December 21, 2014, 06:41:19 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 - Brendon

Pages: 1 [2] 3
16
Canon is NOT making any more money from this move as they aren't changing their wholesale prices.  This is a move to protect small businesses and brick and mortar stores.  The internet stores can afford to cut margins on Canon gear much more than your local retailer because of their lower overhead and massive sales numbers. 

Look at it this way...how many stores in your city actually carry (in stock) a 5diii or 1dx?  The local stores will only  order one for you because the inventory costs on the big ticket items is hard to justify if the margins are cut down by internet pricing.  One advantage (only one for the consumer) of this move by Canon is that you might see more local retailers carrying high end gear. 

Unfortunately for the B&M stores, there will still be an advantage to ordering online to avoid state sales tax (in most states).

For those crying supply/demand or free market this isn't any different than the government setting price floors on milk.  The Government recognized that a free market would result in the obliteration of small farms in the US.  Canon has realized (rightfully so) that internet sales were endangering every brick and mortar store sales. 

For those who want to blame someone about this look away from Canon to the big box electronics stores. I suspect that it wasn't the small business mom and pop camera store that made this happen.  It was most likely the larger retailers (best buy, wolf etc) that were putting the pressure on Canon to change the policies.   

17
Software & Accessories / Re: Video card advice, please!
« on: October 04, 2012, 05:17:50 PM »
Quick answer is no, there shouldnt be any difference in color output from video cards.  The color settings are all software coded and you should be able to tinker with them in the video card utility, so i would start there and make sure you didnt set something weird.

I'll try that. All I did was unplug the old monitor, and plug in the new one with an HDMI cable. I didn't mess with the video card utility at all, but the calibration is all f'd up now.

Quote
As for video card suggestions, i need to know your price range and what you except to do on it to be able to help.

Photo editing is the only thing I'll need a good video card for. I'm not a gamer, nor do I watch movies on my computer. I don't have a firm price range, but if a decent card is going to cost more than $250, I'll probably just buy a new computer with a good video card already in it.

Photo editing is not very video card intensive, it relies more on your processor power.  So really any midrange card (150$ max) should be more than enough for your purposes.  So for ati something like a 6770 or 7770, for nvidia something like 460 or 550 (sorry, but im not too familliar with the new 6XX series of cards so cant really comment).  The one thing you have to be sure of, as the last guy commented on, is the power draw of these cards, make sure your system requirement is less than your power supply.  Another thing to watch out for, some video cards require 2 pci-e power connections, so make sure your power supply has an extra if you choose one of those cards.

BruinBear - You are spot on with your comment, just about any video card with a DVI/HDMI output is going to be good enough for straight photo editing.  You are MUCH better off spending extra money on RAM and an SSD for photo editing to speed up how fast your photos load and how fast edits can be accomplished. 

The question you have to ask is if you want to run dual monitors (dual dvi) or edit video.  If either of these are the case you will have to pony up for the better cards. 

Just for reference, I'm running a quad core i7 with 16GB RAM and running on the embedded i7 video card.  1080 IPS monitor works great and with color calibration you would never know the difference from a more expensive graphics card.


18
Canon General / Re: How do you sell your gear?
« on: September 27, 2012, 07:02:02 AM »
I have used Amazon marketplace many time for selling gear.  Just like ebay, you will lose a few percent for Amazon's cut but I've sold several lenses for very near new prices. 

19
Kelly Moore bags are very nice.  Considering they really do look and can function like a normal leather hand or messenger bag, the prices are lower than what you would pay for designer bags.  Some friends of mine have the "Thirst Relief Bag" and love it.  Benefits a good cause too ;-)

http://kellymoorebag.com/full.html/

20
Lighting / Re: Batteries for Canon EX 600 RT...
« on: September 01, 2012, 09:20:37 PM »
I use the Eneloops exclusively now. I have a mix of the new and old Eneloops (white vs blue) and find them much easier to work with because they do hold their charge well. As long as they haven't been sitting around for months I don't worry about charging the night before an event.

My understanding about the 15 min chargers is that they quickly decrease the battery capacities because of the heat that is generated during the charge. If you don't need to charge dozens of batteries right before an event, the long charge isn't really a big deal.

21

The larger issue is pattern noise. It starts to show up at 6400 on the Mk II, and it's dominant at 12800. It's pretty much unfixable at that point, short of heavy duty NR software. That's where I get my "speed limit" from. Noise doesn't bother me, as long as it's random or appears so. If it looks like film, or can be made to look like film, I'm fine with it.

Others will have a lower tolerance. I suspect most of them never shot high speed photographic film like I have. ;)

12,800 is still usable... I think :)

following photos were taken at ISO 12,800 with 5D3...




rhommel - What NR software did you use?  Did you purposely desaturated and reduce contrast?  Might be the crappy monitor I'm using right now too!  I personally (not be critical just backing up my point below) would have pulled the exposure up a bit on the top image.  This gets very iffy if you shoot at 12800.

I shot my first wedding with the 5Diii two weeks ago and found that 3200 was my comfortable limit because with flash and low light photography I find the need to pull the exposure and shadows up on a regular basis.  You could argue that this is my fault and I should be exposing farther the to right but shooting manual and trying to keep the camera ready to swing around to any angle in the reception hall keeps me from pushing things too far on the manual settings.  If you clip highlights, they are gone and that can happen easily at these ISOs and the changing lighting from the DJ's and videographers.  Don't get me wrong, I shot a decent number of 6400 shots of people dancing so that I could speed up the shutting but keep the background bright but these shots tend to be forgiving in the sense that they have a lot of variation in them (light and dark).  I would hold important shots like the first dance and cake cutting to 3200 and below to make sure that you can recover a little in post. 

The fact that Auto ISO locks the camera at 400 when a flash is turned on is a death nail in my opinion.  Personally, I like flash subjects to balance more with the background which usually means ISO 1600 and up for wedding receptions.  Lots of manual set remote flashes can get the background exposure up as well but that is very dependent on the venue and how many flashes and flash stands you can afford!

22
Lenses / Re: Flat lens offers a perfect image
« on: August 27, 2012, 12:59:59 PM »
Not to get to nerdy here, but it looks like this is basically a plate of material with graduated index of refraction.  These have been built in the past for different applications.  The big problem with this is that there is no way to achromatize this type of lens.  For operating in the C-band (comms band) it doesn't hurt you too bad because most signals are very narrow (like for IR imagery) but if you tried to push broad spectrum light through this (visible light) the colors will separate badly.  Essentially all of the color bend at a slightly different angle through the lens creates the purple and yellow fringing that is often seen in high contrast situations.  If nothing is done to correct for the chromatic aberation, you get a smearing/bluring of the image that is much worse than the little fringes.

23
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III Firmware?
« on: August 22, 2012, 12:30:26 PM »
I really hope they are working on the AF lighting fix.  I used my 5Diii for the first time last weekend at a wedding and the non-lit point drove me nuts in the dark reception hall.  It was especially bad trying to use AI focus with people dancing. 

If they have a problem with the exposure meter getting tricked by the lighted points, I would be perfectly happy with them only lighting up in manual mode!!!

24
Sports / Baltimore Grand Prix Question
« on: August 22, 2012, 12:22:47 PM »
Did anyone on the forums attend last year?  I can't find anything on the website about camera restrictions and I'm curious if I'm going to get turned away if I show up with a 5D and 70-200 2.8. 

Thanks in advance!

25
I think this is something you can do with Magic Lantern.  Just have to wait it out until they officially release it for the 5Diii!

26
Portrait / Re: First time at wedding - feedback please
« on: August 16, 2012, 01:25:57 PM »
Nice work for a first wedding.  It looks like you drew the short straw with the venue as well.  While the wood work and lighting sets a nice tone and background, the wooden ceilings make it near impossible to get a decent bounce for a flash. 

I really like the dancing picture.  You may try to warm and brighten the couple up with a brush in photoshop/lightroom.  That is a hard lighting situation and some flash gels (very cheap) would have helped a lot to match the color temp of the incandescent lights.   Also, if you weren't shooting at max aperture, it could help to separate the couple from the background and add a little light as well.  It looks like you either pulled up the exposure on the picture or added a bunch of contrast/clarity.  You might want to back off a bit from the contrast to see if you can get some of the DR back.

Thank you so much! It's very usefull advice, just one question, if I may: you said i should use flash gels. I not shure, do i need to use warm gel or something cooler?
Thanks again very much!

I agree with the other poster that a 1/2 CTO would be the best for that particular situation.  Beware though, that this will cause the out of camera photos to be overly warm if you use auto white balance because it will be set to match the un-geled flash color temperature.  You can do a manual white balance but will most likely have to touch each photo in post to get it just right.

I also agree with the post related to getting things right in the camera so that there is little work needed in post.  If you are taking 1000s of photos at a wedding, you certainly don't want to have to custom touch each one! 

27
Portrait / Re: First time at wedding - feedback please
« on: August 08, 2012, 03:43:17 PM »
Nice work for a first wedding.  It looks like you drew the short straw with the venue as well.  While the wood work and lighting sets a nice tone and background, the wooden ceilings make it near impossible to get a decent bounce for a flash. 

I really like the dancing picture.  You may try to warm and brighten the couple up with a brush in photoshop/lightroom.  That is a hard lighting situation and some flash gels (very cheap) would have helped a lot to match the color temp of the incandescent lights.   Also, if you weren't shooting at max aperture, it could help to separate the couple from the background and add a little light as well.  It looks like you either pulled up the exposure on the picture or added a bunch of contrast/clarity.  You might want to back off a bit from the contrast to see if you can get some of the DR back. 

28
The main obstacle to this idea is the readout time necessary for each of the pixels at 12 bits is too long.  So instead of sampling a little faster and maintaining the bit depth, sample MUCH faster but only sample 1 bit.  In essence, you run the the bias up so high on the transistor that you have an avalanche photo diode that triggers if it sees a photon ('1') or does not ('0').  The problem still persists that you need one hell of a ROIC to get you to the speeds that you need but the lane width decreases significantly (by 12x).  Other problem is dark and bias noise that will cause a "false 1" but it's not like you get a full 12 bits of info from a 12 bit array anyway.  The sampling speeds you would need to make sure that you are not saturating your sensor are pretty high, but when you get to the sweat spot it turns out that you need MUCH MUCH less light to make a sensor work this way and you would essentially have infinite dynamic range. 

 

29
Lenses / Italy Trip Lens Advice - wide angle
« on: May 30, 2012, 03:21:23 PM »
I will be taking my first trip to Italy late this summer and will be visiting  Rome, Florance, Chique Terre, and Venice.  I'm hoping to pack light and will be traveling with my 5Diii and 24-105L at a minimum.  I'm looking for some advice on a wide angle lens choice for the trip.

I would like to be able to capture good pics inside churches and in the small to large squares as well as the grand vistas like inside the coliseum.  I will not be traveling with a tripod so that will make panos much more difficult. 

I currently have the Canon 16-35L ii but I'm curious if this is the right choice.  I've been eyeing the sigma 15mm fisheye for some time and thought that this might be a better choice? 

My experience with the 16-35 with indoor and architecture shots is that perspective usually causes slanted walls and other distractions.  Would I really be much worse off with a fisheye?

Thanks in advance for the advice!

30
Street & City / Re: Fall in Pittsburgh
« on: May 29, 2012, 10:19:15 PM »
Love the shot!  I've never seen the city with fog like that. 

Pages: 1 [2] 3