Messages

61

Software & Accessories / Re: A Q? for landscape photographers about filters

« on: March 28, 2012, 10:12:26 AM »

I haven't played much with 'digital' ND grad effects, but I agree with those that say once you blow the highlights, you can't recover them.  If you're at that point, you're going to have to merge images or mess with HDR.  I think your investment is a good one for landscape.

One of the most popular HDR software programs is Photomatix.  There is a demo version for you to download and experiment with.  Also, know that it has a 'ghost removal' tool, so you can highlight areas of movement; it's limited as I recall, I think it chooses one of the 3 moving images for you.  I haven't investigated it much though. 

I agree, it takes a bit of effort to make HDR's natural-looking, but it can be done. 

FYI, I have the Singh-Ray Vari-ND.     It can cause vignetting at the wide side of some WA lenses, especially the wide of of my 10-22 EF-S, my most-used lens.  Also, I've found I get blotchy spots when I crank up the filter to around 8 stops, and from googling, that seems universal.  So if you get one, just know you probably will actually have around 7 usable stops, +/-  I still like it, much easier than carrying around several different ND filters and screwing them on/off.  They do make a thin ring mount version; I don't think it has threads so you can put a standard lens cap or any more filters in front of it.

You may also run into vigentting with Lees Filter holders/Cokin holders with wide angle lenses, although there are wide-angle versions of both (some take a hack-saw to the Cokin holder).

You mentioned using Vari-ND and circular polarizers.  Well, I was shooting a waterfall with the Vari-ND, and noticed a bit of a rainbow showing up.  I slapped on a Singh-Ray circular polarizer. While I was adjusting, I accidentally turned the Vari-ND to its max and got an interesting effect.  This is with no adjustment beyond resizing for upload. 

62

Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: A couple of questions about tripods.

« on: March 27, 2012, 01:19:34 AM »

Yeah, definitely don't want to trust your nice expensive rig to a $30 tripod. 

I also sometimes shoot at the ocean, and was worried about corrosion and other issues.  I've had a page bookmarked about tripod maintenance.  It says it's for Gitzo's specifically, but there's some good general information there too:

http://www.naturescapes.net/082004/gd0804.htm

I had also stumbled across this post about tripods and salt water, but honestly haven't read through the whole thing.  There may be some helpful tips in it though.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1001807

Gitzo makes a tripod specifically designed for ocean use (Gitzo Ocean Traveler), but I'm not sure it's worth the expense if you take steps to protect/maintain your tripod regularly.  Maybe if you're always shooting in the ocean, and find you can't avoid corrosion and problems otherwise?  I've never talked to anyone that had one of these though:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/631155-REG/Gitzo_GK1581OT_GK1581OT_4_Section_Carbon_Fiber.html

63

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Travel tripod help!!

« on: March 26, 2012, 10:14:00 PM »

The Benro Carbon, four section with ball-head comes in at ~3Lbs - very light. The Gitzo 1542T is 2.2Lbs but then you need to factor in a ball-head, say a Markins Q3T at .83 Lbs, then you would be up around ~3Lbs too.

Ah, good point, I didn't know there were some Benro's a) that light (the link I clicked on said 4.6 lbs, I think? and b) some came with a ball-head, so those are definitely factors.  I might have been able to save a bit!

64

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Travel tripod help!!

« on: March 26, 2012, 10:13:26 AM »

Here's another vote for the Gitzo traveler.  I was in the same boat, doing a lot of hiking and traveling.  I had bought a Manfrotto carbon fiber to save some money, but I quickly decided to save up for the Gitzo.  Now, lighter can mean more susceptibility to tipping due to wind if you're not careful, but it does have a hook on the bottom which I can hang weight (like my pack, or a plastic back with rocks from the trail) for stability, and if your 70-200 is one of the heavier versions, it may be worth using the tripod collar for center of gravity.  As someone said above, the best tripod is the one you have with you.  A heavier tripod is no use if you're not willing to carry it on your longer hikes.

I'm intrigued by the Benro, I don't know if that was out a couple of years ago when I bought my Gitzo, or if I just hadn't run across it in my research.  Judging by one of the links provided above it's almost twice the weight of the Gitzo traveler.  2 or more pounds difference; for many, that's probably fine, but everyone has different requirements depending on what else you're carrying, distance, fitness level, etc.  For me, 2lbs can be a lot when I'm out all day with 3 lenses, spare body, accessories, food, water, etc.

If you're also traveling a lot, I'd also check the collapsed height of your tripods you're considering.  First, remember, that's without the head, and factor that in, if you're lazy like me and don't want to be taking it off just to squeeze it into your suitcase/duffel bags/whatever.  My Manfrotto was just a bit too tall for my medium/small suitcases even without the head, which I didn't realize until I was packing for a trip.

65

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 Aberration Correction Has Done Wonders for My 24-105L

« on: March 24, 2012, 11:17:59 PM »

Thanks for sharing, I was wondering how effective that 5DmkIII feature would be.  I use a crop body and my 10-22 EF-S is my favorite lens, so of course I run into similar issues.  I was hoping if I moved up to a 5DmkIII & 17-40L/16-35L the issue would be reduced, so glad to hear it's at least somewhat effective!

66

EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price

« on: March 18, 2012, 05:30:52 AM »

It's a bit misleading; the guy said it was "5dMarkus the 3rd," but the name of the video specifies the 5dmark2, as well as the captions in the video itself. Of course, I suppose the mark3 may have the same moire issues, but from what I've read it's supposed to be improved.

The D800 looks way better there, but it doesn't seem fair that they seem to have shot the D800 from much closer in. Maybe if they had shot the D800 from farther out it would have had bad moire too?

you do thats why i have a 550d and a 7D, because im a Nikon troll

Your post reads as if you are unhappy with Canon and you would like to be with Nikon - so that would not be unreasonable.

Im because i was expecting a bit more from the 5d, especially if im using a 7d, it would be a small improvement.

oo yes i forgot, it seems that the moire is badass on the 5d compared to the D800 in video, well it seems that the best card the Canon had is not that good anymore:

Moire test of 5dMarkus the 3rd. vs the D800:

D800vs5Dmark2_moire/ISO.mov

67

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5D Mark III in Stock - BestBuy $ B&H???

« on: March 18, 2012, 04:58:08 AM »

My local shop just called me saying they'd have some Monday afternoon if I wanted to come in. 

I wonder if there's been a semi-secret loosening of the 'official' release date, in response to Nikon moving up their release date in reaction to Canon's announcement of the 5Dmk3's release date. 

At least, I read here somewhere that Nikon changed the D800 date to 3/16, although I don't know if any places actually have it yet.

68

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Chuck Westfall & the 5D Mark III

« on: March 13, 2012, 11:29:12 AM »

to quote Mr. Westfall:

"A new feature called Digital Lens Optimizer processes RAW images to achieve ideal optical characteristics for all types of optical aberration or diffraction, effects of a low-pass filter in front of a CMOS sensor, etc. This function improves image quality particularly in the image periphery in addition to the image center. This function is made possible because the entire design-through-manufacture process, for camera, CMOS sensor, EF lens, and DPP, is carried out entirely at Canon. Images are processed optimally using lens information in the image files (focal length, subject distance, and aperture) and lens data specially for the Digital Lens Optimizer. (However, the size of a .CR2 file will be two to three times larger after applying the Digital Lens Optimizer.) "

This feature has received very little buzz, but I find it quite fascinating. I'm very curious how effective it will be. Maybe it's a gimmick, maybe it's a legitimately useful feature. With the shipment date of 5DIIIs imminent, we shall see very soon

It caught my attention too.  Is he saying that it could, for example, correct for some of the edge of image deficiencies of UWA lenses like the 17-40L?  It can't magically make images sharp edge-to-edge of course, but possibly reduce CA and other issues?

69

EOS Bodies / Re: Hugely Disappointed In 5D III Price

« on: March 12, 2012, 10:42:36 AM »

Nikon does not make their own sensors. They buy them from Sony. Canon makes their own and I assume their prices would be lower then what Nikon pays. I don't know whats the reason for the Canons pricing. Maybe they really do not want to sell that many units at a loss.

I was thinking this could be the reason for the $500 cost difference, actually, or at least part of it.  Sony may have spent less $ than Canon on R&D for their sensor.  Plus I'm guessing they're using it themselves in their own cameras (or a variation of it?) and can recover costs from consumers that way, as well as selling to Nikon.  So to me it's possible what they're charging Nikon is less than Canon is trying to recover for both the R&D & manufacturing prices.  Just guessing, haven't seen anyone post any numbers.

70

Software & Accessories / Re: 5Dlll CF/SD

« on: March 12, 2012, 01:01:48 AM »

Here is another option:  http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=diesdcf&N=0&InitialSearch=yes

Get this and you only need to buy are SD cards.... and still have Dual slot capability in the 5d3

As someone who's got a lot of SD cards, I was hoping they'd add the SD slot for the 5DmkIII.  And i don't do video or long bursts so I'm thinking my SD's will be fine for now.


Thanks for the link, I've been thinking about picking one of those up if I upgrade to it!  I'm going on a big trip, would love to have the security of backup files.

71

EOS Bodies / Re: High ISO comparo: 5DIII vs. D800

« on: March 11, 2012, 12:39:39 PM »

Canon have provided a sample video with the 5D3 coupled to various EF L lenses, some of which was shot at ISO 3200 and some at ISO 6400 (see below). Now compare that to any preview Nikon D800 HD video that is available

Funny timing, I was just reading about the Nikon D800 promo video debacle.  Nikon's apparently admitted they used footage from at least a couple of people without permission for their video, one of which said he shot with a Canon 5DmkII (unless this is a fake story?).  In the comments section I see people pointing out more clips taken from non-D800 sources.  My apologies if this is old news for most.

http://wideopencamera.com/cameras/nikon-steals-canon-5d-mk-ii-footage-for-d800-promo-video/

72

Lenses / Re: Buying third party lenses, and which wide angle do you recommend?

« on: March 10, 2012, 03:22:31 PM »

I was talking about the 5d *mark1* which is ff but has lower mp than the current aps-c generation.

What I wanted to say is: It's easier to build an ultra wide lens for aps-c since due to smaller mirror size, the lens is nearer to the sensor than on full frame. This is only valid for ultrawide, on longer lenses it doesn't matter. So a full frame uwa lens needs more glass than the aps-c equivalent with the same coverage.

Result: Given a certain amount of money, an aps-c uwa lens built for that money will be better than a ff lens, since less good glass is better then more weaker glass. Mass production of the ff lens might reverse that of course, but it's a tendency why you'll see excellent reviews of uwa lenses on aps-c while reviews of uwa lenses on ff tend to be critic about (corner) sharpness.

Ah, I see, thanks for taking the time to explain it.  Guess I got my first smite just for asking, haha. 

73

Lenses / Re: Buying third party lenses, and which wide angle do you recommend?

« on: March 10, 2012, 01:26:35 PM »

What makes you say that? Is this just as in "ff is always preferable due to larger sensor size"? Afaik, one of the few advantages of aps-c is that it's easier to build uwa lenses, meaning that at the same price a ef-s lens will tend to have a higher iq than an ef lens. Thus, I cannot see how a uwa lens on a ff 5d1 will be preferable to one on a 7d

Interesting, I wasn't aware of that, but I'm relatively new to photography.  I use a T2i and 60D with a Canon 10-22mm...are you saying it's possible the IQ will be near, or perhaps better, than a 5Dmk2 and say, 17-40mmL?  I guess I may need to moderate my expectations if/when I move up to a FF camera. 

74

Software & Accessories / Re: looking for top-zipper messenger-like shoulder bag

« on: March 09, 2012, 11:10:10 PM »

I have a Vanguard UP-Rise 38 which I like.  Has a flap like a typical messenger bag, but also a top zipper.  I'm just not sure how water resistant it is, since you mentioned that.  It has some nice subtle features I've grown to appreciate, like the expandable zipper, removeable laptop padding, and the flap on the back that slips over a rolling suitcase handle

http://cameradojo.com/2010/03/29/vanguard-uprise-38-camera-bag-review/

75

Software & Accessories / Re: Looking for a new bag/backpack

« on: March 09, 2012, 11:02:34 PM »

Yet another vote for F-Stop bags, although, as others have mentioned, they're outside the range you mentioned.  I've had the Loka for over a year, and taken it on a lot of hikes/trips.  I like how the Loka fits into the overhead bin on planes, and will hold my tripod on the side, not the back like a lot of photo backpacks.