November 22, 2014, 11:53:37 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 - funkboy

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 29
PowerShot / Re: The manual for the G1 X mark II is published
« on: March 27, 2014, 06:46:58 AM »
No 14-bit RAW or AdobeRGB; boo-hiss!
from Canon's website:
(...)Shooting and Recording Modes Including 14-bit RAW + JPEG
The PowerShot G1 X Mark II offers a host of shooting and recording modes ranging from fully automatic to fully manual, plus Full HD movies and full-resolution high speed continuous shooting. The camera recognizes 58 shooting situations, automatically optimizing settings for achieving the highest quality shots on the go. Alternatively, you can exert complete creative control over the look and feel of your images. 14-bit signal processing, just as in EOS-series cameras, gives images notably rich detail and smooth gradation, and RAW images are available in a choice of 3:2 or 4:3 aspect ratios. Compared with 12-bit processing, 14-bit offers a 4x increase in RAW data for a visible impact, giving images rich detail in both highlights and shadows as well as smoother, more natural tonal gradation for outstanding image quality.(...)

Thanks for debunking that for me; I recall reading it in the specs but I can't remember where, & I couldn't find anything on it in the manual.  I'll still miss the AdobeRGB (my Fuji X10 does it!) but the lower bit depth would have been more of a bummer.

PowerShot / Re: The manual for the G1 X mark II is published
« on: March 24, 2014, 07:08:01 AM »
No 14-bit RAW or AdobeRGB; boo-hiss!

awesome idea for a long-lasting thread.

  • All my white L lenses have gaffer tape around them, cut to measure to fit all the flat surfaces.  Impervious to nicks & scratches & much less conspicuous then the naked white L lens bbl.
  • I always keep a pack of cigarette rolling papers in my bag for use as an impromptu flash diffuser.  Costs basically nothing, nicely frosted translucent paper, and already has sticky stuff on the edge so you just lick it & stick it a built-in flash or even over the flash on a compact.  Just throw it away when done.
  • Also have a white index card in there for bounce flash, same idea.
  • I run a cheap-*ss grip strap instead of a battery grip, along with a quick-detach neck strap.  The grip strap is great when you know you're going to be shooting a lot, & the neck strap when you're not but you want the camera handy (I carry it around my neck, sometimes in a fitted neoprene case to protect it while still keeping it handy).
  • On my 40mm pancake lens, I use a $5 52-62mm step-up ring instead of the expensive Canon "lens hood" as they're pretty much the same thing.
  • Belt pouches for monopods are great for walk-around low-light work if you have a nice small light monopod on which you can adjust the height easily, & not so great if you don't.
  • extra memory cards & batteries!

Lenses / Re: Upcoming Lens Reviews of Sigma & Zeiss Glass
« on: March 17, 2014, 04:56:14 AM »
I imagine you meant focus ring, not zoom ring :-)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Medium Format
« on: March 12, 2014, 07:45:20 AM »
Didn't Canon have some sort of semi-tranparent mirror sort of like Sony's?  Pellical or something wasn't it called?

Yeah, I think they made a Pelican mirror at some point:

Sorry, couldn't resist <grin>

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L IS
« on: March 12, 2014, 07:42:43 AM »
The 180mm focal length was always a bit of an odd-ball.  Also the 180L macro has about the slowest AF of any L lens I've ever seen (certainly because of the huge glass elements involved, but even behemoths like the 85mm f/1.2L are faster).

A 200mm f/3.5L macro with hybrid-IS and fast(er) AF would be a welcome addition to the lineup.

But really I'd love to see them add IS to the 135 f/2L & 200 f/2.8L, or really any other for-mere-mortals fast telephoto prime for that matter.

Black & White / Re: The TRI-X 'look'...
« on: March 10, 2014, 05:53:05 AM »
I looked into the links you posted about gelatin/silver prints using an internegative process.  Do you know of any print shops that perform this service?  I gave up printing my own images a few years ago.  I got tired of dealing with clogged printheads, etc.  I use Costco for most printing, except the fine art prints I do on occasion.  I just sent the two images shown above to Costco.  You can't beat the longevity of silver based images, though.  I just looked at some work I printed more than 45 years ago, still as good as the day they came out of the fixer (but not as good as I could do today).

Haven't used any personally but teg goog turns up several promising shops which you could probably research a little further before taking the plunge.

I like Keith Cooper's quote on the care & feeding of large-format printers:

when recently looking into problems with our iPF8300, I talked to several people in the ‘large format business’, and lack of use was the number one cause of problems.

If I had to put a big sticky label on printers it would be:


I keep a 24″ roll of cheap proofing paper in our iPF8300 and try and make sure I print every week (a diary reminder helps).

Black & White / Re: The TRI-X 'look'...
« on: March 08, 2014, 04:23:19 AM »
I haven't used a chemical darkroom in 30 yrs, even though I've always had one within steps of my office/labs, but I remember with great fondness my grad school days (actually nights) spent making my own developers.  I briefly taught photographic chemistry to the local camera club, but gave up when people's eyes glazed over.  Not everyone was meant to be a chemist, sigh.  Here are a couple of recent B&W images from a trip to Myanmar last March.  They still have that Tri-X look, including the grain.

Awesome shots dhachey.  This thread rocks :-)

Bringing the whole thing together, something that I almost dove into back when I first got a good DSLR but was still shooting film occasionally is  making gelatin silver prints from digital files.  I first learned about it from LensWork magazine, which is a lovely find in and of itself.

In a nutshell, we finally have a use case for the insanely high resolution that the inkjet printer companies have been using as a marketing gimmick forever.  The printheads of even the now-12-year-old Epson 2200 are capable of small enough dots to print a negative with resolution surpassing film when used with the right transparency medium & inks, which can then be used to make a print with a traditional darkroom enlarger.

The process is laborious but I've seen the results in a gallery and the gelatin silver prints from an FF DSLR source file are every bit as stunning as medium format film.

Black & White / Re: The TRI-X 'look'...
« on: March 07, 2014, 06:47:59 PM »
Awesome thread.

I usually shot Ilford Delta 3200 for low-light club stuff in my T90 (which is most of what I shot with it), & HP5 and Superia 400 for outdoor work.  It blows people's minds when I tell them I got into photography with digital in 1999 using  a Powershot S20 and then switched to a fantastic manual-focus film SLR so that I could learn what the h*ll I was doing & get some good shots in music venues (which was basically impossible with the compact digitals of the day as anything over ISO100 was "boosted" & looked like cr*p).

Tri-X is lovely stuff though :-)

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 14, 2014, 09:39:19 AM »
well when you know what your doing you try to keep your ISO as low as possible.

I do try to keep ISO as low as possible.  I shoot aperture priority on my 6D (unless I'm using a speedlite) and set the auto ISO to stay low until correct exposure needs a shutter speed about 1/2 stop faster than the focal length of whatever lens I'm using at the time (yet another good reason to use prime lenses :-).  I just have to set the aperture to whatever is appropriate for the scene & the auto ISO & auto shutter speed does the rest.

This setup works marvelously, & I wish my older cameras had it as ISO really is a "3rd priority" in addition to aperture & shutter speed.

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 14, 2014, 05:15:46 AM »
I would dispute that most people shoot at base ISO.

Agree with you completely.  Ever since I got the 6D I leave it on Auto ISO 90+% of the time.  If I fiddle with anything ISO related, it's the minimum shutter speed and max auto ISO parameters, which I have on the quick menu.

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 14, 2014, 05:11:07 AM »
I personally just need a reliable 50mm.

1.8, 1.4, 1.X? I don't care.. Under $600 ideally, reliable, accurate, decent sharpness and bokeh, I'll buy one the day it's announced..

The new Sigma 50mm Art should get the job done for you.

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 13, 2014, 08:41:43 PM »
Personally I think the G1X II is awesome (the name is pretty rough though).  According to the DPreview preview, this camera has the most luminous lens/sensor setup of any large sensor compact (.7 EV better than the Sony RX100 II).
24-120 f/2-4 with IS is really in the ballpark of what I had hoped for on this camera, & ~12MP is a good sweet spot too.

The price will come down over time (you'll just have to buy a viewfinder on ebay or something if you want it cheaper).  If you have one of these I don't really see a justification for carrying around a non-FF DSLR unless you need super-long or super-wide lenses, or a really fast portrait/low-light lens.  The price would have been lower if they hadn't bothered with EOS M.

IMHO the execution of the EOS M system was pretty poor; theyd've been better served by further promoting the 100D/SL1 and coming out with a couple of compact EF zooms for it (the compact primes are finally coming along nicely & hopefully we'll see 50 or 85mm primes with IS soon).

Don't count on anything happening there, the 6d is unsupported in mainline ML and 6d-TL is only worked on by one person who managed to isolate himself from the rest of the devs. If you want a stable & supported ML anytime soon, definitely don't get a 6d.

Thanks for shedding some light on that, good to know.

Any reason you wouldn't just dump the cr2 once you had the converted DNG?
Because alex keeps improving cr2hdr all the time, next up is floating point dng because it allows more resolution from dual_iso output ... but to profit from that, you have to have the original cr2s available.

Awesome, that's really interesting.  So can these cr2hd files that it puts out still be read by LR/ACR?  Feel fee to point me to documentation or a FAQ or something.

I've been keeping a lazy eye on how things are coming along for the 6D (e.g. tragic lantern), wondering when it'll be stable enough for me to take the plunge...

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 29