March 02, 2015, 11:36:10 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 - Don Haines

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 253
166
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Gotta be patient...
« on: January 03, 2015, 12:14:32 PM »
Golf Clubs & Fishing Reels come to mind for me...

Ditto golf clubs... but I only made one upgrade... after that... it wasn't the club, it was me.
I resisted the urge for better clubs.... it just meant that the ball would be deeper in the woods or into deeper water :)

167
EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX or 1DX2 - that is the question
« on: January 03, 2015, 12:03:15 PM »
My bet is that Canon is in the process of phasing out their 500nm fabrication line, and that means the 6D, 5D3, and 1DX will have to be upgraded to use new sensors....

That said, the volume of 1DX sales is by far the smallest of the three. It would be easier to make enough 1DX sensors for the foreseeable future and keep them in storage. My bet would be the 6D gets replaced, the 5D3 gets replaced, and then the 1DX gets replaced last..... and that's a long wait!

Keep in mind, none of us know what Canon's plans are. A 1DX2 might be announced later on today, it might be in 3 years... none of us know, we just make guesses and speculate.

168
Portrait / Re: Post photos of other photographers in action
« on: January 02, 2015, 09:13:42 PM »
Out for a walk today and shooting squirrels :)

169
They then stopped supporting 500mm lenses... after I purchased the product with this expectation. The newer versions just gave me an error message saying it won't work with 500mm lens. 

Really?

I downloaded the latest version for the 7D II. It just happens that this morning I set up focal and calibrated my 500mm lens.
I didn't get any error message.
While it was set up I did my 5D II and the 7D II. No problems.

Thanks for clarifying.  Since I don't have a 500mm lens, I couldn't be certain...but that statement seemed pretty darn unlikely to me.  Why would it work with 300mm, 400mm, 560mm, 600mm, 840mm and 1200mm lenses...but not 500mm lenses.  There's no reason FoCal shouldn't work with any lens.  Granted, since AoV gets smaller as FL increases, setup stability become more important as the FL increases into the supertele range.  That may present problems for people unable to achieve a stable setup (but then, lack of a stable setup may cause problems for their photography in general!).
Very good point about stability. On a tile floor, my tripod feet slipped and was not very stable and I found that the ball-head made it very hard to do precise aiming. I used a heavy duty video tripod with a gear head instead... that allowed very easy and very precise aiming at the center of the target and it gave a rock solid platform to work from.

170
I have a laptop, and am going to upgrade its ancient 10.6.8 OS soon (10.9 or 10.0/Yosemite). I need to check the specs on the latest release of FoCal. Reikan has updated its FoCal release within the past week to accommodate 7D2. The easiest long telephoto venue for me would be an empty parking lot or top deck of parking garage at work on a weekend day (ghost town), assuming a rectangular floor plan (to help with squaring up the target and camera). The weight of tripods, camera, laptop, lens is rather inconsequential if one works near the car.
I AFMAd my 7D2 one evening after work..... It gave me a long hallway to shoot down and the floor tiles made calculating distance quite easy. A 500 Watt studio lamp helped illuminate the target :)

171
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: January 01, 2015, 04:02:35 PM »
And of that 1,000,000 unit downgrade how many 52MP cameras do you think Canon expect to sell to fill the void?

The downgrade is because the DSLR market is shrinking. I expect they are hoping sales might be in the few hundred thousand over the life span of the rumoured camera, not in the million units per year league. A 52MP camera is a niche within a niche, it is tiny and from a sales point of view, inconsequential, which I suspect is why Canon haven't bothered with it thus far.

1) I have no clue what Canon can expect to sell of a 52 mp camera that does not exist (and may never do so). Is your number based on Nikon 800/810 sales numbers or just wild speculation/guessing?

2) Thank you for agreeing with what I already wrote: "falling DSLR sales are not Canon specific and indeed maybe there was nothing they could do about it"

1/ It is a logical estimation guessed at from some numbers we do know. For instance EF lens sales 100,000,000, number of people that buy a DSLR and don't buy a lens outside the kit lens/es, 97%. That means the total number of all DSLR sales of all EOS cameras ever that goes to pros, semi pros and keen amateurs (the groups that almost certainly would get another lens) is around 3,000,000. If you thought every single one of those pros, semi pros and amateurs was to buy a 52MP camera (and we know they won't) and only they had no choice but that one 52MP camera, since 1987 they would only have sold 3,000,000, or around 100,000 a year. Give a camera a marketing shelf life of 5 years puts sales at an absolute maximum of 500,000 units if every single person who bought a seperate EF lens was to buy one.

2/ You are welcome. I wasn't disagreeing with you, I was pointing out that no 52MP camera is a panacea for any camera company, if Canon come out with one it will not turn their business around, it might stop them losing a very small number of the ever dwindling DSLR sales numbers, but it is such a small niche within a niche it is all but inconsequential. All the hyperbole about Sony are slaughtering Canon, or Canon have to do X to compete or they will die is ridiculous. People need to see the company from a far greater perspective, sure that might not help you shoot the entire DR of your next sunset (but truthfully who gives a damn about another sunset?) but it will stop people being so self centric as to not see the wood for the trees.

Canon owe us nothing, we owe Canon nothing, get the camera and system that best suits your needs. A 52MP 135 format camera will not suit my needs.
well said!
Few of us seem to realize that it is the low end cameras that make up the vast bulk of sales.....

172
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: December 31, 2014, 09:22:55 PM »
There's a lot of talk about this camera being a 5DIV. In Canon Rumors post from November, it's stated that the new high megapixel camera will come in a new line, above the 5D line, which makes sense to me. The 5D3 is pretty much the ideal all-rounder camera and I can't see Canon messing with what has been a winning formula.

http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/11/another-50mp-ff-dslr-mention-cr2/

Such a camera would be even more of an "all-rounder" giving the reach of a 7DII, the landscape potential of medium format

You're wrong about that. The DR and noise characteristics of a scaled up 7DII sensor would not put it on a par with other landscape cameras.

I'm still waiting to see my first real-world landscape image where the amount of DR you can get from a Canon sensor at base ISO is insufficient.  All I ever see is contrived scenes or scenes where compressing all that DR into the final image makes it look like crap.

Here's an easy one for you: go and shoot a sunset (facing the sun) where you've got interesting things in the foreground that are in shadow. And yes, compressing DR into a final image does
Sunset? Sunset? That's overkill.
Here is an owl that was clipped on both ends of the DR scale... you can run out of DR on a cloudy day....

173
Video & Movie / Re: Octopus and More!
« on: December 30, 2014, 07:11:02 PM »
WOW! WOW! WOW!

Fantastic!

174
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Confirms Development of High Megapixel Camera
« on: December 30, 2014, 01:31:21 PM »

Just as a benchmark, that site also claims that sensor size has no real meaningful effect on DOF.

They're correct, the only way sensor size directly affects DOF is due to the relationship between circle of confusion and sensor size.

Which is a totally legitimate, real, and not-ignorable way.

True...but it's a relatively minor effect, in the opposite direction from and totally overwhelmed by the effect which most people consider (changing distance/focal length, which obviously is not directly an effect of sensor size).

exactly!

and if we make a FF camera with the exact same pixel pitch as an APS-C camera, what happens to the depth of field? if you take the central 40 percent out of the FF image, it should be absolutely identical to the APS-C image... including DOF..

175
I purchased Focal and to be honest find it a bit of a pain to get it working correctly...so just left my lens at 0.

Then reading an update on Magic Lantern it said that they had included  green dot AMFA, so I googled it and found that while its a bit of a ball ache, I actually tuned my lens manually and you could too without spending money on this software.

At the time I only had two tele's and one prime to setup so YMMV

This a repeat posting......

I have heard claims that "Dot Tune" was a reliable method to AFMA a lens. I have also heard claims to the contrary. Most of those claims have been long on opinion and short on data, so I decided to give it a try myself on a 7D2.

The results are as follows: (under incandescent lighting)

150-600: dot tune (150 +9) (600 +14) - Reikan   (150 +5) (600    +6)
  70-200: dot tune ( 70 +7) (200   +4) - Reikan   (  70 +2) (200    +3)
  17-55 : dot tune (  17 +4) ( 55    +3) - Reikan   (  17 +5) (  55   +9)
   10-20: dot tune (  10 +4) ( 20    +9) - Reikan   (  10 +5) (  20 +17)
      100: dot tune (100  -8) - Reikan  (100 +5)
       30 : dot tune (  30  -2) - Reikan  ( 30 +1)

I changed locations, repeated the test and got the following: (under flourescent lighting)
150-600: dot tune (150 +11) (600 +17) - Reikan   (150 +5) (600    +6)
  70-200: dot tune ( 70   +7) (200   +5) - Reikan   (  70 +2) (200    +3)
  17-55 : dot tune (  17   +4) ( 55    +3) - Reikan   (  17 +5) (  55   +9)
   10-20: dot tune (  10   +3) ( 20    +7) - Reikan   (  10 +5) (  20 +17)
      100: dot tune (100   -10) - Reikan  (100 +5)
       30 : dot tune (  30   +1) - Reikan  ( 30 +1)

The observations are:
1) The Reikan values stayed the same between the runs
2) The Dot Tune values varied up to 3 units between runs
3) Reikan and Dot Tune only agreed once.
4) Reikan and Dot Tune can disagree by up to 15 AFMA units

If you look at the discrepancies under the two runs.
incandescent - 4,  8,5,1,1,6,1,  8,13,3
fluorescent    - 6,11,5,2,1,6,2,10,15,0

it appears that Dot Tune is affected by fluorescent lighting.

A quick visual verification of the extreme cases indicates that the Reikan values are far more accurate that the Dot Tune values. looking at the before and after pictures, the difference was obvious.

My conclusion. At least on a 7D2, don't waste your time using Dot Tune on your lenses, get Focal and do it right.

176
Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: December 29, 2014, 12:46:48 PM »
Cat -1, remote control helicopter 0.....

177
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: December 29, 2014, 12:26:13 PM »
Thanks for the nice comments all - I had the good fortune to see this beautiful pair together on Saturday morning, so I thought I'd share it as well:


Nice!

178
Photography Technique / Re: panorama
« on: December 27, 2014, 11:52:29 PM »
If you really go crazy and start thinking about 360 degree panoramas and multiple rows of shots, take a peek at AutoPano Giga..... It handles the big jobs quite well. So far, the biggest I have tried is 11 rows of 36 pictures (396 total) and it created a 40,000 by 115,000 pixel image (4.6Gpixels).  It isn't cheap, but if you really get into panoramas, it's worth it.

179
Photography Technique / Re: Time Lapse with a 7D II & a PC?
« on: December 26, 2014, 05:56:31 PM »
Greetings Rumors friends-
A little help, please?
I shot a couple thousand images of the kids opening presents this Christmas with the goal of getting my feet wet in time lapse photography. Now I'm just frustrated trying to find a way to put all the images together on my PC (using windows 7).
So far I have come up with this-
 Load the images onto a flash drive and give them to the wife, she has a Mac.
There is just too much BS on the web for me to sort through, trying plug ins that won't load and watching tutorials that, after ten minutes mention they are using  mac exclusive software. Crap.
I have PS 6 & LR 5.7 but I cant find a coherent tutorial where their examples actually work.
I'm not  the brightest bulb on the tree, but I should be able to do this, damnit!
Thanks in advance!
If you are looking for an easy solution, go to the GoPro website and download their movie maker..... You can import thousands of files in one click, make them into a movie, and store at various resolutions and nitrates.

180
Animal Kingdom / Re: BIRD IN FLIGHT ONLY -- share your BIF photos here
« on: December 26, 2014, 12:50:52 PM »
I finally went out to try my hand at BIF shots at the local lake.  I came away with way more than I expected:

Nice!
I particularly like the first shot.

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 253