Messages

61

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Introducing the MōVI Stabilizer

« on: April 05, 2013, 01:49:55 PM »

I think I'll wait for the Chinese to clone it for $1500/$750.

Not sure I see this happening anytime soon. The secret sauce seems to be the extremely quiet and responsive motors used, as well as the controller used to maintain the stabilization.

Plus the fact that I don't see most of the Chinese knockoffs to work as well. Perhaps they'll work pretty well, but unless you spend the money for high tolerance parts, it won't even match up to what this can do.

62

PowerShot / Re: SX50 outperforming 5DIII +100-400mm

« on: April 04, 2013, 06:22:28 PM »

Try one more thing, locking the focus on fast movement such as birds in flight. I think there you'll find the SX50 might not outperform the 5d3. How was the lighting as well? Good lighting makes a big difference. Almost every camera takes nice shots with good lighting. It's when you've got complex lighting or it starts to fail, you'll probably see the SX50 being quite challenged.

The light was crap for the Robin shot (iso 1600 and 1/160) and dim for the brick wall. A 7D suffers at 1600 iso.  Most of my photos are not of birds in flight.

I have spent weeks doing AFMA on my very expensive lenses and the 5DIII and 7D, and the 7D focus is erratic. This cheapo is spot on focussing every time.

Well, it actually uses Contrast AF, which is known as being more accurate. Usually slower than the Phase Detect in dSLR's. Also it can have trouble tracking subjects in motion, so that's the other bit.

And yes, I'd say that being able to have a much longer effective focal length will generate better quality images due to the higher resolution for similar field of view if you were to crop the 5d3 + 400mm to the equivalent of 1200mm. The 600mm + 2x TC might be another story all together though   But certainly a LOT more costly, that's for sure.

63

PowerShot / Re: SX50 outperforming 5DIII +100-400mm

« on: April 04, 2013, 05:40:29 PM »

Try one more thing, locking the focus on fast movement such as birds in flight. I think there you'll find the SX50 might not outperform the 5d3. How was the lighting as well? Good lighting makes a big difference. Almost every camera takes nice shots with good lighting. It's when you've got complex lighting or it starts to fail, you'll probably see the SX50 being quite challenged.

64

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: CompactFlash vs SDXC (Effectively 5D3 vs 6D)

« on: April 03, 2013, 01:52:41 PM »

CF > SD

C'mon. Stop supporting CF tech. SD is catching up in a more reliable and convenient package and on top of that its less expensive. At the current speeds they both are way passed practical speeds from what current cameras offer. Let CF die...

My d30 is CF only and I need to support CF until another format like XQD is adopted on canon. SD really sucks on the mk3.

Haha I see I just want camera manufacturers to stop CF slots. It'll save them space for other electronics and it'll make our end a lot easier when all cameras have the same standard and computers can easily take SD. 

Actually, I only see the SD physical interface as being more reliable than CF. I personally think the CF cards themselves (at least electronics inside) tend to be built in such a way as to be more reliable. An SD card has significantly smaller amount of space for NAND dies and controller, while the CF card has more room for more dies and potentially better controller which can do a better job of cleaning up space that's not being used to keep write speeds high.

Now, I very much can't wait to see XQD being widely adopted. Must faster theoretical throughput via PCIe, plus I think with a simple adapter I can stick it into my laptop's ExpressCard slot and read it at extremely high rates. Plus slightly smaller size than CF.

65

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Film! What's the best Film left? Just got an EOS 1V Film SLR... and an FD A-1...

« on: April 01, 2013, 05:42:44 PM »

I'm just getting into film myself (RB67 6x7 MF though), and Porta is pretty nice color, while the Ilford line has some great B&W films. I believe the Tri-X is also a well regarded B&W film. All those are negative, not positive (slide) film. I haven't tried going into any positive film yet.

66

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Yeah, that is the future......

« on: April 01, 2013, 02:55:50 PM »

“We expect to have our camera on the market well before the Canon 200-400 f/4 IS lens is released"

Even for an April Fool's joke, that could very well be true.  ;-)

Yea, when I got to this part, I went right...however true that is, Roger must be pulling our collective leg. Very fun read though, I wonder if any of that ever could actually work some day...anyway, it's a pleasant dream to have.

67

Software & Accessories / Re: So...what am I doing wrong with this scan?

« on: March 30, 2013, 04:09:42 PM »

Negative, not calibrated yet, but if you look at the guy in the black shirt you'll see a ton of digital noise in my scan.

For the VueScan settings:

Mode: Transparency
Media: Color Negative
Scan Resolution: 3200dpi
No multi-exposure, single pass
Filter: Light Infrared Clean, Light Grain Reduction

Color:
Color Balance: Auto Levels
Negative Vendor: Kodak
Negative Brand: Porta
Negative Type: 160NC
Film Color Space: Built-In
Ouput color space: Adobe RGB

68

Software & Accessories / So...what am I doing wrong with this scan?

« on: March 30, 2013, 02:46:23 PM »

So I just got the Epson v600 scanner to scan some of my 120 film negatives that I have started to take. Then decided to get ViewScan rather than the Epson software, and so far I like VueScan better. However, I seem to be having an issue with some digital noise as part of my scan. Top image is my scan, bottom is the scan I received from Samy's when I got the film developed. Anyway have any idea what I'm doing wrong?

69

EOS Bodies / Re: Favorite or Preferred Film body?

« on: March 29, 2013, 08:12:37 PM »

I have a mamiya rb67 too. My most preferred by far.

Just got mine a month ago, really awesome, but still learning my way and adapting my shooting style. And getting used to how film exposes differently than digital.

70

EOS Bodies / Re: Favorite or Preferred Film body?

« on: March 29, 2013, 07:36:46 PM »

Well, my response of Other is based on my recent acquisition of a Mamiya RB67 medium format film camera. As for 35mm, I have a Minolta X-700 that's kinda nice, but haven't tried out any of the Canon models.

71

Software & Accessories / Re: Nik Collection for $149

« on: March 27, 2013, 06:38:39 PM »

Duplicate thread.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=13794.0

BUT I did purchase it, and at $125 (see other thread) it's a great value.

Ah, apparently I'm blind and didn't see this thread.

But nice catch on that bonus code, kinda glad I haven't bought it quite yet...probably should now that I can save a few more dollars with that code. Probably worth it for the Silver Efex alone, which I've thought about getting before, but the whole bundle would be nice.

72

Software & Accessories / Nik Collection for $149

« on: March 27, 2013, 04:11:40 PM »

Apparently the entire Nik Collection is being offered for $149 right now, and I've heard that owners of any of the current/former purchasers of any of the software products are eligible for free download of the entire Nik Collection. Wow!

http://www.niksoftware.com/nikcollection/usa/index.php?view=intro%2Fmain.shtml

73

Software & Accessories / Re: Film and polaroid scanner

« on: March 26, 2013, 07:52:05 PM »

My mother wanted a bunch of old slide scanned and I went thought all the costs of me doing it and paying someone. The best deal I found was to rent a nice one. Borrowlens was by my house, so i just picked it up and had it for like 3 days. It was a long week days to get them all done. But It was only like $50. So for the price it was a good choice.

Renting might work in the short term, but since I plan on shooting film for quite a while, it doesn't make as much sense. Currently Borrowlens.com doesn't have a scanner that supports medium format, nor does my local rental place.

74

Software & Accessories / Re: Film and polaroid scanner

« on: March 26, 2013, 05:50:30 PM »

forget scanners,if you have full frame, buy a macro lens (second hand 2.8/90 Tamron if you're on a budget) shoot at f8,in RAW,100 iso,focus with live view,and the quality will be amazing,and the workflow much easier.

I've heard of that method, but couple of factors for me:

1) I need to put together a good setup, and get a film holder that holds it quite flat. Generally I've seen the setups as vertical to the ground.
2) The negatives and polaroids are not of the same aspect ration of my dSLR, so I would have to crop it in various ways.
3) No matter how precise I am, I probably will have a teeny tiny mis-alignment every time I set it up. Even though f/8 might have everything in focus, a tiny angle other than perfectly parallel to the sensor may be visible.
4) I have to buy the bits I need to put it all together, so the cost might end up being non-trivial, although maybe not as much as the v600 it might not be to horribly different.
5) I'm not a poor starving student. I can afford to spend a bit of money on this.

In terms of workflow, I'm not sure how much easier it actually will be, at least for me. I can easily mount the film, set my parameters, click scan, and play a video game or read for the next 5-10 minutes until it's done. 1 roll of 120 film is 10 frames, so if it takes me 2 hours to scan a couple of rolls, I'm OK with that. I'm not a high volume shop. I'd need to spend some time in Photoshop regardless because the colors and such might not be good, and I may even need to adjust by channel whereas with proper scanning software it gets much closer right away as it knows a lot more about the source that it's reading.

75

Software & Accessories / Re: Film and polaroid scanner

« on: March 26, 2013, 04:54:57 PM »

Thanks everyone, so what I've finally decided to do is get the Epson v600, probably buy the VueScan software everybody seems to be raving about, and then look at the OpticFilm 120 dedicated scanner in 4-6 months time supposing I've still be shooting regularly and want an increase in scan quality from negatives/slides.

BTW, if anyone is interested, Mike Pasini is doing solid review (still on-going) of the OpticFilm 120. Seems pretty affordable compared to a used Nikon 9000, if you can even find one of those.