March 01, 2015, 08:01:40 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 - JerryKnight

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 13
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Firmware Coming Soon
« on: February 11, 2013, 12:54:24 PM »
anyone with high hopes that this FW update will bring a noticeable performance boost of the AF system?

I'm hoping this will be the case. I'm currently renting an M to try it out, and I can see where all the autofocus complaints are coming from. If you're comparing it to a point and shoot, it's fairly normal. If you compare it to a DSLR, it's almost comically slow.

Supposedly, it has the same built-in phase-detect pixels on the main sensor as the T4i. How quick is the live-view focusing on a T4i? Because the EOS M should theoretically be able to perform just as well.

Currently, it sure does act like a purely contrast-based system. Phase detection should be able to tell which direction it's out of focus, so it shouldn't have to hunt as much, but as much as the M is hunting around, it seems like it has no idea which way it's out of focus. Maybe a firmware update can adjust the balance phase and contract detection.

Still, if Fuji is able to get the AF performance the X100S has in the preview videos, it's a little disappointing that the M has to be so sluggish.

Lighting / Re: Professional Sports Lighting
« on: February 11, 2013, 02:30:06 AM »
Y'all are doing a really good job at stating the obvious. Of course, using any such system without permission is wrong. Of course, abusing it to the point of failure or damage is something you can be prosecuted for. Using it at all should get you kicked out, but if your goal is to abuse it, it would be a lot harder to find out who and where you are (a Plus2 in your pocket is hard to spot).

I think so much of the existing technology has dealt only with responsiveness, reliability, and range (alliteration! sounds like a marketing brochure) and nothing has really been done to prevent misuse. The PocketWizard frequency and code schemes seem to me to prevent accidental interference from non-PW sources. Nothing I've seen can prevent another PW (plus2 or otherwise) from using a setup, apart from obscurity, but that's not really effective against someone who is trying to use your system.

I wonder what it would take to make a flash system where each transmitter had some kind of secure code scheme. But any such system would definitely add some kind of lag to the flash activation, and it could only get delayed so much before it's not usable as a reliable flash system. Maybe a compromise would be a serial number on each transmitter that gets transmitted along with the sync signal. This wouldn't be 100% secure, and it would be a pain to train the receiver to accept new transmitters, but it would make misuse a lot harder to accomplish.

Lighting / Re: Professional Sports Lighting
« on: February 10, 2013, 10:55:28 PM »
I doubt there's anything illegal about taking over their house flash system. It could be considered breaking a rule, but I can't imagine a law you'd be breaking. The most they could do is make you leave, assuming they found out it was you. If you were legitimately shooting, you'd have to do it from your seat, because you don't have media credentials, and a spectator shooting with a PlusII is a little suspicious.

It's an interesting thought experiment though. What would facilities people do if spectators kept sabotaging their flash remote systems? Are there any commercial radio systems that have encryption or some other form of protection?

EOS Bodies / Re: Need seasoned advice - keep 5D Mark II or NO?
« on: February 09, 2013, 10:27:53 AM »
I'm something of a luddite - I figure that as long as my camera isn't the determining factor in my image quality, it doesn't need upgrading.

I don't think this is being a luddite; I think it's being practical and resisting the natural technolust we all have. It's a very important principle - Don't upgrade until you reach the limits of what you have.

If you're just getting into full-frame, you probably won't notice the difference between a 5D2, 6D, 5D3, or 1DX. The 5D2 has been a workhorse camera for many years. It may be older, but it's been a powerful tool for countless pros during that time. For as many people that used a 5D2, there weren't a lot of complaints during its reign. Of course the newer models are better in many ways, but most of the improvements are expanding the limitations of the newer cameras, not fixing problems of the older 5D2. (Note: I said "most". They did fix a few of the 5D2's minor quirks.)

That said, my 5D2 is slated for an upgrade this year, probably to the 6D. It's my second body for wedding shooting, so the 6D's improved low-light performance and autofocus (I'm mostly a center-focus-point user anyways) will provide a big benefit over my 5D2. My primary body is a 5D3, and it has really shown the limitations of the 5D2 in my shooting, but it has taken many years for me to get to where I can tell the difference.

Stop worrying about upgrading your equipment and just go out and take great pictures !!! :)

The 5D2 is a fantastic camera and you'll notice little difference between it and the 6D or 5D3.

I have two 5D2's and they are perfect for professional quality results.

Save your money and have a nice holiday with the girlfriend (just don't tell the wife ...) lol  :P
Keep the 5D II, still a good body. Get better glass and enjoy shooting!

+1000 each

Lenses / Re: Would you buy a new 28-300 L IS II lens and for how much?
« on: February 06, 2013, 10:36:17 PM »
be a good one for weddings, not so many lens changes...

Dear God, no! 3.7 pounds? I'll take my bag of lenses for weddings. I like a heavy camera because it's inherently more stable, but a 3.7 lb lens on a ~3 lb camera (add on a flash too) for 8 hours is excessive.

This lens is good for several uses, but I would not count weddings among them.

Lighting / Re: Yongnuo st-e2?
« on: February 06, 2013, 07:03:10 PM »
I agree with PWP that you should skip optical and go straight to radio. They're generally more reliable, and their range is typically farther than optical systems.

I personally recommend the Phottix Strato II transmitters/receivers. They're about $100 for a trans/recv pair, and each receiver is around $60.

They have a fantastic range (advertised 150 meters, but I found 100-120 meters were the limit of 100% reliability) and they have four channels and four groups. The group feature is very neat - the transmitter has A,B,C,D buttons and each receiver has a group selector switch. You can quickly and easily turn on and off any combination of groups. I use this during wedding receptions with several flashes on lightstands to decide moment by moment which flashes I want to fire.

If you ever need to remotely fire your camera, the receivers come with this ability built-in (even comes with the camera cable).

Also, the transmitter has an on-camera E-TTL pass-through. This lets you use a E-TTL flash on your camera with the transmitter on or off. Very handy.

Okay, end of sales pitch.

EDIT: Just read PWP's link to the YN-622C review.. those sound pretty awesome. Definitely look into them. E-TTL radio remote for a little less than the Strato II's? Amazing.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 2nd camera body with a twist -
« on: February 05, 2013, 02:44:41 PM »
I just got through saying in another thread that you can only compare specs. There are no inherent artistic qualities in camera bodies that are comparable. It's entirely too subjective to mean anything to anyone but yourself. Your only options are to base your decision entirely on specs or Buy All The Things! and compare them yourself. Even if someone who has owned all of these cameras gives you their artistic opinion, it's just their opinion and others might feel something else.

And whatever you do, don't compare images unless they're straight-out-of-camera. Any editing apart from cropping makes it nearly impossible to tell which camera is better for you. You'd be basing everything on someone's photo editing abilities.

Buy a 6D or 5D3, not because of the "bells and whistles" but because they have modern, state-of-the-art sensors. Canon isn't really just fluffing around, putting lipstick on old technology. They're allowing more possibilities in terms of low-light quality, high-ISO noise, etc. (Ha! Listen to me - I sound like a TV commercial.)

My personal, inexperienced (never owned a 1D-series) opinion is that 1D's are overkill for portraiture. The 1Ds line used to have an edge in image quality, but I don't think that's the case any more. They're mostly sports cameras now. Sure the 1Dx is phenomenal, but if you ask me, without it's bells & whistles (top-notch AF and crazy FPS that would send any bride running) it's not a huge difference from the 5D3 or 6D. Of course, again, no experience with 1D's, but on paper, the 5D3 has roughly the same sensor, if not slightly better. To use a 1Dx for portraiture would be like driving to work in a Lamborghini.

I'm laughing to myself imagining a quiet ceremony in a beautiful church erupting in 1Dx machine-gun fire. I know, it has a silent shutter mode like the 5D3 and 6D, but it's still a funny thought...

I'm a little confused by all this, and it looks like I'm not the only one. Whose photos are you looking at? Are they all straight-out-of-camera, and are you planning on never processing your images?

As soon as a photo is edited beyond the basics, any detailed camera comparison or analysis becomes far less meaningful. The camera's sensor and settings will get you started, but post-processing is almost universally a part of digital photography.

If you're talking about peak performance of a camera, the only things you can compare are the technical specs, and some qualities like sharpness are more related to the lens used. I don't see the point of an artistic comparison of camera bodies. Like others have said, it's too subjective to really mean anything.

Lenses / Re: Have you one of the new 24-70 f4 canon lenses, Is it good
« on: February 04, 2013, 02:47:01 PM »
I like the 24-70mm f/4 IS very much.  I originally bought the f/2.8 MkII, it is a fantastic lens, however I need the IS for low light event shooting. 

I'm confused by how much some people lean on IS for low-light photography. Stabilizing only accounts for one problem of low-light photography. It compensates for camera movement. It's great at doing that, but it can never compensate for subject movement. For me, shooting slower than 1/60th is not an option for available light event shooting. (Of course, with flashes, who needs IS anyways?)

No need for confusion. What works for his particular case might not apply to you. All light event shooting is not exactly the same. It really annoys me how some pro-s diss standard or wide angle zooms with image stabilization (a review of the 16-35VR by Jared Polin comes to mind). This person has tried out the 2.8 II and chose the f/4 IS over it, so obviously it works better for him. Moreover, I cannot accept that Canon didn't do prior market research and just brought out a lens nobody cares for. There cannot be one standard answer for everything.

Please re-read my post, or closely read my attempted clarification below.

when you are shooting for 10 or 12 hours fatigue becomes a very real issue and having an IS lens provides a significant advantage here by compensating for the additional camera shake that enevitably comes once fatigue has set in. some people forget this or dont shoot enough to experience it

Look, I was only pointing out that a stabilized lens cannot compensate for a moving subject, which is big part of event photography, is it not? I know how wobbly the arms get during long shoots, and I know how good stabilizing is at doing what it's made for, but it's not a 100% cure-all for all low-light photography.

If Canon comes out with a stabilizer that can stabilize a moving subject, let me know, but until then, I make the claim that a wider aperture is more useful for low-light event photography than the same focal range with a smaller aperture and stabilizer. Of course, I'm only talking about cases where it's dark enough that you approach the reciprocal rule. There are plenty of "low-light" situations where either lens will perform great.

Or to put it another way: stabilizers are designed for when you're shooting near the reciprocal shutter speed, but when that shutter speed approaches 1/50th, subject motion blur becomes an issue. In this case, a wider aperture that lets you shoot faster than 1/50th is more useful than a stabilized lens at a narrower aperture. That is why I "diss" medium and wide stabilized lenses. They're relatively useless for shooting anything that moves in low light.

(Disclaimer: Again, this is only for stills. Video benefits much more from a stabilizer at any focal length.)

Lighting / Re: An open letter to Canon regarding the Canon RT system
« on: February 03, 2013, 05:24:09 AM »
And how exactly are you expecting Canon to release a firmware update for a flash and/or transmitter? That's basically a recall situation, which they would only do for defects. So don't hold your breath on that.

I would have thought the outrageous pricing would have been the first big clue that Canon is arrogant about their flashes. You can get a lot of third party equipment (ie. Yongnuo + Phottix) for the price of the bare basics in the RT system.

But it's good that you're posting here about these deficiencies. Maybe people who are considering the RT's without carefully comparing specs will see this and go with other flashes, and that will eventually send a much louder message to Canon.

Lenses / Re: A second look at the 24-70 F/4L IS's place in my bag...
« on: February 01, 2013, 05:27:28 PM »
I'm fascinated at who Canon expects to buy this lens.

I agree 100%.

Maybe they think people will see the expensive 24-70/2.8L II and its newer f/4 IS brother and think that the f/4 is cheaper and the IS will make it "just as good" and therefore a bargain.

Either way, by releasing the 24-70/4L they really seem to be shoving the 24-105/4L to the back of their medium L-series zoom line-up. Without saying it, they're hoping people are thinking the classic "Old, Busted....... New Hotness!" and the 24-105 will retire to a life of being just a kit lens.

6D Sample Images / Re: for those who snub the 6D AF...
« on: February 01, 2013, 04:12:17 PM »
Jerry, aren't you glad I mentioned the movie?  Haha.  Does anyone know how many AF points the Kodak camera had?  :P

Sorry, Carl, I didn't read your first post deep enough to catch the reference.

I think those types of cameras had fixed hyperfocal lenses.

Lenses / Re: Which to buy : the 24mm F1.4 or 24mm TS F3.5?
« on: February 01, 2013, 03:04:41 PM »
24mm/3.5 TS

Pro's: Freaking tilt-shift
Con's: Limited aperture, manual focus, priced as much as a 24-70mm/2.8L II


Pro's: Freaking 1.4 aperture
Con's: Less versatile than a zoom

Don't get the tilt-shift unless you have a very specific need for it. It's an extremely expensive niche lens that you really should only use for its tilt-shift feature.

I love the 24/1.4L, but I use it as a prime, mostly for its fast aperture in low light and tight spaces. If I'm in a situation where I need to cover lots of different things at different distances, I'd prefer to use one of the 24mm zooms.

If the tilt-shift is in your price range, you should get the newer 24-70/2.8 ii. If you really wouldn't use a zoom, then the 24/1.4 would complement your current glass nicely, but you should at least consider the new 24-70/2.8 ii, with all the great reviews it's been getting. It's definitely next on my list.

6D Sample Images / Re: for those who snub the 6D AF...
« on: February 01, 2013, 02:33:19 PM »
My sincerest apologies, wellfedCanuck, but this was all I could think about:

My favorite scene from the movie Top Gun

Lenses / Re: Have you one of the new 24-70 f4 canon lenses, Is it good
« on: February 01, 2013, 06:55:45 AM »
Not the worst review here: weren't kidding. that was about the most entertaining review i've ever seen. my new favorite people...asian guys with irreverent and dry humor done in british accent!

i could watch that guy review paper plates.

i've no interest in the 24-70mm F4 however.

Yeah, the DigitalRev crew is very entertaining. You just have to accept that they're biased towards Canon.... and Nikon... and Sony... and Leica... and Fuji... actually, I think their bias changes every video.

They're like the Top Gear of photography. (The proper one, not the awful American version.) All they need is a Cool Wall and a Stig.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 13