March 02, 2015, 12:26:47 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 - emag

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 23
I have the Pro-Optic flavor of this lens and find it fun to play with, both stills and time lapse.  I de-clicked it for video.  A fisheye is something I would not want to spend a lot of money on but I was happy with the price. 
I used it with a 40D to take a time lapse of my homemade motorized slider in action, which was carrying a 60D with a Tokina 11-16/2.8 attached.

I don't know the policy on linking to / embedding youtube videos here on CR, so change 'yertube' in the pseudo-links below to 'youtube' to make them work

Text from fisheye video, which is at   

Home made slider running for about 7 hours.  Taken with Canon 40D and RokSamBow 8mm fisheye.  One 15 second exposure every minute.  On the slider is a 60D taking three 15 second exposures per minute.  Note my neighbor's TRULY ANNOYING security light, I'll have to ask her nicely to aim it in a different direction or shield it.  The timelapse made with this setup is at

I cannot recommend the use of sponges, they are prone to capturing particulates and could scratch the sensor.  And no hair net!  Tsk tsk.  Better get Canon service to take care of that.

Lenses / Re: Keep or sell??
« on: February 28, 2013, 09:06:18 PM »
Get some extension tubes for it.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 candle light High ISO (102400)
« on: February 24, 2013, 09:52:54 PM »
Anyone with a similar shot using 6D?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Camera body lens mount removal
« on: February 22, 2013, 12:08:40 PM »
Don't listen to these guys - take a chainsaw to that puppy and field strip it! 

Seriously though, if yer REALLY worried about the scratched mount, here's food for thought.  Is it just an appearance thing, like surface scratches?  Or is it gouged, as in you had grains of sand on there when you mounted a lens.  I suspect it's just appearance.  You could try polishing, but only if it's something that will keep you awake at night. Practice on the extension tube with a cotton swab (Q-tip) and a small dab of metal polish like Brasso.  Be careful, even if it works, when you do it to the camera you might use too much and it might drip into the camera body.  Plus the whole time you're doing this, dust is falling into the camera body.  My point is, cosmetic mount scratches are nothing to worry about.  Put that OCD on the shelf and take some photos.  And put your extension tube back together, it's fine.

If you listed your $2000 camera on Craigslist and tyoed in $20 in error. would you honor it?

Agree.....even if it was typed (or typoed) in instead of tyoed in :D.  Reputable companies like Adorama cancel the order before it processes, some (as mentioned by a previous poster) charge your card then credit you back....often at their leisure.     Chalk it up to "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't"

Technical Support / Re: Strange pattern in long exposure images
« on: February 19, 2013, 09:25:32 PM »
I've had a similar interference pattern occur when using a filter on my EF300/4 (non-IS), which has an almost flat front element.  Back when I was a young man with a full head of dark hair, we would look for interference fringes when checking optical flats and precision gauge blocks under a monochromatic light.  Neuro mentioned 'Newton's rings'....that's a phenomenon of similar cause, in the context we used it was an indicator that cemented lens elements were beginning to separate.  We'd re-cement them with Canadian Balsam, nowadays replaced for the most part with different adhesives.  This thread has conjured up memories of the smell of hot Canadian Balsam and hours of rebuilding Navy binoculars....a pleasant memory.  Thanks!

Lenses / Re: Reverse teleconverter
« on: February 19, 2013, 01:54:11 PM »
In the astrophotography world it's known as a focal reducer or less commonly a telecompressor.  Often it is optically figured to also reduce field curvature; hence, another name - field flattener/focal reducer or FF/FR.  I use an f/6.3, it reduces my scope's effective focal length from 2350 to 1480mm and from f/10 to f/6.3. 

As for camera lenses:

It's not the body.  And the problems the body has aren't ones that the 40D will necessarily solve.........

Sound advice.  40D is a fine camera (I have one) but will not improve your keeper rate, technique will.  Getting a 40D now will consume capital for little benefit.  Keep saving those pennies in the'll have something better by the holiday season or for next spring.  That said, a decent video camera would not hurt the bank too much and might be a nice addition to capture memories.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Spec List [CR2]
« on: February 19, 2013, 09:20:36 AM »  Arrrrggghhh!  When will Canon get on the ball?  I'm so disappointed.......

Sounds like a fine tool

EOS Bodies / Re: What if the rumored 5Dx is actually a 4D?
« on: February 15, 2013, 09:17:10 PM »

I never use small or medium raw, nor do I know why anyone would. The point of raw is non-processed information; down-interpolation is processing.

I've often used MRaw for time lapse.  I find it gives me PP flexibility without huge file sizes.  YMMV.

Site Information / Re: Anyone bought from DWI?
« on: February 15, 2013, 09:09:56 PM »
Doesn't pass the smell test

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Cinema EOS C50 [CR1]
« on: February 13, 2013, 09:29:15 AM »
.........not working with morons and getting the blame when it goes tetes up.......

I don't do pro film/photo work, but I do have to contend with morons on a frequent basis.  Most of the ones I have to deal with have zip for common sense and no social skills whatsoever.  On those days that are particularly exasperating, I let my co-workers know they should use my Native American name when talking with me:

"Works With Morons"

My $0.02:

7DII will be startlingly good and startlingly expensive

70D will be more affordable and have enough improvements for those who prefer crop to replace 40D/50D, and to some extent 60D.  All the above plus 60D and to some extent 7D users who are on the fence (crop vs. FF) are IMO the target market for 6D.   If you have to make a decision by mid-May, you're looking at being an early adopter who will pay premium price, something to consider.

FWIW - I have an astro-modified 40D and a 60D.  If all I had was the 40D I'd be looking hard at the 6D.  As it is, I AM looking at the 6D, getting my 60D modified and selling the 40D (which is still a fine camera) to pay for the 60D modification.  For my purposes, wireless trumps the 5D3's AF.  YMMV.

PowerShot / Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« on: February 10, 2013, 01:50:28 PM »
No mention that it's also capable of high frame rate video, with reduced resolution of course.  Put it all together and this is an ideal carry everywhere camera.  We don't all want to carry a DSLR and a bag of lenses every day.  Comparable in price to, f'rinstance, a Tamron 28-75/2.8.

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 23