Messages

31

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5d Mark III Shadow recovery

« on: October 08, 2012, 11:52:08 PM »

Adobe Lightroom?

I used camera raw 7.1 in PS

Yes, it recovered the shadows, but can you actually use this for anything above 600px wide?  How bad is the banding and noise in the shadows at 100% view now?
My 5D3 images look absolutely TERRIBLE when i do this.

I don't print images but if you look for it i am sure it is there.. Sorry, you will have to look elsewhere in the forum for a technical feedback

However, I do a lot of extreme high ISO work, and there the 5D MK III has a tiny but noticible DR advantage.

I've seen some of your shots posted in this forum - No doubt one of the Gurus around here.

32

EOS Bodies / Canon 5d Mark III Shadow recovery

« on: October 08, 2012, 04:34:54 PM »

This shot was taken while i was adjusting for correct exposure. The sky looked okay but the bottom half is obviously underexposed. I wanted to see how much i can push the shadows in post.  I increased the shadow recovery slider to +100 in camera raw keeping everything else unaltered. If i can do this in post then this is plenty of available DR in shadows for me.
 
Left  - Original
Right - With shadow recovery slider set to +100

33

EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk [CR1]

« on: September 29, 2012, 04:38:23 AM »

@Mikael Risedal : Why do you write in all bold?

so that others know which part to ignore in the discussion?

34

EOS Bodies / Re: Who said Canon cameras suck?!?

« on: September 28, 2012, 12:35:49 AM »

Thanks Jrista! Although, i admit i haven't understood everything you've said (and there's a lot of it!).

I think we've digressed a long way from what your very first post was trying to say. I've never played with a Nikon but i completely agree with you on the Canon's highlight recovery part (from my far less technical experience in recovering highlights).

If one is interested in the technology aspects of photography it doesn't make him/her any less a photographer than he/she already is (however good/bad that person is!)

35

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images

« on: September 27, 2012, 07:14:46 AM »

 

36

EOS Bodies / Re: New 5dmiii user - love the camera so far

« on: September 04, 2012, 10:29:37 AM »

I agree; the 5D3 is an awesome camera. Everything about it is a pleasure to use.

I had the 7D before (and still have it, in fact), and that felt like a luxury item (and it is).

But the 5D3 feels like a whole step above that, even.

Amazing! And yes, I have it permanently set on "Silent shutter".

And the fact that ISO 12800 is at least as usable as ISO 1600 on the 7D is also very satisfying. There is some loss of resolution at that level, but the noise is very inoffensive, and IMO, the pictures are indeed still very usable.

I am very pleased I splashed out the £££ on it!

+1 This has been my impression too coming from 7d.
I would also add that other than IQ and other image related stuff 5d3 feels awesome in my hands. In addition, if you care about video iso 10000 is a walk in the park and iso 12800 is pretty useful - both with some noise reduction if needed ( I would expect 1dx to be better).

37

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: EOS 5D3 - shooting first wedding on Saturday

« on: August 29, 2012, 03:00:13 AM »

Appreciate the tips shared by members here. Techniques defer but i am sure people have seen success which is why they even care to share.

38

Lenses / Re: Sigma 30mm f/1.4 or Canon 35mm f/2?

« on: August 14, 2012, 02:30:27 AM »

I use the 35mm f/2 on FF.

As expected it is not "very sharp" wide open but of-course your tolerance will vary. The focus ring is noisy and the focus tends to hunt a bit in low light. Also, compared to my other zoom lenses, in manual mode i have to turn the focus ring by a larger amount to acquire focus (not sure if this is the case with other cheaper lenses). Having said that i love the focal length on FF . If budget was not a constraint i would have gone for the 1.4L version.

39

Lenses / Re: EF 20mm f1.8L VS. EF 14-24 f4L

« on: August 10, 2012, 12:50:49 AM »

UWA's distort people waaay too much for my taste, and in such an unflattering way. I'm seriously contemplating picking up an 8-15 fishy for UWA purposes instead of a 17-40 or 16-35.

I'm struggling to reconcile those two sentences!

i'm guessing 8-15 for landscapes and other situations where people are not involved?

40

Software & Accessories / Re: intervalometers / remote controls

« on: July 25, 2012, 07:34:27 AM »

I use a product by Link Delight called the LCD Timer Remote AP-TR3C for Canon TC-80N3 which fits on my EOS 7D and also the EOS 5D Mark III.  I have done several successful time lapse videos (numerous pics of course) with this product.  It was a mere 19.99 on Ebay with $8 shipping and comes from China.  I've never had an issue with it (just suggest getting a good quality battery as the ones that are in these units don't last or are weak by the time they get to you).  Support answers questions promptly and it sure beats paying well over a $100 for the Canon brand (I think it's more like $200).  The company is Aputure but sold by Link Delight.  There may be other resellers of course.  TIP:  only difference I can see on this vs. Canon is there is no way to stop the drain on the battery though quite slow.  I put a small piece of cardboard between the battery and its connector to stop the continuous drain.  You can also use the this device for BULB or any other camera setting requiring straight push button trigger release WITHOUT the battery.  All other timer bases features would of course need the battery.

so you need to buy a canon tc-80n3 first?

Nope. Aputure is canon's third party version.
I had used the Aputure version with 7d and now use it on 5d3. occasionally, the remote has starting issues when using with 5d3 (won't work when plugged-in initially, reconnecting or holding the shutter halfway down while reconnecting the remote did the trick). Maybe it's something to do with camera's standby mode - not sure. Other than this issue the remote works like a charm.

41

Portrait / Re: Some head shots

« on: May 30, 2012, 02:04:49 AM »

Nice shots!

42

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images

« on: May 27, 2012, 03:47:20 AM »

HDR, 24-105L

43

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D800 dpreview

« on: May 15, 2012, 09:11:31 AM »

looks like people tend to patrol CR forum just to re-assure themselves as to what a great decision they made by jumping over the fence to the other side. Get on with it! there are areas where one camera is better than the other - which ever way you look PERIOD

Sure, better tech makes one's life easier (like getting that 'perfect' image at the first instance) BUT it doesn't make one a better photographer instantly. - wait.. did i just say that?

44

Canon General / Re: I have a question about wedding photography

« on: May 10, 2012, 10:17:01 AM »

 I think the skin areas look overdone. Otherwise IMO the shots themselves are pretty good.
If it's just that, maybe you could re-edit few of them with more natural looking skin. It's not an yes/ no situation.
Only you will be able to guess what's on their mind. Anycase, unhappy clients is no good either..

45

EOS Bodies / Re: Up the game

« on: May 08, 2012, 11:49:20 PM »

Nevertheless, I can't wait to see (and get some of my own) all the beautiful images that WILL come out of this crappy sensor. 

I'm not sure anyone (who isn't just being spiteful) would actually call the sensor "crappy". Its certainly not a crappy sensor...however it is LACKING for some types of photography. I don't think there is any question that Canon sensors, for quite some time now, have offered lackluster dynamic range relative to the competition. Nikon was even getting over 12 stops of DR with their own sensors before they moved to Sony's game-changing Exmor. I believe millions of photographers will produce great photos with the 5D III, but that doesn't change the fact that Canon's sensor technology IS rather lackluster relative to the competition.

A better tool in skilled hands will always create a better result.

yeah, my bad, poor choice of a word.