January 28, 2015, 07:37:20 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 - privatebydesign

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 203
46
Lenses / Re: 17-40 ---> 16-35 f4
« on: January 22, 2015, 06:10:31 PM »
I use the $2,000+ 17TS-E almost every day, it is lauded as the best ultra wide lens made by Canon, I recently got a new 16-35 f4 IS for $999. At 17mm the zoom has every bit as much resolution as my TS-E and the contrast is much better.

The 16-35 f4 IS is a very very good lens with sharpness and contrast that rivals the very best available, throw in IS, the 77mm filter thread, and the keen price, I am more than happy with the purchase.

i will be getting the 17TSE I know its a super good glass but since you own it is the 16-35 f4 a better buy. I will not be switching a prime for a zoom thou.

They are very different lenses that do different jobs, but as a 17mm 'prime' the 16-35 f4 IS beats the pants off the 17TS-E. Of course if you need tilts and/or shifts then the 16-35 is useless!

After selling my 16-35 f2.8 MkI and using the 17TS-E as happily as I was I wasn't actually planning on replacing my ultrawide zoom, but after seeing it on CPW for $999 I thought I'd give it a go and I am very happy that I did, the IQ from it is staggeringly good and the functionality with the zoom, weatherproofing, AF, IS etc just makes it a supremely good package. I know it is really the 17-40 replacement, and as such it is a large cost increase, but to my mind it is worth every penny and some.

The 17TS-E does stuff the 16-35 never will, but unless you really need that functionality then the zoom is a vastly better buy. And unless you must have the 17 fov I'd recommend the 24TS-E over the 17 any day.

47
That is not to say that an image cannot be enhanced by some colour grading,  it absolutely can, but for me the best starting point is a neutral raw file.
Is there such a thing as a "neutral raw file"?  I had understood that in-camera white balance settings are only applied during the conversion to JPG and that RAW is RAW.  But, RAW files do include a thumbnail JPG which will reflect the WB settings (primarily for the LCD).

You are right, RAW files do not contain a setting to make the WB 'neutral', they have a tag to tell the rendering program what WB was used or chosen, but that is a completely different thing.

On another note, whilst Tinky took exception to the way he read my comment, regarding WB we are actually on the same page, nearly. There is a 'correct' WB setting, and that is what I called 'true' WB, that is one where blacks, whites and greys are rendered neutral, he then said that file can be 'enhanced via grading' in post, which is entirely subjective, whereas I just used the term 'subjective'. Rendering blacks, whites and greys as neutral is not subjective, processing a file to actually convey the scene in a realistically atmospheric manner is (and we do that far more often than process for 'neutral'). You do not have to do the first before doing the second.

48
Lenses / Re: 17-40 ---> 16-35 f4
« on: January 22, 2015, 04:56:52 PM »
I use the $2,000+ 17TS-E almost every day, it is lauded as the best ultra wide lens made by Canon, I recently got a new 16-35 f4 IS for $999. At 17mm the zoom has every bit as much resolution as my TS-E and the contrast is much better.

The 16-35 f4 IS is a very very good lens with sharpness and contrast that rivals the very best available, throw in IS, the 77mm filter thread, and the keen price, I am more than happy with the purchase.

49
Wow. I've been looking to get a 24" large format printer for a while. I keep looking at older models of Canon and Epson wide formats....but at less than $1300, the iPF670 is a steal. O_o

Are these geared for photo printing?

From the description in the announcement, it sounds like it's geared more toward office environments (i.e. not the best photo performance). The shorter model number (compared to, say, the IPF6400) and the lower price seem to indicate that it's not in the same class as Canon's wide format photo printers.

Anyone else wondering the same thing?

I'm not wondering. They are not photo printers.
They did mention enlargements...last.  Enlargements of photos off the web, I presume ;)

"These models support a variety of applications including: posters, presentations, technical documents, drawings, company announcements, and enlargements."

 :) Maybe....

They are five colour ink sets, so keep dreaming those that want a band new state of the art wide gamut ink set 24" photo printer for $1,300.

50
Wow. I've been looking to get a 24" large format printer for a while. I keep looking at older models of Canon and Epson wide formats....but at less than $1300, the iPF670 is a steal. O_o

Are these geared for photo printing?

From the description in the announcement, it sounds like it's geared more toward office environments (i.e. not the best photo performance). The shorter model number (compared to, say, the IPF6400) and the lower price seem to indicate that it's not in the same class as Canon's wide format photo printers.

Anyone else wondering the same thing?

I'm not wondering. They are not photo printers.

51
I don't need much additional features, its quite good. The gap from LR4 to LR5 wasn't big either. And i didn't buy it, because I got it "for free" from Canon for my 5D3.
I would only consider to buy LR6, if
- its standalone, I will never ever use a cloud based service for my workflow, i don't want to upload something anywhere...
- its significantly faster. My catalog and the photo import folder is already on a Samsung 850 Pro SSD. Ok my CPU isn't the best anymore, but it should be at least 100% faster... especially the spot removal tool. If you have 5 of them in the picture, its much slower than before... and then add another 5...
- i could use the second monitor better. The current way of use a second monitor isn't very good, i.e. compare images, see a zoom range while edit on the one and the full image live on the other etc....
- 64bit only is quite ok, its a while, since I use such an OS (7) the first time... about 5 years i think. And this is good, I hate the double download package with 1 GB every update, and I throw away the half download of it anyway! I know what 64 or 32bit is, why can't i load only the 64bit version now...

And nobody will ever accuse you of getting your facts straight before posting knee jerk rubbish.

LR, and PS for that matter, are NOT cloud based services, the application and all image files, catalogs, libraries etc etc are on your computer and you do not need an internet connection for it to work, well it needs to be connected once every 90 days to verify the license, and all Adobe products have had 'phone home' checks running for years. You never have to upload anything anywhere to run the CC version of LR other than an anonymous user name and password, just the same as you do to post here.

52
EOS Bodies / Re: Global Shutter Coming to Canon DSLRs? [CR1]
« on: January 22, 2015, 12:53:32 PM »
If Canon have a true global shutter working on a CMOS sensor then I will be getting the 1DX MkII on release. That is a significant technological improvement and will sidestep some flash limitations.

53
@DFM: thanks for the information. As you are posting here, would you also have some information as to whetehr LR 6 will be offered also as one-time purchase license - or only as cloud service (CC)?

The question is of significant importance to me. I do like LR a lot, but will not move to a cloud-based rental scheme. If LR 6 comes as CC version only, I will either revert back to Canon DPP or migrate to Capture One.

I also have a license for PS CS5 but don't like the UI at all, so I am not using it and am also not interested in the LR/PS combo offer on CC.

I well understand people not wanting to subscribe to CC, but to call the model "a cloud-based rental scheme" is laughably inaccurate, and is, I suspect, part of the resistance to it.

The software is neither cloud based nor a rental scheme. If it had been sold to the photography community as a stand alone downloaded program (which it is), and a subscription payment service (which it is) instead of a pay for it all upfront once and upgrade when you get a new multi thousand dollar camera.

Adobe have stated several times their intention to maintain LR as a stand alone product.

Improvements I would like/need in LR are mostly file based, for instance, why in gods name can't LR read .psb files? That is a stupid oversight, I don't want LR to replace Bridge for all graphics work, but basic image files created by PS should be readable by their premium image cataloging software. I'd also like the ability to edit grad filters, why can't we just have an erase brush to rub the grad filter off certain areas of the image?

54
The first thing you have to realise, WB is subjective. If you do a 'true' WB at an event and then process all your images to that value then you often find all the character from the event disappears, effectively neutral white has no ambiance so dialing in a perceived WB value (the subjective part) will better replicate the feel of the event. Obviously the type and style of event will dictate how much ambiance you want to leave in.

The Passport will not help with WB values in and of itself, but it will help with colours, sometimes dramatically.

Dual Illuminant Profiles are created in post by a profile editor, I find Adobe's free editor much more user friendly, intuitive, and adaptable than the X-Rite version that ships with the Passport.

What it does is take your reference shot and creates an accurate colour adjustment profile from it, you can specify the WB value for that profile (the most accurate for that one WB value, a Single Illuminant Profile) or you can create a Dual Illuminant Profile (DIP), to make the DIP the profile editor automatically creates two base readings within the same file, normally at 6,500ºK and 2,850ºK, it then interpolates the changes to each colour channel within the profile so as to give you a more accurate colour rendition even when you choose a different WB to the 'as shot' value. DIP's are the most often profiles made and used.

After you use the Passport and make the profile you apply that profile, but then still choose a WB value, either to your choice or direct from one of the various 'white' chips on the card. These two adjustments can then be applied to all the relevant files in one click.

55
Lighting / Re: Profoto B1 vs. Phottix Indra
« on: January 20, 2015, 10:25:37 AM »

The Einstein, which I own, and the Profoto B1 are entirely different tools with vastly different functionality, the Einstein will never do ETTL or HSS. Compare the Einstein to the D1 500 for $1,219 and you are talking some sense.

The Einstein may never do ETTL, but it will do HSS... In fact almost any mono light or pack can.  Just use anything like the Odins, Flex TT5, etc.    I have shot both my Dynalite and Photogenic PL1250DR lights on Photogenic Ion battery pack and PocketWizard Flex TT1/TT5 set up at 1/2000

And the Einstein to Profoto is not a bad comparison either.  The Einstein's have one of the shortest flash duration out there.... I believe the Einsteins are even shorter than when I run a Dynalite M2000 pack with the 4080 Bi-Tube flashes, which has something like 1/3500 of a flash duration and the Einstein I think was closer to 1/4200

It takes some tweaking, but with the PocketWizard Flex, not only can you fire studio strobes at shorter than 1/250, but you can also set it up so not only do you fire off your strobes, but also a second camera and have it all synched.

Hypersync is not HSS, Paul C Buff has said he is not interested in making the firmware to enable Einsteins to do HSS, and with their IGBT circuitry they should be very capable of doing. Your Dynalite and Photogenic are not doing HSS, they are just flashing before the first curtain starts to travel and relying on the flash pulse taking long enough to cover the full travel of the second curtain, that is just timing and you are getting an uneven exposure, it is impossible not to, how noticable that is in any particular shot can be questioned and will vary with shutter speed, flash power, and aperture, but  HSS is very different from the PocketWizard fakie, Hypersync.

Sure the Einstein and Profoto can both do the same things, flash, until you want or need HSS and/or ETTL.

If you are going to compare monoblocs, as I said, the D1 is the Profoto to compare the Einstein to. You need to plug them both in and neither does HSS or ETTL.
I think HSS is way more demanding on strobe in terms of durability and consistency. Some said Einstein was not suitable for HyperSync as it has too a short flash duration. It would create banding. I guess same goes to it's HSS applications.

Maybe, but at lower powers it would just have to pulse more often than a strobe with a longer duration flash, but they are very capable of doing low power high repetitive flashes all day long. I could see issues with people doing repeated high output HSS flashes, but that could be limited in a firmware anyway.

I really like my Einsteins, and they do their job very well, but as I have matured I have come to view lighting equipment with the same use examples we define lenses, sure some people are very happy with one lens and that is it, other people have two or three and cover their needs with that, I find lighting the same, some people are quite happy with no lighting equipment or just a simple on camera flash, others shoot a variety of subjects and styles that demand not just different modifiers but different lights that give them additional functionality and have different capabilities.

When I do end up getting B1's they will supplement the 600-EX-RT's and the Einsteins, they won't replace them. They are all different tools that can do completely different jobs. Just like a 16-35 and a 70-200.

56
Lenses / Re: New Rebel & EF 11-24 f/4L USM Coming Shortly
« on: January 19, 2015, 11:52:29 PM »
I have often framed to crop with the 15mm fisheye, and I remember seeing a very cool wedding image by Joe Buissink, he shot it with the 14mm and insisted he had needed to use that lens. The couple were in the bottom of the frame with fireworks bursting in the sky above. It didn't make sense to me until he showed the original file, the couple were actually standing on the roof of a van and they were just below the frame center pre crop, so when it was cropped they had no distortion but he had the fov to include the fireworks too, it was a perfect example of imaginative pre visualization and mitigation of ultra wide projection distortion.

There's a slider for that in Lightroom.

Yes and that slider is so generic and focused on rectilinear corrections it is all but useless most of the time for me. I do highly recommend a little plugin called Fisheye Hemi, it is the only ps plugin I use regularly, though the newer ps lens field corrections are so powerful even it has become nearly obsolete. The only other player in the game for high quality corrections is the dreaded DxO, their anamorphic corrections are pretty amazing, and very time consuming to replicate well in ps.

57
Lenses / Re: New Rebel & EF 11-24 f/4L USM Coming Shortly
« on: January 19, 2015, 11:08:39 PM »

Since the slightest tilt up or down of the lens (at 11mm) is going to show massively converging/diverging verticals, then using such a lens is going to take some real care and thought about what the images are for and how they are to be cropped or even adjusted in PS.

Well that can be corrected by 'reverse' tilting the camera, and, as you well know, the shorter the focal length the less angular tilt you need for the same effect, if Canon stuck to their traditional 8º-8.5º of tilt you would have the same effect as over 17º of tilt on the 24mm, that leaves plenty of tilt to do the correction.

I understood the convergence to be a function of the pretty extreme retrofocus designs of the 17 and 24 and not an intrinsic function of tilt/swing, certainly the 17 displays the effect much more than the 24 and an 11mm would be even worse.

I was thinking of the convergence/divergence of verticals you get with any wide lens, which is just a feature of going to wider fields of view rather than lens design. In this instance, I should have said "tilt up or down of the camera" since I didn't mean anything connected with lens/camera movements.

With the EF14 it's very noticeable how trees lean inwards if you move the horizon much below mid frame, that and clouds can take on very different shapes.

Perhaps one reason I notice this so readily, comes from using wide and shift lenses hand held, something I find makes me pay that bit more attention to composition. If I'm visiting somewhere new on a job, the tripod comes out for the paid work, but if just 'looking around' I'm happy to have just the 8-15, TS-E17 and 24-70 with me - the tripod stays in the car...  I'd go so far as to say that if you're learning to use a wide TS-E lens, then (occasionally) ditching the tripod is a great way to get a much more immediate 'feel' for how what's in front of you is going to be represented (YMMV ;-). 

If anyone is curious about some of these differences in view, this stitched shot is from my review of the EF8-15 and is taken with the TS-E17 shifted up/down by 12mm, giving a field of view not dissimilar to this rumoured new zoom at 11mm



There are views of the same scene with the EF8-15 and EF14 in the review (about half way down)
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/lenses/canon_ef8-15f4l.html

Ah, yes, that makes much more sense, sorry I misunderstood.

I have often framed to crop with the 15mm fisheye, and I remember seeing a very cool wedding image by Joe Buissink, he shot it with the 14mm and insisted he had needed to use that lens. The couple were in the bottom of the frame with fireworks bursting in the sky above. It didn't make sense to me until he showed the original file, the couple were actually standing on the roof of a van and they were just below the frame center pre crop, so when it was cropped they had no distortion but he had the fov to include the fireworks too, it was a perfect example of imaginative pre visualization and mitigation of ultra wide projection distortion.

58
Lenses / Re: new TS-e lenses ?
« on: January 19, 2015, 10:37:25 PM »
I would buy a 90 pretty much on release, I do a good amount of product photography and really like the movements, I currently use the 100L Macro. I'd be very interested in a 45 too for larger products and architecture.
The current 90 TS-E is my go-to lens for most of my product shoots. If you're doing even a modest amount of product work, why wait for the update? It could be years away. The current 90 TS-E is a fantastic lens which I honestly wouldn't bother replacing with an updated L 90mm TS-E. To achieve a unique look, for some close work I use the 90 with extension tubes, though most close work is done with the brilliant f/2.8 100mm L Macro. Great lens.

-pw

Because I don't need it, if I get a shoot that needs it I'll get one, but most of my product work is easily done without movements with the 100L, they are mostly 6"-18" in size and three dimensional so magnification and tilt are not especially problematic. But the MkII TS-E's are so good I couldn't put off getting a MkII 90. Besides I see no point in buying a TS-E lens without independent tilt and shift rotation, especially for the product work I do, half of it is landscape and half portrait orientation and I'd spend half my time undoing those four screws.

59
Lighting / Re: OPEN BOX PHOTTIX MITROS+ FLASH FOR CANON AND PHOTTIX ODIN.
« on: January 19, 2015, 09:13:09 AM »
Hi Surapon,

I am sure the lack of comments has nothing to do with the fact that the flashes are made in China, if we all stopped using items made there then we would all be in a terrible state, besides, Apple products are know for their quality and have been made in China for years.

With regards the Phottix setup. When I upgraded from my 550EX's to the 600-EX-RT system the only other radio system I seriously considered was the Odin system, unfortunately at that time they didn't have the Mitros+ and I really wanted to get away from the separate triggers with the additional batteries etc that they entail. However now Phottix have come out with the Indra that fully integrates with the Odins, and the much nicer interface with the Odin II than the ST-E3-RT, I think if I were to make the decision to upgrade today I'd go for the Phottix.

60
Lighting / Re: Canon 5D Mk III pre flashing.
« on: January 19, 2015, 08:58:09 AM »
Some great suggestions here, and as Neuro said, pre flash is a necessary function of ETTL.

So, switch to manual, or (as Will so fully said) get a Canon EOS film camera and shoot TTL, or get the 600-EX-RT (or any other flash with a thyristor cutoff) and shoot in thyristor mode.

Another option, and the last I can think of, is to use a long shutter speed and second curtain sync. The average human blink takes 300-400 milliseconds, so use a 1/2 second shutter speed, which isn't an issue if you are shooting in controlled situations as the flash duration is your effective shutter speed, and the blinker will have opened their eyes again by the time the true flash fires.

But truthfully, manual flash is the way to go.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 203