March 01, 2015, 03:49:08 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 - Stephen Melvin

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 16
Nothing like a bit of Screamo to start the morning.

EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How disappointed will you be if . . .?
« on: July 13, 2014, 02:57:14 PM »

Maybe Canon has decided to finally make some pro-grade lenses to go with the 7D, and is waiting until they can launch both at once.
All the Pro grade lenses (the "L" lenses) will work on the 7D.  Do you mean that they will make pro grade EF-S (crop sensor) lenses?  To do that, they will need a pro grade body.  A 1Dx with an APS-C sensor.

Of course that's what I mean. 15 years into the digital age, and Canon makes a superb APS format camera (the 7D), and yet no professional grade lenses designed specifically for the format. Meanwhile, M43 and Fuji are rounding out some really good lens lineups for their smaller cameras.

This whole "L lenses work on APS sensors" thing is beyond idiotic. You knew full well I meant designed for the format. Only Pentax has bothered to make the appropriate lenses for their APS format cameras. But Canon continues to add 18-xxx mm superzooms. They should have had a 58mm f/1.2 lens designed for portraiture a decade ago. A 50-135mm f/2.0 would be an amazing sports lens. And of course a 15-45mm f/2.0. And that's just for starters.

Nikon's been just as stupid, and for their most profitable cameras. There's no direct upgrade path for either camera company. Madness.

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Photoshop & LR CC deal
« on: July 12, 2014, 08:35:29 PM »
I have PS 5, which is all I need or expect to need for some time to come. LR has been on a two year upgrade cycle, give or take, for about $80. So this "good deal" will be a $120 price increase, if they force me to buy it, instead of just upgrading Lightroom.

I seem to remember this originally being $20 a month. In any case, I wish they'd make this thing optional.

EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How disappointed will you be if . . .?
« on: July 09, 2014, 12:56:40 PM »
Maybe Canon has decided to finally make some pro-grade lenses to go with the 7D, and is waiting until they can launch both at once.

It's a good thing I don't plan on updating past my 5D Mk III, because I have no desire to rent software. It's ridiculous.

Stoppage, as far as I'm concerned. I have no desire to rent my software. Fortunately, this appears to be happening around the same time that I feel I no longer need to upgrade my camera, as the Mk III does pretty much anything I need it to. "Last camera syndrome," Thom Hogan calls it.

It's not THAT revolutionary, Olympus have had a 14-35mm F/2 for their DSLRs for a good while and that's unbelievably good quality. I know a professional press photographer who shoots Olympus specifically for that lens.

But it's the equivalent of a 28-70 f/4. A pretty mundane lens, wouldn't you say? The Sigma is the equivalent of a FF f/2.8 lens. That's a full stop extra in light gathering power.

I don't think Canon would invest their money in pursuing a lens like this, unless Nikon came out with one. I feel Canon would rather make more Rebels with no upgraded features than invest in their devoted/professional crop body shooters. Canon like to deal in extremes, ignorant amateur or needy professional.

APS format cameras are still the top-selling cameras in C and N's lineups. They really, really need to start making some professional grade lenses for these cameras.


A side issue, but I thought you shouldn't ever do this as it can damage your camera?

This is a myth. First off, can you imagine a company designing a camera that you had to shut off every time you changed lenses, because doing so would damage the camera? The warranty work would be staggering.

Beyond that, the camera is never really turned off, anyway. Try changing a lens with the camera off, while looking at the "card writing" light. Notice that it turns on briefly? Turning a camera "off" really just puts it to sleep.

I always thought the reason you should power off a digital camera when changing lenses is that when power is on the sensor is charged and will draw dust to it.

However when we use a zoom such as the 24-105 this pulls air in and out of the camera - which is probably why if you just use primes your sensor gathers less dust. Just a thought.

Also myths. The sensor doesn't generate a static charge, and it's behind the shutter, anyhow.

And as a sealed lens, the 24-105 doesn't really draw air into the mirror box. You can feel it pulling through the eyepiece, but it's unlikely that much dust will come through past the focusing screen.

Lenses / Re: 16-35 maybe 17-40
« on: March 09, 2013, 04:16:14 PM »
Neither lens is known for corner-to-corner sharpness, and both will vignette even without filters. You should, as suggested, take a close look at that Tokina. They make superb ultrawides, though this lens *may* have QC issues. Buy from a place with a generous return policy.

Lenses / Re: Will Canon step up to Zeiss with a 55mm 1.4L?
« on: February 27, 2013, 11:10:15 PM »
So Zeiss has cracked the high quality normal prime mystery that has eluded all other manufactures for decades.

The question is, now that the cat's out of the bag, will Canon fire back with a 55mm 1.4L?

One thing you may not be aware of is that 55mm and 58mm lenses used to be quite common. Why? On an SLR, they were the shortest focal length that could be built without going to a retrofocus design. That's a big part of why the Zeiss performs so well: it's a relatively easy lens to design and build.

But photographers hated them. A "normal" on 35mm should be 45mm, not 55mm. 50mm became acceptable enough, and they sold much better than the 55's.

Another thing to keep in mind is that most of the 50's are older designs.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 candle light High ISO (102400)
« on: February 26, 2013, 08:10:51 PM »
Yes, I see a bit of green in the CO and a bit stronger blue in the LR. I'm sure one could mess with them to make them identical, but my exercise was first to see if CO would do what Stephen did in LR, and the answer for me is yes. Then the exercise for me turned to learning to embrace the chiaroscuro, and I learned alot about that from your nice shot and Stephen's nice render. So thanks to both of you for the inadvertent lesson for me!

You're welcome. The rendering of the colors is affected by so many variables, even within a single program. In LR, I selected the "Camera Standard" profile, which is designed to mimic Canon's standard color rendering. I also used the "adjustment brush" to get rid of some of the blue speckles in certain areas of the image. It didn't take long.

[edit] And I'm pleased as can be to know that I can shoot at this ridiculous ISO setting and there are at least two editors, probably more, that can deal with it to at least some useful degree. Pretty amazing tech.

It truly is a dream come true for me. I now find myself looking for more ridiculous light to shoot in, and it's very hard to find a situation that I can't make something out of.

Here's a larger render of my adjustments:

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 candle light High ISO (102400)
« on: February 26, 2013, 01:08:37 AM »
There's actually a solution to that...avoid shooting moving subjects below EV -2 with a slow or long lens without a tripod, and you won't need to boost the ISO that high.

(EV -2 is much too dark to read, so it's not like this is a radical concept....)


Did you see the first image I posted? Lit by a distant streetlight, the only way to possibly take the shot was by boosting the ISO that high. I shot it with a short, fast lens, too. ;)

These high ISO's have opened up a world of possibility for me. I've been shooting in the dark for a long time. My favorite film, after Tri-X, is T-Max p3200. I've pushed that to ISO 50000. The Mk III outperforms the T-Max.

Here's one I did when experimenting the camera when I first bought it. 24mm, 1/25, f/1.4, ISO 102000. All processing done with Lightroom. The light sources is from a street light about 150 feet outside the house. I could barely see her. The AF assist lamp from my 580EX solved the focus issue.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Thoughts on Zeiss Canon 5 lens kit?
« on: February 25, 2013, 09:57:25 PM »
The Zeiss CP's are made in Germany from hand picked glass.  The rejects go into the Zeiss Glass made by Cosina in Japan ;)   

That's nowhere near the truth. I suspect the wink means you meant it as a joke, but I wanted to let other people in on your joke.

Cosina is a world-class lensmaker that produces lens from the bargain-priced Phoenix and Vivitar brands to the high end Zeiss brand. They also make some very interesting lenses of their own design in the high end VoigtlÃĪnder brand.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 candle light High ISO (102400)
« on: February 25, 2013, 07:07:05 PM »

It appears that your 5D3 has the same issue that mine does...  in the far bottom right corner of the image it has a more purple hue than it should.  It is more noticeable in your NR 25 image.  On my 5D3 it is most noticeable at ISO 12,800 and above, but sometimes at ISO 6,400.
Yes, I see it in both CR2 raw files I uploaded as well (taken moments apart), but it mostly is gone when LR opens it with default settings...but I hadn't noticed that before...

Anyone else seeing these at very high ISO/low lighting?

Yes, it's pretty common. I think Canon may be working on a firmware update to help with this.

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D3 candle light High ISO (102400)
« on: February 25, 2013, 01:53:42 PM »
Oh yes it does really look great...time to go LR for me. I did everything in DPP until now...That is quite a great RAW converter and denoise software as I can see.

It is a great converter, but keep in mind that a lot of it has to do with the choices I made when converting the file. The default image that comes up in LR isn't going to look much different from what the original post showed. I did about four or five things to the image in LR's "Develop" module to bring out more from the image. It didn't take me long, because I'm experienced in the program, and have a solid photography and retouching background. You'll need to play around and experiment with whatever program you use to process your images.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 16