Messages

31

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake

« on: February 10, 2013, 11:26:11 AM »

Re: walking around lenses...

I hate walking around with a big zoom on a full sized body.  I can't enjoy my walk, or my vacation that way.  And it's not just the weight, I worry about letting the camera/lens bump into stuff or being stolen.

The pancake lens is a great way to reduce weight and bulk for "walking around" or as I call it, doing the tourist thing.  I like to put it on my little T2i which is super lightweight itself.  Now that really is a walking around combo!

32

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake

« on: February 09, 2013, 11:33:11 PM »

Hi Hobby Shooter,

I'm not sure how you define classic bikes, but they were all pretty old!  LOL  I think there was one brand new Ducati, probably related to the fact that Ducati was one of the sponsors.  I think just about every brand I know of was there except there were no Vincents.  One guy brought his home made scooter that was quite bizarre looking.  I had to google the brand name "Klausmann" which turns out to be the name of the guy who built it in his garage.  Pretty funny.

They must have had over a hundred old bikes there and a lot of art photography too.  The place is at 420 NE 9th in Portland, OR and the show will be there tomorrow too if you want to check it out.

33

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake

« on: February 09, 2013, 08:49:53 PM »

I went to a motorcycle art show today in Portland.  I assumed the lighting would be poor and that I would need a fairly wide lens.  It seemed like a good time to have some fun with my pancake lens.  I compared notes with a fellow Canonista who was armed with a 70-200 and a speedlight with diffuser.  We definitely approached this project in different ways.

I set my 5D3 to AUTO ISO and set shutter speed and aperture manually.  It seemed to work pretty well.

ISO 3200  1/200  F/3.2  40mm pancake on 5D3



ISO 1600 1/200 F/3.2 40mm 5D3



ISO 2000  1/100 F5.0  40mm 5D3


Here's a crop from that last image.  You can see there is just a bit of grain at ISO 2000.

34

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Custom WB is 550K too warm an +10 too Magenta

« on: January 31, 2013, 10:37:44 AM »

JimmysPhoto:

When I switched from my 5D classic to the Mark III there was a definite shift in the color that I see when imported into Lightroom.  It sounds roughly similar to what you are reporting, although my shooting conditions are different.

So far I have just been moving the sliders manually, but one of these days I need to figure out how to get Lightroom to do that for me automatically when the images are imported.  It is a minor issue for me, but if I were a high volume photographer it would need to be dealt with right away.

35

Landscape / Re: Mesa Arch, Canyonlands NP, Utah

« on: January 30, 2013, 11:05:37 PM »

You can also go even later in the year to avoid the crowds.  I was there around the first of November and the place was almost deserted.  The weather was lovely!  Of course I can't promise it will be that way every year, so it's good to keep your options open.  For example, Arches National Park is at a somewhat lower elevation, so you might be able to shoot there if Canyonlands is too cold or snowed in.

36

Software & Accessories / Re: Anyone using PerfXprints to calibrate your color printer?

« on: January 11, 2013, 12:00:29 PM »

Hey JonDave,  Thanks for pointing out the SpyderPrint.  That looks like a very good option and I'll probably pick one up after shopping around a bit.

I'm not sure why that one did not show up in my searches.  Guess that's why we have this forum!

 

37

Lenses / Re: How many times did you return (L) lenses to get a good copy?

« on: January 11, 2013, 11:53:13 AM »

I shot with a 5D classic for a few years.  It did not have MFA so front and back focus was a big problem.  I gave up using lens resolution targets, because the problem wasn't absolute sharpness, it was poor focus.

I had to learn where each lens focused and compensate by putting my focus point either in front of or behind the actual target.  Of course if your lens shifts as you change focal length, aperture or distance, it gets more difficult.

After much experimentation, I ended up with a target like the one you see in the link below, although mine is a cheaper cardboard version.  You just throw it on the floor, put your camera on a tripod and aim your lens downward at about 30 degrees from horizontal.  I put a short length of black friction tape across the center of the sheet to create a solid target for the autofocus to lock onto.

http://www.hayneedle.com/sale/sewezboard.cfm?source=tellapart

I like this approach over other focus calibration systems, because I feel it is more like real world shooting.  I can vary the distance from one meter to maybe 10 meters.  I can take it outside and test in natural daylight or indoors to check for low light focus accuracy.  You don't even need to uploadload the images to your computer to see exactly where the lens is focused.  Just use the LCD screen and magnify as needed.

I normally do this in my studio using the strobes, so I don't even need to use a tripod if I don't want to.  For a quick and dirty focus accuracy test, it works fantastically well.  It just takes me 5 minutes to test a lens for autofocus accuracy.  You can also easily see the effects of tilted or misplaced lens elements.  Grrrr...     I hate it when that happens!

With my lovely 5DIII, all my Canon primes focus right on the money with no MFA.  I have a 28, 85, 100 and a 135L.  My 50mm prime is the Sigma 1.4 which needs a tiny bit of MFA.

Zoom lenses are another story.  I've tested Canon, Sigma and Tamron zooms.  Most of them have an annoying amount of focus shift with changes in zoom.  The best one I've found is my beat up old Tamron 28-75 that I paid $260 for via Craigslist.  I will keep that lens till it dies and probably buy another.  I tried a copy of the new Tamron 24-70 OS and it was less accurate than my old Tamron.

I am not compulsive about absolute sharpness or corner-to-corner sharpness, because I mostly photograph people.  I spend a lot of time with Photoshop blurring wrinkles and hiding blemishes.  Sometimes I wish my lens was softer!  LOL

38

Software & Accessories / Anyone using PerfXprints to calibrate your color printer?

« on: January 09, 2013, 04:07:14 PM »

http://www.perfxprints.com/#Wheretobuy

It's time for me to properly calibrate my Canon Pro 9000 Mark II ink jet printer so that I'll actually use it.  I want to be able to use different inks and papers, so the manufacturers profiles aren't going to meet my needs.

I have a Spyder device to calibrate my monitor and I have a nice Epson scanner, so this product called PerfXprints looks like it would be perfect for me.  If it works.

All they sell you is the software and a color chart card for $135.  You put the card in your scanner to calibrate the scanner first.  Then you print a file with your printer and put the print into the scanner.  Supposedly the software generates an ICC profile.

The website is not completely clear on how it works.  The tutorial page is broken, which is a bad sign in my opinion.  However, you can order it through B&H, which is a good sign.

Has anyone tried this product or other products that work on the same principal?  I really don't want to pay nearly $500 for the ColorMunki that replicates two pieces of hardware that I already have.

Thanks!

39

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Thinking of downgrading my 5d3 system

« on: January 06, 2013, 12:50:50 AM »

I know what you mean about being too much to carry around when on vacation or even just walking around.  I think people who carry big cameras and lenses when they are trying to enjoy a vacation are either crazy or way more manly than I am!  LOL

What I did was pick up a cheap T2i with the stabilized kit lens (18-50).  It is perfect for vacation pictures and weighs next to nothing compared with my 5D3 and a fast lens.  With a bit of photography skill it takes great vacation pix and I am giving it a try for street photography, something which I have been wanting to explore.

You can get a T2i really cheap from the Canon refurbished web site.  No need to sell the 5D3.  Your Mark 3 will still be a great camera in five years that will do anything you need.  I suspect that you will regain your interest in high level photography eventually and you will wish you still had your Mark 3.

40

Lenses / Re: Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 or Canon 24-105 f/4

« on: January 04, 2013, 06:22:36 PM »

As some reviews have mentioned, it is a little shorter than 70mm on the tele end. 

Ah yes, that helps to explain why I missed the long end of my old Tamron 28-75 for portraits. I was wondering why 5mm made such a significant difference.

Fortunately I recently acquired a 135mm f/2.0 L. 

41

Lenses / Rented a Tamron 24-70 f/2.8

« on: January 04, 2013, 02:15:00 PM »

I rented the new Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 from LensRentals.com during their end of year special.  Gotta love their service, although charging me sales tax was not a welcome addition!

I wanted to see how the Tamron worked with my 5D3.  I currently use an old Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 that actually works fine for my needs.

Due to the weather, I mostly shot in my studio with strobes, so the stabilization did not get much of a workout.  I did some limited testing with continous light sources and found that it did allow me to use shutter speeds two or three stops slower with equal motion blur.  I found that I needed to shoot about three frames of each subject to make sure that one stopped the camera shake well enough to make me happy.  If I were going to use this lens for slow shutter speed work, I'd probably set the camera for rapid fire.

In the sharpness department, I found nothing to complain about.  It is at least as good as my old Tamron.  I did not shoot any resolution charts, prefering to leave that kind of testing to folks like Roger Cicala at LensRentals.  They say it is very sharp.

In the autofocus department, it generally focused fast and quietly.  However there were some situations where the camera would not lock focus in dim light where I did not expect it to have a problem.  I had to press the shutter button a second time to get a focus lock, which is not something I had ever noticed with the Mark III.  I turned up the modeling lights on my strobes and the problem went away.

As for autofocus accuracy, I tested with my usual floor grid and found that there was some variation, as is typical of many zoom lenses.  Sometimes it back focused moderately and sometimes it front focused moderately.  It was more accurate if you focused at the same place twice instead of making it focus elsewhere in between test shots.  Since most of my studio shooting is at 5.6 or 8 I elected not to put in any MFA correction and focus accuracy was not a problem.  If I want every shot tack sharp at f2.8, I'll use my wonderful prime lenses.

My only major complaint about this lens is the size and weight compared to the old Tamron that I'm used to.  If you are used to a Canon 24-70 Mark I you won't have a problem, but I found the extra weight made it hard to hand hold and unpleasant to carry around.  I thought the extra weight might make it feel more stable, but that did not happen for me.

After renting the lens for a week, I have elected not to purchase one for $1299 - they never seem to go on sale.  However I think this might be a useful lens for wedding and event photographers who photograph relatively non-moving people in dim light situations where the stabilization will be useful.  On the other hand, the 5D Mark III allows you to use pretty high ISOs to keep your shutter speed up, so that may be a better solution for most photographers.

42

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Is it hard not to buy 3rd party lenses now?

« on: December 23, 2012, 08:59:53 PM »

I think TomScott has a good view.  Canon lenses, at least the L series, seem to be built more sturdy than the Sigma and Tamron equivalents.  Of course that also comes with larger size and greater weight, as well as higher price.

I view the L series as good tools for pros who are rough on their equipment and can write off the price on their tax return.  They are probably signed up with Canon Professional Service and can get repairs or loaners quickly.

Me, I'm only semi-pro and I treat my lenses very gently.  If a non-Canon lens has something I want and gets good reviews, I'll buy it.

I had a Canon EF-S 17-55 IS with a loose zoom assembly.  It took Canon Service three tries to figure it out.  I sold that puppy then and got a Sigma 17-50 IS that works fine and is just as sharp on my 7D.

When I was using a Canon 5D classic w/o MFA, I went crazy trying to find lenses that would focus well with it.  I bought the Sigma 50 f/1.4 and was not very impressed, because of the poor autofocus performance.  I even tried renting the famous 24-70 L from Lens Rentals.com - what a disaster - the focus was all over the place.  I think it was rented too many times by professionals, LOL!

I finally got lucky and found a Tamron 28-75 on Craigslist for about $260.  I was amazed to find that it worked perfectly and was tack sharp with that old 5D classic.  I am still using it today on my 5D3.  Who needs an L lens? 

And that Sigma 50 1.4?  It focuses beautifully on the 5D3 now.  Autofocus performance depends as much on the camera as on the lens.

I don't worry too much about the brand any more.  Tomorrow I will receive my first L lens, a 135 f/2.0 L that was on sale for $899.  It will be an outdoor portrait lens for my 5d3.  I am prepared to be impressed, but my record with lenses has not been very good.  Wish me luck!

43

Lenses / Re: Sigma 50 1.4 or canon 85 1.8

« on: December 22, 2012, 12:21:53 AM »

I have them both.  The Canon 85 1.8 focuses a bit more accurately and consistently than the Sigma 50, but they both create nice bokeh wide open. The choice would really depend on the exact kind of photos you are doing.

If I have limited space to work and a need to blur the background, I use the Sigma 50.  The Canon 85 is nice when I am working a bit father back from my subject.  I do notice that the 85 needs a higher shutter speed or else I have to use a tripod to avoid motion blur.  I'm using them on a 5D3, which makes them both focus much better than my 5D classic.

The Sigma looks more impressive if you are trying to impress your photographer friends.

The first photo is with the 85mm at 1/320th, f/2.8, ISO 12,500 under a bridge on a cloudy day.



The second photo is with the Sigma 50 at f/1.4 in a backlit situation.  Sorry the two photos weren't taken under similar conditions.

44

EOS Bodies / Re: Eye Fi and 5D Mk iii

« on: December 21, 2012, 06:59:28 PM »

Update!

The Eye-Fi people have released a new version of their app for I-pad and related platforms.  I tried it on my I-pad and found that the images from my 5D3 now display almost immediately on the full I-Pad screen.

I'm still trying to figure out how to navigate around the I-Pad app to see and manage my photos.  It certainly is not intuitive!

45

Lenses / Re: Zoom vs Primes?

« on: December 11, 2012, 12:23:33 PM »

I'm waiting for a second copy of the 40mm pancake to arrive in two days.  (The first copy did not focus consistently on my 5D3)

I think the 40 will be a good, discrete lens for street photography, but I haven't tried it yet.  Will let you all know how it works.  I will try it on my T2i and my 5D3.