September 18, 2014, 09:46:17 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 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 29
76
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 05:47:13 PM »
The only part I'd be concerned with is the ability of the A7r to hold a long/heavy lens on a tripod.

er... what? The tripod holds the lens, the lens holds the camera.

77
EOS Bodies / Re: Are These The EOS 7D Mark II Specifications?
« on: August 25, 2014, 04:18:57 PM »
looks pretty decent to me
if there a some deals or sale down the road after the bleeding edge stampede dies off i might pick one up and leave it stuck on the tamron 150-600


+1

78
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII dual cards
« on: August 25, 2014, 03:20:37 PM »
3kramd5 - I shoot JPEG with the various adjustments and RAW in the hope that I've got something to work with if I cock up.  Also, as you are probably aware, the SD card slot is crippled and it's faster to save JPEGs to SD.

Yah, I know. It's not crippled, it just pre-dated faster SD. I personally haven't run into buffer issues (I shoot RAW to both cards), but I don't burst often, so perhaps that's why.

Personally, I do a lot of things out of ease, so with that in mind:

Once you're out of the field, if you haven't have a failure in the CF card, do you keep the JPEGs?

If so... why? :P

If not, then just keep them on the SD card as you delete from CF. They're small enough relative to RAW that you aren't likely to fill a card with them with the balance of space freed by deleting RAWs, right? How big is the best quality JPEG relative to RAW? Let's assume they are 66% as big. Suppose you can fit 99 JPEGs or 66 RAWs. You'd have to delete and re-shoot literally 1/2 of your RAW files (that is, shoot 66, delete 33, and shoot 33 more) before filling the card with JPEGs. And even if you would fill a card, just get an extra SD; it's cheap, and then you never have to think about synchronizing your deletions. Just replace the SD when it gets close to capacity so you don't fill it at an inopportune moment :)

It is a little weird that canon basically handcuffs us when it comes to accessing files on the secondary card. Sure, you can change the playback setting, but that's a PITA. But while weird, it's never been problematic to me.

79
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIII dual cards
« on: August 25, 2014, 02:10:08 PM »
I don't believe so. You delete from whichever card you have selected for playback.

As an aside, if you are using dual cards for backup, shouldn't you have both record the same format? JPEG isn't really a backup to RAW, it's a compromised replacement. That way, you could delete whatever you want in the field, and never have to even remove the backup card from the camera as long as you don't have a failure with the primary (or accidentally delete the wrong image).

80
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D replacement: What is a "fine-detail" sensor
« on: August 23, 2014, 10:20:37 PM »
Fine detail sounds awfully lot like a euphemism for high resolution (eg 20MP APS-C)

82
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma and Tamron OS/VC quirks
« on: August 22, 2014, 01:42:39 PM »
Hi,
I now own two third party stabilized lenses, the sigma 70-200 2.8 EX (there are a lot of letters and I always forget them) and the tamron 150-600. I've noticed a quirk they both exhibit that none of my canon IS lenses do: when the stabilizer engages, the frame tilts down what visually feels like about 5-10°. With the 70-200, it's not that bad, but at 600mm with the tamron, 10° is a lot.

Has anyone else noticed that kind of this happening? What's the explanation? Misalignment in the stabilizing optic? Maybe I'll shoot a video if nobody can picture what I'm seeing.
    My tamron 150-600mm will usually just "jump" (meaning that it'll return to the initially aiming point) a bit when IS is activated... sometime if the IS is not activated for a long time, the frame will move down a bit, but still very close to my AF point... at 600mm, the distance it move is around the size of my 6D centre AF point... not very much... my handshake is easily 10 times worst than that...  ha ha ha :-P

   Have a nice day.

Haha, yah hand shake is much worse. It's easy to compensate for, but it just seemed... quirky.

My 150-600 doesn't have that problem or indeed any that others have reported.  My former 100-400L used to drift in IS.

Interesting. Maybe it's just a manufacturing tolerance issue if yours doesn't do it.

83
Third Party Manufacturers / Sigma and Tamron OS/VC quirks
« on: August 22, 2014, 09:35:02 AM »
I now own two third party stabilized lenses, the sigma 70-200 2.8 EX (there are a lot of letters and I always forget them) and the tamron 150-600. I've noticed a quirk they both exhibit that none of my canon IS lenses do: when the stabilizer engages, the frame tilts down what visually feels like about 5-10°. With the 70-200, it's not that bad, but at 600mm with the tamron, 10° is a lot.

Has anyone else noticed that kind of this happening? What's the explanation? Misalignment in the stabilizing optic? Maybe I'll shoot a video if nobody can picture what I'm seeing.

84
Software & Accessories / Re: Aluminum vs. Carbon Fiber?
« on: August 21, 2014, 03:06:33 PM »
And of course not all Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Plastics are the same.

Nor are all aluminum alloys, but yes, there is certainly more variability in composites (fibers and resin systems or prepreg used, curing times/temperatures/pressures, layup, etc).

85
Animal Kingdom / Re: Tamron 150-600mm bird pics
« on: August 20, 2014, 12:01:31 AM »
I got this lens for my concert photography (so I'm no wildlife photographer), but I have been having fun taking photos of other things...  this is one of my hummingbird photos from this weekend (mounted on a 70D for added reach).



I really love this lens, especially with the 70D (I have two 5D Mk IIIs and two 6Ds and bought the 70D just to use with this lens for the added reach).

Jason

awesome, truly.

86
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Why the delay for the Tamron 150-600?
« on: August 19, 2014, 05:17:16 PM »
They could also be tightening things like quality control, too. Such as making it really stretch closer to 600mm.

If the zoomed in optical formula doesn't equate to 600mm, tightening quality control won't make it.

87
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Why the delay for the Tamron 150-600?
« on: August 19, 2014, 03:35:04 PM »
Backlog of orders aside, does anyone think Tamron might be tweaking the design so it zooms closer to 600mm or any other "improvements"?

No, I certainly don't think they would adjust the optical formula. I think they underpriced it hence the heavy demand.

88
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Another Nikon full-frame
« on: August 19, 2014, 12:06:50 PM »
I am doing my best, to understand why it is a bad thing for a company to give consumers a choice. I wish that Canon would give us choices like this. Its great that Canon offers a bunch of different lenses, but not ok for Nikon to offer a bunch of different cameras?  That is hypocrisy to me.

I think the people complaining do so because quick refreshes hurt resale value. Why they think Nikon should protect the price of used gear at the expense of customers ready to buy new gear (if they sat on the 610 for two years and sold off the flawed 600 stock, that would be truly something to criticize) is beyond me, but maybe it feels different for people who buy gear based on a schedule rather than on an as-needed basis.

89
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 150-600mm availability
« on: August 15, 2014, 11:35:48 AM »
Mine shipped from BH today (August 15). I ordered it May 5.

90
Canon General / Re: Gear Realities
« on: August 14, 2014, 05:17:54 PM »
Nice summary, with one glaring omission…you completely forgot to discuss the gear considerations for cat photography!

 ;)

Not to mention book plagiarism photography, which requires pro high FPS bodies, super zoom lenses, and third party speedlights.

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 29