Messages

166

EOS Bodies / Re: diy ideas on how to protect camera from rain?

« on: April 07, 2013, 08:26:15 AM »

Are you acting in an official capacity? If so, set up one of those four legged sun/rain shelters and shoot from there.

Be prepared to "rope it off" with yellow plastic marker tape or you will get crowded out of it by others. Also, wear one of those safety vests, you are a lot less likely to get bumped or crowded if you look official.

Plastic bags and tape do wonders.... Don't forget your lens hood! A small backpack with attached umbrella works as long as there is no wind.

167

Canon General / Re: Goodbye Cruel Canon

« on: April 05, 2013, 10:37:38 PM »

Do the art students work underwater, or do you end up in jail for drowning them?

168

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Can anyone explain what on Earth DXOMark is on about?

« on: April 05, 2013, 10:34:18 PM »

As far as I know, DxO tests just one copy of a lens.  Given Sigma's reputed less-than-stellar QC (not than Canon/Nikon are perfect, far from it). So, perhaps not errors on DxO's part, but rather copy variability as seen in Roger Cicala's testing of his rental stock.

This is my problem with DxO... to only test one sample is to get a meaningless number...... did they test the best one ever produced or the worst? What is the range? What is typical? It's a lot like looking at the road, the first car that drives by is red, and saying that all cars are red......

Roger Cicala tests dozens of copies of a lens... he can tell you what the best and worst are and where you should reasonably expect a "normal" copy to lie.

169

Site Information / Re: Love or Hate Canon Rumors Forum

« on: April 04, 2013, 08:49:09 PM »

But as all things on the internet go, your anonymous so people will tend to act differently than they do in the real world.  I know I am kind of an exception to that here, as my handle is my real name...   

And that is why I use my name. If I post something I am willing to stand behind it. If I am mistaken or wrong, I will admit it and/or appologize.

I have learned a lot from this forum and have gotten some great advice from it's members.

170

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Test Camera [CR1]

« on: April 04, 2013, 08:43:39 PM »

-new to the forum- Aside from the fact that the sensor is cropped, will the image technology be the same as the 5D mark III?

The expectation is that it will be new technology and newer/more powerful processing power, and that it may have equivalent ISO capability of the 5D3.... That said, if such new technology emerges, it is a safe bet that a 5D4 is well along the design path and will probably emerge a half year or so after the 7D2 and will probably have 1 1/2 stops (or more) performance over the 7D2.

171

PowerShot / Re: SX50 outperforming 5DIII +100-400mm

« on: April 04, 2013, 05:42:39 PM »

So please explain how that is "outperforming" it?

For starters it costs $120,000 less than a DSLR and an 1200F5.6 lens

172

Lenses / Re: Moving on from 20D

« on: April 04, 2013, 12:05:49 AM »

I finally surrendered my 20D for a 5d Mark iii.  I own a 24-105 f/4L and a 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L.  I typically like to shoot sports games(night also under lights), scenery, and of course people.  Any suggestions on adding one or two quality lenses?

On a FF body, a 70-200mm f/4L IS would be reasonably close to your 24-105mmL on a crop.  It is wicked sharp.  The f/2.8 is a tad sharper and a lot more expensive.  I have both, but I'm going to give up the f/4, too much duplication.

I just can't say enough nice things about any of the 70-200's.... and they are WAY sharper than the 100-400.... so much sharper that it almost has the same resolving power as the longer lens, but at twice the speed for the F2.8 versions. That extra speed can be nice when shooting night games, plus with the 5d3's higher ISO performance you are going to end up with night shots that are hard to believe.

173

Landscape / Re: Post Your Comet Pictures

« on: April 03, 2013, 10:56:02 PM »

Went outside tonight to try some comet pictures, but could not see it from my location. All was not lost though, shot this one of the Orion Nebula.

60D, through telescope, ISO6400, and 30 second exposure

174

Lenses / Re: Fingerprint "investigation"? (ef 35mm f/1.4L)

« on: April 02, 2013, 09:28:07 PM »

Your smeared fingerprint might be as minor as the third party mounting the lens onto a camera to make sure it worked before they shipped it.

I received my 24-70L today and know it had not been used.  It, of course had the tiny scratch marks on the contacts.  The lenses are mounted and tested by Canon at the factory, and if you look closely, they are on all new lenses.  Camera shops do not test lenses before selling them.

Actually...... The last two lenses that I bought, both were in what looked like unopened boxes. The clerk suggested that I try them out in the store ( they had demo lenses too), so she opened up everything and mounted the lenses on my camera and I gave them a quick check. It never hurts to verify BEFORE they get your money......I would never pay for the product without verifying the contents of the box

175

Lenses / Re: Fingerprint "investigation"? (ef 35mm f/1.4L)

« on: April 02, 2013, 07:26:27 PM »

Your smeared fingerprint might be as minor as the third party mounting the lens onto a camera to make sure it worked before they shipped it.

176

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Microphone recommendations?

« on: April 02, 2013, 12:12:16 PM »

I have the Rhode VideoMic and love it..... but thinking outside the box, there are other solutions.

Most cell phones, Ipads, and the like have a sound recorder ap.... makes for a cheap external mic of supprisingly good quality... Sometimes you can place an external sound recorder "close to the action" and add the soundtrack in post-processing.

177

EOS Bodies / Re: New Specs for 70D from Cameraegg

« on: April 01, 2013, 10:45:13 PM »

It will be interesting to see what the "ALL NEW" 18 mp sensor is like
(not holding my breath though)

99% VF is a big improvement
as would be the 25 pt AF and the 7 odd FPS

might be a decent camera if its all actually true

It could be that the specs are 100 percent accurate, and there lies the April Fools Day joke...... Publish the real specs and nobody believes you

178

EOS Bodies / Re: New Specs for 70D from Cameraegg

« on: April 01, 2013, 12:33:15 PM »

It's difficult to takes announcements serious on April 1st.
Though the specs look very good.

It's even harder to take it seriously when the last line of the article is "Happy fool's day"

179

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D L Announced, Shipping in May

« on: April 01, 2013, 12:01:39 PM »

ʇnoqɐ sı ʇuǝɯǝʇıɔxǝ ǝɥʇ ןןɐ ʇɐɥʍ ǝǝs oʇ ןıɐɟ ı

How'd you do that? 

http://www.fliptext.org/

180

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D L Announced, Shipping in May

« on: April 01, 2013, 11:46:21 AM »

ʇnoqɐ sı ʇuǝɯǝʇıɔxǝ ǝɥʇ ןןɐ ʇɐɥʍ ǝǝs oʇ ןıɐɟ ı