April 24, 2014, 11:01:13 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 - thebowtie

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Also, I have found the Speedlighter's Handbook by Syl Arena to be helpful. 

Two good sources for getting into flash photography.

+1  :)
Syl Arena has a blog on pixsylated.com - there are links to his excellent books as well as his workshops.
I bought his "Speedliters Handbook" on Amazon for my Kindle - in hindsight, I would have better purchased it in hardcopy form - less technology required to enjoy it.


Thanks to all for your advice and opinions - it has helped me make a simple (mostly financial) decision - I'll add the Extender EF 2x III to my collection.

An additional benefit will be that I will be able to take the 70-200 lens and get into a venue (I live in Sydney, Australia) for Twenty20 cricket whilst keeping the 2xIII in my pocket - and not get hassled for a too-large lens.

I already have a Manfrotto CF monopod and head - hopefully the gate people won't give me grief about that (no problems last time - I extended it and used it as a walking-stick on the way in!)


Lenses / Re: AFMA w/ 1.4 extenders
« on: January 07, 2013, 12:08:03 AM »
an you please tell me what distance did you set your camera when doing AFMA with your 70-200?



Hi Mencho,
for the plain lens, I used the recommended 20-50x focal length rule. For 70mm I used 4.2m (60x), for 200mm I used 6.8m (34x) - that's all the room I had in my backyard.

When I attached the 1.4x, I did the AFMA at about 9.3m - 33x (I had to put the target at the end of the yard, and the camera in the house, shooting through the open door.


Lenses / Want 400mm reach (FF) - 70-200 2.8 IS II + 2x III or 400 5.6L?
« on: January 06, 2013, 10:41:12 PM »
Hi folks,

I have the excellent 70-200 mm f/2.8 IS II and the TC 1.4x III - which I love, paired to my 5D mark III.

I recently shot some cricket matches, and I think I need more reach than the 280mm available with the 1.4x, and without the bulk (I'm an amateur, and there seem to be restrictions on many games where non-accredited photogs cannot take in big lenses).

I think 400mm would be about right (based on some rough crops of the 280mm), but can't afford the big guns (400mm f/2.8L IS).

The games I would photograph would either take place in bright daylight or under broadcast-standard lighting (1000 lux).

Looking at what's available, the only affordable lens is the EF 400mm f/5.6L. It does seem to be very old, and has no IS.

An alternative is to acquire the TC 2x III - which would give me the same aperture, and add IS with a more modern lens formula / AF combo.

Does anyone have any experience with the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II with the TC 2x III that they would like to share?


Lenses / Re: AFMA w/ 1.4 extenders
« on: January 06, 2013, 10:11:48 PM »
I just did the AFMA on my 5DIII (firmware 1.1.3) with a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II and a 1.4x III, using FoCal Professional, version 1.6.

Like neuro, I have found it registers as a unique combination.

In fact on the 5D mark III, you can register by the lens and TC serial numbers as well - so the AFMA settings are set for Tele and Wide for each lens/combination.
By way of example, my lens AFMA's look like this:

70-200 f/2.8L IS II : AFMA @ 70 = 0, AFMA @ 200 = 2
70-200 f/2.8L IS II + 1.4x III 98 (70 * 1.4)  = -1. AFMA @ 280 (200 * 1.4) = 4

 I had forgotten the need to perform AFMA on the lens/TC combination - when shooting a cricket match recently, I found that there was front-focus when using the 1.4x III that wasn't there using the bare 200 lens.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: How to find shutter count on 5D mark III?
« on: December 18, 2012, 06:56:54 PM »
I got my 5D III from 1st patch...and it starts from 99. I'm guessing your had 1300clicks on it - that is nothing if you got some great discount from your dealer.

FoCal also shows shutter count after you run AFMA.
Thanks @Dylan777 - I do have a license for FoCal Pro - and have done AFMA - so I had forgotten that it also shows the shutter count!

Regarding the discount - I got a 5D3 and 24-70LII for a great price at the time (a month ago) - now the market forces are making the difference reduce - BUT - I love the combo and from my point of view, the price you pay is like what you pay for a car - the value is in the use you get from it!


EOS Bodies - For Stills / How to find shutter count on 5D mark III?
« on: December 18, 2012, 07:04:48 AM »
I recently bought a 5D mark III in Sydney - I just love it!

The retailer (an authorised dealer) offered it at what was a good price at the time although I suspect that the unit had been used as a 'showroom' unit for a little while, because when I took it home and put a brand new memory card in it, the sequence number was around 1400.

That may or may not be the actual shutter count - possibly a card used in another camera had been used by the shop to demo the camera.

I tried EOSinfo (had good results on my older 50D) - but it didn't work  with the 5D III (PC, Windows 7 64-bit)

Does anyone know of a method to find the actual shutter count on a 5D Mark III?

Lenses / Re: Canon 80-200 f2.8L Image Quality
« on: December 10, 2012, 06:33:14 AM »
I wish Canon made gray telephoto lenses...
I think we need a more imaginative set of colors!
Maybe lilac, puce, taupe - that way you could color-coordinate things!  ;)

Of course, if what you are trying to achieve is less visibility that you have an expensive lens, maybe one of the commercially-available lens skins could work - you can get them in jungle patterns and various other camouflage too.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Skiing picture advice
« on: December 05, 2012, 01:01:41 AM »
I'll be bringing along my 7D and 5Diii with 70-200 2.8II to the family ski trip this year, but I've never shot snow sports before.  Are there any tips on filters, camera settings or gear that would be smart to bring along?  I expect that shooting in the bright light, with the snow glare, will require adapting... but I'm not sure in what way.
Depending on how you envisage shooting (e.g. taking landscapes, or action shots) may also influence whether you are interested in slower shutter-speed / shallow DoF.

If you want shallow DoF, you'll probably want a strong ND filter, say ND8 or more, to reduce the EV so that you still get suitable shallow DoF.

Glare from the snow can be a problem - try a circular polarizing filter
+1 on this one.

Is there a need for ND filters if you bracket your exposures and use photoshop to blend in the correct exposures?  I took a course at Maine Multimedia this summer and my instructor said she quit using ND graduated filters and used photoshop with multiple exposures.
Good question. I have been experimenting with a 58mm Hoya graduated ND4 filter for my 50mm f/1.4 and have found that it plays havoc with the focus mechanism - of my old 50D and now my 5Dmk3. Focus is slow (partly a property of this lens) and I suspect due to using Evaluative TTL - although Center-weighted average doesn't make it noticeably better.

I have conducted some test shots recently to see if there's a better way - and like your experience, have found that I can get as-good or better using photoshop, provided I prepare a little more and do some Exposure bracketing.

What I see as the advantage of using post, is that you can make the exposure look anyway you like - whereas once you have shot it with an Grad-ND filter - there's no way back.

The IQ on the 5D3 is so much better than my old 50D, that I'm quite happy to do it in software now.

EOS Bodies / Re: Hydroscopic coatings
« on: November 05, 2012, 11:28:42 PM »
Oh, the problem of me being pedantic! ;) I should have double-checked before posting!
Of course you are correct!
What we want is 'Hydrophilic' - water-repelling.
Correct term - as used by the BBC in the above program, which I watched with interest, too - is hydrophobic ('tending to repel or fail to mix with water'). This is actually the exact opposite of 'hydrophilic' (lit. 'brother to water'). ...

Following up the rest of your post:
The difficulty with that solution is electric currents. The smallest scratch in such a coating, e.g. on the contacts of a memory card or in a switch, which tend to be vulnerable to scratches anyway -  and the conductivity of water would render your device useless.  A phone without an sd-slot, without mechanical switches, with a soldered-in battery and with a properly sealed sim-card slot might be commercially waterproofed using hydrophobic coatings. For electromechanical devices such as dslr's, current solutions are regrettably as pricey and cumbersome as they are optimal, if you ask me.

Mind you, I'm talking about fully waterproofing a camera here. Obviously such a coating could go a long way in making a camera more water-repellant.
Not only is there the issue of surface damage to the coating creating the risk of electrical problems - there's also the risk of any captured water retained in voids in the equipment - whilst not immediately corrosive, it can cause deposition of dissolved solids (minerals), and suspended matter (dirt) that can further harm the camera.

Keep it all out, I say!  :)

EOS Bodies / Re: Hydroscopic coatings
« on: November 05, 2012, 06:33:21 PM »
After watching the BBC program Miracles of Nature in which a treated mobile phone was dropped down a toilet and survived, can we urge Canon  to consider weatherproofing bodies and lenses in the same way.
Consider shooting in a monsoon  and not having to worry about water damage.

A small, pedantic thing - not intended to de-rail this thread. Hydroscopic / Hygroscopic actually means 'water-absorbing'. See http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hygroscopic

What we want is 'Hydrophilic' - water-repelling.

Regardless of dictionary definitions, water-profing requires more than a water-repellent coating.

It also requires careful engineering so that all potential points of water ingress (think buttons, switches, displays, battery-compartment, CF-card case, electronic interface points (HDMI, USB, N3, X-Sync, etc.) are also made to resist water ingress.

Not a simple task.

Many of us complain about the cost of new Canon bodies - being this waterproof would add to the cost (unless you buy a 1Dx - which is largely already water-resistant, but won't survive a swim at all.

The immersible cameras that are on the market are often mono-bloc in construction, with few external controls or parts, in order to limit water ingress.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Shutter Issue with 5D Mk3
« on: October 31, 2012, 11:47:17 PM »
Could it be that you are shooting JPEG, and have extreme low-light Noise Reduction on?
As I understand it - if you have it on, it will take a long time to process then store each picture under these circumstances.

Just an idea.

Slightly off-topic, but maybe not so.

I have a Canon 580 EXII and an old 420EX as well as a Yongnuo 565EX, and a bunch of YN-622 wireless triggers.

I'm happy with the triggers, and want to extend my flash collection affordably to be all HSS-capable, controlled-from-the-camera.

The Canon 420-EX supports HSS but only by manual switch control, and the YN565EX has no HSS.

Has anyone got any experience with YN-568EX flashes coupled with a Canon 580EXII that they can share?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark III sensor cleaning noise (squeaks)
« on: October 25, 2012, 10:55:36 PM »
I wonder how you folks go when you stand near people operating hair dryers or power tools - the high-frequency harmonics must drive you nuts!

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4