October 21, 2014, 10:15:50 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 - Mt Spokane Photography

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 575
1
Reviews / Re: Camera Store Trashes New G7X
« on: Today at 06:29:16 PM »
Now that DPR has upgraded their review, some of the things are falling into place. 
 
One of the strong points is the much better lens on the G7X, sharper with fewer CA's.  For jpeg images, Sony has a lot more sharpening, and apparently does some in camera CA removal as well.
 
Check out the DPR test image setup, and compare raw images, they are very close except for the Sony CA at the edges.
 
AF speed is a weak point for the G7X.  It would be enough for me to drop it from consideration.  I'd already dropped the RX100 MK III due to its short zoom range. 
 
It does appear that someone wanting a tiny camera will have to determine which features he values most, because no camera has them all.
 
With all things being relatively close, I'd go for the faster AF speed, but there are just too many features that may appeal to users on one camera or the other.

2
That's why I'm scared off by the G1X II, it just loses so much detail at high ISO's...
Still have to decide for myself between Canon G7X and Panasonic LX100... I'm tempted by the size and FL of the Canon, but the handling on the Panasonic is extremely attractive...

At high ISO levels, a G1X II is light years ahead of the Sony and Canon 1 inch sensor cameras, the LX100 is closer.  They all have their points, but the G1X II is almost the same as the 70D at high ISO.
 
If you are concerned about loss of detail at high ISO's, you will need FF to be appreciably better.

3
Camera shutters fail for a variety of reasons, including heat and shock, camera manufacturers will replace the shutter if it fails in warranty.  Otherwise, they'd have infrequent users demanding a shutter for their 15 year old camera that has bounced around in the back of their car and took 100 shots a year.
 
Canon might be willing to help defer some of the cost if you ask them nicely.  You can purchase a new shutter and do it yourself or have someone who knows camera repair do it.  It depends on what is wrong.  Just the shutter blades are cheap, like $6 from Hong Kong.
 
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw=5D+MK+III+replacement+shutter&_from=R40%7CR40&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.X5D+Mark+III+replacement+shutter&_nkw=5D+Mark+III+replacement+shutter&_sacat=0
 
 

4
I'd like to ask some advice from you learned ladies and gentlemen.

I have a 5D3 and a Samsung Galaxy Tab S.
I can plug in a USB key into the tablet and copy images and videos both ways, but can I plug my camera into my tablet and download the photos from the camera directly (with the correct cables)?
Do I need some software to be able to do it?

I use a eye-fi card in my 5D MK III.  It can download to my computer or tablet or smartphone, but the files start downloading automatically so you have no control over the timing.
 
No cables or other claptrap.  I only download jpeg, but it can do either or both.  You might take a look.
 
http://www.eyefi.com/products/

5
Reviews / Re: Gizmodo reviews the Canon 7D Mark II
« on: Today at 12:21:13 PM »
The original 7D had a huge amount of hype, and it was a good camera, but when the dust settled, it was over priced and could not match my used 1D MK III.  As for sports and kids running around, I've never had a problem except with the old extremely slow to focus and open the shutter point and shoot bodies.  Its all dependent on the user, of course.
 
Once the hype is over and reality sets in, it will be seen as a camera for special purposes, and over priced for 99% of new DSLR users who buy a DSLR, then don't like the shallow depth of field, and put it in a closet.  This forum has lots of camera enthusiasts, but is not representative of the average DSLR buyer who goes to Best Buy or Amazon and buys one that looks impressive.
 
 

6
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: How Strong is a Sony Lens Mount
« on: October 20, 2014, 10:56:31 PM »
I did a search for problem with loose Sony lens mount.  Lots of items appeared.  There are lots of very unhappy users, and its not just with big lenses.  Of course, not everyone will have a issue, but when it happens to you, and someone tells you to pay $$$ for a different mount, I'd be very unhappy.
 
http://www.bing.com/search?q=Problem%20with%20Sony%20loose%20lens%20mount&qs=n&form=QBRE&pq=problem%20with%20sony%20loose%20lens%20mount&sc=0-0&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=088cb90a06dd486685aa82641df4ab92

7
FOR SALE Photo Equipment / Re: Flashes and PocketWizards
« on: October 20, 2014, 09:59:30 PM »
+1

8
Third Party Manufacturers / How Strong is a Sony Lens Mount
« on: October 20, 2014, 07:54:57 PM »
I've never heard of a camera user needing to purchase a 3rd party lens mount, but with Sony, apparently, its bad enough to warrant a 3rd party making a replacement.
 
Generally, lens mounts are considered to be very critical, Canon service manuals devote processes for aligning, measuring and shimming them to be perpendicular to the sensor, and the exact distance to sensor is critical as well.  Apparently, even a Chinese made ring will be a improvement to the plastic thing that Sony uses, alignment or not.
 
http://www.fotodioxpro.com/tough-emount-from-fotodiox-pro-replacement-lens-mount-for-sony-nex-emount-camera.html

9
Lenses / Re: Zoom or 135 in Place of 100 and 200?
« on: October 20, 2014, 07:33:04 PM »
My 135mmL was by far my most used lens for a few years.  Then, I got the 70-200mm f/2.8 MK II.  Now, the 135mmL just sits.  Then, I bought the 24-70mm f/2.8L MK II, and my 2nd most used lens, the 35mmL dropped off the list.  So... I bought a 16-35mm f/2.8L.  It gets no use, so go figure.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 With a Liquid Element
« on: October 20, 2014, 07:27:44 PM »
Nothing really revolutionary in this others have tried liquid lenses in the past without any real success.

If it is actually practical, that's a big difference.  Since they received a patent, it has some unique feature.  The fact that this is their 2nd patent in a year shows that they are spending time and money on developing something, but, it may never make it to production.

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 With a Liquid Element
« on: October 20, 2014, 01:10:30 PM »
Isn't this the 2nd Canon patent for a liquid element, or was the first one a April Fools joke?  I'll search.
 
Yes, in 2013.  Patent 2013-101227
 
There are lots of liquid lens patents, here is a bit more information about liquid lenses, which have been around since the 18th century. 
 
http://www.nature.com/nphoton/journal/vsample/nsample/full/nphoton.2006.2.html

12
Reviews / Re: Camera Store Trashes New G7X
« on: October 20, 2014, 11:33:54 AM »
Wait, the RX100 does not do 85mm or 100mm, the most common portrait focal lengths.

RX100 focal length actually covers both 85mm and 100mm (as 35mm "equivalent")

And which did they compare with the G7X, the MK I or the MK II?  There are plenty of other cameras with a wide Zoom range, but the video is specifically about comparing the RX100 MK III.  It Does not include portrait ranges.
 
Its just a situation where you can't really compare the two because they are not equivalent.  If you want to take portraits, forget the RX100 MK III.  You can compare common focal lengths, but the RX100 MK III is crippled.
 
 

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 2.0X TC With Diffractive Optics Element
« on: October 20, 2014, 11:26:22 AM »
Hi, thanks for that feedback @>neuroanatomist and @>NancyP. Cheerz !

It has been my experience, that most people purchase a medium-range fast-aperture lens, and then down the road a bit, they add a TC to the kit/gear bag.
But to find yourself suddenly nursing a 600mm f/4 with a TC on a thin-walled-camera-body. I see a chance of heart-break.

I am a DIY Loony, I make all my lens' (including make my own 'glass')
I have a Pentax P50 here with the front of the camera pulled out so far, a good 1/2 inch(12mm)
Arca Swiss seem to have a very accommodating level of flexibility. No doubt there are others also.



propter artem artium

Adding a TC to a big white puts very little added stress on a camera body.  Doesn't matter if its a eos-M or a 1 series. 
 
The lens is the heavy part, and its mounted to the tripod.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 2.0X TC With Diffractive Optics Element
« on: October 19, 2014, 11:20:50 PM »
A diffractive element lets you bend light rays more without some of the side effects like chromatic aberrations.  The additional bending allows for a shorter lens.
 
DO elements are very expensive, so, unless you wanted a shorter TC, the additional elements used in a regular TC cost less and work very well.
 
I could see a very desirable but expensive application for a TC with a DO element in a lens that has a built-in TC that can be engaged / disengaged. 

15
Lenses / Re: 100-400 with 1.4x teleconverter on crop body
« on: October 19, 2014, 11:12:33 PM »
It works poorly, if at all.  Don't expect good results with autofocusing, the lens may hunt, focus motor vibrate, or, if you are close to being in focus, it might snap into focus, or just take a oof image.
 
I'd say try a 70D with live view, or wait for a 7D MK II which will AF at f/8.  It will be slower, but at least, the other issues should not happen.  The 70D, and presumably a 7D MK II will AF at f/11 which means with a 2X TC.
 
Also note that third party TC's will have varying results depending on brand, model, and even within the same model (Kenko Pro DGX), there are different firmware versions that act differently..

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 575