Topics

16

5D MK III Sample Images / Birdarazzi shoots a hawk - June 23, 2012

« on: June 24, 2012, 05:41:21 AM »

Well, what can I say, A Hawk came calling yesterday (June 23, 2012) and stayed put on the branch near my house for over one hour and 8 minutes (or 143 snaps) - but who is counting? Well, I did! It was great to have a bird see me and assess that I was not a threat. Not since the times I shot the Black Kites three years back (at another location).

So! Here are the pics. Background. I had issues with the 5D3 and the 100-400 and needed to AFMA - which I have done several times - and this time it seems to have worked. Or so I believe... However, I am told that I am easily pleased and so I would like to have the CR community comment on the pictures. I have done NO post work on these. These are all OOTC JPEGs except that they are cropped and re-sized.









Edit: Lined thumbnails 6 to a row...

17

Software & Accessories / Is anybody using FoCal on a XP SP3 with 2GB of ram?

« on: June 13, 2012, 11:36:05 AM »

I figured I needed FoCal but the website says one needs 3GB for XP SP3. I am going to do AFMA on my lenses for the 5D3 so XP SP3 is fine. However, as I have just 2GB of ram I am not sure if it will run. I have posted a question on their forum but was wondering if anybody is running it on a 2GB XP machine.

Yes, I know the config is low I did not need more ram earlier so I stayed with 2gb.

18

Lenses / My 100-400 is Not focusing consistently specialy when the light is not optimal

« on: June 12, 2012, 11:56:48 AM »

My 100-400 is not focusing consistently specialy when the light is not optimal. I have done the MA three times now and I am not happy with the results. There does not seem to be a consistent behaviour if the light is not optimal. If I shoot a subject in sunlight, it is sharp and focuses correctly. When I shoot say a hawk in a tree with the sun at 11 o'clock and the sky seen through the branches, although the bird is clear and I shot the bird with centre point focus (and I am quite still - shot over 3000 shots of black kites with my rebel and the same lens) and I can swear I did aim right   the camera somehow does not focus on the bird...

When I shoot with my 24-105, the camera focuses correctly. So the camera does not seem to be at fault. It just occurred to me that I should probably clean the contacts. However, if that does not fix the problem, I am thinking of taking the lens to the Canon repair centre and have them look at it. The lens is almost 5 years old and has never been serviced.

Does anybody have any other suggestions? Has anybody experienced anything similar?

Look forward to your advice.

Thanks in advance.

19

Animal Kingdom / Went whale watching...

« on: May 05, 2012, 02:17:37 PM »

Hi,

Here are my pictures from last Sunday. Shooting with my 5D3 was fun. Here are a few shots. I still need practice shooting from a rocking boat 

Here are a few shots:

     




The links are:
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/8341/pg1c0985.jpg
http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/4623/pg1c0815.jpg
http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/3746/pg1c0747.jpg
http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/369/pg1c0667.jpg

20

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Going on a boat ride in LA - I have the 5D3 and 24-105L; need advise...

« on: April 24, 2012, 01:31:39 PM »

Hi, so I have taken my Rebel 300D to San Diego and went on a short trip in the water there (ocean water). I did not think much of the issues of "salt water damage" as I was sure I would not dunk it in the water. Well, guess what! I did not and it all worked out.

BUT now it is different. I am scheduled to go on a boat trip into the ocean from LA next Sunday. Now this will probably be a 2 to 4 hour trip. The "boat" will surely be bigger than the one in San Diego. BUT. Sorry, it seems I may have paid between $500 and $3500 too much for the camera and I would like to protect my investment - or camera - whatever. Since the camera is "weather sealed" and the 24-105L is a L lens, do I need to take any other external protective measures? Currently I am going with "No you do not need to...". So then the next question is: Do I need to do any "cleanup" after I get back to land (ie. hotel)? Would appreciate experience and theory.

Thanks in advance.

rpt

21

EOS Bodies / AIFocus works!

« on: April 08, 2012, 12:12:54 AM »

Ok, so I have been re-educating myself as the jump from the 300D to the 5D3 is bigger than I imagined (silly me!). So after figuring out how to shoot without a fill in flash  , I decided it was time to check out AIFocus. A dragonfly obliged by dashing back and forth overhead (above the terrace). I had 5 tries and one was decent. I would have had more I guess if I had set it for continuous shooting I would have got more keepers - I typically set it at one shot so this is a learning... Here it is.

22

Lenses / Looking for lens advise - Should I get he 18-200 or 15-85 or 18-135?

« on: March 21, 2012, 12:11:58 PM »

Hi, I am looking to purchase a new camera this year. It will be a 7D2 (if they release it - please, please, please...) or a 7D or a 70D or a 5D2 - don't have money for a 5D3...I am not a pro - never earned a cent from my hobby - never did try either...

If I get the 5D2, I will get the 24-105 or the 24-70. However, I think I will end up with a crop camera...

I have been shooting for the last 43 years with various cameras (300D, AE1 and a Russian MF in at order). Yes, I don't change cameras till they croak.  I shoot various things. Off late it has been birds, fighter jets, sports, cultural events, landscapes, panoramas, macro etc.

I have the 100-400L lens for its reach and find the 17-55 kit lens of the 300D to be limiting at the upper end. Hence I am looking for a different lens for the new camera.

I would prefer the 18-200 as it would cover most of my needs except for the times when I need to go to 400mm if the bird/plane is far away.

I was wondering if anybody had any first hand experiences on this lens that they would care to share.

The next choice of lens is the 15-85 as it starts wider and has USM. Also the gap between 85 and 100 I can ignore.

The 18-135 gives me a bit more reach.

I do not shoot too much in low light so I am not looking at the 2.8f lenses. They are also a bit out of my budget. May be I will get primes and not zooms for specific shooting later.


Any and all advise is welcome.