I'm assuming you performed AFMA on that lens + body, correct? If not, perhaps that contributed to the OOF. f/2 on the 135 is a pretty shallow DoF.
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.
Umm... No. This is a reflection in the viewfinder area where the focusing screen and focus points exist, not the sensor area. Verify this by seeing if the problem exists in liveview. Wait, those points don't show up in live view because....
i think you'd be better buying a light meter, they are quite cheap...
Pn the flip side, contrary to the many claims you will hear, right now in the Canon lineup a 36x24 sensor is also not more useful for landscape photography UNLESS you own and use the T/S wide angle lenses. You will hear all day long how FF offers better image quality at low ISO. It does not, and you can demonstrate this all day long by presenting unlabeled large prints from both (or pixel crops online) and watch while FF fans stumble trying to guess which is which. They never can.
Who is 'they'? Here's what I can tell you. I took a series of paired, identically framed shots shots with the 7D and 1D X, using either the 24-105L or the 70-200/2.8L IS II, using the zoom to compensate for the effect sensor size on FoV (meaning same distance, so same framing and same perspective for each pair). I shot about a dozen paired images like that, some landscapes, some architecture, and a couple of close-up flower/plant shots with the 24-105. I processed them equivalently, then showed the paired images to my wife, scaled down to 3.7 MP (full screen on an Apple Thunderbolt Display), and asked her which she liked better. For 11 of the 12 shots, she picked the 1D X image. Subjective and completely anecdotal? Yes. But subjectively and anecdotally, at least, the 'FF mystique' is real.
Here is how it looks like. I was able to capture it via the viewfinder using my phone. Note the area above the top focus point:
Not to worry. I'm an expert for this job. Red or Black?
The cards are rated to 1000x, 600x, 400x aso. Hence their sustained data transfer rate must be somewhere around these values.That's their linear read rate.
Unfortunately, their write speed is not determined only by their "data transfer rate". The reason for that is that the flash can only write into pre-erased blocks, and the size of erase block is big, in the order of several megabytes (whereas FAT32 cluster size is in the order of several kilobytes), the erase operation is slow, and the writes almost never happen to be by full erase blocks.
The controller writing logic is quite complicated and consists of a lot of tradeoffs (such as for which file sizes to optimize the erase blocks de-fragmentation logic). As a result, for example, one card can be faster than another in writing JPEGs (smaller files), but slower in writing RAWs (larger files).
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.. )
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
Why didn't Neuro figure this out
I'll have to check my lenses.
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..
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.
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!
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.