August 30, 2014, 02:13:44 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 - Sycotek

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8
76
Similar experience to the Tammy 70-300 VC USD however my work around (which I do with all my 'IS' lenses) is power up the servo by tapping [af on] to send power to the lens. Then by the time its at your eye there is no power up lag and IS is up and running :) The 70-300 did jump when the VC kicked in, was actually better then the EF 70-300 f4-5.6 IS in terms of IS and build imo.

If it's a small jump - dont worry that's how the tammys work.

77
Same issue mate - 2 bodies, returned them both and hired a 3rd - same issue.

Questioned Canon they advised to send the bodies in as they had never heard of this issue - strange they have never googled 5d3 read noise (dubbed the rainbow effect).

If you want to really see it - shoot anything close to 18% grey or shoot a landscape and check the shadows you will see it.

Better yet import it in LR and remove the default +25 colour NR reduction.

---

Funnily enough if you look at dpreviews review you can clearly see the banding. Yet they never mentioned it.

It is a good coverup!

79
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X - June 20, 2012 in Japan
« on: June 20, 2012, 02:29:24 AM »
FARKING HELL CANON!

Well at least if we follow SG's pricing its closer to 7.2K then 7.5K

Still - anticipation much?!

80
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X - June 20, 2012 in Japan
« on: June 19, 2012, 07:57:14 PM »
Bah I keep checking back for an announce!


81
EOS Bodies / Re: More 1Dx sample shots now with 500mm F4 L II
« on: June 17, 2012, 10:41:08 PM »
Lol i've made a copy on my ftp just in case these go missing magically again

but yes not pattern noise what so ever cant see it, same green colour throughout so the wb is spot on for auto - a little soft but i put that down to NR being set to strong in jpeg mode.

over all pretty impressed

with that said - i dont know if anyone else has noticed but the new ud lenses seem to have the same pastel rendered bokeh - its not dreamy at all anymore?


83
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: So Nikon D600 is real after all
« on: June 14, 2012, 11:47:30 PM »

I'm with you on that one Mate - I'll be getting one of these to compliment my 1DX (seeing as the 5d3 was a failure in my experience) - guarantee the read noise on the d600 will be better then anything canon has out at the moment. And tbh nikkor lenses really aren't that bad lol!

If they fix their AF unit it will be a decent cheap FF - if its plagued like the d800/d4, then I start to second guess.

The d800 is pointless for me - i don't want or need to deal with 70MB raw files.

If Canon bring out a studio camera between now and then - my money will go there.

I am sticking with my near zero noise at iso 50-200 1DS3 until there is a replacement

I wish i never sold mine :/

84
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: So Nikon D600 is real after all
« on: June 14, 2012, 11:42:50 PM »
maybe just maybe if a bunch of canon shooters jump to the dark side, maybe we will see a huge flux of gear up for sale...  =)  sweet.

If Nikon provides me a camera with better IQ than the 5D3 for half the price, I'll be one of them.

I doubt that D600 will have better IQ than 5D3. Nikon will definitely be keeping a good quality difference between D600 and D800 if D600 is half the price of D800.

If you want the best quality and the most megapixels, you'll get the D800. The D600 is for those that want full frame but have neither the money nor the technique to get the best out of the D800.

The D600 will be a bigger threat to Canon than it will be to Nikon's D800.

For the price of a 5D3 you will be able to buy a D600 plus lens or two.

The 5D3 has two problems:
1) price tag
2) sensor
and Canon can only fix one of those without replacing the product. That said, maybe the 5D3 will go the way of the 1D3 and have a short life span of about 18 months.

I'm with you on that one Mate - I'll be getting one of these to compliment my 1DX (seeing as the 5d3 was a failure in my experience) - guarantee the read noise on the d600 will be better then anything canon has out at the moment. And tbh nikkor lenses really aren't that bad lol!

If they fix their AF unit it will be a decent cheap FF - if its plagued like the d800/d4, then I start to second guess.

The d800 is pointless for me - i don't want or need to deal with 70MB raw files.

If Canon bring out a studio camera between now and then - my money will go there.

85
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: So Nikon D600 is real after all
« on: June 14, 2012, 03:30:46 AM »
Wow this will bring the 5D3 down to entry level!


86
EOS Bodies / Re: CANON 1Dx - New presentation & video -
« on: June 13, 2012, 09:15:06 PM »
After horrible experiences with 2x5d3 bodies it looks like canon's fixed the rainbow pattern noise and stepped up the shadow noise - not that i'd ever purposely underexpose like this and then try and bring back 4ev's but for arguments sake:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/33440790/dx/dxcropEV4.png (60% enlargement, iso 160 clearly under exposed then +4ev)

And here's a sample of iso 6400 which to Me looks pretty freaking sweet - again no rainbow noise in the greys - unlike the 5d3 bodies I had (and returned) - still hard to believe that was shot at 800mm!

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/33440790/dx/DX6400.jpg (13MB WARNING: acr beta raw to jpeg no nr in post)

Would be very happy with the above camera - these were shot on 6/6/2012 - not sure how many people have seen them but to me, I'm sold and not pulling my DX preorder.








87
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X - June 20, 2012 in Japan
« on: June 13, 2012, 10:33:20 AM »
In Perth Australia $7759 AU (which is a hell of a lot more then 6800 US!)

88
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X - June 20, 2012 in Japan
« on: June 13, 2012, 09:56:42 AM »
Finally - and to think i was considering cancelling my pre-order!

89
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5Dm3 Grainy Images?
« on: May 21, 2012, 12:14:13 AM »
I've returned 2 so far for the same issue

ironically doing jpeg to raw conversion in-body yields the same results.

iso 100 in my first two had banding in the shadows.

second body iso 400 you can see the noise even on the rear lcd.

this ones going back today - not sure if im going to bother with a 4th body

90
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d Mark iii noise at 1600
« on: May 15, 2012, 11:07:19 PM »
Hi Mate, I don't have a 5D3 anymore but I didn't try one combination.

FYI the Latest DPP raped my 5d3 cr2s - best combination i found was DNG to LR4

One thing i noticed looking at the sample shots on the canon website and wondering WTF my iso 400 raws don't look as good as their iso 3200 jpegs - is that they used the in-body convertor.

Please see samples below:

1dx http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos1dx/downloads/010.jpg

5d3 http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dmk3/downloads/15.jpg


The 5d3 iso 3200 image they used shot by the same tog in the same location 800mm FL on the 5d3 has no banding… blows the 1dx out of the water.

Where is that noise profile on the production model 5d3?!!

On that 5d3 sample page the 5d3 indoor iso 3200 wedding shot is banding free also... something fishy going on...

As noteed at the bottom – in camera raw conversion – maybe the body knows something dpp/acr/DNG doesn’t.

I can't confirm if the in-body convertor is the key, I wont be able to test till the weekend when i get my hands on another 5d3 but something to consider and try out

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8