August 29, 2014, 12:19:49 PM

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 - Drizzt321

Pages: 1 ... 64 65 [66] 67 68 ... 112
976
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: digital camera as light meter
« on: December 11, 2012, 02:38:44 PM »
Are you looking for an incident reading or reflected reading? Incident is you put the meter between the subject and the light source(s), reflected is you point the meter are your subject. So your normal camera with a light meter built in is generally going to be reading the reflected light, however it's also calibrated more specifically for that sensor/electronics. If you want an incident reading, you probably should get a dedicated light meter.

Neither, I WANT a digital MF camera.  But that's not going to happen. But if the image on my lcd of my digital camera can be reproduced with the MF film camera with the same settings, I see no need for a light meter, which can only tell you what IT thinks is correct. ( I understand some differences will be there, depth of field, FOV, etc..  )

I think the biggest thing would be the ISO, since actual effective digital ISO levels actually vary a bit from the stated ISO levels often. So the shutter/aperture listed will likely be in the ballpark, but not necessarily exactly what your MF camera would need to be set to. If it's not too expensive, you can try doing a series of +/-Ev on your DSLR and compare against the actual exposure for that subject on your MF film. Plus you have the different metering modes. Spot, center-weighted average, partial, evaluative. So, you may need to experiment some to find the one you like best, or just simply use spot to get the most specific metering mode on a very specific part of the image.

So, my guess it'd take a bit of experimentation to get exactly what you want, but it certainly can be done. Just make sure you record everything until you figure out the exposure correction factory (e.g. if your DSLR shows f/5.6 @1/500 ISO 400, by experience you've found you need either 1/1000, or f/5.0 to get a correct exposure on your MF film with film of ISO 400).

977
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: digital camera as light meter
« on: December 11, 2012, 01:50:55 PM »
Are you looking for an incident reading or reflected reading? Incident is you put the meter between the subject and the light source(s), reflected is you point the meter are your subject. So your normal camera with a light meter built in is generally going to be reading the reflected light, however it's also calibrated more specifically for that sensor/electronics. If you want an incident reading, you probably should get a dedicated light meter.

978
Thankyou for ur reply Drizz, by better files I meant that the increased file size & later model of the CCD of the Mk111 compared to the origional 5D  which I'm currently using. I'm sure I read somewhere the bottle neck for write speed was the canon choice of connection from the SD card to processor or something to that effect. The write speed was 133x which meant 20mb per sec , or something similar & folks were complaining regarding slow shooting due to the buffer overload. But if I can shoot short bursts of 2 fps with no buffer problems writing full RAW to both cards I would be fine.Thanks again Pete

First, the sensor type for both cameras is CMOS, not CCD.

Second, increased filesize is not indicative of 'quality', which can be subjective. It is influenced significantly by megapixels, and somewhat by the content of the image which can include the amount of noise and other things which can cause it to not compress as well as a fairly uniform image.

And the bottleneck for writing to the SD card on the 5d3 is the fact that Canon did not use the newer UHS-1 hardware which I personally suspect is partially due to the Digic 5+ only having 1 high speed memory card interface. Although it could simply be that Canon didn't want to put in the necessary hardware interface for UHS-1 since it likely was a bit costlier at the time, and/or they didn't see that the necessary cards would be coming out as soon.

And yes, I suspect you will be fine at ~2 fps shooting, although you likely would eventually hit buffer full. But if you pause for a second here, a second there, you likely will be fine.

979
For the frame rate, the speed of the flash cards only comes into play if you end up exceeding the size of the memory buffer. So let's say you're shooting full size RAW, and the memory buffer can hold up to 12 images. You can hold up to 12 images before the camera needs to stop taking photos until a photo is flushed to the memory cards. In reality it tends to exceed the memory buffer size some because it writes out to the flash cards while you are still taking photos. So with the fastest cards (which in the 5d3 is the CF UDMA7 cards) you can pretty easily get several extra frames before the camera increases the time between photos.

So, if you are shooting 1-2 frames per second on average, you likely will be fine so long as you get an SD card that will max out the speed that the 5d3 can write to it. Now, for downloads, you may want the faster UHS-1 SD cards, but that's purely a matter of workflow and amount of time it will take.

You speak of "better quality files", but what does that mean? The RAW files on the 5d3 is of course somewhat different than the 5d2. They are different cameras. But both will include proper checksums, preview jpg, meta-data, etc. The Digic5 generally just gives a faster CPU, as well as more memory and possibly more readout line capabilities, but that requires the sensor to be able to handle those as well.

980
Why didn't Neuro figure this out :)
I'll have to check my lenses.

Because he's too busy schooling us on the mechanics, technology, and general photo information to be bothered with something like this. Or he figured it out already and was keeping it secret just for himself.

981
Canon General / Re: Camera insurance for Canadians (Travel)
« on: December 10, 2012, 05:43:19 PM »
I can't find any company with more than 500$ insurance on camera(electronic) stuff around the globe (I will travel to Europe) (theft,loss etc ).. I'm kind of worried about this because I will bring for about 6000$ in gear . Is there someone who can help me with this? Thank you
I'm from Quebec, Canada so I don't think a USA insurance can cover me..

Not sure about Canada, but I know I can get an addition on my renters (or for those who own, homeowners) insurance which covers my cameras for loss, theft, etc. I do know there is photo insurance out there which will cover theft, etc wherever you bring your equipment, but I haven't researched any of that yet.

982
Lenses / Re: History Lesson: Canon FDn 1200 f/5.6L 1.4x Lens Images
« on: December 10, 2012, 05:41:49 PM »
Doing some Google searching I found that another company (rhymes with Flycon) has/had a similar lens.  The explanation of why the lens was made is interesting.

http://www.nikon.com/about/feelnikon/recollections/r16_e/index.htm

Very interesting. And I love how they don't ever once give the name of the competitor :)

Olympics and Pulitzers: I thought I would pass along my experience with Canon 1200/5.6 from the 84' Olympics which led to a great shot and part of a Pulitzer prize.

I was working at the Orange County Register in SoCal and was assigned to cover the 100K Cycling race in Mission Viejo. To get the shot I wanted, I would have to camp out over night in the backyard of local that looked straight down at the finish line but I was going to need a monster of a lens and when I heard about the Canon 1200, I knew it would do the trick. I camped out the night before and as the race unfolded the next day it came down to a sprint to the finish between the Canadian and Alex Grewal of the US and was literally so close at the finish line that there was no jubilation until about 50 yards past the finish line. It was perfect from my vantage point and a nightmare for the pool photographers who were getting his rear-end since the Olypic Pool position was right at the finish line!

Then it was topped off when the next year, the Register was selected for a Pulitzer prize for our Olympic Photo coverage and that images was part of the entry.

I had other occasions to use the lens for other sports events, but in SoCal, you had to be careful using it on a hot day at ground level as it would pick up so much of the heat waves coming of the ground, that it would compormise your focus....They are a pretty amazing piece of glass and a fond memory for me!

Todd Buchanan
www.toddbuchanan.com

Photo: Mission Viejo, CA- Los Angeles Olympics 1984 Alexi Grewal wins the Gold medal in the 100 Kilometer bicycle road race to win for the United States team.

Awesome story. That's really awesome, and a great shot. I guess that's just what you have to do to get the shot you want, camp out where you need to be and bring a BIG lens :)

983
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: CompactFlash vs SDXC (Effectively 5D3 vs 6D)
« on: December 10, 2012, 03:29:29 PM »
My concerns about speed were generally unfounded.

I just tested my memory cards for speed:
Card TypeCard Write SpeedCard Read Speed
SD - SanDisk 16GB Extreme Pro UHS-1 95MBps70.5MBps87.5MBps
SD - Transcend UHS-1 32GB35.0MBps84.5MBps
CF - Transcend 16GB 600x26.9MBps78.7MBps

The SD UHS-1 cards truly surprised me!  I also learned that the SDXC readers in Retina MacBook Pro's are direct to the logic board and transfer at 2.5GT/s, which is well into the GB/s range.  The old MacBook Pro's used to have their SDXC readers attached to the USB 2.0 bus, so they were limited to a theoretical maximum of 60MBps.

I'm quite happy with new SDHC cards!

So I'm guessing you got the 6D? Or are these speeds with your MacBook Pro? How did you come up with the CF card speeds? With my 32GB Transcend I've gotten >100MB/sec sustained via the Lexar CF/SD Pro USB3 reader to my mSATA SSD on my laptop (after recent Lexar firmware update). Sure that's reads, but writes are supposed to be a good bit higher. Or was your OP about whether the SDXC/UHS-1 cards would be significantly slower than modern CF cards?

984
So, I recently upgraded to an mSATA SSD on my laptop with a fresh install of Win7 Pro. So far awesome, but I saw I was getting really slow (~13 MByte/sec) reads from my CF cards when trying to download them. Very odd, as previously I was getting ~60+ MByte/sec on the spinning disk. Did some googling, apparently Lexar has a firmware update for their CF/SD Pro card reader to update it for UDMA7 support. So I download and update it, now my Transcend 400x 32GB CF card is doing sustained >100MByte/sec reads. Holy crap!

985
Technical Support / Re: I solved my own problem, but thought I would share
« on: December 07, 2012, 01:15:26 PM »
Interesting. I had no idea, although I haven't tried this yet. Really good question as to why. Very odd, thanks for sharing!

986
Reviews / Re: Review - Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD with Pictures
« on: December 07, 2012, 01:36:58 AM »
Ok, so rented the lens from LensRentals, first shots with it tonight. I was shooting the technical/test performance for a burlesque holiday show. Small space (bar performance area), lighting was mostly small spots, so pretty bad most of the time, and then a bit too bright over part of the image some of the time. All in all, very challenging lighting. I'm downloading the images as we speak, but here are my first impressions based off of what I saw on the back of the camera (5d3, MFA via FoCal, +14 wide, -1 tele).

The VC (image stabilization) works well. Did a few test shots at 1/10 sec f/2.8 and zoomed in some on the camera, looked quite good, although I haven't extensively tested it yet.

So, for starters, the zoom ring is nice and wide, but reversed from what I'm used to. It's at the far end of the barrel, and you rotate to the left to zoom out, not to the right like the rest of my Canon lenses. The focusing ring is fairly narrow, but the grip is quite good. It's right where I'm used to resting my fingers when I'm holding the camera, and I suspect I might have confused the lens as it thought I was trying to do FTM, when I was just resting my fingers or accidentally shifted it trying to zoom in/out.

The focusing is a bit slower than the L lenses I've used (24-105, 135, 17-40, rented 14L, 24-70L v1, 70-200 2.8 IS v2). Not bad really, but not snappy like I'm used to. I shot most of the night in AI-Servo, since they were dancing and moving all around. As I said the lighting was quite challenging, but even when the AF points I was using was over the subject in decent lighting, I always felt like I had to wait a second or two for the camera to lock focus and start tracking. Quite annoying actually, and nothing something I'm used to. Part of it may have been, as stated above, my fingers rested right on the focusing ring so I may have confused it.

Otherwise, based off of the back of the camera, IQ seems pretty good, bokeh is nice, and colors are good. Seems sharp, although some of the shots the focus was off and I suspect it's because the AF motor couldn't keep up, or the AF on the 5d3 couldn't keep up, or whatever it was that made the AF seem to hesitate. I'll have more to say on this after I finish downloading the shots from tonight, and tomorrow night during the actual performance, and then process through everything.

Leaving aside the IQ, if I can't figure out the AF in this kind of lower light, I might have to not get this lens, which would make me sad as this is exactly the environment I'd use this in. I'll try using my 24-105 briefly in the same lighting conditions to see if it shows similar hesitation, and if so it's the camera/lighting, and not the lens and I'll have to test out in other dim lighting conditions.

987
Lenses / Re: Best lenses for canon 5D mark iii or 6D
« on: December 06, 2012, 08:20:38 PM »
The WiFi on the 6D is only good where you have WiFi. Alternatively, you can use your phone as a hotspot. Or you can get the 5d3 with one of the EyeFi cards (for example, see http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/07/better-cameras-google-plus-and-other-instagram-hacks/) and get similar type of functionality in terms of uploading to instagram, or other photo sites while out and about.

988
Contests / Re: Gura Gear Giveaway!
« on: December 06, 2012, 06:20:47 PM »
I want to win!

So...I'd love to win, I need a new pack that can take my slowly expanding collection of lenses along with me, and sometimes my extra body. What I have now is just getting crowded, and practically bursting at the seams as I try and stuff everything into it all at once. Help!

989
Lenses / Re: Ef 24-70mm f/4.0 L IS availability????
« on: December 06, 2012, 05:46:16 PM »
I have searched all over and can't find a release date.  Anyone know?

Soontm

In all seriousness, I have no clue, not sure if the announcement included any firm date. Based on past performance, I'd guess in February or March*.

*But I really don't know anything, just a random guess, so don't take my word for it.

990
I got one for that price, it's pretty decent for an 'entry' level large sized photo printer. From what I read before I bought it, the ink usage is reasonable. Not as bad a rip-off that normal cheapo consumer inkjet printers are. I've done probably 3 or 4 dozen 4x6's, a dozen or so 5x7's (both edge-to-edge), and a few 8x10's and still have quite a bit of ink left.
How much is 'quite a bit',  80% left in the tanks, 50%, 30?

I'd have to look, >50% on average I'm pretty sure, likely more. I'll try and remember to check tonight when I get home.

Pages: 1 ... 64 65 [66] 67 68 ... 112