Messages

1

Technical Support / Re: Completely off topic but you gotta see this....

« on: June 18, 2013, 11:42:12 PM »

If they couldn't be bothered to read the manuals then what can one say.

Software programs overriding manual control is nothing unusual, it ends up saving lives more often than not - humans are humans after all.

Someone who thinks that a pilots manual covers all the tiny technical details needs to read one.  They can't possibly be large enough to cover everything, and they don't. A pilot needs to be able to find information reasonably quickly.  That was definitely a abnormal thing for a pilot to do, but it should not have resulted in a accident.  I'll bet the software was revised quietly later on.  The FAA and EASA don't like computer software to promote accidents.

The OP mentions that this was a new plane and the crew was testing it without reading the run-up manual. Reading the manuals and the safety procedure is something the crew should have done. Probably the crew thought they had all the experience in the world to fly the aircraft and got too cocky.

Mishaps due to software have happened but mostly due to the fact that the crew were not aware of what the software would do in certain situations. Training should have taken care of such instances but this is where airlines have probably cut corners.

That said, there was no software error in this case ... it was the violation of test procedures that led to the crash -

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/violation-of-test-procedures-led-to-toulouse-a340-600-319969/

 
 
Yes, it was a highly trained Airbus technician's error and nothing to do with software or reading the manual, the customer crew aboard had absolutely nothing to do with the accident except to point out to the Airbus technician operating the plane that it had started moving toward the wall.
 
It was the firmware in the Technician that was faulty

2

EOS Bodies / Re: Moire in the 1DX and 5D3

« on: June 18, 2013, 11:26:16 PM »

The lens is oversampling the sensor.

I'm afraid I don't understand this statement.  A lens is an analog device; I don't see how it can "sample" anything.

Ideally, it provides a perfect image focused upon the sensor - that's the goal, is it not?  At worst, the image has lost some resolution, and perhaps has some aberrations introduced.  But moire isn't either of these two effects.  As the respondent below pointed out, you never see this sort of thing with film (an analog media).

So I would assume it is a byproduct of the way the system samples the sensor array and merges the four color pixels into one.  But the lens has nothing to do with that, unless you are suggesting that there is something inherent to the performance of the lens that causes this effect when the sensor samples.

Would you please explain this (or point me to a reference that does)?

Thank you.

Its a side effect that appears as you get higher frequencies in the image.   Unfortunately, once its captured, it can be reduced but not eliminated.
 
The part the lens plays is in delivering high resolution that lets the fine detail be projected on the sensor.  Stopping way down filters out the moiré by reducing resolution.
 
https://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/9544/~/what-is-moir%E3%A9%3F
 
 

3

Technical Support / Re: Completely off topic but you gotta see this....

« on: June 18, 2013, 11:02:31 PM »

http://www.snopes.com/photos/airplane/etihad.asp

'nuff said

 
Good Catch dr croubie.

4

Lenses / Re: Tokina AF 17mm f/3.5 AT-X Pro

« on: June 18, 2013, 10:44:33 PM »

I bought mine used for $125, it was a real bargain.  I liked it so much that I sold my 17-40L.
 
While its not perfect, it is a excellent lens and there are not a whole lot of 17mm FF prime lenses for Canon.  I'm not much of a wide angle photographer, but it works for me.  This is a snap shot I took shortly after buying the lens.
 
It was taken with my   5D MK II at ISO 100, f/16, 1/60 sec.
 

 
 

5

Canon General / Re: When out & about, how do y'all respond to gear small talk?

« on: June 18, 2013, 09:28:20 PM »

I seldom get comments like that, I occasionally have someone ask what camera I'm using and I tell them.  Some might say "Nice Outfit or Nice camera and I say "Thank You".  It happens so seldom that I've never thought much about it.

6

EOS Bodies / Re: Bizarre grid "pattern" with Rebel t3i/600d

« on: June 18, 2013, 09:17:22 PM »

I also can't see what you are describing.  There is a annoying change in brightness when I place the mouse on the image or move it away.

7

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D3 LCD brightness: Auto or manual?

« on: June 18, 2013, 09:13:55 PM »

I tried manual, but it has to be changed if the light level changes substantially.  Finally, I went back to auto and that works better for me.
 
I'd do which ever works for you, there is no right or wrong involved.

8

Technical Support / Re: Completely off topic but you gotta see this....

« on: June 18, 2013, 01:36:05 PM »

Its been a common issue with Airbus aircraft, where the computers override the pilots.  Some have crashed due to this, but the design philosophy continues.  The systems are so complex that no pilot can know what a computer might do next. 
 
A difference of design philosophy between Boeing and Airbus.
 

9

Canon General / Re: improving IQ in landscape

« on: June 18, 2013, 12:23:19 PM »

Landscape does not mean wide angle, some use 300mm.  It all depends on the subject.
 
Stitching images brings its own distortions, and a proper head + good stitching software is expensive, and unlike a lens, software has little or no resale value.  It does yield supurb results when done properly. 
A TS lens works well, but they are very expensive.  At least, they have resale value.
 
I'm sure there are lots of different takes on this,  and all have merit, I'd not argue with opinions because they have worked for the poster.
 
Lightroom 5 has some pretty good lens distortion and perspective correction, I'd like to see a wide angle expert post some corrected landscape images using the upright feature or the manual distortion correction.  You lose some of the image, but not as much as with stitching..

10

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L Non-IS Discontinued?

« on: June 17, 2013, 11:19:05 PM »

It would indeed be sad to see it disappear.  Its a fine lens, and affordable. 

11

Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 II. How much AFMA does your copy need? What's acceptable?

« on: June 17, 2013, 11:13:18 PM »

I don't worry unless it exceeds about 14.  9 or 10 is fine.
 
My 24-70 MK II on a 5D MK III was -5 tele and +1 Wide.
 
You can see other results at Reikan Focal. I've pasted in the chart, the box in the lower right corner shows the AFMA spread over 10 bodies.
 AF Microadjustment Spread
Again, if have the information available we will show the spread of the AF Microadjustment/Fine Tune values determined by FoCal for the chosen camera/lens combination:
 

• The title will show the number of tests and number of unique bodies used for these results
• The height of each bar shows how many of the camera/lens combinations are using this value of AF Microadjustment/Fine Tune
• The colour of the bar shows it’s distance from 0 – red indicates front focus, and blue indicated back focus.

12

Lenses / Re: Canon 100mm macro L or Zeiss 50mm makro?

« on: June 17, 2013, 03:29:08 PM »

I guess I forgot to mention I will be using these on my 6D. Thanks for all the info so far.

A longer focal length for a macro means you do not have to get so close, this allows the subject to be naturally illuminated without shadows from a lens 2 inches away.  Since the 50mm is not a true macro, it likely does not focus as closely.
Personally, 100mm is the minimum I'd want to use for macro on FF, and longer is better.  If you are taking casual images, the IS of the Canon L really helps, it works far better than I ever expected, I can get close and still not use a tripod and macro head.  Don't overlook some of the other third party macro lenses, there are lots of very good ones.
 
On a crop camera, 50mm might be a good choice, but there again, on a crop body, the Canon 60mm Macro has a lot going for it.

13

Lenses / Re: $1000 .. what to buy

« on: June 17, 2013, 03:20:18 PM »

You have three lenses covering 85mm and 100mm, but none wider than 24mm. 
 
If you want ultra wide, you might look at a 17-40mmL.  Mine was a good lens, I just never warmed up to ultra wide shots.  I now have a 16-35 and it gets very little use.  You need to be a person who likes the wide shots I guess.
 
I'm finding that I no longer use my 35mmL, 85mm f/1.8, 50mm's, or even my 135mmL since I bought the 24-70 MK II and the 70-200 MK II lenses.  I sold all three of my 50mm lenses, and my 85, but still have the others.  My 100mmL is staying, its a lens I'll keep.  My 24-105mmL now gets little use, but I've kept it.

14

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Worth getting an SD card for 5D3?

« on: June 17, 2013, 12:20:06 AM »

I use a CF Card and write at the same time to the SD card, gives me two copies of everything I shoot (on the 5DMK III).

To cover the speed issue on the Canon Buffer/write issue, I use a 128GB CF Card @ 100Mbs + 64GB SD card @ 95Mbs, so slowest write speed should be the SD Card @ 95Mbs, which I can live with.

I do this as I have twice now had CF Cards corrupted, fortunately with Software I've rescued the Images, so now I cover my Bases by writing to both Cards, I do the same on my 1Dx, but both CF Cards are 128GB 100Mbs, so not an issue like the 5DMK III.

Try to find a situation where the write speed on your SD Card is as close as the Write speed on your CF Card, then the issue is no longer an issue and you have the convenience of a set of "Back Up" Images.

 
You will never see close to a 95 MB/sec SD card write speed on a 5D MK III.  You can put a 95 MB/sec card in a 5D MK III, but you will eventually get about 10 mb/sec due to the type of SD controller in the camera.
 
The card speed is limited by the camera.
 
 
Speed advertisements for SD cards are misleading, since they only apply to a new and blank card, and they are for Cameras with UHS-1 controllers which have a internal bus speed and thus write about 2X faster.
 
 
Initially, you might get 20 MB/sec or even more in your 5D MK III, but ... once you have filled up that SD card, and do a in camera normal format, the write speed drops to 10 MB/sec or less.  This is because the controller must first go thru the slow process of erasing a memory block before writing to it  To regain the lost speed, you must do a low level format which erases the card.  It can take hours to do that for a large card.
 
 
 
All the reviews for SD cards are for a card that has had a low level format first. 
 
http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/06/the-5d-mark-iii-sd-memory-cards/

15

Software & Accessories / Re: Recommended Video cards for use with Adobe Premier...?

« on: June 16, 2013, 11:59:37 PM »

In case you did not see this, it basically repeats docholiday's response.
 
http://www.nvidia.com/object/premiere-pro-cs6.html
 
Be sure to check the power requirements, you might need a amazingly big power supply which then means better cooling.