July 24, 2014, 04:52:24 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 - Marsu42

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 291
People who own the 6D and use it (including me) seem to be generally pretty pleased with it's performance and likely (I don't want to speak for everyone, of course)

Indeed, count me out of this summary. The 6d's tracking is mediocre at best, might work ok-ish with the correct c.fn settings for spatial movement but is a complete failure for towards/away esp. if being forced to track with a single non-cross point... up 50% keepers for running horses if I'm lucky and I really tried about everything.

I find the 6D to have better focus than any crop camera (and I've owned them all).

I'd also tend to disagree here. I've never owned a 7d which has said to have ok tracking capabilty, but my 60d is at least as good as my 6d and you don't have to worry about "oh no, it a non-cross point" but just can use them. The low-light capability of the 60d is very handy, mind you.

Photography Technique / Re: UWA odd angle postprocessing howto
« on: July 11, 2014, 06:33:24 PM »
If it's just actuations, that doesn't worry me at all.

Not with a 1d, but if you have a 100k-rated camera (60d, 6d) and your doing focus stacks all the time you start to think about if it's really necessary to do quick af... besides, it really hurts to hear the mirror flip on each af, a real reason to get a 70d with an actually working lv af system.

Photography Technique / Re: UWA odd angle postprocessing howto
« on: July 11, 2014, 05:07:27 AM »
Why would the camera close and reopen the shutter when doing a live few quick focus?  I would think it would be sufficient to just flip the mirror twice.

I don't know, maybe protect the sensor from dust being whirled around when flipping the mirror? But each "quick af" operation certainly counts as a shutter actuation towards certain doom(tm), even though at least Magic Lantern has different stats for lv actuations and non-lv shots.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: A Summary of Sigma Lens Rumors
« on: July 10, 2014, 05:32:19 PM »
Why do people keep thinking that a 24-70mm f/2 is even remotely likely?

Hope dies last and if there is nothing really looking forwards to (clean iso 12800, f2 zooms, ...) you won't be able to satisfy your gear acquisition syndrome in the future, meaning severe withdrawal symptoms in the future.

Lenses / Re: Need help deciding on my next lens
« on: July 10, 2014, 05:30:09 PM »
Yet oddly there are millions of people taking pictures they are perfectly happy with using Rebels every day.  I know I did.

I admit I really do find this odd esp. if you've used at least a xxd camera type before - the Rebels are so crippled in the fw (well, Magic Lantern somewhat compensates) and body usability (small grip, no back wheel, no nothing) that I wouldn't want to use this handheld all day long. Probably doesn't matter on a tripod for landscape though.

Personally, when focus stacking, I never change the frame i.e. camera never moves

I also do this with Magic Lantern, the catch is that when re-focusing the image magnification changes which means that you are missing image data behind objects.  The software tries to compensate by adding some reconstruction blur, but this often doesn't work esp. not for high-iq pro purposes.

There are only two ways around this problem: a) use a macro rail which forces all images to have the same magnification at all focus settings or b) stop shooting at the first large object and remove clutter in the foreground.

Lenses / Re: Need help deciding on my next lens
« on: July 10, 2014, 06:47:47 AM »
Crop is 'all about' getting 95% of the product for 50% of the price.

Well, I guess that was in the bad ol' times. Unless you're completely broke getting a 6d or used 5d2 gets you into into ff territory at a budget recently unheard of. Heck, even *I* have got a ff, and that's sayin' something. For 50% of a 6d you're getting a Rebel, and I somehow doubt you'll want to produce anything with that kind of usability.

Photography Technique / Re: sunset post-processing
« on: July 10, 2014, 03:48:09 AM »
thanks all for the tips, what about something like this?

Whatever the cropping or tone curve is: my issue with this otherwise nice shot is that a lot of space around the sun is blown which makes the nice sun rays fall short of what they could look like. Looks more like a nuclear bomb explosion right now :-)

Next time probably try to do more brackets or more ev spacing? This has nothing todo with the legacy "hdr look of horror" but simply preventing clipping.

Lenses / Re: Need help deciding on my next lens
« on: July 09, 2014, 05:32:18 PM »
Shouldn't the excellent EFs 17-55 f2.8 be considered ?

Considered, yes, but imho then dismissed unless you need constant f because what's the use of getting a fast zoom on crop? If you're that desperate for light or thin dof go ff (if you can cough up the $$$), otherwise crop is all about flexibility, reach and having fun shooting.

Here's an image exported in LR5.3 and LR5.5 for comparison purposes.

Hey, I didn't say *I* want to do this :-p ..  anyway, this is how the tags differ - There is a strange tag difference in the Adobe APP14Flags0 tag, maybe that's the cause.

Also attached is the LR55 jpeg with all tags stripped, check if this opens in non-Adobe apps - if not, the binary data is broken and it's an Adobe bug, if yes they can blame it on DPP.

Code: [Select]
--- LR53.txt 2014-07-09 23:22:40.108754500 +0200
+++ LR55.txt 2014-07-09 23:22:36.812749000 +0200
@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
 [ExifTool] ExifToolVersion: 9.65
 [System] Directory: .
-[System] FileAccessDate: 2014:07:09 23:15:48+02:00
-[System] FileCreateDate: 2014:07:09 23:15:48+02:00
-[System] FileModifyDate: 2014:07:09 23:15:56+02:00
-[System] FileName: LR53.jpg
+[System] FileAccessDate: 2014:07:09 23:22:16+02:00
+[System] FileCreateDate: 2014:07:09 23:22:16+02:00
+[System] FileModifyDate: 2014:07:09 23:22:18+02:00
+[System] FileName: LR55.jpg
 [System] FilePermissions: 666
-[System] FileSize: 227148
+[System] FileSize: 263092
 [File] BitsPerSample: 8
 [File] ColorComponents: 3
 [File] CurrentIPTCDigest: 491e51fded5c122d01e757c357157923
@@ -20,11 +20,11 @@
 [IFD0] Copyright: JEL
 [IFD0] Make: Canon
 [IFD0] Model: Canon EOS 5D Mark III
-[IFD0] ModifyDate: 2014:01:05 09:12:46
+[IFD0] ModifyDate: 2014:07:07 21:21:31
 [IFD0] ResolutionUnit: 2
-[IFD0] Software: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.3 (Windows)
-[IFD0] XResolution: 240
-[IFD0] YResolution: 240
+[IFD0] Software: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.5 (Windows)
+[IFD0] XResolution: 300
+[IFD0] YResolution: 300
 [ExifIFD] ApertureValue: 1.20000007832525
 [ExifIFD] ColorSpace: 1
 [ExifIFD] CreateDate: 2014:01:01 02:17:34
@@ -58,16 +58,16 @@
 [ExifIFD] WhiteBalance: 0
 [IFD1] Compression: 6
 [IFD1] ResolutionUnit: 2
-[IFD1] ThumbnailLength: 9365
+[IFD1] ThumbnailLength: 9035
 [IFD1] ThumbnailOffset: 986
 [IFD1] XResolution: 72
 [IFD1] YResolution: 72
 [Photoshop] DisplayedUnitsX: 1
 [Photoshop] DisplayedUnitsY: 1
 [Photoshop] IPTCDigest: 491e51fded5c122d01e757c357157923
-[Photoshop] PhotoshopThumbnail: (Binary data 9365 bytes, use -b option to extract)
-[Photoshop] XResolution: 240
-[Photoshop] YResolution: 240
+[Photoshop] PhotoshopThumbnail: (Binary data 9035 bytes, use -b option to extract)
+[Photoshop] XResolution: 300
+[Photoshop] YResolution: 300
 [IPTC] ApplicationRecordVersion: 4
 [IPTC] By-line: jelstudio@hotmail.com.jelstudio.
 [IPTC] CodedCharacterSet: .%G
@@ -117,9 +117,9 @@
 [ICC-meas] MeasurementObserver: 1
 [XMP-x] XMPToolkit: Adobe XMP Core 5.5-c002 1.148022, 2012/07/15-18:06:45
 [XMP-xmp] CreateDate: 2014:01:01 02:17:34.00
-[XMP-xmp] CreatorTool: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.3 (Windows)
-[XMP-xmp] MetadataDate: 2014:01:05 09:12:46+01:00
-[XMP-xmp] ModifyDate: 2014:01:05 09:12:46+01:00
+[XMP-xmp] CreatorTool: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.5 (Windows)
+[XMP-xmp] MetadataDate: 2014:07:07 21:21:31+02:00
+[XMP-xmp] ModifyDate: 2014:07:07 21:21:31+02:00
 [XMP-dc] Creator: jelstudio@hotmail.com.jelstudio.dk.twitter: JEL248
 [XMP-dc] Format: image/jpeg
 [XMP-dc] Rights: JEL
@@ -136,14 +136,14 @@
 [XMP-photoshop] DateCreated: 2014:01:01 02:17:34.00
 [XMP-xmpMM] DerivedFromDocumentID: 185070B51AB83644A38502E862A348A9
 [XMP-xmpMM] DerivedFromOriginalDocumentID: 185070B51AB83644A38502E862A348A9
-[XMP-xmpMM] DocumentID: xmp.did:781592f3-572b-c643-be24-7d1671d63c02
+[XMP-xmpMM] DocumentID: xmp.did:18c1f38b-c9f2-9f4c-baba-1a9ba35c6d82
 [XMP-xmpMM] HistoryAction: derived, saved
 [XMP-xmpMM] HistoryChanged: /
-[XMP-xmpMM] HistoryInstanceID: xmp.iid:781592f3-572b-c643-be24-7d1671d63c02
+[XMP-xmpMM] HistoryInstanceID: xmp.iid:18c1f38b-c9f2-9f4c-baba-1a9ba35c6d82
 [XMP-xmpMM] HistoryParameters: converted from image/x-canon-cr2 to image/jpeg, saved to new location
-[XMP-xmpMM] HistorySoftwareAgent: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.3 (Windows)
-[XMP-xmpMM] HistoryWhen: 2014:01:05 09:12:46+01:00
-[XMP-xmpMM] InstanceID: xmp.iid:781592f3-572b-c643-be24-7d1671d63c02
+[XMP-xmpMM] HistorySoftwareAgent: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.5 (Windows)
+[XMP-xmpMM] HistoryWhen: 2014:07:07 21:21:31+02:00
+[XMP-xmpMM] InstanceID: xmp.iid:18c1f38b-c9f2-9f4c-baba-1a9ba35c6d82
 [XMP-xmpMM] OriginalDocumentID: 185070B51AB83644A38502E862A348A9
 [XMP-crs] AlreadyApplied: True
 [XMP-crs] AutoLateralCA: 0
@@ -182,7 +182,7 @@
 [XMP-crs] HueAdjustmentYellow: 0
 [XMP-crs] LensManualDistortionAmount: 0
 [XMP-crs] LensProfileChromaticAberrationScale: 100
-[XMP-crs] LensProfileDigest: 639283345D6001793A602558C753423F
+[XMP-crs] LensProfileDigest: 1B9204B25A98B63F2DFD385A244207BE
 [XMP-crs] LensProfileDistortionScale: 100
 [XMP-crs] LensProfileEnable: 0
 [XMP-crs] LensProfileFilename: Canon EOS 5D Mark II (Canon EF 85mm f1.2L II USM) - RAW.lcp
@@ -241,17 +241,22 @@
 [XMP-crs] SplitToningShadowHue: 215
 [XMP-crs] SplitToningShadowSaturation: 50
 [XMP-crs] Tint: +12
+[XMP-crs] ToneCurve: 0, 0, 255, 255
+[XMP-crs] ToneCurveBlue: 0, 0, 255, 255
+[XMP-crs] ToneCurveGreen: 0, 0, 255, 255
+[XMP-crs] ToneCurveName: Linear
 [XMP-crs] ToneCurveName2012: Linear
 [XMP-crs] ToneCurvePV2012: 0, 0, 255, 255
 [XMP-crs] ToneCurvePV2012Blue: 0, 0, 255, 255
 [XMP-crs] ToneCurvePV2012Green: 0, 0, 255, 255
 [XMP-crs] ToneCurvePV2012Red: 0, 0, 255, 255
-[XMP-crs] Version: 8.3
+[XMP-crs] ToneCurveRed: 0, 0, 255, 255
+[XMP-crs] Version: 8.5
 [XMP-crs] Vibrance: 0
 [XMP-crs] VignetteAmount: 0
 [XMP-crs] WhiteBalance: As Shot
 [XMP-crs] Whites2012: 0
-[Adobe] APP14Flags0: 16384
+[Adobe] APP14Flags0: 49152
 [Adobe] APP14Flags1: 0
 [Adobe] ColorTransform: 1
 [Adobe] DCTEncodeVersion: 100

Lenses / Re: Need help deciding on my next lens
« on: July 09, 2014, 05:13:53 PM »
At risk of sounding like a dumbass (which, ok, I kind of am right now), what do you mean? I have two friends who shoot with a Canon 60d and swear by their 24-70s. The images I've seen look really nice, too. Or do you mean it just isn't as good of a lens on a crop than it is a full frame?

The 24-70 range is meant for ff because 24mm is as wide as you can go w/o considerable optical distortion "effect" and the long is limited by them mostly being f2.8 ... for f4 lenses, 24-105 gives you much more flexibility. It's just that Canon marketing decided that they'd do the 24-70/4 because people will have to buy *another* lens, meaning 70-200 or 70-300mm, meaning $$$ for Canon.

With crop, what you actually get is 24-70 * 1.6 = 38-112 which is in between everything and tends to be boooooring. If I look at the shots I like best, they are either wa or uwa (certainly <38mm) or at least medium tele (i.e. 135mm+). Of course ymmv and you can always crop, but missing the wide end certainly is limiting.

I think the best general purpose lens for crop bodies (assuming you're not planning to go full frame anytime soon) is the 15-85 IS.

+1, this would have been my choice when I'd have stayed with crop only, a much underestimated lens and when in doubt you really don't need a fixed f-stop lens unless you know you do. Also don't buy into the red ring hype w/o a good reason, your shots don't get any better because you're getting an adrenaline rush by feeling "pro".

Lenses / Re: Need help deciding on my next lens
« on: July 09, 2014, 03:36:55 PM »
Canon 24-105 f/4 L ($1150)
Canon 24-70 f/4 L ($1500)

Having shot with a 28-105 for quite some time on crop in hindsight I have to say this is an awkward focal length, with 24-70 * 1.6 you're missing out the most interesting parts.

Canon 17-40 f/4 L ($839)

I've also shot with this on crop as a "standard" zoom, but advise against it unless you're moving to full frame - the 17-40L is soft up to f8 when pressed to this resolution. If you're really in for this focal length with the ff option, at least get the new 16-35L-IS.

Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 ($649)

Now *that* does sound like a lens matching your camera and with an interesting focal length at last! Also consider the Tokina f2.8 uwa if you don't need the Canon's zoom range.

Sigma 15mm f/2.8 fisheye (I rented this years ago and found it neat and unbelievably sharp. Plus it's only $609)

Without putting too much a fine point on it: using L wide angle or esp. uwa lenses built for ff on crop is like putting the wrong tires on your car. The manufacturer has to take a lot of hassle building these but on crop with the smaller mirror, ef-s uwa lenses are much simpler designs and have a much better $$$-image quality relation. The one catch is that non-L lenses aren't sealed (thanks, Canon!).

The usual disclaimer: It's impossible to give good advice unless you tell us what you're actually shooting (wildlife, portrait, landscape, astronomy, ...) and what you're missing, apart from more sharpness and better color accuracy that is.

Photography Technique / Re: 85 vs 135 for portraits
« on: July 09, 2014, 03:06:05 PM »
Not quite sure where you've got that idea from, the AF is pretty fast with the 100 2.8L IS.

I'm getting the idea from my 100L right here on my camera. It's not as slow as the 180mm macro or "fast" big glass lenses, but "snappy" is different.

Not that AF is much of an issue for portraits.

This really depends on your style, doesn't it? If it's more "documentary" or "natural" having a quick usm does make a large difference.

In low light, my 100L likes to hunt...

I was about to write that, but then refrained from it because I feel I'd have to define "low light". But for my portraits (with flashes) the light seems to be low enough to get into the 100L's lag zone. That's why I'd define it as a macro lens with dual-use portrait capability.

Photography Technique / Re: UWA odd angle postprocessing howto
« on: July 09, 2014, 02:32:29 PM »
The processing power is decent, but needless to say I need more battery life...  The question is whether to get a new laptop, new battery, or buy an external battery.

I'd get a win8 x86 tablet, they're fast, battery-saving and you can run all the usual programs on them (LR, PS, EOS Utility, ...). Having an external battery pack wouldn't hurt though esp. if you only need to carry it to the back yard :-)

Good luck with your horse photos - you should really think about creating a book.  I have done two now, and while they are a lot of work, it's rewarding and gives discipline to your work.

Actually this is the very thing that has been suggested to me more than once. The site your books are on looks really interesting, I'd need something in the EU though (preferably Germany)... I'll send you a pm concerning this.

Do the JPEG files open in Photoshop?  If so, then the problem is most likely another bug in JPEG parsing in Canon's DPP code.

To get anyhwere with this issue you'll have to export the same shot in both LR5.5 and LR5.4 and then compare the xmp/iptc/exif/maker tags with exiftool - is there a difference? Of course Adobe will try to blame other apps, with "standards" such fuzzy as jpeg or tiff that's always possible until proven otherwise.

You can also simply strip all the tags from a "broken" LR5.5 image by running "exiftool -all= -Adobe:all= image.jpg" and then see if it opens in DPP or whatever.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 291