July 22, 2014, 04:31:24 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 - TAF

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
Software & Accessories / Re: ProDot Shutter Button Upgrade
« on: November 14, 2013, 10:10:33 PM »
I got some early prototypes when I ordered a c-loop (which I really like) and they didn't stick for very long.  One came off first time I took my 7d out of my camera bag.  The one on my 5D came off after about 30 shutter activation's in warm summer weather.  Unless they fix the adhesive and make the price a lot more attractive (I've got experience with mold costs) and change their shipping methods I don't see these taking off.

I too got a couple free when with an order.

I am sorry I applied it to the camera.  The adhesive smeared all over the area around the shutter button, and it is very difficult to remove this material.  Then I noticed that the shutter button now spins freely (it did not before I applied the disk), probably because as the camera is put in and out of the bag the little knubs grab the bag.

It's a really nice idea (and I do like the feel), but overall not a very well executed item.

I absolutely love their C-Loop, so this one is a surprising disappointment.

Lighting / Re: Infra red flash / lighting?
« on: October 21, 2013, 08:36:59 AM »
Modifying the Yong is a great idea; xenon strobes put out a large amount of extra energy in the IR range (UV as well).

By removing the original lens and replacing it with the IR filter, you'll get maximum IR output (the original plastic lens is at least partially intended to absorb the "undesirable" IR and UV that the strobe naturally generates).

It would be interesting to compare a filtered 600EX with a modified Yong, and see which generates more IR power.

Depends on how you define "excellent" performance.

Leaving aside the technical issues involved (as discussed above), I would think there would be a market for a camera (body) which yielded ISO 100 level of quality at say ISO 204800, even if it 'only' had 8 MP.

Shooting perfect pictures in the dark would be lots of fun.

Even better would be if it included a very high speed mode - say 10000 fps video capability.

That would sell quite well indeed, especially if it was under $1K.

I'm guessing it isn't going to happen any time soon.

EOS Bodies / Re: What do you think will be the Shelf life of the EOS 6D ?
« on: October 18, 2013, 08:10:25 PM »
I was wondering if you could give your opinion on that? ???

While I realize the OP is talking about the marketing lifecycle, I am curious about the real shelf-life of the product.

Since the move to RoHS in electronics, I am seeing more and more devices fail for no apparent reason - some of which have literally just sat on the shelf.  So this begs the question: has anyone experienced any hardware failures in older cameras, or worse in more recent ones, that cannot be explained by external issues?

I have a Rollei TLR that is over 80 years old, and it takes marvelous photos.  Will my 5D3 still be functional in 10 years, never mind 80?

Thoughts on that?

EOS Bodies / Re: Holidays 2013: Where the Heck is Canon?
« on: October 17, 2013, 02:38:47 AM »
Well, Canon MUST have something in the pipeline for the Holiday season.  I'm pretty sure it's not going to be too exciting, most likely along the lines of EOS-M2 and a lens or two.  I am secretly hoping for a 50L II, though.

Speaking from the American perspective, I would venture to say it is too late for this holiday season.

If the product isn't on container ships heading this way NOW, they won't be here in time.  Air freight is too expensive for large quantities of 'stuff', and it takes 30 days or more to cross the Pacific these days.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: I don't understand
« on: October 05, 2013, 11:21:32 AM »
and my p/s even has a dedicated program mode for taking cat pictures, a necessary feature for facebook :)

Humm...that sounds like something that I would find quite useful - what's the model number?

I've noticed that the facial recognition focus mode in my EOS-M won't 'do cats'.

Perhaps Magic Lantern will offer a version that turns the C3 position on my 5D3's main dial into just such a function...it should be popular.
It is an Olympus TG-830. I got it for use in the kayak and for in the rain. The camera is waterproof to about 40 feet and works underwater.... Makes it kind of hard to accidentally destroy... And it really does have a cat mode... I am serious.... I am not kidding! The picture is of the camera display in the mode selection menu...

Wow, a dog mode as well...and waterproof, shock resistant, and affordable.

I think I "need" one for model aircraft use.

I hope Canon does a firmware update to compete.

Thank you very much!

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: I don't understand
« on: October 04, 2013, 09:25:45 PM »
and my p/s even has a dedicated program mode for taking cat pictures, a necessary feature for facebook :)

Humm...that sounds like something that I would find quite useful - what's the model number?

I've noticed that the facial recognition focus mode in my EOS-M won't 'do cats'.

Perhaps Magic Lantern will offer a version that turns the C3 position on my 5D3's main dial into just such a function...it should be popular.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon is going to add mid format
« on: September 02, 2013, 11:37:47 PM »
some additional news over at NL
18th We're told (thanks) that nothing will appear in any Canon branded MF range until there are enough items to introduce it as a 'system'. This will include 'Canon designed' [sic.] lenses with a new larger version of the EF mount (tentatively called EF-L) and, as with the EOS-M EF->EF-M adapter, a way to allow them to be used seamlessly as very high quality lenses on the current EF mount.
The lens development is being influenced by the new range of 'Cinema' lenses (I note their prices!)
The aim is a 'show stealing' announcement at Photokina next year, but no details on when any cameras might be offered for sale.
I've seen other related comments (thanks) which emphasise that this is still at a relatively early stage and the business relevance has not been established.
My own thoughts are that with the recent decline in DSLR sales, this might be a tricky one to get a good return on the necessary investment?

"EF-L" seems like a terribly choice of name, given the likely confusion with "L" lenses, unless all MF lenses will be "L".

Perhaps "EF-66" would be a better choice, assuming they retain the 6x6 format for the notional MF camera.

Lose the flash.  It is potentially dangerous (bad news near oxygen), annoying to everyone, and might get you thrown out (or at least 'lectured').

Technical Support / Re: Wedding shooter - DO NOT TRY THIS, UNLESS
« on: August 21, 2013, 07:28:23 PM »
... You want to GO TO JAIL.

In the US, where this was taken it is ILLEGAL to fly drones for commercial purposes, UNLESS you have one of the few FAA waivers which are mainly for crops and law enforcement purposes. 

Many companies who do this type of aerial photography for real estate, etc. have been visited by the FAA and given cease and desist.

For each incident, a person faces fines from $10,000 to $100,000 (yes... $100K per incident, and 3 to 10 years in jail.


And while the jacka$$ photographer is happy with All press is good press... Getting viral coverage could cost him a whole lot more.

So I'm curious, not having done a lot (well, any) research on it, how do they classify the hobbyist RC helo's & planes that have been flying for decades? What's the difference? If it's when you go out of line of sight, sure, I can completely understand that and it makes sense. Otherwise, what's the real difference? Is it the fact that people are being paid to basically do the same thing they'd be free to do if they were just doing it for fun?

We're talking about the US Gov't here, so the rules and regulations have no basis in logic or rational thought.

A (very wealthy) hobbyist flying a remotely controlled aircraft with every surveillance sensor known to man for his personal enjoyment - legal, as far as the federal government is concerned  (within the altitude and location limitations associated with model aircraft operation...if it's OK for your 12 year old neighbor, it's OK for you with all the camera gear; basically, stay low, stay away from airports, and keep your aircraft light in weight).

But someone flying a toy helicopter with a camera on it and GETTING PAID TO DO IT - illegal.

It's all in the 'getting paid' part.

I kid you not.  See:  http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/uas/reg/

Yes, this is one of the dumbest pieces of regulatory nonsense in recent memory.  And they plan on fixing it over the course of the next couple of years...and the fix will probably be worse than the present rules.

Lenses / Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« on: August 21, 2013, 12:00:07 AM »
Based on my experience with several Canon IS lenses (and their IS binoculars), I would say that the IS is essentially instantaneous (below my reaction/sensing threshold, anyway).

Have you actually looked?  I just tried with my 100L, and stabilization clearly isn't 'instantaneous'.  If I just fully press the shutter with a handheld shot, it's not much better than no IS with a slow shutter (1/25 s). 

I took a few tripod test shots with the 100L and the 600L, I'll have a look at the results in a day or two.

But of course.

On my 70-300L, as soon as I push the shutter button part way down, the jiggling appears to stop.  Same with my 24-105L.  So it's fast enough I don't see it dampen out - or I'm shaky enough that it looks so good I can't tell how quickly it settles down.

I'll play with the tripod over the weekend.

Technical Support / Re: Wedding shooter - DO NOT TRY THIS, UNLESS
« on: August 20, 2013, 11:53:23 PM »
"The surveillance drone is a sensor, not a weapon.  Please use it accordingly."

Good thing it was only a GoPro and not a 1Dx hanging from the bottom of the drone...

Lenses / Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« on: August 18, 2013, 03:31:14 PM »
Yet another Nikon fail?

Based on my experience with several Canon IS lenses (and their IS binoculars), I would say that the IS is essentially instantaneous (below my reaction/sensing threshold, anyway).

I don't know what Canon's official line would be, but here's my guess comparing Canon to Nikon.  Having designed and built a few pieces of equipment that had accelerometers in them, I suspect that Canon keeps the power on to the accelerometers (they use very little power) and thus only need power the servos (which will drain the battery) when you press the shutter button; while Nikon probably tries to save that last little bit of power by powering down everything.  Since it does take MEMS accelerometers a moment or so to stabilize when initially powered up, this could account for Nikon's showing in those tests.

Point to Canon.

I'll note that I too have never seen an image where IS caused degradation, so I never turn it off except when on a tripod.

EOS-M / Re: My own take on the EOS M
« on: August 16, 2013, 08:31:23 AM »

used this for some low light, indoor portraits the other day.

Nice portrait.

Which brings up my most recent 'M' story.  Ever wonder how well sealed the camera is?  I found out the hard way...my little furry friend got sick all over my 'M'.  Much to my surprise, none of the rather acidic ick got into the camera.  The only place where it wicked was across the lens mount.  Fortunately, it didn't get all the way past the flange face.  But I do think some sort of gasket to prevent rain from getting in there would be a good idea.

Street & City / Re: Reprimanded for a photograph
« on: August 09, 2013, 09:01:54 AM »

The photograph below was taken in Dubai Mall, ostensibly the largest mall in the world.  The subject was 30 m from me and what caught my eye was the shoes she was wearing under the head-to—toe garment referred to as Abaya.  When I showed it to my expat host, he said that I should be careful and not publicise this photo since, ‘Here, we are not free to do things as you would do in the West’.  This seemed rather odd.  I have travelled extensively and I think I am culturally sensitive.  Has any one else among the rumour-mongers experienced this real or perceived Gestapo mentality when it came to otherwise innocuous  photographs.  I can understand one’s handlers in Pyongyang not allowing you to point your camera in a particular direction but when no apparent reason exists, a ‘police state’ mentality governing photography would be interesting.

Excellent photo, well done.  However, even though it's too late now, I would have paid very careful attention to your host if you ever planned on visiting that country again.  I'm not certain I would do so.

You may believe yourself culturally sensitive, and in the western sense you may very well be, but in this case I think you stepped on a geopolitical landmine.  You've just posted a photo that completely skewers one of the grand perceptions that middle eastern Islam has presented to the west - that the religious requirements that we in the west find so odd are pervasive throughout society, and that their womenfolk fully support them.

Those shoes are either a remarkable protest against that particular requirement of her religion, or a demonstration that those requirements are for public consumption only.  Neither plays well amongst the hard line religious folks who run those countries and who have an unpleasant habit of executing people who they believe have embarrassed them or disrespected their religion.  I think you just did both.

So yes, there really is something wrong with the photo, if you plan on ever returning to that part of the world.

As for the North Korea comparison, at least they're consistent with the western perspective.  They don't want photos showing how destitute their country is (politically embarrassing), or what their military is doing (could work against them in the next war, which they expect any moment).  Much easier to understand than religious thinking.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10