April 24, 2014, 03:28:10 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 - mb66energy

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 20
Lenses / Re: Canon teaser for 4/24 announcement -- new fast prime?
« on: April 22, 2014, 08:28:43 AM »
the four character can be translate to "In Praise of Shadows", but no idea what product will be

The EF 24/4.0 STM pancake lens with incredible flare resistance/contrast so shadows in contralight are full of plenty detail.

Photography Technique / Re: Panning
« on: April 21, 2014, 03:55:43 AM »
I tried some panning shots today. Gear used was 5D Mark III and the 70-200 II. I shot a reasonable number of images today and these are two of the few shots that I liked. The first shot is at ISO 50, 70mm, f/2.8 at 1/50s. The second shot is at ISO 100, 70mm, f/2.8 and 1/60s. The lens was in IS Mode II.

Issues -
1) I wasn't able to generate a more streaking background despite shutter speeds which I thought were reasonably low;
2) Dropping the shutter speed lower resulted in an extremely poor hit rate;

Please suggest as to how can I improve my panning technique.

Thanks in advance,

Regards ... J.R.

Try an external viewfinder - to enhance tracking over longer periods, just an idea.
 Or use a tripod if you can control the path of the subject in someways: With a ball head lock the ball and use the panning capability of the base of the head (e.g.).

 Never checked it both measures work ... just time for me to do that soon :)

Photography Technique / Re: Am I the only one this has happened to?
« on: April 21, 2014, 03:39:04 AM »
It has happened to me with the 300/2.8.  As if a sneak photographer would to be so visible! Ironically, using an SX50 or its many equivalents of much greater range attracts no attention.

+ 1

That is what l would explain someone who accuses me to take pics of people  secretly!

Other ideas to react:
- "I am Mr.. . . . . what is you name?"- politely... to get the name of the other person to show some openess
- offering to call the police because you feel threatened

 Preventive deescalation:
-  pointing the lens while not in use to the ground
-   E.g.  ask dog owners it if is o.k. to take photos of the dogs.  Then you are part of the group and your intention is cleared.

Stormtrooper edition available next month?

May the 4th be with you....  ;D

 :) So we use all the Darth Vader-Edition?
 Oh, forgotten. This one has still to come: Black polished surface ...

White will reflect the sun rather than absorb it, keeping the camera and lens cool, so hot climates like ...  OOPS, Whats wrong here???

After  a while it produced a grin  on my face! Perhaps this camera is optimized for holy days in sunny and warn countries?

 But - combined with e.g. a 70-200 it would be a nice combo for sunny days. Black cameras (notebooks etc.) will heat up to ~60 degree centigrade, well above specs for electronics and batteries.  7Dii in white  would be very interesting ...

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Gets Reviewed
« on: April 06, 2014, 06:28:10 AM »

One more thing learned -- weighs 28 oz /  1.75 lb / 0.8 kg.

- A

Wow, that's quite heavy for a 50/1.4!

:) I thought it was 470g (from dpreview).

I think a factor of 3 to a double gaussian optics is a good rule of thumb for a weight conversion into a retrofocus lens like the new sigma, 300 grams (for EF 1.4 50) x 2.5 is 900 grams. The sigma seems to use metal compared to the EF 1.4 50.

2 times the length + 1.2 times the diameter means 2 x 1.2 x 1.2 ~ 3

Canon General / Re: No one sees it like you....
« on: March 31, 2014, 08:22:04 AM »
Has to be some type of composting -- optical or software.  I don't see anyway to have decent focus on the eye itself and the reflection at the same time if it was a straight shot.  Focus distance to the eye is very short -- maybe an couple inches max.  the reflected image focus distance is the actual distance to the object reflected -- several feet to infinity.  (Try this test, take camera and focus on your own reflection in a mirror, then without changing focus, shift sideways so the frame of the mirror is in view.  It will be out of focus.  Refocus on the mirror edge and your reflection goes out of focus.)

A flat mirror is the wrong comparison.

You really don't need CGI to have sharp eyes AND sharp reflections see the image below which is a simple proof. The image is made with an APS-C camera, HD video mode, f7.1 @60mm (EF-S Macro). @f/2.8 the same situation.
The cornea is a spherical mirror (in that case) and acts as a second optical element providing more or less sharp images.

The only problems are:
  - avoid the reflection of the imaging system
  - getting enough contrast (as you can see with my image with blue-gray eyes) - dark (e.g. brown) eyes are
    much better but i have to live with what I have.

CGI is much cheaper and using a fisheye will give satisfactory distortions which are well accepted as reflections form the cornea.

So everyone is right - at least a little bit ...

EDIT: Forgotten the attachment  - now available ...

PowerShot / Re: Canon PowerShot G17 Coming in May? [CR1]
« on: March 30, 2014, 02:09:23 PM »
This might be an EOS M killer ... at least for a lot of potential users.

The factor of 2.8 makes the lens a 8.5 - 72 mm lens. f/2 @ 72mm means 36mm aperture. This seems possible.

Hopefully the IQ is at least very good over the wide range at wide apertures.

EOS-M / Re: EOS M Lens survey - your favorites, and your most wanted?
« on: March 26, 2014, 12:32:18 PM »
I have only the 18-55 EF-M as a system lens and it replaced (incl. the EOS M) my S95 which was not good enough in terms of IQ.

EF-M 18-55: very good quality for a zoom
EF converter + EF 40 STM: Better IQ, nearly the same size but much less flexibility
EF converter + EF-S 60 USM: Better IQ, a little bit on the larger side
FD 1.4 50mm S.S.C.: Very good IQ from f/2, but clumsy to work with for AF (EVF would help massively for manual focus without fiddeling around with magnification etc.)

=> A 2.0 or 2.8 50mm with IS, STM compact outline and close focus capability (1:4 magnification o.k. for me) would be a great addition / lens I wish ... better f/2.8 and stellar IQ than f/2.0 and very good IQ

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Samsung NX mini – I'm speechless
« on: March 21, 2014, 05:51:16 AM »

The camera features a solid premium metal body with a luxurious leatherette finish, making the camera the natural choice for style-conscious shooters looking to make a statement.

Is this really where photography is headed?


I had the same feeling while walking around a lake/forest to photograph:
Person: "What is the brand and name of that camera, you use?"
Me: " It's the EOS M from Canon."
Person: "It is a nice looking camera ..."
Me: "And it has a very good photographic quality like the SLRs with similar sensors."
Person: "The finish is very nice, great surfaces and good design." His eyes were absorbed by the camera.
Me: "But more important: You have a great photographic tool in a tiny package ..."
The person's mimics lead to my conclusion that he has a totally different idea of what cameras are built for ...

EOS Bodies / Re: Hardware Hack for EOS Cameras Coming Soon? [CR1]
« on: February 28, 2014, 06:20:10 AM »


<p>As for the modification itself, it’s said it will “greatly improve dynamic range and video sharpness and performance in the EOS 5D Mark III.”</p>


Optimized PCB layout might help to get the pedestal noise down which increases DR directly. Perhaps they introduce some intelligent readout which reads the sensor twice to extend the DR by increasing the max counted photons per subpixel. Sometimes tiny alterations of PCB layout reduce "electronic dirt" on signals making them cleaner, more realistic.

Our brain disciminates very subtle changes in signals. Think about sound reproduction: I added a dipole subwoofer to my very good loud speakers and the rendering of sound below 35Hz is magic - I don't hear to much new things in that region.
Listening is much easier than before; from psychoaccoustics we know that the brain adds missing details very effectively like bass sound from higher frequencies. But I think, the brain has to do the calculation of missing details - if you add the detail you need less processing power which can be used to enjoy the music.
The same might apply to optics/cameras.

Another thought: cooling or at least stablizing the temperature to something like 20 degree celsius for sensor and ADC might help to reduce noise sources substantially.

IMHO substantially higher frame rates are not possible because the shutter mechanism will limit fps for an EOS 5D MarkIII.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Laser Light Burns a DSLR Sensor in Canon 7D
« on: February 23, 2014, 08:21:11 AM »
Yup, we see posts about this from time to time, its been happening for years, but a reminder every once in a while might prevent someone from having the issue.

A useful reminder to have, thanks.

Does anyone know what about the laser actually kills the sensor?

The energy transported with the LASER light is converted into heat if the light is absorbed by the chip. The heat might damage the structures on the chip consisting of the pixel structure and conducting signal lines.

The problem with movie mode and live view is that the chip is alltimes exposed to the light. If the image of a light source is intense enough you might heat up the chip structures to temperatures above spec. This might be around 100 degree Celsius.

LASERs are monochromatic and the light bundle is nearly parallel. The light is focused to one tiny spot - 1/1000 mm is possible - with a single lens, more with a well corrected lens. If the thermal energy cannot be removed by thermal conduction in the chip to the back or outer regions you have some pile up of thermal energy which means increased temperatures. The tiny structures made of different materials/material combinations mix by diffusion of atoms due to the heat.
With blue light there might be another effect: Blue light consists of photons with higher energy per photon and these photons can damage structures directly - think about ultraviolett radiation which has again more energy per photon (=light quantum) and might damage biomolecules resulting in cancer generation!

If I have the sun in the frame I try to use the diaphragm control button to reduce the heat load on the sensor - this is one possible measure to reduce heat/high temperatures on sensor regions.

Lenses / Re: Another Mention of a New Macro Lens in 2014 [CR1]
« on: February 14, 2014, 12:58:51 AM »
Ok, it is not a true "single lens" but there is a good chance that you do not loose 50 % of the initial
focal length.

All the macro lenses you just listed do not use internal focusing, so your point is moot. I did not argue against macro lenses in general, only against macro lenses with internal focusing.

Modern lenses bend the light by crazy ways so there is a chance that you simulate lens positions to get
1:1 without loosing any focal length. Think about EF-S10-22 at 10mm which leaves 35mm space between back lens and image plane!

These lenses do all kinds of crazy stuff, but when it comes to focusing they are still as they always were: internally focusing lenses which forfeit focal length at MFD for elegance, and lenses that maintain their focal length but become longer as you focus closely.

I own the 60mm and the 100 mm USM Macro-both do NOT extend and use (including the 180mm Macro) after Canon's USA home page a
 "Focus Adjustment:    Inner focusing system with USM"
 - so I do not understand your arguments - or is there a difference between "inner focusing system"  and "internal focusing"?

Lenses / Re: Another Mention of a New Macro Lens in 2014 [CR1]
« on: February 13, 2014, 12:04:46 PM »

All internally focusing lenses do this by shortening their focal length. If you go all the way to 1:1 macro, your focal length would be cut in half. This means your beautiful 200mm macro lens with internal focusing would turn into an 100mm macro lens at 1:1 magnification. Pretty pointless, isn't it?

The distance between image plane and object is 4 times the focal length at 1:1 or otherwise: the focus distance at 1:1 will give you the focal length if you divide it by four:

EF-S 60    MFD 200mm        Calculated Focal length at 1:1   50mm
EF 100     MFD 300mm        Calculated Focal length at 1:1   75mm
EF 180     MFD 480mm        Calculated Focal length at 1:1   120mm

Ok, it is not a true "single lens" but there is a good chance that you do not loose 50 % of the initial
focal length.
Modern lenses bend the light by crazy ways so there is a chance that you simulate lens positions to get
1:1 without loosing any focal length. Think about EF-S10-22 at 10mm which leaves 35mm space between back lens and image plane!

Lenses / Re: Another Mention of a New Macro Lens in 2014 [CR1]
« on: February 13, 2014, 11:46:57 AM »

It would be expensive and it would sound like a very cool lens...but it would be mostly a marketing gimmick. You'd think tilt would let you achieve an apparently deeper DoF for macro shooting, right?  Well...it would, but the amount of tilt required increases with magnification.  I think you'd need 30° of tilt or more, meaning a truly massive image circle would be needed, and even then the optical quality would suffer with such extreme tilt.

I don't think so because the lens is usually tilted around an axis which lies in the image plane. Actually the projection of the image plane at 30° tilt is smaller than the image plane at zero tilt.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 20