July 30, 2014, 04:19:28 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 - FunPhotons

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 27
16
I use it. I like separating out focus and shoot, not sure why. Throws off others when they pick up my camera though :)

17
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: ST-E3 Overheating?
« on: August 06, 2013, 05:34:45 PM »
Unlikely since it's just a RF transmitter. The misfiring seems more likely to be local RF interference would be my guess. Doing a spectrum/channel check might have been useful.

18
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS Update [CR2]
« on: August 06, 2013, 05:32:03 PM »
Lovely, I'm looking forward to it. I've been waiting for some three or four years. No rush, people advised "buy buy buy" on the current model, but I like getting lenses on the first rebate after they come out or sometimes before then. Anticipation is half the fun.

I think non push pull, the latest IS, better weather sealing and better IQ is a given. Oh and plus the annoyingly slightly changed white which won't match my slightly older 70-200 f/2.8.

19
EOS-M / Re: EOS M replaced my 5D kit
« on: August 06, 2013, 06:41:02 AM »
It seems like the DSLR is like a stick of dynamite. It will get a lot done if it is set up right, but that's difficult to do and is just as likely to blow up.

I don't find mine difficult to set up. Have you tried reading your manual?   ;)

How droll :)

What I mean by this comment is that with the DSLR, lenses, filters, tripod, color correction, flashes, modifiers, etc I'll usually go to great lengths to get mediocre pictures. And oftentimes using that specialized stuff leads to mistakes, like the time I had the reverse GND on for taking sunset pictures, then forgot it when a perfect picture of the family presented itself. Interesting to see their light legs and dark upper bodies - bang! If I just kept it simple and not tried to get a perfect shot of a sunset (which has been done a billion times before) then I could have some nice landscape shots and family shots (sure before you say it I can try and massage the shot in PS, but in that case in those circumstances I think the picture is probably lost).

Or messing with flashes, instead of just keeping it simple and using ambient, with maybe a little fill light I'll fiddle with three flashes, modifiers and ... often get worse lighting with odd shadows I'm struggling to control - bang!

Or I'll go out and about with one of my extreme lenses, like a UWA or a telephoto, and have a lens completely wrong for something else I'd like to take a shot of (like a family shot and all I've got is a UWA) - bang! Or I'll go out with just the 50 (which is still heavier than the EOS M and two lenses) and miss shots at the other extremes - bang!

Sure, before you all tell me how you can carry 60 lbs of equipment on your back and always get just the right setup, in time, for the circumstances you want to get the shot because you anticipated it 10 minutes before, that's great and good for you.  Hey maybe I'll get there too someday, I'd like to think so and it gives me a goal, as I'm certainly not selling my gear.

20
EOS-M / Re: EOS M replaced my 5D kit
« on: August 05, 2013, 08:39:58 PM »
It seems like the DSLR is like a stick of dynamite. It will get a lot done if it is set up right, but that's difficult to do and is just as likely to blow up. The EOS-M works better for for most shots. It will get them easily and simply, and will be there at your side for them all the time, but it won't move as much earth as the dynamite.

If I was shooting professionally I wouldn't give the EOS-M a glance, but you know I wonder if many or most of us non pro shooters are getting too much camera. Having said that I like having the full kit and still plan to use it, but maybe it will be more like the Mercedes that only gets driven on the weekend.

21
EOS-M / EOS M replaced my 5D kit
« on: August 05, 2013, 06:51:35 PM »
I got the M deal and have been using it for a few weeks, and just took it up for a trip to a family reunion up in a picturesque area. I have the three lenses for it including the new UWA which I had just received from Canada. Unusually I didn't bring my big DSLR which I pack into a Pelican case with all the lenses, filters, flashes, etc. Did I miss the DLSR? Not a bit.

No, it's not as good as, but it's good enough and comes in a tiny package is easy to travel with, plus it works with with existing accessories such as the GPS and flash units. I just brought the camera, three lenses and a single older 580ex flash and it covered everything I wanted. A chair worked for a tripod for the big family shot (and the single flash on top worked perfectly), and otherwise I never took the UWA lens off for everything I wanted. Normally I have to bring the DLSR and a compact camera or two whereas this covered all bases about as well.

Anyhow it seems to get me 90% of the way there, and is the last 10% really worth all that weight? Hmm ...

22
Canon General / Re: People that don't shoot in manual...
« on: July 30, 2013, 10:27:09 AM »
Seems strange to be annoyed at how other people like to shoot.

Anyhow, I usually shoot Av but have been wanting to go M for consistency and control. What is your procedure? Use the built in meter, by eye, or other?

23
EOS-M / Re: EF M 11-22 from Vistek
« on: July 28, 2013, 04:42:17 PM »
wow that's great to know!  i too use a 5D along with the 16-35 II and have been considering the 11-22 for the M

would it be too much trouble to see comparison images with the 5D vs M @ 11mm and 22mm (18mm and 35mm respectively FF)

many thanks in advance!

I did some test shots but they aren't useful. Both look the same, except the M exposes to the right. Without pixel peeping I'm not noticing anything much different in informal shots.

The M is now my favorite kit. I'm shooting the most with it as the combination of capabilities, IQ, features and size. Having a viewfinder is nice, especially when outside, but having a screen makes it great to shoot odd angles. Only problem is carrying it, I don't have a good solution for that.

24
EOS-M / Re: EF M 11-22 from Vistek
« on: July 27, 2013, 04:21:59 PM »
Got the lens, came in a couple days from the East to the West coasts.

Nice lens! Feels less "pointy" than the 18-55. It's not much but the slightly wider 55 versus 52 and slightly shorter length add up to make it seem more balanced and a better fit to the camera body. Of course that's the retracted size, when "deployed" it's much longer. Otherwise beautifully built like the other two lenses. I love the design of these lenses, totally sleek and minimalistic.

Pictures look great otherwise, as a package much nicer than my 5DmII + 16-35 (this is 18-35mm equivalent I believe). Haven't done extensive comparisons but the IQ of the 5DmII is of course better, but the 16-35 has distortions left and right compared to this one which seems to be pretty flat field across the board.

Combined with the 18-55 this is a killer combination. 

25
EOS-M / Re: EF-M mount lenses
« on: July 24, 2013, 06:28:12 PM »
My price reduced EOS-M is coming tomorrow with the 18-55 IS lens.  Would someone comment on image quality between the 22 and the lens I will be getting?

They're both good. I don't pixel peep. Got the 11-22 on the way.

The reason I didn't get the 18-55 is it's f/3.5-5.6. If it'd be f/2.8 throughout the focal range I'd definitely have gone with it, even if it was $50 or $100 more. f/2.0 on the 22mm is great, but I'd accept a bit higher cost and small increase in size for a good normal f/2.8 zoom.

Yeah, at 2.8 it would probably be more expensive than that and bigger?

I'm fine with the zoom, good walkabout lens. I also like the f/2 of the prime.

26
EOS-M / Re: EF-M mount lenses
« on: July 24, 2013, 05:18:12 PM »
My price reduced EOS-M is coming tomorrow with the 18-55 IS lens.  Would someone comment on image quality between the 22 and the lens I will be getting?

They're both good. I don't pixel peep. Got the 11-22 on the way.

27
EOS-M / EF M 11-22 from Vistek
« on: July 24, 2013, 01:53:35 PM »
My lens is shipping today to the U.S! I'll update with initial thoughts when I get it in 4-5 days.

These two lenses and the EOS M is a pretty potent small package I can take anywhere.

28
EOS-M / Re: EOS-M EXIF Screwup?
« on: July 22, 2013, 10:41:45 AM »
Ah, I'm viewing it in OS X Preview. I'll try looking at it using something else. Presumably the problem is in the Apple RAW library.

So this is interesting, what is actually stored in the EXIF - a number indicating the lens?

Yep, it's Apple's problem.  I see it, too, on a sample image downloaded from canon.jp - both in Preview and Aperture.  I've submitted a bug report to Apple.

FWIW, viewing the EXIF with exiftool (from Terminal) shows the lens correctly identified as the EF-M 18-55mm.

Interesting, exiftool must have its own database (so you need to keep updating it as new cameras and lenses are developed?)

I wonder what LR on OS X says? If anybody has it handy see what it says, or I can check later today.

29
EOS-M / Re: EOS-M EXIF Screwup?
« on: July 22, 2013, 09:36:35 AM »
Ah, I'm viewing it in OS X Preview. I'll try looking at it using something else. Presumably the problem is in the Apple RAW library.


So this is interesting, what is actually stored in the EXIF - a number indicating the lens?

30
EOS-M / EOS-M EXIF Screwup?
« on: July 22, 2013, 07:59:36 AM »
If you have the EOS-M with the 18-55 lens take a look at the lens EXIF information in a JPG shot. Do you see the following?

Lens ID: 4,143
Lens Info: 18, 55, 0, 0
Lens Model: Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM


What the hell? The Lens Info seems to tell the focal range, but did they program these with the wrong Lens Model information!?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 27