October 20, 2014, 05:01:50 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 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 171
496
EOS Bodies / Re: Is there something wrong with my 5D Mark III?
« on: July 28, 2014, 03:50:04 PM »
I suppose the newer cameras with a WB target on a colour wheel are much better than the older cameras that only allowed you to dial in WB on the Kelvin scale. On my 1Ds MkIII's when I put in a personally selected ºK value I get a zero tint value and no in camera way to change it. That's progress for ya.....  :)

Lightroom also displays the camera derived Tint value.

497
EOS Bodies / Re: Is there something wrong with my 5D Mark III?
« on: July 28, 2014, 03:18:20 PM »
I know WB is supposed to give you "true", even valued, white black and gray tones, but there is no doubt that in camera it doesn't, all my AWB tungsten shots have an orange colour, and I am happy with that...

AWB, like auto exposure, kinda seems to put you in the ball park most of the time, but it doesn't actually know what you are trying to do as a photographer.

Exactly.  Well, almost - orange really isn't in the ballpark with white, it's somewhere in the next town over.  I sometimes leave indoor shots a bit warmer than neutral, but I don't like them orange.

 :D Alright, maybe not orange, perhaps "warm", a few hundred degrees off for pure even tones.

But the tint issue in AWB is one I never really did get my head around, if WB just does blue to yellow, then tint, with green to magenta, is every bit as important, particularly for things like stadium gas lights and fluorescent lamps and the multitude of colours they now come in.

498
EOS Bodies / Re: Is there something wrong with my 5D Mark III?
« on: July 28, 2014, 02:41:56 PM »
As for the AWB result, what colour was the light? If it was tungsten then the Canon is a more accurate representation of the actual colour of the scene, the NIkon has removed the colour, take your pick.

Sorry, but it's auto white balance – the idea is to render a white/neutral object in the scene as white/neutral in the image, not to render it as 'the actual color of the scene'.  Under tungsten light, AWB on most Canon bodies will render a white object as orange.  That's a WB fail (even if it's by Canon's design - they should put that tweak into a Picture Style, not AWB).

I have found that to be the theory, but not the execution. Certainly all bodies seem to handle AWB differently, often the same body in the same situation will produce different WB levels in a sequence. Also, WB is only one part of the WB control, Tint is the other.

When I shoot tethered I can do an in camera custom WB and it looks good, if I then go into DPP whilst tethered I can re WB that image with the additional Tint control and it shifts, sometimes quite a lot.

I know WB is supposed to give you "true", even valued, white black and gray tones, but there is no doubt that in camera it doesn't, all my AWB tungsten shots have an orange colour, and I am happy with that, maybe it is just the  difference between the Tungsten temp and the actual colour if the bulbs I have used.

My first 1D actually had an exterior WB window that measured some ambient, it didn't rely on 100% TTL, I really liked the AWB on that camera but not so much since.

AWB, like auto exposure, kinda seems to put you in the ball park most of the time, but it doesn't actually know what you are trying to do as a photographer.

499
PowerShot Cameras / Re: Will the G17 have a 1" sensor?
« on: July 28, 2014, 02:17:26 PM »
Sony is hoping a couple if there cameras will sell???

The RX100 I, II, and III, have cannibalized S120, G17, and G1X II sales.

When is Canon going to produce a competitive model???

OR, when is Sony going to make a camera that doesn't cost the Sony corporation a fortune? Besides, do you have actual true sales figures for all those models?

500
EOS Bodies / Re: Is there something wrong with my 5D Mark III?
« on: July 28, 2014, 01:34:41 PM »
I AFMA'd the 50 1.4 to +4. I didn't AFMA the nikon. I didn't know Canons AWB was that poor - I actually assumed the opposite. Part of the learning curve I guess. So basically what you're saying is these results are in fact typical? I was kinda hoping they were isolated to my body - so I could send it for service again or sell it and take my chances on buying another.

There is probably nothing wrong with your gear, just your ideas of what a comparison is.

In defense of the 50 f1.4, which is as sharp as the 100L Macro at f5.6 ( http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=6&LensComp=107&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3 ), try them both stopped down.

As for the AWB result, what colour was the light? If it was tungsten then the Canon is a more accurate representation of the actual colour of the scene, the NIkon has removed the colour, take your pick.

501
Lenses / Re: Lenses in the 20mm range
« on: July 28, 2014, 01:21:06 PM »
With tripod use and a measured approach 17 TS-E without question. Shift is a very valuable interior technique and the 17 TS-E is unmatched in this field in the 135 format.

If you want AF, IS etc I wouldn't know.

P.S. Interior spaces that are "square", that is the four walls are at 90º to each other, you miss a huge amount of wall space on the two closest walls where the camera has to be a few inches off the corner. More than 94º is important for record type images.

502
CR should come up with some kind of way to host photographers of this caliber from time to time.

Video, Blog, or whatever.  I think it would be cool and really set CR apart from (and above) other rumor sites.

Absolutely agree with that idea.

503
"Size = Small = Not much improvement.
Gels = Neat = Not enough incentive."


Price = DOA

£120 is over $200, for a bit of plastic to stick on your flash that can be done better with a piece of 69c foam paper.

504
PowerShot Cameras / Re: Will the G17 have a 1" sensor?
« on: July 28, 2014, 11:23:24 AM »
I can't see Canon coming out with the S130 and G17 and having an outdated 1/1.7" sensor when Sony, Panasonic, etc are pushing forward with bigger sensors.

Probably not.

The G1X series is supposed to be the crossover larger sensor P&S, also that lens speed is very fast, it would make the lens much bigger than the 140mm f2.8 on the G16, so a substantially bigger camera.

Why not? Canon play by their own tune. Sony are churning out different cameras in the hope that a couple actually sell, FF mirrorless, fixed lenses on FF cameras, three FF versions of their A7 while they lose more money than their core insurance business can support; meanwhile Panasonic are playing the out video feature game, but both are throwing huge amounts of money into a market that is in a terminal death spiral. P&S's are not the cash cow they were just a few short years ago.


The two main selling feature points of P&S's is size and price, now phones take basically the same pictures for "free", which kills price, size is it, it seems to me Canon are happy with their camera sizes.

506
PowerShot Cameras / Re: Will the G17 have a 1" sensor?
« on: July 28, 2014, 10:50:47 AM »
Probably not.

The G1X series is supposed to be the crossover larger sensor P&S, also that lens speed is very fast, it would make the lens much bigger than the 140mm f2.8 on the G16, so a substantially bigger camera.

507
Can you put a 100% crop of the worst bit, and another of a not as bad bit illustrating exactly what you mean in line?

I'll happily have a look if I know what to actually work on.

508
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« on: July 26, 2014, 09:12:09 PM »
I mentioned this in the other thread with this diverting lens identification activity, but will mention it here as well.

I had a "perfect" score in identifiying photos where the 1.2 was used.  Of course, I jest a bit, as I picked only one image and got lucky.  I could just as easily have been wrong, but I wasn't  :P

Hmm, "Mr. 100%" is sounding like a more attractive name than "notapro" about now . . .  ;D

Hmm, "Lies, damn lies, and statistics." We can all make the numbers say what we want, my take is you got one right out of 24, so 4.16%, but what do I know?

candc's new example images illustrate why I really don't like the 1.2 so much of the time, you have to be so very careful of background objects. I have circled the areas in two of your images that I, personally, find very distracting.

Obviously these things are all personal preference, but I found this kind of distracting element in 1.2 images far too often, I'd rather a fractionally slower and arguably less "sharp" lens that doesn't do this anywhere near as often. People that shoot with uncluttered backgrounds, or who have more control over the direction of their shots can certainly get the best out of the 1.2 between f1.2 and f1.8-2, however I prefer a lens that is far more flexible than that.

509
Lighting / Re: Flash Zoom - Difference in Stops?
« on: July 23, 2014, 11:37:49 PM »
24mm - GN28m = f2.8 @ 10m and 100 iso
70mm - GN50m = f5.0 @ 10m and 100 iso
200mm - GN60m = f6.0 @ 10m and 100 iso

Therefore:-

 24mm - 70mm  = 1 & 2/3 stops
 70mm - 200mm = 1/2 stop

510
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
« on: July 23, 2014, 09:10:53 PM »
So the answer.

Three lenses, all Canon 50's the 1.8, the 1.4 and the 1.2L.

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 171