February 28, 2015, 11:03:18 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 - Positron

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9
EOS Bodies / Re: Why the Japan hate Canon
« on: March 02, 2012, 01:27:16 AM »
This is nothing new. Electronics have been more expensive in Japan forever.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Full Spec List?
« on: March 01, 2012, 09:03:04 PM »
Anybody knows if it has 60fps?

Doesn't say.

No full specs yet.

I'm really hoping it does slow motion. My plan was to sell the 7D and replace it with the 5D mk III, but I use the slow motion all the time. Hmmm. Decisions....

A french magazine appears to say 30p is the max.

That magazine article (if you're talking about the one linked by Smith above) doesn't say 30p max explicitly; all it says is 30p at Full HD (1080p). Which admittedly would be par for the course, but doesn't in any way rule out 720/60p.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Full Spec List?
« on: March 01, 2012, 09:00:52 PM »
I can buy sooo many other things for 3500 dollars(I'm almost at an M9 by then.)

Just *another* $3500 short! (Since you're basing this on retail price.)

EOS Bodies / Re: Thunderbolt in the new 5DMK3
« on: March 01, 2012, 02:53:06 AM »
That would be a PC sync port.

Edit: AG beat me to it.

Yes - Craig has confirmed they're people with NDAs expiring then. I'd imagine we would have heard if that's changed.

3250 Euros if the Google translate of one of the pages is correct. 

Hmm. £2750 or $4400. I'd imagine the UK price could be higher than the straight currency conversion though?

Historically, Euro prices for equipment have been quite a bit higher than the straight conversion would suggest. At 3250 Euro even something as low as $3500 wouldn't be too shocking.

Example: 5D Mark II kit list price at review time (via DPreview)
• US: $ 3,499
• EU: € 3,299
• UK: £ 3,049

EOS Bodies / Re: 5Diii movie functions - realistic?
« on: March 01, 2012, 02:08:28 AM »
It's almost certainly a data throughput issue. Right now I think the processors are the bottleneck (for encoding), but if they get even a little better it won't take long for the interface between the camera and the memory card to become the weak link (although I think you could reach 1080/60p before hitting that limit). Ironically, I think the most exciting thing about XQD as a format is that it's internally based on PCIe, which is theoretically capable of speeds well over 1GB/s (read: it won't be the bottleneck for a looooong time, it's way more than enough throughput for 4k/240p if someone could actually build a card fast enough to take advantage of it).

EOS Bodies / Re: Here's an Invite for March 2, 2012
« on: February 29, 2012, 09:51:53 AM »
this invite looks kind of lack luster compared to the invite for other recent invites

I actually have to agree with this. It seems rather... non-thematic for a release as monumental as the 5D Mark III.

I mean, I still believe that CR is correct, since he has access to enough information that he's usually right, but why such a tame theme for the release of the update to their most successful product ever?

Canon General / Re: Next thing in Monopods
« on: February 29, 2012, 09:41:51 AM »
I think it will be a while before Aerogels are a viable material to make monopods out of.  ;) You should be safe with carbon fiber for now.

I think the thing you're talking about is this. I have no experience using one or even seeing one in use.

Looking at generaional gaps between other cameras my guess would be roughly a stop of improvement in terms of real world use, assuming, as you stated, that the resolution stays similar to the 5D2's. Just speculation though. Hopefully it won't take too long from the announcement for high ISO samples to be available for perusal.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: ND Filter for video - how to use?
« on: February 27, 2012, 07:14:15 PM »
Your white balance is off because the 10-stop ND filter has a warming effect (my B+W 77mm and Schneider 82mm 10-stoppers do).

That doesn't sound very "neutral" at all! Do all 10-stoppers have that problem? And if so, why?

I think so. 

Lee doesn't seem to publish transmission curves, but for the Big Stopper they warn, "Use of the Big Stopper may result in a slight colour cast.

B+W does publish transmission curves (one reason I like them - you know, up front, what you're getting), and it's clear that with the 110 (10-stop) and to a lesser degree with the 106 (6-stop) filter, there's increased transmission in the red area of the spectrum.  B+W calls this out in their description of the 106 stating, "Because of its higher transmission in the red beyond 660 nm, this filter brings a slight warm tone to color photographs.  If this effect is undesirable, a B+W UV-/IR-Blocking Filter 486 in front of the neutral density filter (not behind it!) remedies that situation."  For the 10-stop filter, they indicate that the warm tone is slightly stronger than with the ND 106.

You can see the warmer tone below, top shot is no filter, bottom is the 82mm 10-stop ND from Schneider Optics (parent company of B+W and the only 82mm screw-in 10-stop filter available, AFAIK).  As you can see, I use the 10-stop to blur out the people walking through the shot, cars going by, etc.

That's actually pretty dramatic, but since it's very even across the frame I'd assume it can be pretty much completely corrected with a white balance adjustment. Personally, I actually like the colors on the bottom image more, but that's not the point. Did you use manual WB for those? I feel like auto would have picked up on such a large color shift.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: ND Filter for video - how to use?
« on: February 26, 2012, 04:33:16 AM »
Your white balance is off because the 10-stop ND filter has a warming effect (my B+W 77mm and Schneider 82mm 10-stoppers do).

That doesn't sound very "neutral" at all! Do all 10-stoppers have that problem? And if so, why?

Lenses / Re: Lenses for 650D
« on: February 25, 2012, 05:49:04 PM »
When you say you "decided to dive into the world of photography", are you coming from point-and-shoot, or did you shoot film more seriously and just getting into digital? You seem to have done your research regarding the equipment, but if you haven't been a hobbyist before it's hard to know what kind of things you enjoy taking pictures of the most, and that knowledge is critical for making a meaningful recommendation.

If you do a lot of "walk-around" photography, for example on vacations or at street festivals, the suggestion neuro made (why are all of his suggestions so good?) will serve you extremely well, plus you get decent portrait and landscape setups to boot (between the 85/flash and 15/tripod). If you are a macro fan, that gear won't help you as much as you'd like, and if you like to take pictures of sports or animals in their natural habitats, you may be disappointed, as well.

As was mentioned before, $2500 is quite a lot of money to spend at once, even if you know exactly what you want! If you can afford it, more power to you. In my case, I had a little over $1500 of disposable income and I was considering getting a T2i with the 17-55, but I decided instead to get a refurbished T2i/18-55 kit and a 50mm 1.8, and leave the other $800 in the bank. Now that I've shot a bunch I realize that I love wide angle to death and 17mm on crop just wouldn't do it for me, so now I'm saving up for a 5D and 17-40 and/or possibly Samyang 14 2.8.

Anyway, enough about me. If you know what you want, go for it and don't look back. If you're just getting into it, though, and you're not looking to blow your life savings, I'd figure out what you enjoy shooting first and specializing your gear toward that.

Lenses / Re: A Canon Competitor for Nikon 14-24 f/2.8
« on: February 24, 2012, 11:17:18 PM »
2mm on the wide end is quite a bit, especially for wide-angle junkies. That is not to mention anything of the jawdroppingly good optics on Nikon's 14-24. I agree, however, that an overlap doesn't make a lot of business sense, especially since the 16-35 is already f/2.8. For that reason, I think that if Canon does release a 14-24 (and I hope they do!), it will probably replace the 16-35 rather than becoming a third wide-angle zoom in the lineup. If it does happen, I'm sure the loss of the extra range would be bemoaned by some, but at the price it would need to be there shouldn't as much concern about complementing it with a normal zoom of some type. The switch to a bulbous front element could be troublesome, but then again it's not like the already-excellent 16-35 II would be going anywhere.

As for actual rumors, I've heard nothing of the sort.

Out of curiosity, if you do set the Live View autofocus mode to Quick Mode and then focus in Live View, do you have the same problem?

Phase detect is the AF mode that the camera uses normally, when it's not in Live View. Contrast detect is the default Live View method (unless you switch it to "Quick Mode").

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9