Messages

31

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 650D - sensor size?

« on: April 20, 2012, 06:15:41 AM »

My bet is that it will be a 22.1 mpix   

I think that's pretty unlikely. The Nikon D800 is pushing up against diffraction limits, and this would go well beyond that because of the APS-C sensor size. It is simply not practical to go much higher than the 7D in terms of APS-C sensors.

Also, the data handling requirements of this would require faster processors and path handling, which I admit is a possibility, but Canon will not wish to cannibalise the higher end market.

If this MP is achievable in APS-C I would expect to see it in a 7D2, if anywhere, but I suspect the image quality would be pants due to noise and diffraction, particularly in the non-L lenses likely to be in use at the lower end of the market.

32

EOS Bodies / Re: So where do I buy my 5d mark iii at?

« on: April 18, 2012, 10:58:52 AM »

Hey, Deadpool790, you might get better quality answers if you could give a clue whereabouts on planet Earth you live - it's a big place, and tax rates and rules vary.

I've used DigitalRev in the past - they are pretty good - based in Hong Kong.

I've also used B+H, who were also very professional, in Manhattan of course.

But whether you pay tax and import duty or not will depend a great deal on where you live. I ended up paying tax and import duty from B+H, but not from DigitalRev. I'm in the UK, and customs are getting very good at hitting you for tax on imports.

However, I've come to the conclusion with the 5D3 that I will buy locally, even if I have to pay a bit more. This is because with all the recalls and suchlike, I don't really want to have to return the thing by post across the planet, and then wait ages for its return, assuming that this is necessary at any point. Of course, if the savings were larger, I might be persuaded to go elsewhere...

33

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D MKIII vs 1Ds MKIII

« on: April 10, 2012, 06:50:32 AM »

They include everything in the price: Product + shipping + taxes.

They don't include VAT and import duty - they used to 'guarantee' you would not pay it, by marking the parcel as a 'gift', and refunding you if HMRC (customs) caught on, but they are more reputable these days, and HMRC have got wise. In any case, this is illegal.

I don't believe there is import duty on camera bodies (only lenses) but you will certainly pay 20% VAT on delivery, plus a handling charge from Royal Mail or whoever the handler is - normally £20 or so on top. If you don't pay up, you don't get the goods.

If you work it out, prices from DigitalRev are therefore higher than the UK at present on a 5D3.

They are nice, reliable people though.

Of course this advice applies to all non-EU vendors when you are importing into the EU, for example Adorama, B+H, etc.

34

EOS Bodies / Re: Anyone shooting film?

« on: April 05, 2012, 04:28:26 PM »

I have an aversion to carcinogenic chemicals, though.

I read a study recently (sorry, don't have the link, but maybe Google will find it) where they looked at photographic industry darkroom staff, who had been up to their necks in darkroom chemicals their whole life, pretty much. I think they were expecting some crop of weird diseases.

But in fact, they lived longer, and were healthier than the control group.

Fixer is a little nasty, if you do something stupid like drink it, but developers such as Xtol are mainly vitamin C, and stop bath is essentially vinegar. You use nastier chemicals cooking, frankly. Of course some are nastier, but it's not like you will be touching them, if you are reasonably careful and/or wear gloves (which I don't).

Let's not fall into the 'if I don't understand it, it must be dangerous' model of thinking, please!!

35

EOS Bodies / Re: Anyone shooting film?

« on: April 05, 2012, 04:20:35 PM »

But that's exactly the point I was trying to make. Sure, developing b/w is pretty easy. But that doesn't help with making the prints - which is the whole point of the exercise.

Sure, but I had to compromise somewhere. I used to wrap up a room in blackout, and print using an enlarger, many years ago, but the hassle and level of investment is huge. This way, I still get the creative joy of film, and of developing, and the smell (which is somewhat addictive by the way) but not the darkroom hassle, which is hugely disruptive, especially now I have kids. It was that or go 100% digital, and to be honest, I don't miss the printing - I find I get as much creative joy from Nik and Lightroom these days. I'm sure a purist would hate it, but it works for me.

Sometimes it's amusing as well - some guy asked me the other day if my EOS 3 was a new DSLR he hadn't heard of. ha!

@SandyP: love those pictures! Amazing. Thanks for sharing.

36

EOS Bodies / Re: Anyone shooting film?

« on: April 05, 2012, 03:23:23 PM »

Couple of examples, just for fun - they are a little compressed, so the fine details will suffer, but trust me, these in full are really nice.

A black and white from Yosemite, using a 1970s Canonet QL17 GIII, and Fuji Acros 100 film, developed by myself in R09, and an EOS 3 photo on Fuji Velvia. The latter is pretty much as it came off the scanner - unprocessed.

Both taken in the last 2 years.

I'm sure there are better photographers out there, but hopefully this gives you a taste.

37

EOS Bodies / Re: Anyone shooting film?

« on: April 05, 2012, 03:09:40 PM »

The problem really is that finding places that develop and print traditionally is close to impossible.

b/w - do it yourself ! You don't need a darkroom, just get a 'changing bag' - you stick your hands in to reel the film onto the developing tank spool, and then the tank is lightproof and pour the soup in to develop and fix. Easy. Of course, you can't see what you are doing, but that's ok.

Colour, yep, that's harder. I use peak imaging in the UK, who I can highly recommend. http://www.peak-imaging.co.uk/ They usually turn stuff around in 2-3 days door to door, which is amazing.

I don't analog print though - develop only, and then into the negative scanner. If I print, I print digitally on an inkjet (Pixma 9500).

38

EOS Bodies / Re: Anyone shooting film?

« on: April 05, 2012, 03:04:41 PM »

Have a look for a book entitled 'Film is not Dead' on Amazon. It's for digital natives looking to understand film (unlike us old codgers who always understood it...)

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Film-Is-Not-Dead-Photographers/dp/0321812808/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1333652643&sr=8-1

39

EOS Bodies / Re: Anyone shooting film?

« on: April 05, 2012, 03:01:48 PM »

Sure, I shoot loads of film. I have an EOS 3 and an EOS 5, both of which take EF lenses just like a modern EOS camera. And the flash works too...

The EOS 3 in particular is a fantastic camera - full frame (of course!), eye control focus, weather sealed, 8 fps, a real delight - and all for about £100 or maybe $150, on eBay !

I use a Nikon negative scanner, and then Lightroom 4 and Nik plugins, and have all the joy of digital post-process workflow...

Maybe you can the same effects with digital, and I do use a DSLR too, but somehow, you just KNOW that you have black and white film in the body, and it somehow alters your perception. Likewise, a bit of Fuji Velvia 50 for landscape or Portra for portraits. Superb.

The thing is, with 36 exposures, you have to THINK about what you are doing.

I also have a Mamiya RZ67 (medium format, 6x7 negative), which I use occasionally, but not so much joy with that yet - much tougher to use, more demanding, and harder to scan well. Manual focus, manual exposure, and a beast to lug around. I'll get there one day...

Aiming for a 5D3 later this year.

40

Lenses / Re: Your Most Used Lens!

« on: April 05, 2012, 01:58:17 PM »

17-40L, but my Sigma 50mm f1.4 is a close second...

41

EOS Bodies / Re: Letter to Mr Rockwell in regards to his 5Dmkiii review

« on: April 05, 2012, 04:05:48 AM »

Sadly, I don't know if he's lost interest in his site.  A couple of years ago, he was belting out some good content.  Now it seems solely like a money making exercise.  It's as though he's sold the site and someone new is just capitalising from the page visits.

Yep, seems off his game these days. I agree, though, he can be entertaining. Kinda like Dilbert - you have to take him with a pinch of salt.

42

EOS Bodies / Re: Letter to Mr Rockwell in regards to his 5Dmkiii review

« on: April 05, 2012, 04:02:38 AM »

I think you all need to take a chill pill.

Mr Rockwell lives on controversy - literally. This post, and others like it, provoke people to visit his site, and he gets more advertising revenue.

He likes to be controversial and extreme - it provokes debate, gets more hits.

The guy isn't stupid, and he doesn't pretend to be unbiased or accurate. His motivations are simple: generate traffic.

Once you realise that, comments like 'I never use a DSLR for anything now, I use a Leica M9' or some other daft thing become more understandable: he is all things to all men, and has an opinion on everything - even if its a stupid one.

Sending him letters is great, if it makes you happy. But don't expect him to change.

Cameras are just tools. Some are good for some things, some for others. There is no perfect camera, and there never will be - the laws of physics make that a certainty. Ken just plays that diversity to his advantage. You think this is any more ruthless than Apple, Google, Microsoft or Canon ? I think not.

43

EOS Bodies / Re: Finder Mounting Frame...Does anyone uses one?

« on: April 04, 2012, 11:03:00 AM »

You need to get one of these Canon extras. Only $500, or £1200 in the UK.

44

EOS Bodies / Re: Thoughts of Gizmodo today - pretty balanced

« on: April 04, 2012, 03:37:18 AM »

Regarding the 250k photos statistic: I'd probably be quick to jump on the "he must be exaggerating OR he must be way too trigger-happy" bandwagon, if it weren't for the fact that Brenizer's work is just so consistently amazing.  The most brilliant wedding photographer I've come across on the web, certainly.

I certainly had no intention of criticising the guy - his work is great, and however he produces it is certainly none of my business. I was simply highlighting that 250,000 images a year is a heck of a lot to be archiving, which is what he implies by his 'non-starter' comment, and that if each of these images is valued enough to archive, he should not be whining about the 20 terabytes that it takes for 250k 36MP images vs the 10-15 terabytes it would take for 250k @ 22mp. That's just silly, frankly, given that you can get a terabyte for less than £100 these days.

45

Software & Accessories / Re: Canon SDK for 5D Mark III Availability

« on: April 03, 2012, 02:41:28 PM »

Reikan Photography, aka Focal, quotes: "Canon DIDP have replied with a statement that the SDK supporting the 5D Mark III and 1D-X will be available in mid May."

http://www.facebook.com/ReikanFoCal