October 24, 2014, 12:55:27 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 - Marsu42

Pages: 1 ... 136 137 [138] 139 140 ... 322
Reviews / Re: Review - The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS
« on: May 10, 2013, 11:03:06 AM »
I needed the extra DOF to make sure the whole primary leaf was in focus.

+1 - in my observation people seem to underestimate how very thin the dof is for 70mm@f4 or 300mm@f5.6 if the subject is near - and I'm even on crop with a larger dof at same object size. What I usually want is a nice bokeh with overlapping light circles and not a smaller dof, and the 70-300L is able to deliver this if the background is a bit away.

Lenses / Re: 17-40 f4 L discontinued???????
« on: May 10, 2013, 10:58:46 AM »
I would also like to see an updated 17-40/4L (or a 16-35/4L), hopefully with IS, but most imported with high optical quality.

IS versions usually require a larger filter size (front element), that's supposedly why the 24-70/4 has IS and the 24-70/2.8 hasn't. For the 17-40L with 77mm now this might still work, but for the 82mm 16-35L it could be tricky.

In any case if the corner iq is also improved you'd probably see more weight and certainly a massively "improved" price tag. The question is if the 17-40L mk2 could still be the L budget choice - and if you want heavier and better, you can get the current 16-35L right now.

Lenses / Re: 17-40 f4 L discontinued???????
« on: May 10, 2013, 07:56:19 AM »
Maybe I got a bad copy, or I had higher expectations coming from medium format primes, but I just don't think it's all that special.

It's special when you use a L lens outdoors in bad conditions and it still goes on shooting when other non-sealed lenses fail and need an expensive repair. Imho the iq is ok when stopped down, peaking @f8 - and considering the price I can live with that.

I was going to buy one from eBay for £25 My friend suggested I wouldn't be happy if the cheap grip became faulty and damaged the camera!

Nowadays Meike grips seem to be fine and sturdy from everything I've read (I considered one for my 60d, but then decided against the added bulk).

The one problem is cheap battery grips are ... well, cheap, meaning due to wiring problems some have a tendency to just fail after some time - so don't shoot anything critical like a wedding with them. But considering the large price difference the Canon original price seems a bit strange for an older and cheaper camera like the 60d, so I'd rather buy 2 3rd party grips and still save a lot.

Reviews / Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« on: May 08, 2013, 08:07:46 AM »
However, I found that the 5D3 has very strong, very large grain luminance noise which shows prominently by ISO 4000.  I found an adjustment of the luminance NR slider in LR4, needed to be high up at 80, to have any effect on this noise.  And when it did, of course huge amounts of detail were erased along with it.

Luma NR 80 is indeed absolute overkill, even on very noisy sources I seldom use more than global 30 or any detail is lost - you can apply more nr locally with the brush for gradients.

But to the point: From everything I've read (and that's a lot when deciding what ff to get) the 5d3 and 6d sensors are very similar. The 5d3 has a bit more noise, maybe 1/3 stop, but it has a bit higher resolution and some more sharpness (even better: 5d2...) so if you tune that down to 6d level the differences should be much more minor than what you describe - but feel free to prove different by posting your sample shots.

its more the actual image quality theres no core quality to the photos to develop from.

Unless you post a full resolution image we'll never be able to tell, will we? If this board doesn't allow such a large attachment upload it somewhere else like imageshack and give us the link.

Schneider Optics (parent company of B+W filters) makes an 82mm screw-in 10-stop ND filter, that's the one I have.
I recently researched the color cast with 10x nd filters (see http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=12884.25) and ended up with a Heliopan that also has a warm, but slightly different color cast than the b+w. I chose the much more reasonably priced uncoated version because a 10 stop filter is designed to stop light. Correcting wb doesn't really remove the color cast completely, but it is "good" enough, for better results you have to use ps.

The catch in any case is: For really good results you need a "hot mirror" nd filter that stops infrared, because the color cast is not the only problem but ir also lowers contrast in hot conditions. Since you cannot stack filters for uwa lenses, the only choice is a combined ir-nd which is for example available from Tiffen, but for a much higher price.

Btw: you can also build a vari-nd filter from two polarizers (cpl + non-cpl) which is exactly is what a composite nd filter really is, just in the home-made version you can still use the polarizers alone and you have the option to adjust the rear cpl for a polarizer effect which is not possible with a ready-made vari nd. I wouldn't use any vari-nd for uwa though.

The 70D AF-system is a big step under the D7100 AF-system.

That's as in "the current prototype", or is there the chance Canon will improve the 70d af before release considering the competition?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Do you trust your camera?
« on: May 06, 2013, 08:00:49 PM »
Once you have the requisite experience, and know the strengths and weaknesses, you have trust that you can get the image you want with what you have.

With the 60d I somehow doubt this :-o I still find it so damn hard to af on a tiny spot you can barely see in the crop vf or with a thin dof in macro. And I have been getting so much better during the last two years, but the af problem persists - that's why I'm asking now in this thread.

Have you tried shooting one way, then shooting a different way in similar situations and see if one way gives you better images (subject to what you consider a better image)?

Absolutely, I have been trying everything imaginable and now have some grasp of what is easy or hard and what I have to get right in camera and what can be fixed in post if necessary.

Also I should note that I am trying to get good shots @100% crop just for the sake of gaining experience, if I was aiming for a specific downsized res I wouldn't make such a fuzz.

One thing which would help you (if Canon would implement it) is AFMA which can help avoid AF misses due to slight front/back focusing problems.

Afma isn't the problem, except maybe with the 100L @macro distance and f2.8.

Lenses / Re: Poll: Most Wanted New Lenses of 2013.
« on: May 06, 2013, 06:40:56 PM »
  • 180mm f/3.5 IS Macro

...and plz change the vote to "members can change vote", I already voted something else from the list and I don't think locking the vote is necessary here.

Lenses / Re: Poll: Most Wanted New Lenses of 2013.
« on: May 06, 2013, 06:19:42 PM »
  • 180mm f/3.5 IS Macro

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Do you trust your camera?
« on: May 06, 2013, 06:07:02 PM »
When shooting scenes that I consider to be "keepers", with my 60d I am always taking multiple shots because I fear the af won't be spot on. The actual "real" af misses are maybe 5%, however more often the large af points miss slightly when trying to af on small points for example the eyes of a horse looking towards me.

Another issue is IS which only improves statistically so even with good IS systems like 100L and 70-300L I always take multiple shots because in my experience there are visible differences even with the same settings.

That's part of the reason why I'm now @120k shutter cycles, apart from running focus stacks and bracketing. Also sorting through very similar shots and deciding which is a little better than the other is annoying and time-consuming.

I'm wondering: Am I doing something wrong or different than other people? If you have a 60d or other cameras (what about 6d/5d3), do you trust your af and lenses so much that you  take just one shot even of important scenes?

maybe i wasnt up to it , but i expected to get at least get lucky enough a few times! this time around it was a complete failure on my part!!!!  im very confused!

I'm also rather new to photography, but in this limitied experience I'd say that "semi spray'n pray", i.e. having some clue but also relying on luck, heavily depends on daily form (I hope I got the correct word, I'm not a native speaker).

On some days, I'm just producing crap shots, no matter how many shots I take. This is indeed confusing but I have learned to recognize this and settle back accordingly. I understand this separates an amateur like me from a pro who can take good shots in any situation no matter what.

Still, you can learn from it - after calming down look through the shots, try to identify what you can recover in post and what you did wrong while shooting, read up on composition and then do better next time w/o relying on lucky shots :-)

IN CAMERA! It's all about getting it as best as can be in camera. Post………go ahead and rely on post, if you like that sort of thing.

When shooting something like architecture I don't think getting it right in camera is an absolute requirement (fewer shots, while heavily pp'ing thousands of shots of an event is a pita).  You can also use focus stacking to get a large dof while keeping the lens at the sharpest aperture, you're most likely on tripod anyway.

You cannot achieve the same effect that a TS lens can do for you in PP.  Depending on the amount of shift there are cases where you can get somewhat close, but a TS lens is the only real solution.

+1 - though recent software like the new dxo viewpoint gives much better results than bare lr and fixes horizontal/vertical lines, but it cannot reproduce the main advantage of a ts-lens: If doing it in software you're massively loosing resolution if correcting more than just a bit - and you need to shoot with much more space to avoid clipped parts (see sample processed from low-res source).

But in my recent, limited experience when shooting for smaller output resolutions and correcting for some angles software is just fine, even a t/s lens doesn't move your camera so the point of view is often feels a bit unnatural to me.

Depends. If you're subject is changing, focus stacking might not give you the result you want (i.e. grass waving in the wind). Sometimes the only way to get the shot is to increase the DOF.

Correct, I just didn't want to elaborate on focus stacking  but just mention that it isn't only good for macro shots but you can do nice 100% dof landscapes with it, too - in many cases when something is in motion you might get lucky and the software will figure it out and still assemble the shot correctly w/o artifacts.

Pages: 1 ... 136 137 [138] 139 140 ... 322