April 17, 2014, 09:55:08 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.

Topics - bdunbar79

Pages: [1] 2 3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / 1Dx EC in Manual Mode Question
« on: April 14, 2014, 11:41:44 AM »
Excuse my ignorance (not just on this topic, but everything else too). 

I noticed recently that having been shooting in Tv mode with a +2/3 EC, I must have changed some setting where it obeys the EC setting in Manual.  Not full manual obviously, but when using auto ISO.  So for instance if I shoot at 1/500s, +2/3 EC in Tv mode, then switch to M mode and set 1/500s, f/4, auto ISO, the +2/3 EC still remains and it adjusts accordingly.  Previously, when I switched from Av or Tv mode back to M mode, the EC bar was never there and I couldn't do it.  I wonder what I did?  I'll check through my settings more but could it be from the newest firmware version where you CAN do EC in M mode and I just didn't know it?  Thanks.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / 1DX Question from a friend of mine...
« on: February 24, 2014, 10:53:44 AM »
He posed the following questions.  We would really appreciate any help!

Although I haven't had time do more than minimal processing, I'm pretty pleased with the results and with the camera in general. I'm puzzled by two issues - probably due to lack of knowledge about the camera settings. I've searched through the manual without success. Perhaps you know where these functions can be found.

1. I get no audible beeps for either of the self timer functions. I often use the 2 sec self timer for long lens tripod shots in lieu of the remote cable release. But the camera doesn't give me the audible tones I'm used to as it counts down.

2. I often shoot with spot metering in manual mode to give me full control over changing conditions. But the top-side display doesn't provide active meter readings in "M" mode regardless which meter mode I select. The viewfinder DOES provide a meter reading that changes with the lighting but neither the top-side display nor the live view display show active meter readings.

Canon General / Just For Fun!
« on: July 13, 2013, 05:22:44 PM »
I thought just for fun I'd post the top things I'm sick of hearing in the world of photography.  Here are some that come to mind:

1.  You can shoot better shots with a P&S than a 1Dx if you understand lighting
2.  Gear doesn't matter, it's the photographer
3.  Well, back in the film days...
4.  RAW is a crutch
5.  If you get it right in camera you don't need to do post-processing
6.  Canon's falling way behind in sales because of the D800 and DR
7.  L-glass is ALWAYS better than non-L

That's all I had right now.

Thought of another one:
8.  If you have to ask questions about the <insert gear>, then you don't need it.

Reviews / Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II vs. Sigma 24-70
« on: June 09, 2013, 09:49:03 PM »
I told a group of people that the Canon performed better opitcally, based upon REAL comparisons.  Not to mention the price difference.  I was told that I was wrong and the testing and reviews had to be wrong, because the Sigma is better.  Why did I get this response?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / 1DX and 5D3 RAW files
« on: May 20, 2013, 05:46:35 PM »
I have heard, increasingly lately, that 1DX RAW files are better than 5D3.  I have noticed myself, in other posts, that they tend to be able to be pushed farther.  Why is this?  Thanks for any insight. 

Lenses / 400 f/2.8L IS I vs. 400 f/2.8L IS II
« on: May 19, 2013, 11:55:09 AM »
I am only curious, but has anyone ever really done a true comparison in performance between these two lenses (and the 300's as well)?  I just wonder if there are actually any in-the-field performance differences.  The ISO comparion charts look very similar.  I was just curious.  Thanks.

Lenses / 300 f/2.8L and 400 f/2.8 at f/2.8
« on: April 14, 2013, 11:11:40 AM »
I have a technical question to ask the forum.  I already have some ideas on what is going on, but I don't really know for sure and wanted to ask, since many of you are so knowledgeable.  In advance, thanks.

I tested my 300 f/2.8L I IS vs. my 400 f/2.8L I IS yesterday at a track meet.  I felt that I had more OOF shots with my 400 and wanted to see if that was really true or not.  So I set up at the end of the back straightaway, and shot runners running towards me (from curve up to about 20-30 yards away from me).  I set the lenses both to f/2.8.

I shot with the 300 and the hit rate was unbelieveable.  The faces were razor sharp almost everytime.  My settings were 1/5000, f/2.8, auto ISO.  I was in Servo mode on a 1DX.

I then shot the same settings and the hit rate was much less with the 400.  A lot of the focus was missed (can see another area in focus just slightly to the right or left on another runner) or the faces were just soft and there was no real apparent focal point anywhere in the photo.  However, it did hit a lot of photos, and again, those were incredibly sharp.

I did realize of course that with the 300 the runners are closer to me when I fire the shutter, vs. the 400, which could matter. 

Is DOF (f/2.8 is pretty thin) more difficult to manage at longer focal lengths?  Remember up until this year I had only used a 300 for sports and didn't buy the 400 until last July.  Is IS more of an issue, even at 1/5000?  Does the lens focus slower or not as accurately as the 300?  I was thinking it's not AFMA since when I shoot golf with it I never have any OOF shots, ever.  Of course they are not moving much in golf, so I'm afraid the track problem could be my bad technique with the 400. 

Just thought I'd ask since of course as you can imagine, it's sort of frustrating.  Thanks a lot!

Lenses / Tilt Shift Lenses: 17 or 24
« on: March 29, 2013, 05:21:32 PM »
Hello everyone,

Now it's time I ask a question.  I am going to get either the 17 or 24 TS lens.  I'm leaning towards the 17 because I'm interested in a lens that wide, but I suppose it doesn't matter.  I know the perspective is different (7 mm that wide is a lot), but do either have any optical advantages over the other?  Thank you so much.

Third Party Manufacturers / Olympus OM-D E-M5
« on: March 23, 2013, 12:13:28 AM »
Is anybody considering purchasing this camera with a good lens?  I am certainly considering it myself.  Thanks.

Canon General / Post-Processing Woes
« on: February 10, 2013, 11:43:58 AM »
Just a friendly question here.  Has anyone ever done post-processing of photos and thought they looked good and they looked the way you wanted them to look, only to go back say, a week or two later, and think that is awful, what was I doing?  For instance I had a series of photos that I thought were exposed correctly and looked good to my eye as I was doing it.  Then about 2 weeks later I looked at them again and thought, these aren't bright enough.  This happens time to time and I wonder if it has to do with staring at a computer screen for long periods post-processing and then going back "fresh."  Just a fun question I thought I would pose.

Software & Accessories / Photoshop and file information
« on: December 15, 2012, 03:41:50 PM »
We are using photoshop 6 right now for a large paper.  I have taken 30 photos that I would like to upload to a gallery, and want to put the file info in, for the byline.  Apparently there is a way to add it once, and apply it to all 30 photos, vs. simply typing it in for each individually.  Does anyone know how to do this?  Thanks in advance!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / 1D X AF in Low Light action
« on: December 13, 2012, 12:47:06 PM »
The 1D X finally met its match Tuesday night.  I filled in for a reporter for the News Journal at a game in Mansfield, in a terribly lit gym.  I used a 135L with a 1D X at 1/500s, f/2, and ISO 3200 to 6400 depending on location on the court.  The majority of my shots were slightly OOF, and I attribute this to the AF system not being able to lock focus in the dim lighting.  Looking at my photos, it didn't apparently lock on anything in the frame.  In a few burst shots, the first one was in focus (while athlete still on the floor) but the camera lost focus as the player went up for the layup, even with face-recognition on.  Needless to say, as I'm going through my RAW files right now, I'm highly disappointed.  I will admit though, that the 135L is not as good at locking on focus as the 70-200 f/2.8L II IS zoom lens, but I couldn't afford the loss of a whole stop of light in this gym.  I know I've been spoiled with a lot of light lately, but I just wanted to point out that as good as the 1D X is, and it is, it is certainly far from perfect.  My suggestion is that in these cases maybe don't use high burst rates, but wait for a moment and try to lock on, then move the camera with the player, sort of like panning, and then fire a shot, maybe even just one shot.  Bursting did NOT work at all here.  Ok, I'm done venting.

Lenses / Golf Tournament
« on: October 04, 2012, 10:39:05 AM »
Hey everyone, I was just asking here for some advanced tips/suggestions regarding a golf tournament that I am going to be paid to shoot for the Great Lakes Intercollegiate Athletic Conference Oct. 14-16.  I know I've done things like this before, but I'm never above asking for help and seeking tips from those that are advanced sports shooters and so I thought I would pose some general concerns here.

First, unlike in the past, I will not have help doing this.  There are 10 teams and I have to get 2-3 photos of every player from every team.  I also need to shoot the awards ceremony at the end, on day 3.

How aggressive do you guys usually get with golf?  Do you stay far away and shoot people teeing off with a long lens, such as 300mm or 400mm or do you get closer?  What typical focal lengths would you use for the awards ceremony?  Worst of all, lighting is never ideal in these situations, so maybe using a 400 f/2.8 for teeing off and getting 40-50 yards away might be more suitable?  Metering may be an issue with high contrast/shadow parts of the day, which is my biggest concern. 



EOS Bodies - For Stills / Something wrong with my 1DX
« on: September 21, 2012, 10:54:10 PM »
Went and shot volleyball tonight and THIS was on my CF card!!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / A New 1DX User Thread
« on: September 16, 2012, 10:51:00 AM »
I did a high school football game Friday night at a Division 6 high school game and let's just say the lighting was the worst I've ever shot in.  Even late in the 2nd quarter, the auto ISO in CWA was registering ISO values higher than what I was wanting to shoot at, and I was even at f/2.8 and 1/500.  So I spot metered off the players brightest part and although that left the remainder of the player underexposed, it didn't matter because 1.  ISO was about 6400, and 2.  the 1DX allows you to pull a TON of shadow detail after the fact in post.  I want to emphasize that this is much much easier if ISO is 6400 vs. say, 25,600.  This may be a great alternative way to handle this siutation if you dislike shooting at high ISO, which I do.  It was still very challenging, but again, I didn't see any of the other photographers shooting anything in the 2nd half, and I still could.

Pages: [1] 2 3