October 23, 2014, 10:29:27 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 - Random Orbits

Pages: 1 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 92
631
Lenses / Re: to TS-E or not to TS-E?
« on: June 21, 2013, 11:36:11 AM »
Using the 24-105 at the wide end using manual focusing for landscapes/architecture is also a good idea.  Drop the ISO down to 100 to maximize DR/sharpness and stop down the aperture to f/11 or f1/16 to maximize DOF.  If you are ok using this workflow for landscapes and architecture, then the TS-E will be a great addition for you.

I will play around this weekend MF no-IS with my 24-105 and see how i get on...  good advice, thanks! :)

The only problem with F16 is that its diffraction territory and softens the image... F11 is as far as I would go...

Diffraction softens it somewhat but it does extend the DOF.  If the lens needs a few stops from wide open to get to the sharpest setting, then the diffraction softening at f16 may be worth the additional DOF (it may be sharper at f/16 rather than wide open).  See lens rentals column below.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/03/overcoming-my-fentekaphobia

632
Lenses / Re: Alaskan Cruise - 70-300L/Crop Sensor?
« on: June 21, 2013, 11:25:23 AM »
Might the answer be to rent a 100-400 and call it a day and then, if I love it, buy the 100-400II one day?

Might be...if you're willing to carry the weight.  If you'll need 400mm much of the time, that's the way to go, else the 70-300L is the better lens.

Can we assume that the 70-300L met your expectations after putting it through its paces?   ::)

633
Lenses / Re: to TS-E or not to TS-E?
« on: June 21, 2013, 08:19:52 AM »
The TS-E 24 is not that big of a deal to shoot if you know how to use it.  If you are taking a shot without tilt or shift, it is no different than shooting a non-IS lens manually.  Think of it as a large, sharp, slow prime that can also be used as a tilt-shift.

I recommend using a tripod for landscape and architecture shots, if for no other reason than to utilize the amazing edge-to-edge sharpness of the TS-E.  If you have any non-IS lenses, shoot one for a day manually and determine whether you would be willing to do this.  I drink a lot of coffee too, and it is a non-issue for me.

I also advise staying away from the Rokinon because their quality control is terrible and the lens simply isn't that sharp.

It takes 82mm thread filters, so factor this in.

+1.  Shift is relatively easy to do handheld, precise tilting of the focal plane is best done using LiveView and a tripod.  Using the 24-105 at the wide end using manual focusing for landscapes/architecture is also a good idea.  Drop the ISO down to 100 to maximize DR/sharpness and stop down the aperture to f/11 or f1/16 to maximize DOF.  If you are ok using this workflow for landscapes and architecture, then the TS-E will be a great addition for you.

634
Lenses / Re: New Wide Angles Lenses in 2013 [CR2]
« on: June 20, 2013, 08:36:42 AM »
.. which most likely would exclude a 2013 release date, thanks. And Canon will sell the more expensive 14-24 uwa first anyway to max profit, just like they sell the 600rt flash and we're still waiting for the cheaper version

 Last not least, there also is a 17-40 mk2 prototype, so depending on marketing strategy Canon might opt to go for this cheaper version than a more expensive 16-50L ... or they just cheat a little on the focal lengths and relabel the 17-40L to 16-50L :->

If the rumor of a f/4 IS ultrawide is true, then I can see Canon listing it around 1500 USD.  The 14-24 would be around 2500 USD.  Let the howling begin!

635
Lenses / Re: Alaskan Cruise - 70-300L/Crop Sensor?
« on: June 20, 2013, 07:50:25 AM »
Absolutely!  A longer zoom comes in handy if you go on a whale watch at Juneau or go White Pass railroad tour.  It also comes in handy photographying the glaciers.  The glaciers are large, but the cruise ships are thousands of feet away.

Most of the time, you'll be using it outside, so it can tak the place of the 200 2.8 II.

636
Lighting / Re: On Camera Flash: Direct or Bounce, candid.
« on: June 20, 2013, 07:41:28 AM »
Bounce when possible and typically angled so that the the flash is aimed at a spot halfway to the target.  Ceilings are most often used, but walls can be used too.

For candids, flash is lifesaver when the subjects are strongly backlit.  Without the flash, the subjects are either underexposed or the background is blown out.  Learning how to use FEC and EC together to balance the subject brightness and background brightness will improve photos a lot, even if the flash is located on the camera and pointed directly at the subject.

Flashes have a zoom coverage range, and it is a consideration.  The 430 covers up to 105mm while the 600 covers up to 200mm.

637
Normal.  This topic pops up from time to time.  Mine was tight on a APS-C camera, but exhibits the slight rotational play you describe on my 5D II when I had it and later 5D III.

638
Lenses / Re: Help complete my bundle...
« on: June 19, 2013, 09:13:00 PM »
Thanks everyone for all the insight thus far. I will need to do some more research on the 600 vs 480ii flash. See if it's worth the additional money for my needs.

I definitely want at least one zoom. Anyone with kids knows how they hate to sit still. I cannot keep up.

However I would like a few primes too. Is the 40mm worth it even if I already have the 50mm and will presumably cover that focal length if I get the 24-105?

It's worth it to some people and not others.  I don't see it having as much value for someone that has a nifty fifty.  It has more value for those that only have larger/heavier lenses.  If you are intending to go ahead with the 24-105, faster primes would give you a clearer delineation as to use which lens under different circumstances.  I would suggest getting other lenses that fill out your focal length needs first, whether it is a 70-200 f/4, 70-300L or 135L.  Try the 6D with the 24-105 and 50 first and then decide what to get next based on where your kit is the most lacking.

639
Lenses / Re: Help complete my bundle...
« on: June 19, 2013, 07:20:04 PM »
6D + 24-105 + 430EX II and start saving for a telephoto prime/zoom.  The 24-105 has good value because it has been discounted so much.  The 430 has much of the functionality of the 580/600s but costs a lot less and is a good value.  The 600ex-rt is only worth it if you intend on using multiple units and need radio transmission.  For a single flash setup, much of its value is unrealized because it'll be connected to the hot shoe.

640
Lighting / Re: PocketWizard Noob
« on: June 18, 2013, 12:59:36 PM »
What if I can only afford one 600 right now?

You could get the 600 now and a long ETTL cord to move it off camera.

641
Lighting / Re: Flash Newbie: Flash Photography Concept
« on: June 17, 2013, 08:50:16 AM »

I often use Av mode for flash stuff for candids, etc, because it does meter for the ambient.  I'll typically set the meter to -1 and then adjust FEC accordingly.  Set the ISO manually high enough so that the ambient is about 1/100-1/200.  Enable HSS on the flash in case you walk into a brighter area and the shutter speed goes past the sync speed of the camera.

It might be worth checking out the manual to see if you can override the max iso of 400 constraint.  Is it only with flash attached, etc?  Perhaps there is a setting to remove it.

Will HSS be required if the shooter walks into brighter area? The "bright" ambient light will take care of the black bars when shutter speed goes past the sync speed of the camera - won't it?

And yes, adjusting the ISO manually is the best bet, instead of letting it stay on auto.

Depends....  The situtation I was talking about is more appropriate when the light levels change a lot.  For example, ISO is set to 2000 and shutter speed of about 1/100 is achieved for indoor work.  You walk outside where there is a lot more light and you want to use the flash for fill.  The fastest shutter speed is the sync speed and not the 1/4000 that is more appropriate, so the shot will be horribly overexposed (if the camera is capped to the sync speed with flash is attached).

Unless I need 2nd curtain sync, I leave it in HSS.  If the shutter speed is less than the sync speed than HSS does not apply and everything operates normally.  If the shutter speed is faster than the sync speed, then HSS does what it is intended to do.  Basically, it's a hedge against a fixed ISO like auto ISO would be.  Otherwise, the bars might not be black, but any linear delineation between "exposure" zones might be annoying.

642
Lighting / Re: Flash Newbie: Flash Photography Concept
« on: June 17, 2013, 07:16:32 AM »
So in conclusion, if flash is mounted, there is no way to automatically get standard exposure in Av mode.
Also it is undesireable to use Av mode, simply because there is no way I can make my Min shutter speed to 1/90 or 1/125. Also Auto ISO is Clipped to 400.

My intention is, I want the camera to automatically get exposure of ambient light 1 stop below standard exposure exposure (given min shutter speed and auto ISO), in different lighting condition. And be able adjust FEC as necessary.

As conclusion There is No Way to do this.

I often use Av mode for flash stuff for candids, etc, because it does meter for the ambient.  I'll typically set the meter to -1 and then adjust FEC accordingly.  Set the ISO manually high enough so that the ambient is about 1/100-1/200.  Enable HSS on the flash in case you walk into a brighter area and the shutter speed goes past the sync speed of the camera.

It might be worth checking out the manual to see if you can override the max iso of 400 constraint.  Is it only with flash attached, etc?  Perhaps there is a setting to remove it. 

643
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 DC Available for Preorder
« on: June 14, 2013, 03:59:34 PM »
I do have a question about its design, though.  It's heavier and longer than the 16-35L II, so is this lens essentially a 16-35 FF UWA design with a speedbooster added?
You need a 1.55x speedbooster (telecompressor) to go from f2.8 to f1.8. If a 16-35/2.8 was fitted with a 1.55x telecompressor, it would become an APS-C 10.3-22.5/1.8.

A better match is a 24-70/2.8 with a 1.55x telecompressor. The nearest rival is another third party premium product, the Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC (just £20 and 15g more) - and that would make a 15.4-45/1.8 VC lens with the same telecompressor built in. Wider, longer, and image stabilised.

Yes, the 24-70 would be required, not the 16-35.  Oddly enough, the 18-35 f/1.8 is similar in weight to Sigma's 24-70 but is about an inch longer than the S24-70, which I found curious, which was why I thought Sigma might have "built-in" the booster to get the fast lens for APS-C.  Chop off the long and wide ends where zooms are typically weakest, optimize the optical formula slightly, and voila!

644
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 DC Available for Preorder
« on: June 14, 2013, 12:44:00 PM »

I started another thread on this when the price dropped yesterday...

Engagdet (not a great SLR source of insight) expected this to be priced in the $2k+ range as it was an industry first.  Cue giggling.

But even I am surprised with the $799 price including the hood.

I personally was expecting this to be coming in around $1,000-$1,200 even though it's APS-C only.  A first is still a first, and I'm not convinced something is so easily 'priced out of APS-C user territory' with so many sports / wildlife guys plugging much more expensive glass on their 7Ds.

Any of you surprised by the $799 figure?  The chatter I've seen on other announcement pages (photo rumors, Petapixel, etc.) has been very positive re: the price.

Sigma is on fire right now with that 35mm F/1.4, so people are taking them more seriously.  I still am bent out of shape that they are using whatever witchcraft they have on crop when full frame people would give their left nut for this -- where is the EF 24-50 F/2.2 for full frame?   ;D

- A

Not too suprised about the price.  Sigma has found a nice spot shy of 1k.  If it were FF, then it'd be 2k or more, depending on it's peformance.

I do have a question about its design, though.  It's heavier and longer than the 16-35L II, so is this lens essentially a 16-35 FF UWA design with a speedbooster added?  If it is, does that imply that a fast FF zoom would be similar is size to a medium format lens?

645
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS
« on: June 14, 2013, 12:28:08 PM »
So this could possibly turn into an actual product within a year?

Maybe.  There have been rumors that it's being evaluated in the field.  If you don't hear any testing rumor, then year -> years.

Pages: 1 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 92