December 19, 2014, 04:05:28 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 - 3kramd5

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31
1
I use mine with EF lenses in studio and landscape environments. If I know that's all I will be shooting, it's great. If I just grab a camera for general purpose my 5D gets the nod, and I don't hesitate to use it for landscapes.

I find the Sony a bit tedious to use, but the resolution with and ability to use it with canon glass makes it a fairly easy buy.

I suggest renting one first. At the Sony rate, they'll likely have a version 2 in the not to distant future.

2
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Co-worker dumps $5k on Nikon
« on: December 10, 2014, 11:06:54 AM »
Good for her.  Most of us wish we could drop five grand on camera gear before a big trip. 

This. Hell, many of us with we could have a big trip, let alone spend $5,000 on gear FOR said trip.

Dilbert now why would you go posting something like that on a Canon forum. ::) ::) ::)

Because:

hahahahahaha

you guys make me laugh.



3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D III Playback Card keeps changing
« on: November 29, 2014, 09:33:59 PM »
This is a bug which I reported to Canon shortly after the 5d3 was released. However they only fixed it on the 1dx via a firmware upgrade.

Can you clarify the nature of the 'bug' to which you're referring, that was 'fixed' via firmware for the 1D X?   

My 1D X has the current firmware; card 1 is set for playback, but if I remove card 1 and close the door, it switches to card 2 for playback and stays there even after I reinsert card 1.  So I believe what the OP describes is the expected behavior.

I'd call it an annoyance, not a bug. It also seems like a solution in search of a problem. Pick it once. If the selected card isn't there, then play from the one that is.

Out of curiosity, does the 1Dx write video to both cards when set to write a copy to the secondary slot? The 5d3 only appears to write video to the playback card.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: I killed my brand new 7D MK2 today
« on: November 13, 2014, 11:06:48 PM »
You're not the only one:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=13892

Nice. I once fixed bent (shorted, criss-crossed like the in-n-out palm trees logo) pins of a USB 3 jack on a motherboard with a pair of tweezers. Good times.

5
It's shocking, IHMO, that the new 7DII has lower scores than cameras with even smaller sensors.

That's been the problem all along with DXO. While their three individual metrics are very insightful, how DXO weighs these metrics against each other to arrive at a single score is one giant mystery. And people are willing to riot over that single overall sensor score :)

The Zeiss 24-70 f4 just bested the Canon and Nikon versions, despite the fact that the Nikon outscored the Zeiss in each metric the Zeiss still got an overall score one more than the Nikon.

Lest we forget, DXO mark includes sensor performance in lens scores. If you use the A3000 rather than the A7R, the Zeiss turns to crap.

So not only are there some bizarre undisclosed weightings involved, but DXO isn't even testing bare optics.

6
As a working pro that makes a living off my tools (currently 1DX's), there are a couple of features that I'd spend a lot of money for. ..
#2: Digital crop that would allow cropping into the sensor on the fly, similar or better than the Nikon D3/D4 can do.

Interesting. May I ask why? It's a nice to have, maybe, but if that (software) functionality adds "a lot of money" to the cost of a body, I'd prefer to put that money into memory and crop in post.

For most of my work there is no time for post processing.  My images go straight from the camera to viewing stations where my customers can view and purchase the images.  Selected images also go straight to slideshows running on multiple 50" screens.  If a parent sees a good shot on the 50" screens, chances are they are going to head to the viewing stations to look and hopefully make a purchase.  A my larger venues my selected shots are projected on 20'x30' screens.  Again no time for post processing.

The crop on the fly ability allows me to put a more tightly cropped image in front of the customer, whether it be on my viewing stations, 50" monitors or 20'x30' screen.  For me this increases sales.

-John

Fair 'nuff. Thanks John!

7
Lenses / Re: Why does a 2x TC lose 2 stops?
« on: October 29, 2014, 02:06:22 PM »
Such an adapter would not be practical for two reasons:  first, because the image circle is reduced in proportion to the conversion scaling factor, and because most if not all EF lenses are designed to only project an image circle roughly large enough to cover the 24x36mm imaging sensor, the result of such a converter in an EF-to-EF system would be large sections of black, unexposed sensor in the image periphery.

Naturally, but note that many people don't mind cropping (D800/600, probably many sony models will do it in camera), and may be willing to give up peripheral pixels in exchange for brightness.

That said, there likely isn't a major market for it.

8
Lenses / Re: Why does a 2x TC lose 2 stops?
« on: October 29, 2014, 12:52:01 PM »
The reverse is also true: A 0.5x TC gains 2 stops.


Wow, I have never heard of that.  That's two learnin's I got from one thread.  :)

http://www.metabones.com/products/?c=speed-booster

So they are only used with mirrorless cameras?  That's probably why I never heard of them.  Still interesting though.  Thanks for posting it.

I've not seen one that is, for example, EF to EF. It would be kinda cool I suppose to use one to brighten up and widen EF lens for use on a crop body. Maybe there's something out there.

9
Lenses / Re: Why does a 2x TC lose 2 stops?
« on: October 29, 2014, 12:40:15 PM »
Time for the day's stupid question:

It is a known fact that all 2x teleconverters lose 2 stops of light, and all 1.4x TCs lose one stop of light. Why? What if the glass in the TC was twice as large? ... it would let in more light, therefore the light loss would be less. Now I realize this logic is somehow flawed, but I can't reason why. Anyone?

What a TC effectively does is magnify. It spreads a constant amount of light over a larger area. So no, if it were bigger, it wouldn't let in more light.

10
Lenses / Re: Why does a 2x TC lose 2 stops?
« on: October 29, 2014, 12:36:19 PM »
The reverse is also true: A 0.5x TC gains 2 stops.


Wow, I have never heard of that.  That's two learnin's I got from one thread.  :)

http://www.metabones.com/products/?c=speed-booster

11
As a working pro that makes a living off my tools (currently 1DX's), there are a couple of features that I'd spend a lot of money for. ..
#2: Digital crop that would allow cropping into the sensor on the fly, similar or better than the Nikon D3/D4 can do.

Interesting. May I ask why? It's a nice to have, maybe, but if that (software) functionality adds "a lot of money" to the cost of a body, I'd prefer to put that money into memory and crop in post.

12
I have some difficulty seeing what Canon could pack into a camera to justify a $10k price tag.

Accounting for inflation, didn't many of the 1Ds models cost that much?

Anyway, for me the answer is yes. The ultimate camera will be so revolutionary that every image I record earns me a dollar. At 50FPS, it will pay for itself post haste.

Also, it won't be full sized, but will ship with two detachable grips:
1) typical battery grip, and
2) memory grip compatible with two 2.5" solid state drives at SATA-express bandwidth.

13
Lenses / Re: Review: PowerShot G7 X via DXOMark
« on: October 27, 2014, 08:38:57 PM »
That's really hijacking. Cool!  >:(

Nothing has been hijacked. This thread doesn't even exist!

There are two sites I will never link again, and one of them is DXO.

14
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 22, 2014, 11:39:08 PM »
Have you seen the "ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 300mm F2.8"?  In FF equivalent it is a 600 f/2.8 ...

600/5.6.  You don't get something for nothing.

It's always both amusing and rather sad that people don't understand the word "equivalent".

It's very odd, especially when the same people don't make the same mistake with teleconverters, which do exactly the same thing as smaller sensors (crop and enlarge).

They do the same thing. So do scissors and bandsaws. That doesn't make them the same. Optical cropping and magnifying does not equal digital cropping and up sampling. The end is likely very similar, however (although with canon's signal chain, I imagine enlarging and increasing sensitivity before digitizing is better). It would be interesting to actually test which process takes a bigger noise penalty.

15
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to differentiate crop vs. FF
« on: October 22, 2014, 05:13:32 PM »
The combo will be cheaper, lighter, smaller and unless I'm shooting at dusk or dawn, the grizzlies will show the same size (and probably comparable IQ) on the same size print, or my screen.

Time of day changes magnification?  :o

Why should I buy a trash can sized lens
...
I want the reach of 800mm or more

That's why :P

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 31