October 02, 2014, 08:49:47 AM

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 - brianleighty

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 18
46
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Warning on low card space
« on: March 25, 2013, 10:43:04 AM »
Before somebody says it, I do realize that the 5D mark iii has 2 slots and that I could of selected the option to have it start recording to the other card but being that it was a wedding, I decided to have it record JPGs in case there was an issue with one of the cards I was recording on. I had extra cards in my pocket but in moments like that you don't have time to switch cards. Sigh... live and you learn I guess. Just frustrating that a $3000 camera can't give a simple warning for something so important as card space.

I have my camera set to switch from Card 1 to Card 2 automatically. I have two 32GB CF cards which can hold roughly 1,396 RAW pictures each. From past experience, I know roughly how many pictures I will take at each event and so I make sure I have enough. The same goes for the battery. They are the two things you must never run out of on a shoot, especially a paid shoot, or anything that is important to you.

I think the idea of getting a notice from the camera saying that you have only X number of shots left on a card is a good one in theory, though I am not sure how effective it would be in real life. Still sounds like a simple issue to implement and Canon could give users the option at what point to deliver the notice and how.

You mentioned you were shooting JPGs, how big is the card you were working with?

My backup was JPEG as I don't use SD cards much so I only had a single 16 GB card which wouldn't be enough for recording RAW as a backup.

47
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Warning on low card space
« on: March 24, 2013, 01:40:19 PM »
That seems like a nice feature.  I'd go to the Canon forum and suggest it.
 
I finally just got a big enough card to hold twice the expected shooting volume, and the same sized card for backup.  That way I don't have to worry, and I always have a backup copy if there is a failure.
 
Since I do not use the high speed shooting very often, its not a big deal If the SD card is slow.  If I were going to do video, I'd do a low level format on the SD card first though.

Do they actually listen to customer request there? Yeah, switching to 64 GB cards would probably help avoid this as well. I guess I just hate having everything on just one card. I guess with a camera with 2 slots though, that's where the backup slot comes in handy in case something did happen to your main card.
Suprisingly, they do!  Some of the announced updates like the ability to autofocus at f/8 , and the fix for slow autofocus  with AF assist lights came about thru user input.
 
They should be able to do it in firmware.  However, it might show in the viewfinder or the top LCD, and just looking at either place lets you see shots remaining, so I suspect that's their logic.
 
Perhaps if the shots remaining number flashed on and off, that might catch a persons attention.  A user could set the number remaining before it started flashing, as well as disable the feature if it bothered him.
 
 
Its just a question as to how important it is and how many users badly wanted it.  That's where a post on the Canon forum allows others to speak up.
Not true, the viewfinder only gives you your burst rate which since I shoot in raw is only like 7-12 depending on settings. I rarely check the top LCD except for if I'm just pulling the camera out of the bag. I mainly look at it on the back LCD but since there's no face detection on all the cameras I work with I usually leave it off unless I'm changing a setting. What you said regarding flashing in the viewfinder is exactly what I was thinking. Or even better if the back lcd could come on have the number of pics remaining flash there as well. I'll post on the Canon forum but I'm not holding my breath.

Yeah, 128 would definitely solve it :). I got my 32 GB cards for around $40 from a sale on B&H and I'm sure if I looked I could 64 or 128 cards at a decent price so it's not an issue of cost. It's more I just don't want to take chances on just one card. Risk management. I just have to get better about checking I guess.

48
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Warning on low card space
« on: March 24, 2013, 12:39:41 PM »
How large is your card?  On a 32GB card I have shoot around 1,000 raw images.  Is that enough for a single event.  Costs are around $150.  Consider that 1,000 images is the equivalent of ~30 rolls of film.  Back in the day (ancient history) slides plus processing cost between $10-15/roll.  Digital equivalent of a roll of film (36 exposure) is only $5.

Double the card size, you will double the number of images.  Are you using the vertical grip?  If not, the battery will die before a 64GB card is filled.  A 128 GB card will outlast both batteries in the vertical grip.

If you are still worried about filling the card try setting the camera to use automatically switch to the second card once the first is filled.
Yup, using 32GB cards. I switched my first card with about 100 pics left on it and I filled up the second one. We tend to shoot quite a lot (in the 3500-5000 shot range). Not using a vertical grip although I'm curious if it might help me with the 70-200. I tend to use it a lot in portrait orientation and my arm was pretty sore by the end of the ceremony.

49
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Warning on low card space
« on: March 24, 2013, 11:39:23 AM »
That seems like a nice feature.  I'd go to the Canon forum and suggest it.
 
I finally just got a big enough card to hold twice the expected shooting volume, and the same sized card for backup.  That way I don't have to worry, and I always have a backup copy if there is a failure.
 
Since I do not use the high speed shooting very often, its not a big deal If the SD card is slow.  If I were going to do video, I'd do a low level format on the SD card first though.

Do they actually listen to customer request there? Yeah, switching to 64 GB cards would probably help avoid this as well. I guess I just hate having everything on just one card. I guess with a camera with 2 slots though, that's where the backup slot comes in handy in case something did happen to your main card.

50
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Warning on low card space
« on: March 24, 2013, 11:18:34 AM »
i always check my card space a minute or two before i know an important moment is happening. just have to get into the habit of doing so.
Yup, definitely agree it's something I have to get better about no question about that. It's just frustrating this can't be built into the camera's software for those times when you forget because you're focused on getting your settings right.

51
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Warning on low card space
« on: March 24, 2013, 10:10:07 AM »
So I just shot a wedding last night. I got to try out the Sigma 35 1.4 and a 5D Mark iii. Great lens BTW. We were all setup for the exiting shot with sparklers. Right as they came out the doors my card reads full. Luckily my wife got the shot but is it just me or does anybody else find it frustrating there's no warning when you're running low on card space? I come from the video world and pretty much every camera I've ever shot with has had a warning message when you get to around a couple minutes of space left on the tape/card. It seems like such a simple thing and especially with the 5D mark iii now having a section for warning messages, this seems like an obvious thing to put in there. I took a look at magic lantern again today but didn't see anything like this in there. It'd be great if at least it supported it. Before somebody says it, I do realize that the 5D mark iii has 2 slots and that I could of selected the option to have it start recording to the other card but being that it was a wedding, I decided to have it record JPGs in case there was an issue with one of the cards I was recording on. I had extra cards in my pocket but in moments like that you don't have time to switch cards. Sigh... live and you learn I guess. Just frustrating that a $3000 camera can't give a simple warning for something so important as card space.

52
Pricewatch Deals / Canon Direct 20%-30% off February 24-27
« on: February 20, 2013, 09:12:40 PM »
Just found out Canon Direct will be having a sale February 24-27. It reads "20% or 30% Off Refurbished Lenses"
and
20% Off Select Refurbished EOS Digital Cameras (Excludes 5D Mark III Refurbished)

Most likely the 30% off is on the entry level 55-250 or 70-300 but even with the 20% there's some good deals and stock appears to be good at the moment. Remember this doesn't start until February 24th.

53
Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac
« on: January 31, 2013, 04:57:42 PM »
Sure videos a full different ball game though. You look at intel with their quicksync dedicated on the CPU itself. It's much simpler and more standardized than RAW formats that are company specific. GPU only helps if the software can be coded to use it which as I said most RAW programs don't seem to be doing due to the complexity. I think another part is the quality also can suffer using these things so they're good for previewing but don't help with the final rendering or if they do, it's of lower quality than when rendered with the CPU.

54
Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac
« on: January 31, 2013, 12:33:32 PM »

Thanks.  So you feel the stock i5 on the 27" is good enough.  What is the advantages of i7 then?

This might be too little info too late, but the Core i7 can hyperthread while the core i5 can not. That means the Core i7 functions as an 8 core processor, while the Core i5 functions as a 4 core processor. I'd spend the extra couple of hundred bucks on the Core i7. The Core i5 is quite old at this point, and I'm surprised Apple offers it in a newly revamped machine like the iMac.

The i5 is a great inexpensive alternative. But honestly for photo and video, just like a previous poster said, you'll the good everything. GPU should def be atleast 1GB. You can definitely get by with the i5 if you don't have the money after getting the GPU, but if you can, get both.

Why does everybody always say a super duper graphics card is mandatory? In both Lightroom and DPP it doesn't help with rendering. I guess if the software you use can take advantage of it, that's one thing but CPUs are king of the hill when it comes to RAW conversion.

55
Macro / Re: Which extension tubes to buy?
« on: December 25, 2012, 03:24:54 PM »
I bought the Kenko set. Very nice quality. I believe the 20mm one is a tighter lock than the others but not so much that's it's super hard to remove. I've been very happy with them.

56
Lenses / Do I need to rent a normal range zoom?
« on: December 21, 2012, 11:50:43 PM »
So I'll be shooting a couple weddings in March and I'm starting to think about gear for it. While the wedding I did in early December was with two full frame cameras, my wife was one of the brides maids so I was able to have both cameras with me with one having my 24-105 and the other a rented 70-200. My question is this. Do I need to rent a normal range zoom to make sure I don't miss shots? I'll give my wife the 24-105 so I'll at least have some fall back there. I normally use the 70-200 for most of the ceremony and a good part of the reception as well. The main things I'm thinking of are the cake cutting and wide shots of people dancing where you need something wide. My thoughts are either #1, use my 40 2.8 lens for this. I always have a hard time using this lens just cause of it's low price yet it's a very nice lens so maybe it's just in my head and that would a good option. The other possibility would be to rent the Canon 35 1.4 like I did for this last wedding and have that for my wider angle option. I'm only wanting to rent one wide aperture lens though and I'm trying to decide between this and the Sigma 85 1.4. Now one other thing that factors in and is part the reason I'm wondering if I can get by without renting a normal range zoom is I also still have my 50D which I can either have ready to go with my Sigma 10-20 or Tamron 17-50 as a backup as well. Full frame is obviously a lot nicer though so I wouldn't want to be using it more than I'm using the full frame or else what's the purpose in renting the full frame camera then? So any thoughts on this? Thanks

57
Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac
« on: December 07, 2012, 08:26:56 AM »
photo and video, by the biggest and fastest of everything....
I think this negates a valid price vs performance analysis. I just ended up building a hackintosh last night because the 27" iMac is out of my price range and the 21" is pretty much not upgradable at all unless you have apple do it which is super expensive. I think the stock CPU will be fast enough for you. Graphics card won't make a huge difference either. These are all incremental upgrades. The fusion drive though might be worth it. I made my own fusion drive since it's a hackintosh and it only cost me $75 extra. I think apple charges $250 which isn't cheap but for apple standards isn't bad. The only way to do this on an iMac if you don't get it with it is to setup a thunderbolt SSD and by that point you're better off just getting it from Apple. That's my take on it. So from Apple, possibly Fusion drive and then upgrade the ram your self.

Thanks.  So you feel the stock i5 on the 27" is good enough.  What is the advantages of i7 then?
Well you end up spending an extra $400 ($200 for the upgraded 27 and $200 for the processor) for it so my thinking is why not save that money and probably in another 3-4 years put that towards a new one. My best guess is you'll get a max 25% increase in CPU speed with the upgrade. From the last gen iMac to this one you're looking at a 25% increase in processor overall and some benchmarks I believe showed up to 100% increase. So if you  use that as your "upgrade path". Then over the course of 3-4 years you get more value for your money there. I have no doubt the stock 27" iMac will be plenty fast and will be a huge upgrade from your current system.

58
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 6D vs 5D MKII (Focusing?)
« on: December 04, 2012, 11:19:14 PM »
My final words are.. the center point from the Canon 6D might be better for accuracy from any Canon camera ever build.. believe me, this thing is very powerful..
Hmm. LensRentals did a controlled test and the results don't support your enthusiasm.
In terms of AF accuracy, the 6D is closer to the 5DII than the 1DX/5DIII.
Some others have already commented but I thought I'd also point out that Roger wasn't really testing for AF accuracy on it's own, this article is related to all the previous ones where he's comparing contrast live view focusing vs phase detection AF. Even the lowest level 6D shot is still obviously very much in focus. It just isn't "perfect". So the real answer is without further testing this test doesn't prove anything other than the 5D mark III and 1DX do better with newer lenses than the 6D which isn't that huge a deal. What needs to be tested is how the camera handles in low light and low contrast situations. I look forward to hearing more about this.

59
Software & Accessories / Re: iMac As Display / Calibration
« on: December 04, 2012, 01:14:17 PM »
I ♥ Win 7 Pro.  :|
Eh! Windows 7 is alright. Far from great. Windows 8 looks to be aweful. I've been running 10.6 up to this point and am really happy with some of the new things in 10.8. Mountain Lion feels like a much more polished product than Windows 7

60
Software & Accessories / Re: Which iMac
« on: December 04, 2012, 01:12:28 PM »
photo and video, by the biggest and fastest of everything....
I think this negates a valid price vs performance analysis. I just ended up building a hackintosh last night because the 27" iMac is out of my price range and the 21" is pretty much not upgradable at all unless you have apple do it which is super expensive. I think the stock CPU will be fast enough for you. Graphics card won't make a huge difference either. These are all incremental upgrades. The fusion drive though might be worth it. I made my own fusion drive since it's a hackintosh and it only cost me $75 extra. I think apple charges $250 which isn't cheap but for apple standards isn't bad. The only way to do this on an iMac if you don't get it with it is to setup a thunderbolt SSD and by that point you're better off just getting it from Apple. That's my take on it. So from Apple, possibly Fusion drive and then upgrade the ram your self.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 18