October 23, 2014, 12:14:19 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 - sanj

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 104
286
Canon General / Re: $10,000
« on: April 22, 2014, 06:10:25 AM »
This is quite irrelevant unless you tell us what kind of photography you like.

287
Canon General / Re: Canon Hong Kong Announcement April 24, 2014
« on: April 22, 2014, 06:09:07 AM »
"safe to say it won’t be a white EOS camera" :) :) :)

288
Lenses / Re: 24 mk II Tilt SHIFT Pano Photo
« on: April 20, 2014, 11:18:07 PM »
I wish I could help but I am learning this myself.

I do like this photo.

289
Photography Technique / Re: Am I the only one this has happened to?
« on: April 20, 2014, 11:14:58 PM »
Sign of bad times.
Lets not judge the man who stopped you, in his mind he did his 'citizen job of the day'. He did what he thought was correct. He should have checked the situation properly before reacting but I am glad that there are people out there who feel that they need to protect the kids. Good. I think it is incorrect on anyone's part to call him a pervert.

I have a similar story but perhaps I, unlike you, was actually wrong. I had bought an underwater housing for my S90. I took it to my gym pool in broad daylight to see how it works. There were just kids in the pool. Boys. I was NOT taking their photos just trying to see how the housing feels underwater. One fat mama started singing the opera… I immediately stopped.

Good luck with learning servo focus etc. Try back button focus please.

290
Lenses / Re: Sigma vs Zeiss vs Canon
« on: April 20, 2014, 01:06:32 PM »
Thank you all for your thoughts on this topic. It opened up my eyes to the fact that lenses are not only made for sharpness but other qualities as well.

I still feel that if Canon has the 1.2 for 'dreamy' look, then it should also provide another lens for the people seeking the 'sharp' look.

291



Can someone please explain dumb me what does focus at "-3ev" actually mean? Thanking in advance.

Exposure values were initially used to merely compare exposure settings, and settings independent of film speed. EV0 was defined as 1sec at f/1. In this context, it is assumed to be at 100ISO (ISO100, aka light value). EV0 light would require f/1 at 100 for 1 second or equivalent to properly expose. EV-3 is three stops darker, or f/1 at 100 for 8 seconds, or f/0.7 at 200 for 2 seconds, etc. In other words, it's dark.

Thx much. So 6d center point would focus better in low light?

As per the theory, yes.

However, I find that EV3 is the extreme of low light and I'm not sure what can be shot handheld.

I'm sure AF at EV-3 is useful to some people, but as far as I'm concerned I don't shoot too often in extreme low light. When I do, I (a) use the tripod and AF is pretty much irrelevant; OR (b) use AF assist with a speedlite. 

PS: I'm sure someone will come along denouncing me for not trying the AF at EV-3, but personally, I haven't found it too useful. I'm also yet to be faced with a situation where my 6D could achieve AF and the 5D3 could not.

Thank you. I am concluding then I am not missing out on anything.

292



Can someone please explain dumb me what does focus at "-3ev" actually mean? Thanking in advance.

Exposure values were initially used to merely compare exposure settings, and settings independent of film speed. EV0 was defined as 1sec at f/1. In this context, it is assumed to be at 100ISO (ISO100, aka light value). EV0 light would require f/1 at 100 for 1 second or equivalent to properly expose. EV-3 is three stops darker, or f/1 at 100 for 8 seconds, or f/0.7 at 200 for 2 seconds, etc. In other words, it's dark.

Thx much. So 6d center point would focus better in low light?

293
Can someone please explain dumb me what does focus at "-3ev" actually mean? Thanking in advance.

Note that phase af always works with open aperture, i.e. your camera will need more LV with a slow f5.6 lens than with a fast f1.4 one to still be able to focus... one reason to get a f2.8 zoom even if you seldom actually take pictures @f2.8 and are ok to carry the bulk/weight + pay for it.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/ev.htm

Thx. Understand a bit more...

294
Can someone please explain dumb me what does focus at "-3ev" actually mean? Thanking in advance.

295
I have both the 6D as well as the 5D3. I've tried and did not like using the 50L or the 85L II on the 6D except when I was shooting with a tripod and LV. The positioning of the AF points on the 6D is such that lots of focus-recompose is needed and with the 50L and 85L II, it's just asking for trouble.

While it is true you are more limited with your AF points on the 6D, keep in mind you can focus and crop instead of recompose.

More importantly, the 6D allows for easy switch to Eg-S focus screen unlike the 5D3 - so IMO 6D actually has a significant advantage for manually focusing the f/1.2 lenses and seeing their true DOF in the viewfinder.  One could argue you are looking for trouble in general if you try to autofocus at f/1.2 all the time no matter what camera you use.

Does not sound like a great idea to me.

296
"many of us know that focus/recompose causes problems with fast lenses shot wide open.  If you're using a slower lens, stopping down your fast lens, or aren't a stickler for critical focus on your intended subject, focus/recompose can work."

One learns this within months of starting to learn photography.

297
"The 5D3 and 1DX, would not have autofocused at all in this light."

??????

298
Lenses / Re: Sigma vs Zeiss vs Canon
« on: April 19, 2014, 12:20:58 AM »

So. Am I to infer that if Canon comes out with 50/1.2 II that is sharper and has better corner to corner sharpness then you would not DESIRE to use it?


It depends entirely on who "you" is and what s/he wants to do with it.  If you like that dreamy look, and if you use the lens to take portraits (in which case the chances that anything in a corner would be in focus anyway seem slight, rendering - pun half intended - corner sharpness moot), you may not want such an improved lens at all. 

And if you do want better sharpness, including sharp corners, why not get the new Sigma - or do something different altogether and buy, say, a Sony A7r + FE 55 1.8?  Do your lenses all have to have "Canon" written on them?"  Your complaint looks rather like another manifestation of the fanboy-ism that keeps getting brought up:  Does Canon have to make the best of everything according to some notion of "best" that may or may not be widely shared?

(And leaving all that aside, for now if you want a 50 1.2 (or 85 1.2) lens for a ff camera, regardless of brand, are there better alternatives which are also 1.2?  There are new similar lenses from Fuji and Panasonic/Leica, both supposedly marvelous, but they're APS-C and M43 respectively, but that's not quite the same thing....)

I realize that is where my problem lies.

299
Lenses / Re: Sigma vs Zeiss vs Canon
« on: April 18, 2014, 04:22:29 AM »
@Dilbert: I refer you to Neuro's answers for all the spherical aberration stuff. Canon DOES purposely leave in spherical aberration by design, as it is a desirable effect in many circumstances.

As for your assuming, you assume that people are trying to justify what Canon does, when in actuality people are simply explaining what Canon does. You assume that people here "worship" Canon, when in fact some people are simply fans, others are simply customers and might otherwise not care about the brand. You assume a whole hell of a lot about people here man, and then you lash out at them with thinly veiled hostility and nasty words based on your INCORRECT assumptions.

All I'm saying is...might not want to assume, you would look like less of a donkey's rear end in the end.

Totally rude and unnecessary. How can a person use such words to make a point?  :(

You might want to go through and read a couple weeks history of Dilbert's posts. Then make a determination of who's rude. Dilbert LOVES to make assumptions about people, then create little fantasies about why people write the posts they do based on those assumptions. You know what they say about people who assume, right? "When you assume, you just make an A*s*s of you and me?" Hence the donkey comment. I thought it was rather appropriate, given the whole discussion of assumptions at the time. :P I think everyone else got the joke.

Oh!

300
Lenses / Re: Sigma vs Zeiss vs Canon
« on: April 18, 2014, 04:21:31 AM »
If you want this...you gotta buy a lens that offers it. Either a soft focus control/defocus control lens...or something like the 50L/85L.

Or smear a bit of vaseline on the lens :)

(Just kidding.)

Phil.

Hah! That is actually an old technique used in cinematography for the dreamy effect. It doesn't give you spherical blur circles, though, just the soft highlights.

All the time! Hair nets work wonders but the look is bit dated now.

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 104