with supertelephotos.  I have a Markins M20 ball head on top.

I later bought a Gitzo 2541EX for use with macro and put an Acratech GP ball head and two RRS macro rails on it.  This is probably the best setup you can get for macro - though if I could do it again I would get the geared version.

For a monopod I have the Gitzo 5541 with a RRS tilt head attached.

You can't really beat Gitzos for the stability and light weight they provide.  They have also thought of nearly anything.  I do agree that you can find very suitable tripods for less money, but IMHO the premium is worth it.  Once you purchase one Gitzo you'll find that you have no desire for anything else.

195

Macro / Re: Water macro

« on: January 03, 2012, 07:16:38 PM »

Actually it was not shot in a dark room.  However neuroanatomist is correct that the shot was frozen with flash - not with a high shutter speed.

The whole setup was achieved using a Stopshot that I recently purchased.  In terms of a 1 second shutter speed, the actual shutter speed was less than that.  I had the camera on bulb mode and used the Stopshot to control the shutter time.  For some reason Canon seems to register it as 1 second but the shutter speed of the camera doesn't really matter here anyways.

I wrote a guest blog for a friend on the setup - http://www.ronmartblog.com/2011/12/high-speed-drop-photographygetting.html - though I have changed it a bit since (and since I just bought this am changing it each time I shoot).