August 29, 2014, 08:17:12 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 - Northstar

Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 95
... a state-of-the-art fibre optic network ... the 100Mbps network ...

With normal cat5 cables you can achieve that speed, but not constantly and not more that few meters (~100 if I recall correctly) due to noise . To have constant 100Mbps for 20km, that's amazing and you can achieve it only with fibre optic.

Offtopic: Does canonrumors wipe members who haven't logged in for sometime?

yes...I remember that they did a huge purge several months ago. 

What "pro" does Canon have that's WiFi enabled.  The closest you can get is a 6D, which is not really something I would be using for sports.  None of the 1-series or even 5-series have WiFi.

I think he meant the Wireless File Transmitter?

No, I really meant built-in WiFi. It was a sarcastic remark. (For the why, read my other posts.)

Regarding the WiFi enabled...with the way the world is so quickly going (gone) digital and online I'd bet that the next Canon 1D series has WiFi capabilities.  I know for my own use in sports photography, it would come in handy.

Software & Accessories / Getty Images Sochi Olympics image workflow..Wow!
« on: February 11, 2014, 04:20:41 AM »
From the article link below...

At the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics in Russia, Getty Images has set up a state-of-the-art fibre optic network in conjunction with the AP, AFP, Reuters and EPA wire agencies to deliver these gold medal moments in record time. Consisting of 20 kilometres of cable, the 100Mbps network allows Getty to deliver images from gold medal moments direct to publications within 180 seconds.

Pushing through an image from capture to distribution in such a short period of time is a massive undertaking — and it's not just the photographer who is doing all the work. Behind the scenes, Getty has a team of editors, captioning specialists and Photoshop experts who are preparing the image for delivery in record time.

Once the images arrive from the photographer, basic metadata is already embedded in the photo. Then, there are three editors who select the best images to send through to the Photoshop experts who colour correct and crop images based on the best composition. They may also adjust saturation and contrast. From here, the images get sent through to the caption team who identify any names and send the images through to the Getty website and feeds.

Link to article...

Lenses / Re: Most Anticipated Rurmored Sigma Lenses?
« on: February 10, 2014, 05:13:12 AM »
An "Art" refresh of the 85/1.4 would be very welcome.


Landscape / Re: Mountain morning
« on: February 06, 2014, 04:27:11 AM »
Took a brief walk this morning and took a few shots. Cold out! -27C.

Shot with the 6D and 70-200/4 with a Cokin grad.

Looks very peaceful and certainly quite cold!  -27 Celsius can get pretty dangerous if the wind picks up!

Cervantes....well written article, very informative, thanks!

Sports / Re: Pole Vaulting
« on: February 04, 2014, 06:44:35 PM »
5d3 with Canon 300mm f/2.8 IS Mk II

5.15 meters

Olympic Champion and World Indoor Record Holder, Jen Suhr.

excellent images!!  question, have you had the opportunity to compare the 300 2.8 IS vs the 300 2.8 IS ii?, that female pole vaulter is a beautiful woman!

Video & Movie / Re: Made by Highschoolers: Technology in Education
« on: February 04, 2014, 06:41:53 PM »
Hey folks,
if you have a few minutes, I'd really appreciate it if you'd check out this video a friend and I made. It's an entry for the White House Student Film festival, and features our concept of a future classroom. I helped direct and film the video, but my friend ( did all the editing and CGI. Let me know what you think!

Technology in Education: A Future Classroom

nice job!!

Sports / Re: track and field photography
« on: February 04, 2014, 06:38:51 PM »
Learn to shoot in manual mode and watch the light meter in the view finder.  I don't trust the auto exposure modes.  All too often, the background can adversely affect the meter reading (such as skaters against a white ice rink).

Action shots need a minimum shutter speed of 1/500 (maybe 1/400 for younger kids).  Preferred speed of 1/1000.

Shoot your 70-200 wide open (either 2.8 or 4.0 -- I don't know which lens you have).

ISO up to 3200 often produces clean images with the 5D3 without noticeble noise.  Don't be afraid to go higher.  I often shoot up to 6400 in indoor gyms.  Remember, a sharp noisy photo is begter than a blurred clean one.

Shoot AI SERVO focus mode and single-point focussing with 8 expansion points.  Use Case 2 to keep your subject in focus when something else gets in the way.  Lock on to your subject with the center point and follow your subject.  Keep panning with your subject as you shoot.  As long as one focus point stays on your subject, your subject will stay in focus.  Keep in mind that AI SERVO is a predictive mode.  It keeps your subject in focus by tracking its movement, then predicting where it will be when the shutter trips.  It works best when you start tracking a second a so before triggering the shutter.  Track with the shutter partially depressed. 

Google "Canon back button focussing".  It may take some getting use to, but it is quite handy.

Set drive mode to high speed burst.  But, don't make it a crutch.  In many cases the only way to get "the" shot is with good timing.

Some indoor venues may benefit with custom white balance.  But, shoot in RAW and you can fix this in post if needed.  If not comfortable with custom white balance, shoot AWB.

Develop good habits for holding the camera -- cradle the lens in the palm of your left hand and keep your wings in.  Pan at the waste.   A monopod will help eliminate fatigue for longer events.  Hold steady, but not too tight.  Relaxed hands are steadier than clenched hands.

If using IS, set it to pan mode.  At 1/1000 second, you can turn off IS.  Some advise turning it off at anything above 1/500.  But, with the 70-200 f2.8L II, I can't tell a difference with IS on or off.

Learn to anticipate the action and be prepared.  Lastly, practice, practice, practice...

BLF and FTb....lot's of really good advice from both of you.

Sports / Re: track and field photography
« on: February 04, 2014, 06:20:12 PM »
A few things I've learned from shooting Cross Country that might help you:

1) Use a small aperture (but not too small), such as f/2.8 or f/3.5. f/4 is good too. This separates the competitors front he background, which is really important, as meet backgrounds are often very bright, colorful, and distracting from your subjects. 

2) Prefocus on a specific spot. A tripod or monopod will help you with this. This is the best method to freezing action that I've found, as it guarantees sharp shots when the runners are in that zone.  Use your 1DX to focus on one spot on the track, and when the runners are roughly 5 feet away from that spot, start mashing the shutter button.

3) Use at least 1/2000th sec shutter speed. Self explanatory.

4) Put your camera in AI servo mode, it saves time on AF

5) I hope this goes without saying, but don't use the 5D III as your main body. I wouldn't use it at all for action if you can avoid it.

Pretty good advice Teentog but 1/2000 shutter is probably not happening indoors with track and a 70-200 2.8 (maybe with a 100, 135, or 200 f2, but almost certainly not at 2.8 unless you don't mind ISO 12,800 and above)

As Brymills described, 1/1000 is a good starting point if there's enough light to do it at 2.8 and ISO 4000 or lower. (or ISO 6400 for others depending on personal pref.)    But usually there isn't enough light indoors to do this so 1/800 or 1/640 come into play.  With 1/640 being the slowest I would go for this situation.

Remember, for a 1dx user, it's highly advisable to "shoot to the right" in this situation, so if you set this up in your custom settings for an extra 1/4 to 1/2 stop of light then you'll be pushing the ISO even further.

Sports / Re: track and field photography
« on: February 04, 2014, 03:12:55 PM »
All the feedback so far looks pretty good. 

As a 1dx user that shoots indoor sports all the time, I would like to add some very simple advice for indoor action when the lighting is not good (when using 70-200 2.8)

1. You mentioned spot metering...don't do that.  Use center weighted average for this setting.

2. Use Manual mode and set your shutter speed at 1/640, aperture at 2.8, and ISO on AUTO.  Don't change these settings for action shots. 

3. Make sure your AF is on "servo" not "one shot". (i'm sure it is but just thought i'd make sure)

4. Auto WB is fine, if the 1dx gets it wrong, you can easily correct in Lightroom.

Good luck.


Lenses / Re: 24-70/2.8 Canon or Tamron: Which did you choose and why?
« on: February 02, 2014, 08:51:11 PM »
I am so much on the fence between the Canon 24-70/2.8L II and the Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC. Would love to hear why you chose one over the other and if you are still happy with your decision. I am very aware of the physical differences between the two and the various test reports out there, but I am more interested in "how they feel and taste", if you know what I mean ... Comments?

I'm probably on the other side of the fence from most people here, as for me I'm not on a budget. I just chose the best lenses that are available.

I started out with the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 II, this lens had been so hyped up that I was one of the first to line up to buy it. After all such an expensive lens had to be good.

It's worth mentioning that the 24-70mm f/2.8 II is the only apochromatic normal zoom lens made for full frame cameras. Apochromatic lenses are usually reserved for lenses you've heard a friend of a friend try at a show. They tend to cost $5,000+ and are made of pure moon rock's - I've heard. I hate color fringing and it's my least favorite image quality facet and so I jumped on the 24-70mm f/2.8 II like a kid in a candy store.

The 24-70mm II makes bad photos.

The problem with this lens is the bokeh, contrast and color. They're terrible. When they designed the lens, they messed up the correction for spherical aberration. This causes the bokeh to melt into it's surroundings and areas that are slightly out of focus to be mushy. You can notice a visible lack of contrast and color comparisons between this lenses bokeh and any other lens in this range.

Canon 24-70mm II:

24-70mm Tamron:

24-105mm Canon

Notice the mushiness?

I have never seen a lens make scenes look so bleached and ugly.

If you look at sample photos you can see this same effect.

Images from this lens look flat.

The 24-70mm mk I f/2.8 from Canon was worse as it has weird bokeh and the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 isn't much better (though it's the best out of the 3), but the Tamron 24-70mm VC really has this look that pops. It has more pop than the Canon 24-105mm, which is a lens that has a lot of pop.

The Tamron 24-70mm VC just has better color contrast and pop than any other normal zoom on the planet. Images from it simply look better.

Images from the Canon BORE me. They look pathetically lame and make me want to throw up. I'm a pro photo editor (I edited for Harper's Bazaar before I ever touched a DSLR) and I can manipulate color and contrast and character and texture extremely well so I can fix the flatness issue, but again the flatness is only in the slightly out of the focus to very out of focus areas. That means that to fix it you need to adjust these areas independently. The Tamron does not have this problem and so delivers good images without spot editing.

In the end it was easier to fix the Tamron's color fringing over the Canon's poor rendering of everything more than slightly out of focus, so I went with the Tamron.

If you have any doubts in what I'm saying take a look at this image:

Here we have a dog. Notice how his fur is perfectly contrasty and has nice sharp edges. Now notice the grass. Notice the dark areas of the grass. They are grey. The Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 II is a bad lens that makes bad photos. You should not buy it.

I bought the Tamron as a backup lens to use in emergency low light situations that required f/2.8 with VC and to stay in the bag 99% of the time and the Canon as my pride and joy. The Canon actually took such unusually bad photos that I had to stop, wait a second and think to myself "what in the world is wrong with this lens that is supposed to be amazing?". I wasn't even prepared to think that the Canon 24-70mm II took bad photos but they were so bad, I couldn't avoid noticing the problem, despite already making up my mind that I liked it. And the Tamron schooled it so badly that I actually preferred it after I had used a label maker to label it "For emergency low light use only".

Hope that helps, from somebody who's chose between the two regardless of price.

wow...i can't tell if you work for nikon or tamron....probably tamron.   sure, the tamron is a nice lens, but to say the canon is "bad" make your bias so obvious.

Lenses / Re: 24-70/2.8 Canon or Tamron: Which did you choose and why?
« on: February 01, 2014, 05:32:42 AM »
Sold the 24-105 to buy the canon 24-70 2.8ii...never considered the Tamron.

I live by one rule when it comes to buying most anything that I intend to own for the long better quality/brand..  (It took me a good decade or so to learn this).
A year or two from now you won't even know where the $ is that you saved by going the cheaper route, and you'll wish you had just bought the canon to begin with.

I agree with mrsfoto...the 24-105 is a great lens if you don't need the extra stop of light...but it's IQ is less compared to the 24-70 2.8ii.


Landscape / Re: Stars Above, Stars Below.
« on: January 31, 2014, 02:51:52 PM »
Eldar, he didn't ask you! ;)  Of course lots of gold but hockey is where it really counts!! :)  It's been a rough go here with the Oilers. :(


The Oilers won more than their fair share during the 80's!  Must have been fun to be a fan back then!

I just looked up the odds...Canada is favored to win, followed by the Soviets and US

Landscape / Re: Stars Above, Stars Below.
« on: January 31, 2014, 02:49:49 PM »
By the way, Mr Canuck and you guys think the Canadians have a chance at the Gold this year?
 ::) ;D
Curling?  ::)

Finland's got a good team too(and an outside chance)...pretty darn good considering you only have 5 million people there!

Pages: 1 ... 29 30 [31] 32 33 ... 95