Messages

1

Lenses / Re: Canon at the London Summer Olympics

« on: July 31, 2012, 02:03:27 PM »

Caught this guy at the fencing on Sunday. Not sure what kit he is carrying, but no doubt one of you guys will recognise it.

I've got to say that the 5D3 (on its first real outing) performed superbly - really happy with it. I was about 300m back from the action (no press pass!) with nothing more than a 200mm f4 IS, and yet the 5D3 nailed some great shots in very challenging circumstances - very fast action, high ISOs and so on. The only bit that really failed was the metering - neither spot nor evaluative really got close, so in the end I dialled in -1 exposure comp, which seemed to get things about right. With the bright spotlighting and white clothes on pitch black background, this was never going to be easy though...

These snaps are heavily cropped, btw, and were taken at high iso, so the quality is not perfect, but acceptable in my opinion. You can see more at http://www.shakespearesswords.org.uk/#/2012-london-olympics/4567286090

2

Video & Movie / Re: Happy 4th all

« on: July 05, 2012, 12:40:19 PM »

We don't celebrate the 4th July here in England, just like you guys in America don't celebrate the fall of Hanoi...

But have a great time nonetheless ...

Please don't chuck any tea in the harbour - it makes a heck of a mess.

3

EOS Bodies / Re: Is the 5DIII the New 50D?

« on: June 14, 2012, 01:06:01 PM »

Well, I suppose I have a view on this, having just bought a 5D3 !

I wondered long and hard about whether to wait longer and see if a higher resolution full-frame would come out.

The conclusion I came to in the end was that the 5D3 did what I wanted: it takes my Canon L glass, it has the resolution I want, it is a robust digital alternative to the EOS 3 that I am upgrading from.

So it has what i want and meets the specification I need.

Sure there will be something better along sooner or later.

Sure, maybe I could save some money if the price drops dramatically. But you can wait forever and never buy anything on that basis.

I'm happy with my decision. It's a great camera. Life is too short to wait around for the next great thing. Get out and shoot something...

4

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Considering an EOS 35mm (film) body

« on: May 31, 2012, 09:36:27 AM »

3. The 'per frame' cost of film is lower than digital, because the camera doesn't cost as much as a small car.

Stop talking about things you clearly don't understand.

For an amateur... yes...
For those of us who shoot 1000+ frames per week... no.

"Stop talking about things you clearly don't understand"

I'm not suggesting film for a pro - that just would not make sense in this day and age. So yes, good point. But I don't expect to have to write small print on my posts... and the nonsense being spouted by the earlier poster did get me kinda riled.

Film is fun, and if folks out there have never tried it, they should. My point was: it's not expensive to give it a try out, and for lower volumes is way cheaper than digital.

5

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Considering an EOS 35mm (film) body

« on: May 31, 2012, 09:34:21 AM »

What is this store thing you takes trips to? I take trips to the darkroom.

Ha ha! Nice response. I too develop my own black and white, but colour is a bit too much hassle. But even for colour, I get excellent professional lab results returned within 2 days of posting. OK, it's not instant, but it's pretty good.

And then scan, and all the benefits of lightroom and Nik etc.

I used to do the printing (enlarger) myself, but although it's fun, life is too short.

6

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Considering an EOS 35mm (film) body

« on: May 31, 2012, 09:03:27 AM »

12 year old autofocus and metering technology, 150 year old sensor technology, every shot costs a buck, no auto ISO and a limited range, and they get back to you a few days later (toss in a few trips to the store with the price of gas). No thanks ...

This is ill-informed nonsense. If you don't like film fine, I have no issue with that.

But, just for the record:

1. The eye-controlled 45 point '12 year old' focus on my EOS 3 is better than the 5D mark II. This is why I waited for the 5D3 before upgrading, and even that has some bad points compared to the EOS3.
2. The 150 year old sensor technology was actually likely developed/revised in the last 5 years, and gets further updated regularly, which your current digital sensor won't, unless you replace the camera.
3. The 'per frame' cost of film is lower than digital, because the camera doesn't cost as much as a small car.

Stop talking about things you clearly don't understand.

7

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Considering an EOS 35mm (film) body

« on: May 31, 2012, 05:42:16 AM »

I can highly recommend the EOS-3. It's a truly great camera in my view. Robust, weather-sealed (up to a point), and accepts all EF lenses (not EF-S).

It has eye-control focus, though that's easy to switch off if you don't use it. The spot meter can be linked to the eye-selected focus point, which works very well in contrasty light situations.

The exposures are spot on, and I find it a delight to use. I've recently upgraded to a 5D mark III, which feels roughly the same in terms of build quality and general usage, though even that doesn't have all the EOS3's features...

They are about £100 on ebay in the UK, and I would recommend the PB-E2 battery grip, which accelerates the FPS to 7 frames a second - faster than the 5D mark III, as well as providing portrait operation and additional battery options.

8

Technical Support / Re: 18-135mm Lens Fungus HELP!!!

« on: May 30, 2012, 04:41:25 AM »

Simple household vinegar works quite well. Though UV light (sunlight) works too. Try leaving it out in the sun for a few days, maybe you won't have to disassemble it.

But this fungus looks a bit odd. Normally, fungus grows outward from the dust that accumulates at the very edge of the lens, not in the centre portion, as appears to be the case here. Are you sure it's not an oil spot?

9

Canon General / Re: Canon stock (CAJ) repeatedly hitting 52-week lows

« on: May 29, 2012, 08:10:39 AM »

I was going to buy a few thousand bucks worth of Canon stock in my retirement portfolio... Unfortunately, Canon stock (CAJ) is continually triggering news alerts in my browser for having hit a "new 52-week low".

What kind of person would buy stock when it's at an all time high? Doesn't this make an all time low an excellent time to buy?

As someone on this forum has as their signature line: 'only dead fish swim with the tide' (though my son points out that jellyfish do as well...)

10

Canon General / Re: LEE filters vs Multi-exposures

« on: May 29, 2012, 08:03:55 AM »

There is of course one key difference: filters use a single exposure, so nothing can move in the time interval between exposures...

Personally, I think they both have a role to play, but I accept their use is more limited on digital than film.

11

Canon General / Re: Beliefs and myths.

« on: May 29, 2012, 07:57:42 AM »

* If the user understands Photoshop properly then Nik softwares are redundant.

A quick comment on this point. I would say 'false' to this, though it has some value as a point of view.

Understanding Photoshop is not the same as wanting to use it, or wanting to pay for it. Photoshop is remarkably expensive, remarkably powerful, and remarkably complex. Nik plug-ins are generally cheaper, even for the full set, especially if you get the Lightroom variants, and are pretty quick and easy to use. Photoshop was never designed for photographers - it is a general graphics package which is showing its age.

So in conclusion, I would recommend Nik plug-ins over Photoshop for users who do not work as professionals, or for professionals who value their time, and do not require the flexibility of Photoshop. Looking at a (not very) professional wedding shoot recently, where it would seem no post production was done at all and the results were distinctly average, I would say the latter is a pretty big category...

My 2 cents anyhow.

12

Lenses / Re: A myth of growing from APS-C to Fullframe or Dealing with anachronisms

« on: May 24, 2012, 11:10:00 AM »

When I was buying my 40D in 2008, I was thinking well, I'll first get into Canon system and then will grow into fullframe.
And because I am a pure hobbyist, I actually never had neither the money nor the excuse to pay big $ for FF camera and lenses.

I got into Canon around the same time, again with a plan to 'evolve' to full frame. But unlike you, I bought only the best L glass I could afford, sticking it on a 450D in the interim, and also an EOS3, which you could I guess describe as full frame (135 film!). Just last week, I upgraded my 450D to a 5D3, so plan is complete !

So it can be done.

But I agree with your premise. It's not easy or cheap.

I think Canon should take a leaf out of Nikon's book and allow EF-S lenses to fit full frame cameras, using a discrete part of the sensor - the APS-C part. With 23 MP to play with, this isn't such a bad deal, and at least it gives you an option as you shovel more cash into the Canon machine and upgrade your glass over time.

13

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: The Canon GP-E2 Now Shipping

« on: May 23, 2012, 12:34:14 PM »

Well any time I feel I am forced to bend over and just - take it I will bitch loudly. 
Of course if you're being violated even worse then by all means you go ahead & squeal louder.
Grab your ankles - take it like a man...... 

Fair point. Assume I am now squealing... and ordering from B&H ! I worked out even with shipping and tax, I still save around $100 (£60).

 

14

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: The Canon GP-E2 Now Shipping

« on: May 22, 2012, 08:38:17 AM »

However if you think $269 is expensive, try living in the UK. This Unit is costing £299 ($464) at Warehouse Express, one of the largest photographic online retailers in the UK, at $269 that works out at £175 at $1.55/£.

This really is an outrageous markup, even allowing for the VAT and everything.

I really want this thing, but it's a scandalous price in the UK. May give importing a whirl - even with the VAT and duty and shipping, it cannot be that much...

So please, my American friends: I love you dearly, but please stop bitching about $3500 and $269. It's starting to get annoying ! 

15

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake Coming [CR3]

« on: May 22, 2012, 03:45:13 AM »

This is dumb. F/2 or faster for primes otherwise, WHATs THE POINT?! Just use good zooms.

I think the canon mirrorless will suprise us with a EF mount system with 1.3X crop factor. It will be not a low end entry level, but a mid-range camera like the fuji X-pro 1. This would make sense for them not to cut into the rebel sales or the G1X sales.

Fingers crossed that its a optical rangefinder style camera... Or has a VERY VERY good LED viewfinder. 

I reckon you are right. Canon are not dumb. Greedy, maybe, but not dumb. This lens has only one point: SIZE. And that only makes sense on a tiny camera. So I'm thinking Leica M9 or Fuji X-Pro sort of size. Pancake makes a lot of sense on that, and with an EF mount (EF-S) could shift a lot of units. The f2.8 doesn't sound so stupid then.

Let's see.