April 16, 2014, 04:38:48 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 - Northstar

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 80
331
Lenses / Re: Canon Cine vs. L lens video. Hilarious
« on: December 27, 2013, 07:58:50 AM »
Funny bit...."the stops are harder" and the girl smiles with eyes widening.

332
Software & Accessories / Re: Black-rapid failure!
« on: December 27, 2013, 07:47:26 AM »
I like my BR, it carries my 1dx and my 70-200 all the time...never had a problem...and I'm pretty active when shooting sports.  I would recommend the product.

However, if I had bought the strap without doing any further reading/research on how it can fail, but simply just started using it,(like some people do) then I guess there would be a decent chance of a "drop" having happened at some point in time.  I was aware of the potential issues so I began taking precautions from day one.

We all know it can fail as a "right out of the box product" (pretty unlikely, but possible) if you're not taking some precautions/measures to decrease the likelihood of failure.

So with that said, there is some merit to the point that it could be designed better.   IMO


333
Portrait / Re: Wedding pic
« on: December 26, 2013, 07:38:39 AM »
Would like some feedback on this photo. Thanks

I think it looks good!

Maybe a bit too much vignetting in the corners if I had to critique something.

Welcome

334
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: December 25, 2013, 11:20:16 AM »
Merry Christmas to all the wonderful people on this 1DX thread! 

It's been very enjoyable for me to follow along in the discussions, learn some new things, and view the superb photos.

Thanks
north


335
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: December 24, 2013, 08:21:33 AM »

Black-faced Spoonbill (Platalea minor) by alabang, on Flickr

This is the Black-faced Spoonbill, a very rare bird reported in the news last week.

Read more about it in the link below.

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/340837/scitech/science/rare-black-faced-spoonbills-spotted-in-candaba-swamp

===========================

The Black-faced Spoonbill (Platalea minor) has the most restricted distribution of all spoonbills, and it is the only one regarded as endangered. Spoonbills are large water birds with dorso-ventrally flattened, spatulate bills.[2] These birds use a tactile method of feeding, wading in the water and sweeping their beaks from side-to-side to detect prey.[3] Confined to the coastal areas of eastern Asia, it seems that it was once common throughout its area of distribution. It has a niche existence on only a few small rocky islands off the west coast of North Korea, with four wintering sites at Macau, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Vietnam, as well as other places where they have been observed in migration. Wintering also occurs in Cheju, South Korea, Kyushu and Okinawa, Japan, and Red River, Delta Vietnam. More recently, sightings of Black-Faced Spoonbill birds were noted in Thailand, the Philippines, mainland China, and Macau[4] They were classified as an endangered species through IUCN in 2005.[5] Declines in their population are predicted in the future, mainly due to the amount of deforestation, pollution, and other man-made industries.

The Black-Faced Spoonbill population as of 2012 census was recorded at 2,693 birds, with an estimation of 1,600 mature birds. Breeding colonies occur between March and August, on small islands. These birds are known to be crepuscular eaters, using intertidal mudflats.[4]

Conservation efforts have been made, and surveys were taken in order to determine the opinions and awareness of the local residents, residing close to the Black-Faced Spoonbill’s natural habitats.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-faced_Spoonbill

Location: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candaba,_Pampanga

Settings: 1/500 ƒ/9 ISO 100 800mm


Merry Christmas to you too! Nice photo!

336
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: December 24, 2013, 06:12:19 AM »
One of a girl i shot in budapest Ivett,shot with 85 1.2 L 2 @ f1.6

Beautiful photo and girl!

337
1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: December 17, 2013, 08:41:43 PM »
1dx and 24-70 2.8ii at 2.8

338
I live in the north where it's regularly 20 degrees (-7 celsius) this time of year, and I'm regularly moving my gear from outside to inside. 

I've seen many questions on how to avoid condensation / damage to your gear when doing this, so I did a little experiment last night.  My gear sat in my car all night(12 hours) at 20 degrees.  I brought it in this morning and left it in my camera bag, which was zipped up tight:  (bag - Kata bug) (interior temp about 70)

1. checked on it 5 minutes later - no visible condensation - gear still very cold when touched
2. 20 minutes later - no vis condensation - gear still very cold to the touch
3. hour later - no vis cond. - slightly less cold to the touch but still noticeably cold
4. two hours later - no vis cond. - slightly less cold, but still cold
5. three hours later - still no condensation - slightly less cold, but still cold

After three hours I took the gear out of the bag and I transferred my files to Aperture...all is good….gear is still slightly cool.   I was amazed that the gear was still so cool after being indoors for 3 hours, I had never noticed this before! 

I should add that it's fairly low humidity inside my house…and I keep two 5gram silica gel packs in my bag at all times to encourage a dry environment.  I put new packs in once a week - and usually leave a few of the old ones in the bag so there's usually 5-6 in the bag at all times.

I think this slow warm-up method is a good way to prevent damage.   Leave the gear in your zipped tight camera bag and just remove your memory card for transfer to your computer.

I've seen other good advice from other members on this topic, but this is just my contribution/experience.  I haven't had any problems from doing it this way.  I thought some of you other cold weather shooters would find this little experiment of interest.

Thanks, Northstar




339
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 300-600 f/5.6 w/1.4x TC
« on: December 13, 2013, 07:18:42 PM »
It seems to me that stopping down on big whites is actually fairly common (as seen above). I'm constantly surprised at the high apertures people actually use when shooting wildlife. Sometimes you even see relatively extreme apertures that, on paper at least, I would want to avoid due to diffraction.
I'm sure the option of using f4 comes in handy every once in a while, but in practice it looks like the wide apertures get used for TC compatibility more than anything. Options are nice but getting the lens at the focal length you want is still the best choice. The 600f4+TC is top dog for birding right now, but if/when a new 800f5.6 comes out I don't think many people will miss the extra stop of light.

The wide aperture affects AF speed and AF point precision and capability. Remember, particularly in the 61pt AF system, there are f/2.8 double cross type points, f/4 cross type points, f/5.6 line points, and the center expansion f/8 points. With an f/4 lens, you ALWAYS AF at f/4, no matter what you stop down to for actual shooting. The extra stop of light allows the AF system to operate more quickly and more accurately. When f/4 AF points are used, they tend to be more precise than f/5.6 points, which need larger pixels in order to sense as well as f/4 pixels.

The point of an f/4 lens isn't that you always shoot wide open (although in the evening, it isn't uncommon...I tend to be around f/8 aperture for shooting during daytime, and f/4-5.6 for shooting around sunset, for wildlife.) It's that you ALWAYS AF wide open (by design.) And yes, with an f/4 lens, when you slap on a 1.4x TC, you still AF at f/5.6, which is still better than AF at f/8, no question.

Jrista....help me better understand this.  If I have two 1dx cameras(same settings) each with a 300 2.8 attached, but one set at 2.8 and one set at f5.6....are you saying that the one set at 2.8 will have faster more accurate AF capabilities?

That is actually exactly the opposite of what I said. Let me quote myself, for clarity:

Quote
"With an f/4 lens, you ALWAYS AF at f/4, no matter what you stop down to for actual shooting."

If you have two 1D X bodies both with a 300mm f/2.8 attached, BOTH will AF at exactly the same speed, with exactly the same capabilities...REGARDLESS of whether one of them is stopped down to f/5.6.

When it comes to AF, only the MAXIMUM aperture matters, because Canon bodies always, ALWAYS AF at the maximum aperture, then stop down the aperture and actuate the shutter after AF has locked.

Good....because thats what i always had thought.   Somehow i misunderstood what u wrote.

340
Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: December 13, 2013, 11:46:25 AM »


Canon 1D mark III + EF 70-200 2.8L IS USM
148mm, f3.2, 1/2000, iso500


Love it!

341
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 300-600 f/5.6 w/1.4x TC
« on: December 13, 2013, 11:45:15 AM »
The FD version was 150-600/5.6.  So should this be.  300/420 at the WIDE end isn't wide enough.  Sigma and Tamron both have super tele's with wider zoom ranges than 2x.

You have to figure there would have to be IQ compromises to support 150-600 though. In the film era, the difference would probably not have been noticeable. With constantly increasing sensor resolution these days, I'd rather have a 300-600 f/5.6 if it means the lens is sharper with better contrast.

The 70-200/2.8L IS II shows the folly of that thinking.  Building an f/5.6 lens to be optically excellent is much easier than building an f/2.8 lens.

I would also bet that no FD lens that Canon ever designed came even remotely close to producing the kind of IQ that a modern Mark  II supertele produces. An f/5.6 aperture at 600mm is also quite a bit larger than f/2.8 at 200mm (102mm vs. 71mm), so from the get go we are talking about a particularly non-trivial front element.

Zooms require compromise, and the greater the zoom ratio, the greater the compromise (especially when the wide end varies so much, in terms of AoV, from the long end.) The 70-200 has a 2.77x AoV factor (34.4°/12.4°), where as a 150-600 would have a 4.32x AoV factor (17.8°/4.13°). They aren't similar enough to be compared, and even though the patent is for an f/5.6, I would be willing to bet hard money that a 300-600mm focal range (which has a mere 2x AoV factor (8.25°/4.13°) is more amicable to modern Mark II IQ than a 150-600mm focal range.

It's unfortunate that third party manufacturers seem to sell more lenses with a big zoom range than high quality primes, or good zooms with a short zoom range. I guess we need more people birding. All it would take is a good 600f5.6 lens and most of the large supertelephoto lenses would become practically obsolete (or at least redundant), but it sounds like there will never be a big enough market for that without company pride on the line.

I dunno. Personally, I'd still buy the 600/4 over a 600/5.6 (or even a 300-600/5.6). I wouldn't want to sacrifice the extra stop of light, which is really the primary draw of a lens like the 600/4 (and often essential to get good IQ, especially in the kinds of circumstances you frequently find with bird photography). Same reason I would buy the 300/2.8 over a 300/4. The 300/4 is certainly cheaper, but the 300/2.8 cannot be beat for the balance of sharpness & AF speed vs. portability...not to mention it's versatility with teleconverters. It is the ideal wildlifers lens if you have a few thousand dollars to spend.

It seems to me that stopping down on big whites is actually fairly common (as seen above). I'm constantly surprised at the high apertures people actually use when shooting wildlife. Sometimes you even see relatively extreme apertures that, on paper at least, I would want to avoid due to diffraction.
I'm sure the option of using f4 comes in handy every once in a while, but in practice it looks like the wide apertures get used for TC compatibility more than anything. Options are nice but getting the lens at the focal length you want is still the best choice. The 600f4+TC is top dog for birding right now, but if/when a new 800f5.6 comes out I don't think many people will miss the extra stop of light.

The wide aperture affects AF speed and AF point precision and capability. Remember, particularly in the 61pt AF system, there are f/2.8 double cross type points, f/4 cross type points, f/5.6 line points, and the center expansion f/8 points. With an f/4 lens, you ALWAYS AF at f/4, no matter what you stop down to for actual shooting. The extra stop of light allows the AF system to operate more quickly and more accurately. When f/4 AF points are used, they tend to be more precise than f/5.6 points, which need larger pixels in order to sense as well as f/4 pixels.

The point of an f/4 lens isn't that you always shoot wide open (although in the evening, it isn't uncommon...I tend to be around f/8 aperture for shooting during daytime, and f/4-5.6 for shooting around sunset, for wildlife.) It's that you ALWAYS AF wide open (by design.) And yes, with an f/4 lens, when you slap on a 1.4x TC, you still AF at f/5.6, which is still better than AF at f/8, no question.

Jrista....help me better understand this.  If I have two 1dx cameras(same settings) each with a 300 2.8 attached, but one set at 2.8 and one set at f5.6....are you saying that the one set at 2.8 will have faster more accurate AF capabilities?   

342
Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: December 13, 2013, 09:10:37 AM »
Dear Friends.
These are point and shoot of Fun Animal shots.
Enjoy
Surapon

Funny shots Surapon!  Thanks!
North

343
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: December 13, 2013, 09:08:27 AM »
Great Crested Fly Catcher with Damsel Fly...
1/1600s
f/3.5
ISO 640
200mm

Lovely framing!

344
Technical Support / Re: Best Possible IQ
« on: December 11, 2013, 07:13:09 PM »
Sanj,

You always underestimate yourself when you are one of the best photographers I've seen. They picked you because of your great portfolio. Relax.

Just call the client and tell them you want to make sure you provide them with the files they need. Ask to talk to whomever is doing post-processing and find out how they envision accomplishing this. (They'll probably be so amazed that a photographer actually talked to them before the shoot that they'll love you forever.)

You can explain that you see several possible approaches and you want to talk about how he or she envisions the final product. Personally, I'm not comfortable with the ND filter approach because it's kind of a one shot, roll the dice sort of thing and the risk of getting "ghosts" is really strong. (See the first ever recorded picture of a human being: Niepce's Paris Street Scene, where the guy getting his shoes shined shows up because he was standing still while the rest of the people on the street were moving)

I've never tried the approach recommended by Martin Evening, but it seems to me that would be a lot safer provided the person doing the processing understands what they are doing.

Honestly, I'm a little worried about not knowing their expectations. It's very possible that the only post-processing they intend to do is converting and tweaking the images for CMYK. He/she may have a heart attack if you give them 50 or 60 files that need to be merged without talking to them first.

As far as cameras, any full frame will be more than adequate. Heck, you could probably shoot it on a 7D and be fine. Remember, the major limiting factor is going to be the output resolution, not the capture resolution.

very good advice here…very good.

345
yeah man, adorama is the worst.. I have experience the same thing.. Didnt get my 18 dollars refund.. support sux. by that experience no more adorama for me. sticking to bnh

don't insult our intelligence with this baloney…first time poster writing something like this.  either you're making a bad joke or you have no brain.

bottom line…both bh and adorama are solid companies and folks reading this post should feel comfortable and confident in ordering from either!

Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 80