August 27, 2014, 06:58:44 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 - Redreflex

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]
76
Lenses / Lens cap solution?
« on: May 05, 2011, 09:46:18 AM »
I have always found it somewhat annoying how easy it is to lose the lens caps on DSLR lenses. Why has Canon never come up with a way of ensuring the lens cap stays permanently attached to the lens?

What do you guys use, if anything, to overcome this little nuisance? I know Amazon has some cheap "lens cap keeper" solutions, but have never tried them.

77
EOS Bodies / Re: "Discontinued" 5d Mark II ?
« on: May 02, 2011, 11:24:45 AM »
I called all the four Best Buy stores in my Michigan, USA area this morning. All said "discontinued" or "no longer available", and the system would not allow them to even place a back order. I know for a fact that one of these stores had a 5dmkII in stock in store about a month back.

Is this purely a sign of the recent quake affecting production in Japan, or is it a real indicator of an imminent announcement of a replacement?

An indicator of stock levels, nothing more.  Out of curiousity, why Best Buy?  They are usually substantially more expensive than most retailers.  FWIW, here in MA the 5DII shows up on bestbuy.com as unavailable - as is the case for about half of the major retailers (see canonpricewatch.com). The 60D is also out of stock at about half the listed retailers, and no one is suggesting that the 60D has been discontinued...

Best Buy, because when I called a month ago, they were happy to match an internet price I quoted and can be picked up the same day. I'm going on a trip in 4 days' time, so wanted to get one in time for that. Having said that, I've never bought anything from them.

I agree that "out of stock" on it's own doesn't mean much, but not being able to place a back order in all the 4 stores in the area as well? Seemed a little unusual to me - why would they turn down a back order on a high ticket item with presumably good profit margin? Maybe that just indicates a severe production shortage such that ETA cannot be predicted. Or..... ?

Someone's gotta fan the rumor flames...

78
EOS Bodies / "Discontinued" 5d Mark II ?
« on: May 02, 2011, 10:34:55 AM »
I called all the four Best Buy stores in my Michigan, USA area this morning. All said "discontinued" or "no longer available", and the system would not allow them to even place a back order. I know for a fact that one of these stores had a 5dmkII in stock in store about a month back.

Is this purely a sign of the recent quake affecting production in Japan, or is it a real indicator of an imminent announcement of a replacement?

79
Canon General / Re: Any thoughts on 7D availability?
« on: April 29, 2011, 07:52:47 PM »
Here's a couple of quotes from a Reuters article on the Canon 2011 Q1 results and projections, published on 26th April 2011. The 3rd sentence of the article reads:

"Supply chain recovery to take until June or July - Canon"

In the same article, there's some information about current production capacity:

"Canon was forced to halt operations at its main camera factory on the southern island of Kyushu in March due to a shortage of parts following the quake, but Tanaka told reporters after the briefing its is now running around 70 percent of capacity."

Link for full article: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/26/canon-idUSL3E7FP23S20110426

80
Software & Accessories / Re: Digital Photo Professional 3.10.1 Updater
« on: April 21, 2011, 08:07:32 AM »
Question - do most people put their RAW images through DPP?

I've just switched from shooting in jpg to RAW 1 week ago (!), and have stayed with my trusty Aperture. Thus far, seems OK, although I've never used DPP. Am only scratching the surface of what I can do with RAW.

There are lots of very good RAW editors, Aperture is one of them.  DPP is free, and for free software, it is very good.  However, most photographers have their own preferred software.  I use lightroom, and occasionally export a image to Photoshop for extensive editing.  DPP is handy occasionallly as well.  I don't update it very often, because they are always issuing updates to add new camera models but not new functionality.

Thanks.

My understanding is that one of the benefits of using DPP, is that all the presets you have on the camera are available (WB, Pictures Styles - Canon website has additional ones that can be downloaded into DPP). This may make for easier adjustments (especially those new to RAW like me) that would be somewhat reproducible by manipulating camera settings.

Is that correct?

With Aperture, I'm not using most of the adjustments available. There are over 20 potential variables, many of which I'm still figuring out if it really has a practical role.


RedReflex, Aperture which I have been using solely, is applying Camera Specific Presets to EACH RAW file you import, found under RAW FineTuning. These are called all very naturally: Boost, Hue, Sharpening, De-Noise etc etc... Your screen impression can be very different between different import settings! Be careful to what extend they are applied (like with my 40D the preset of max boost increases contrast unnaturally).

Thanks. I'm not sure I can see a significant difference on screen with changes to some of these "Fine Tuning' variables! The untrained eye?

81
Software & Accessories / Re: Digital Photo Professional 3.10.1 Updater
« on: April 20, 2011, 10:08:38 PM »
Question - do most people put their RAW images through DPP?

I've just switched from shooting in jpg to RAW 1 week ago (!), and have stayed with my trusty Aperture. Thus far, seems OK, although I've never used DPP. Am only scratching the surface of what I can do with RAW.

82
Lenses / Re: Lens filter: step-down adapter ring, or not?
« on: April 20, 2011, 12:22:37 AM »
If you are using the hood, there will be precious little room between a 77mm filter and the hood, and it will be annoying to get on and off.

To clarify, that's getting the filter on and off.  It will be impossible to get the hood on/off with a 72-77mm adapter on.

Thanks. Hood's essential for me, so adapter ring's out for daily use and 72mm's in. Very helpful.

I would not jump to order a new polarizing filter for your 135mm.  If you only use it occasionally now, hold off and see if you take a lot of photos that would need one.  A hood, on the other hand is very useful.

A set of stepup and step down rings is pretty inexpensive and handy to have around, but I would not want to eliminate the possibility of using a hood.

I may well get an adapter ring anyway as you suggest, for the occasional use of the CP, although not sure how much I'll actually need it for a 135mm.

Thanks again to both.

83
Lenses / Lens filter: step-down adapter ring, or not?
« on: April 19, 2011, 10:32:08 PM »
Need your thoughts please...

On my two L lenses, I've currently got B&W 77mm UV filters with the occasional use of the 77mm circular polariser MRC. I've just ordered a 135mm f/2L, which would take a 72mm filter.

Should I:

1. Stick with 72mm filters (for those who agree these are useful!), i.e. buy a new filter, or

2. Get a step-down 77-72mm adapter ring (B&W has them - amazon, for an inviting $19.95). Whilst it may not be a good idea and I can imagine it would be incredibly annoying to repeatedly swap UV filters between lenses and leave a lens or 2 without a filter permanently attached (do most people always leave a filter on every lens anyway?), it would make sense to have an adapter for more infrequently used filters, i.e. in my case the circular polariser MRC filter. At over $150+ a pop, I'm not sure I want/need 77mm AND 72mm ones! So the adapter would get round that cost issue.

Suggestions very gratefully received!

84
Software & Accessories / Re: Insurance - travel within and outside USA
« on: April 14, 2011, 01:24:38 PM »
Thank you. Yes it is!

85
Software & Accessories / Insurance - travel within and outside USA
« on: April 14, 2011, 09:44:20 AM »
Hello all,

I recall reading a post about insurance for camera equipment some time ago, although can't seem to find it.

Any recommendations for insurance for camera equipment for:
1. Travel from USA to Europe
2. General coverage within the USA (i.e. anywhere outside my home in Michigan). My home insurance doesn't cover damage outside the home (I believe places like the UK have this).

And any comments that includes how easy / difficult it was to claim any loss / damage would be appreciated too.

Thanks!

86
Lenses / Re: Old film camera lenses for DSLRs?
« on: April 05, 2011, 09:22:13 AM »
Question for all - has anyone found any old film "vintage" lens to be significantly superior to a current day sister lens in terms or image quality on a canon DSLR? Or has it just been a matter of price for those or who gone down this route?

87
Lenses / Re: Old film camera lenses for DSLRs?
« on: April 05, 2011, 09:19:53 AM »
My suggestion is to focus on composition and the things that make a good image. The IQ altar is usually not the best place to worship.

I don't disagree with you here. But IQ is a relatively easy win ($ dependent), whilst composition is much more difficult to excel in. So why not consider going for the easy win with an affordable "vintage" prime if it works, since this form part of the overall output? Plus it could be fun to try something new. Hence I raised the question.

88
Lenses / Re: Old film camera lenses for DSLRs?
« on: April 05, 2011, 12:57:27 AM »
the EOS system.  That means you can't use old FD lenses on an EOS body, unless you find an adapter.
That said, it is probably a fair bet that many early EF zooms do not deliver the level of performance that modern sensors require.  The story is rather different with prime lenses - for instance the 50mm f/1.4 which is on the market today was introduced in 1993.  Later versions of that lens may have been tweaked a little, but the optics are basically the same.  You will find that there has been much less development of prime lenses than zooms, since zoom lens technology is much newer.  Some prime lens designs, like the Zeiss Planar date back as far as 1896, and the optics of many modern prime lenses are fundamentally the same as their ancestors - going back over 100 years in the case of the Zeiss Planar!

Thanks. So, where can I find an adapter, and can one expect image quality loss with this, 'leak' light, etc? So if I can find say a 24mm/f1.4 or 50mm/f1.4 from the film days, is that worth the cost savings, or am i better off with an L lens?

89
Lenses / Old film camera lenses for DSLRs?
« on: April 04, 2011, 10:41:39 PM »
First off, I'd just like to say that I'm reasonably new to this thoroughly enjoyable and informative site, particularly the forums.

My question is about whether old "vintage" lenses used on film bodies can be used on canon DSLRs?

I got my first L lens just 4 months back (24-70mm), and it's been a point of no return! Or at least I thought so... A buddy of mine has a Nikon D90 (bear with me, I know this isn't a Nikon forum), and got a new 50mm f/1.8 (released 2008 I think). He got his hands on a 30 year old 50mm f/1.8 in the past week and the optics just seems to blow the new one away (image quality, sharpness, colours), which is really quite a surprise to both of us. The drawback of course, is that this lens only has a manual focus function.

Would be very interested to hear whether this is feasible with canon DSLRs (I suspect not, although I don't recall where I read this), and if so, whether it's worth the cost savings particularly with having to manually focus all the time (I shoot a lot of my mobile 2 year old kid). Otherwise, I plan to only get L lenses in the future.

Thanks for your feedback!

90
Lenses / Re: Your lenses wishlist for 2011 - RESULTS
« on: February 20, 2011, 10:17:15 PM »

1. EF vs. EF-S

It's clear to see why Canon spends far more effort in designing EF lenses.  out of 113 votes for lens requests, only 14 were for APS-C only lenses.  that's a meager 12%, and I do think this statistic is telling.  the people who are going to be puchasing and owning multiple lenses tend to be those who take photography seriously.  if you're taking your photography seriously, you're likely to want to invest in better gear (quality over quantity).  if you want the best quality, it looks like people still go to the EF lineup for it.

2. L glass

By comparison, 71 requests were for what would presumably be designated "L" glass, a huge 63%.  Why would Canon be investing major effort in low-margin EF-S glass if they can be selling 5 times as much of the big...

Nice post. However, I think it's worth bearing in mind that both these stats largely reflect the readership of this forum, particularly those who would respond to posts and have the knowledge and experience to come up with a wishlist. In fact, I wonder what percentage of DSLR owners regularly read up on forums?

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]