September 21, 2014, 02:44:33 PM

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 - Random Orbits

Pages: 1 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 90
631
I understand that we cannot utilize the highest speed of 5d3 if we setup the camera to write files into both cards at the same time due to the limitation of the in-camera SD card speed.  So my question is if it is possible to take photos and save as RAW into the CF card first and then do a Jpeg conversion through the camera later to save the Jpeg files into the SD card?  I know how to do a single file conversion but would it be possible to select a batch of RAW files and do a batch conversion through the camera?  This workflow is very useful that we can do batch processing without a PC especially during travelling.  I have to admit that I did not read the manual completely.  Any help on this would be appreciated, thanks!

Yes, and that is the only way that I have used the SD card so far (intentionally at least).  I shot dozens of pics in RAW to the CF and then batch converted them to jpgs onto to SD card.  I was then able to move the SD to an iPad and display the photos from there.  I hate how the iPad is unable to display RAW 5D III files (works with 5D II).

Hello Random Orbits, can you show me how to do batch convert in 5D3 or point me to any on-line references?  I had just tried again with my camera but still have no clue on how to do it.  Thanks!

Actually, I can't because my memory is faulty.  You can batch copy but not batch convert.  Sorry.  I must have converted them one by one...

632
Lenses / Re: 17-55 internal dust removal
« on: June 10, 2013, 10:05:43 AM »
Yeah I think the dust I'm seeing is tiny. Sucks that insignificant dust results in no sale or reduced value. This is about the only thing I don't like about this lens. It's by far my most useful lens. I thought of selling it and replacing it with a 24-105L just for the weathersealing. Still debating with myself what upgrade path to choose. Should I just sell it and get the 24-70 II? Is that where I'm gonna end up anyway?

Take your time cleaning it, and you'll get a good result if the dust is between the 1st two groups.  I only bothered cleaning those two surfaces while the lens was disassembled.  I'd pop in the front element w/o putting the screws back in and zoom/focus the lens to move the elements around.  Then recheck to see any dust is visible.  I cleaned the front surface of the front element after it was screwed in.  All lenses can get dust in them, but I find that having a filter on the 17-55 all the time helps a lot because the front decorative ring that covers the front screws is not airtight.

And yes, you will eventually end up with the 24-70 II.  The question is when.   ::)

633
I understand that we cannot utilize the highest speed of 5d3 if we setup the camera to write files into both cards at the same time due to the limitation of the in-camera SD card speed.  So my question is if it is possible to take photos and save as RAW into the CF card first and then do a Jpeg conversion through the camera later to save the Jpeg files into the SD card?  I know how to do a single file conversion but would it be possible to select a batch of RAW files and do a batch conversion through the camera?  This workflow is very useful that we can do batch processing without a PC especially during travelling.  I have to admit that I did not read the manual completely.  Any help on this would be appreciated, thanks!

Yes, and that is the only way that I have used the SD card so far (intentionally at least).  I shot dozens of pics in RAW to the CF and then batch converted them to jpgs onto to SD card.  I was then able to move the SD to an iPad and display the photos from there.  I hate how the iPad is unable to display RAW 5D III files (works with 5D II).

634
I would like to be able to save my raw files to cf and small jpg images to sd...  and I haven't gotten that deep into the manual to see if it can do that...  though I guess no.

It can do it.

635
Lenses / Re: WA lens advice 16-35 II or the TSE 17
« on: June 10, 2013, 07:25:25 AM »
Thanks for the replies. I'm going to buy the TS-E 17mm next month.

The only thing that I am left wondering is whether it would be smarter to get a used 17-40 as well for a "grab and go lens" as Neuro mentioned above.

Cheers ... J.R.

If you can swing it... absolutely!  Sometimes, you just won't be able to bring more gear, and something like that will fit the bill. 

636
Lenses / Re: WA lens advice 16-35 II or the TSE 17
« on: June 09, 2013, 05:05:27 PM »
Skip 16-35 II. Nothing special @ f2.8.  I'm thinking 14mm prime, since 95% of my landscape shots @ 16mm.

Thanks ... The 14mm prime crossed my mind too. But from what I've heard you can stitch the TSE's images quite well and make it a panoramic shot ... That said, I wouldn't mind a canon 14-24 which is as good as the 24-70 II.

Once you get used to TS-Es, you'll wish that all your lenses had those movements!  But it's manual and you'll have to have a different workflow to get the best out of it.  A lot of people have chimed in that it requires a bit more care because of its convex front element, but care should also be taken with water.  There are hinges and slots for the movements, and they are not sealed.

Shift is easy to do handheld, but controlling the DOF precisely to throw more of the frame in focus will require live view/tripod.  Exposure bracketing and post processing can simulate NDs.  Whereas filters put all the work up front, the TS-17 will require less work up front but more at the backend.  Yes, some filter setups are starting to come out for these lenses, but I'm not keen on carrying a bag of lenses and then another bag for the larger filters.  Some can't be simulated (i.e. polarizer) but some tilt movements can't be simulated in post either.  It's a trade off.

I see more of a difference between AF/MF rather than MF and tilt shift.  If you don't use the TS functions, then you'll essentially have an awesome non-weather resistant MF lens...

637
Lenses / Re: 17-55 internal dust removal
« on: June 09, 2013, 01:24:31 PM »
I've done it before, and it is easy.  There are youtube videos of it.  What it comes down to is prying off the label ring off the front element (sticks with adhesive, so using something like a toothpick), removing about 3 screws that hold the front element in place (noting where the indentations are so you can put it back together) and tipping it over and the front lens assembly slides out.  Clean and reverse.

638
EOS-M / Re: FF EOS-M?
« on: June 09, 2013, 12:32:57 PM »

re. size/weight advantage of mirrorles vs. DSLRs: yes, tele-lenses and tele-zooms like a 70-200/2.8 L IS will be the same size and weight and their use will almost nullify the size/weight advantage of a compact FF-mirrorless.
BUT unless totally specialized in photography of certain sports or wildlife, most photographers will not use tele-zooms or long tele lenses ALL the time on their cameras. Actually, many photographers will never use such lenses. Probably 99% of all images are captured using focal lengths between 24 and 100 mm. These lenses especially wide-angle for a FF camera body with a short flange back distance could be considerably smaller than current EF-lenses. Point in case is the Leica M-system and its "surprisingly small" (fixed focal) lenses. And contrary to common belief, adding a ring-USM AF drive would mean very little additional weight and bulk, since movable lens mass is quite small in these lenses. IS would ideally be in-body IS. Viewfinder image on an EVF can be stabilized by purely electronic means. Using a few clever algorithms and ample procesing power, legacy EF (tele) lenses with IS would work in tandem with the in-body IS to give up to 5 or even 6 stops total stabilization effect. 

That would finally yield a really small and light kit for the many occasions when we want to go small and light without sacrificing anything in performance, speed, ergonomcis and IQ compared to a good but big DSLR. The only limitation would be available tele-range in native-mount. Only when we need more tele range will we then pack and carry a simple and cheap-to-build extension tube adapter without optical elements plus any existing EF-lens (tele/zooms). But only then. Not all the time.

This is what I am waiting for. My current 7D plus EF-S and EF lenses is my last DSLR-based system. I want and will "upgrade" as soon as I get a Canon EOS 5D-M with a mirrorless body only slightly larger than a Sony RX-1 - to accomodate a built in Hi-End EVF. With a new sensor with ultra-fast in-plane phase-AF of course and an image processing pipeline that at least fully matches the current Nikon D800. Along with in-body IS and built-in WiFi, GPS and EX-RT wireless flash radio commander ... these radio components can be had ridiculously cheap and small. Price? Clearly below a 5D III, since it is so much cheaper to make a mirrorlss body without all the hi-precision mechanical cr*p in it - mirror, sub-mirrors, large and expensive glass prism etc. And, Canon - please aslo do away with that mechanical shutter and start using fully electronic shutters with X-sync all the way to 1/8000s.

And put an "as large as possible" fully FF-capable lens mount up front. Along with a number of "as small as possible" FF pancake AF-lenses (think of the EF 40/2.8) between 20mm and 85mm [20/2.8, 35/1.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.8). Make them AF-only. Forget about those manul focus rings and gears. I don't ever use 'em. That way, it will be smaller, lighter,  easier to fully weather-seal and lower cost. And for conven ience two hi-quality, ultra-compact "folding" zooms: a tiny 17-50/4 kit zoom and a 50-150/2.8 even smaller than the former Sigma 50-150/2.8. And the EF-adapter. That's all I need. :-)

It might happen... in 10 or 20 years.

639
I've been looking through my pictures and I have to say, I am not very happy with the IQ of the 24-105. I suppose that's why I never really use it and depend on my 50 1.4 most of the time. I really don't even want to have to use it. I'm ok with the 24-105 supplementing focal range but honestly, I think it's going to end up getting sold one way or the other. And if I do sell it, I can buy another lens a lot sooner.

Can either of the 2.8 zooms compete with the 50 1.4 in IQ? Are the 2.8 zooms comparable to each other in IQ?

The best zoom I have ever used is the 24-105, so I guess I feel a hint of skepticism regarding their performance versus primes.

The 24-70 II destroys any Canon EF 50mm prime at f/2.8 and smaller.

640
I sure wish some others would chime in with a response also if they can use outer points or no.

Here is an update - Bought the Sigma 50 to replace the 50L and it does the same thing with the outer points! The left side is a little worse as was the case the the 50L. But it consistently front focuses about a meter when over 15' away or so. And probably a foot front focus at 8' away or so. We also had another engagement shoot where I told my wife again to just use the center point so she did and every shot where she was over 15' away or so, the camera front focused like crazy! ... So I just shipped the 5D3 and the 50L to Canon on Wednesday. I sure hope they can resolve this because again, I put the Sigma 50 on the 6D and it works gloriously with the outer points! We have a few engagement shoots and 1 wedding scheduled during the time the camera will be at Canon so we will have to live with the 6D and 7D for a few shoots. Who knows, if they can't fix it, maybe 2 6D's would be better.

Sure wish some others with this combo would chime in to help out a bit on this!

Thanks!  Cody

I have the combination you're describing (5DIII/50L) and I can get consistent focus with the outer points (tried at f/1.2 and f/5.6).  I'm using the left most f/2.8 point, the center point and the right most f/2.8 point and they give similar accuracy.  I was shooting at objects inside at around 10 ft and outside at 20-30'.  I'm using spot focus with f/2.8 points only.  However, there is a big caveat.  The entire focus point box must be in an area of high contrast to get consistent focus.  If it is not, the focus can miss very badly (even with focus confirmation) especially with the outer points.  The central points have additional phase detect baselines which increase their accuracy.  I tried taking pictures of my daughter at around 10' where she was strongly backlit (without flash assist), and it missed badly because local contrast was poor.  I then tried shooting a colorful bag on the couch lit by the backlight next to her (similar distance) and it nailed it consistently with center and outer points.

Perhaps a flash's focus assist will help...

641
EOS-M / Re: FF EOS-M?
« on: June 07, 2013, 11:49:47 AM »
I always chuckle when I see folk wanting full frame mirrorless.  They just haven't got the concept.  Big sensor means big lenses. big. big. Not small.

One day soon Canon will finally be forced to come up with a super-compact (think Sony RX-1 size) hi-performance FF mirrorless body plus a couple of tiny but fully FF-capable pancake lenses with AF (think EF 40/2.8 size) and an adaptor for EF lenses. And if they manage to do so before somebody else does, I will buy it from Canon ... :-)

I'm not so sure it has to go that way.  A mirrorless might make the wider lenses smaller/lighter but f/1.4 or f/1.2 lenses are never going to be pocketable.  For longer lenses (i.e. 70-200), I don't think it'd make much difference in weight/length at all.  Where I hope Canon goes is to first produce a mirrorless camera that has the same sensor distance that uses electronic shutters to boost flash sync speeds and to get rid of the mirror to push the FPS higher.  To make that happen, EVF need to get better/cheaper, AF needs to get better, and the overall cost to the consumer needs to be similar.

There is a reason why the RX-1 can not change lenses.  If people think the EOS-M options are too slow (to maintain compact size) or too large, then the prospects of a FF version being sucessful drop a lot.  Now, if they can shrink the electronics/parts of the 5DIII similarly to the T5i/SL1, then that'll be something. 

642
Lenses / Re: $1550 for a used 85L f1.2 II
« on: June 06, 2013, 09:40:53 PM »
I saw a post on CL - 85L f1.2 II selling for $1775.

Condition according to seller:
1. Like new  in term of funtionality and cosmetic. ( I did saw the pictures from seller, the lens looks new)
2. No dust, B&W filter is included
3. Date code UA(2012)
4. Comes with everything box, foams, etc....original receipt from best buy. Warranty is just expired
5. Reason for selling: seller wants 50L. 85L is little to tight.

I spoke to seller over the phone and we agreed @ $1550 cash.

Question: Would you go for it if all conditions above are true?

Thanks guys...I'll inspect and test out this lens this weekend. I'll keep everyone updated. Hope everything will go smoothly.

Another question: How do you identify refurb lens?

Not really a good way if the guy is clever, but refurbs come in a different box -- not the typical retail box that you are used to.  The refurb box is mostly white and doesn't have the typical product markings on it (i.e. generic).  You can also look for the warranty card -- new will be the 1 year that you're used to; refurbs have a piece of paper that detail the 90 days.

643
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III phenomenon
« on: June 06, 2013, 01:59:34 PM »
I tend to remove the card to transfer files rather than using the camera/usb cable connection, so it happens a lot. 

So do I, I just swap in another card at the same time.  Since the 1D X has dual CF, I write RAW to both simultaneously.  I have three 32 GB 90 Mb/s cards, after a shoot I swap out the Slot 1 card with the one from the previous shoot, and the Slot 2 card stays in as a backup until it gets full.

Thanks for the idea!  I'll have to get a few more CF cards of the same capacity to make it work effectively. 

644
EOS-M / Re: EF-M 11-22 / 4-5.6 IS STM - officially announced
« on: June 06, 2013, 01:34:10 PM »
I think we will see full frame mirror less cameras within a year or 2 at most ... just my gut feeling.

Not in a compact format like the EOS-M you won't - maybe a full sized DSLR style mirrorless, but there would need to be another full range of EF lenses to make a EOS-M as a full frame because of the flange distance issues.

+1.  If the M is any indication, the transition from EF to EF mirrorless will take years.

645
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III phenomenon
« on: June 06, 2013, 01:22:02 PM »
Happens with my 5D III too.  I tend to remove the card to transfer files rather than using the camera/usb cable connection, so it happens a lot.  So much so, that I've added that menu to my favorites to quickly change it back.

Pages: 1 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 90