October 20, 2014, 02:59:26 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 [4] 5 6 ... 574
46
This is very weird.  The forum will be full of posts from those who bought one and it won't work for their Canon or Tokina lenses either.
 
Since everyone will eventually update their firmware in the new lenses for one reason or another, its a mess if Canon TC's won't work with them. 
 
I wonder if the error keeps the lenses from focusing , stopping down, or locks up your camera like the Tokina TC's do with certain lenses?  Maybe just error 99??
 
I certainly would hold off on one of the new lenses if I had to buy dedicated TC's just for them.

47
Technical Support / Re: Pink/purple streak in pics when using live view
« on: October 10, 2014, 01:14:24 PM »
A lot more heat is generated during live view, not just from the backlight on the LCD, but the snsor gets warm as well.  If left on too long, and the camera is in a warm location, it will go into overheat shutdown.  Its also possible that components in the camera are drawing more power than normal, which makes them run hot.

48
Lenses / Re: 24-70 swap
« on: October 09, 2014, 12:33:04 AM »
You might want to look at Lens Rental's comparison, he checked 24 copies of the 24-70mm f/4 and compared them to the 24-70MK I, MK I, the 24-105mmL, and even the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8.
 
Form your own opinion.  Roger will be the first to admit that his numbers do not tell the whole story, there are lots of other factors to consider.
 
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/01/canon-24-70-f4-is-resolution-tests

49
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: HTC Introduces a Camera
« on: October 09, 2014, 12:22:58 AM »
I think that someone forgot to tell them that low end small sensor P&S are replaced by smartphones. 

50
Lenses / Re: recommendation: canon 24mm f1.4 or 85mm f1.2 for wedding?
« on: October 09, 2014, 12:19:37 AM »
I'd get a 24-70 to put on one camera, and your 70-200 on another body.  Leave the rest home.  Two bodies are virtually a must for a serious wedding photographer, if one dies, you have big trouble.  A 2nd photographer is also nice, since its hard to be in two places at once.  Rent a 2nd body with the 24-70 and you are set. (Assuming you have proper lighting)

51
EOS Bodies / Re: Multilayer Sensors are Coming From Canon [CR2]
« on: October 08, 2014, 04:14:34 PM »
Those Canon patents are supposed to be a improvement over the Foveon weaknesses, but the big benefit is accurate and better colors.
 
 
It might be interesting to see what happens.  Canon is very conservative, so we do not see new technology until its been tested pretty well.  Even so, there are always issues when you get tens of thousands using it.
 
 
http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/07/patent-another-multi-layer-related-sensor-patent-from-canon/
 
http://thenewcamera.com/canon-patent-news-three-layer-sensor-from-canon/

52
Lenses / Re: 24-70 swap
« on: October 08, 2014, 02:38:28 PM »
I had 5 version 1 lenses, none were really good.  The AF issue is likely due to some 5 cent internal plastic guides that crack, or break.  You can replace them yourself.  Thher are also internal lens adjustments that seem to need tweaking over the life of the lens which goes out of adjustment due to bumps.
 
The 24-70mm f/4 is not likely going to be a improvement, its about the same as the 24-105mmL.
 
I'd recommend having your lens tuned up.  It might cost you $300, but you should see a big improvement.  The one weak area is the curvature of field, at wide apertures, the edges will be oof, or if you focus at the edges, the center will be soft.  This is a lens design issue and can't be fixed.  Its only apparent to those who obsess over IQ.

53
PowerShot Cameras / Re: G7 Picture @ Dpreview.com - High iso quality?
« on: October 08, 2014, 12:26:42 PM »
He is 13 years old and needs an low light capable compact cam. Shooting indoor @ discos,...
It should be compact, as he is want to take it with him when he goes flying and doing much sports.

I would not use anything but FF in light that low.  A 1" sensor is going to be a big compromise.  With people moving in a disco, you need reasonably high shutter speeds, so ISO levels of 6400, 12800 and higher might be needed.  Of course, he can possibly get some sort of image if there is a spotlight on the subject, but to capture the colors in low light is just plain difficult.
 
Also be aware that any laser light show will ruin the camera if the beam hits while the shutter is open.  Its a common issue for newbies who try to take video at a laser light show.  Warranties don't cover things like that either.

Thanks. He knows this problem. I know, that an 6D would be better. But to carry this Cam with the 24-70 2.8 around, is to much risk. Better an small camera. Lesser risk.

I understand the desire to want small, but if he wants to use it in low light, plan on returning it.
 
I would suggest a wide aperture f/1.4, f/2, or a 40mm f/2.8 over the 24-70mm L.  I bought a G1 X MK II as a compromise, its reasonably small, not tiny, has a large almost APS-C size sensor, can do ISO 3200 in a pinch, and has a fairly large  aperture at the wide end of the zoom.
 
I've yet to try it for low light events,  however, here is a theater shot of a stationary subject with my G1 X MK I at ISO 3200 1/25 sec f/5 (New model has faster lens)  Its ok for prints 8 X 10, but at 1:1, detail is definitely lost.
 
This is a jpeg processed from a raw exposure.  I went light on NR to retain detail.
 
 

54
Canon General / Re: Just a mention of the 5D MK III is worth Money
« on: October 08, 2014, 12:03:56 PM »
Someone bought it, that's what surprises me.  The seller is probably upside down on the shipping too.

Jim

"Delivery: Varies"

I imagine fax would work.  How much does it cost to fax something at Fedex Kinkos these days?
e-mail of a scanned copy is much cheaper ;)
 
However, it was not relisted, so maybe you get a authentic original1

55
Reviews / Re: Scott Kelby 7D Mark II Real World
« on: October 07, 2014, 11:44:16 PM »
Which begs the question...where are some 7D II RAW images?

Probably all 7d2 reviewers had to sign an nda to hold back the raw images?

Reasons would be that the usual suspects can optimize their raw converters for the 7d2 so no sub-par raw conversions are used in reviews. And of course (conspiracy theory goes here) that the sooc jpegs are like Canon wants them to look, while in-depth raw reviews might discover the skeleton in the 7d2's closet sooner than necessary ...

You can download RAW images from Imaging resource at various ISO levels so they are out there.  The jpeg images I've seen pretty much match the 70D.  I downloaded a raw image, but then realized that Lightroom would not develop it, and I did not want to fool around with other software for a camera I do not intend to buy.
 
I try to compare resolution, color saturation, and contrast with a similar image from different models.  The 1D MK IV beat the 7D MK II by about one stop as expected.

56
PowerShot Cameras / Re: G7 Picture @ Dpreview.com - High iso quality?
« on: October 07, 2014, 11:38:06 PM »
He is 13 years old and needs an low light capable compact cam. Shooting indoor @ discos,...
It should be compact, as he is want to take it with him when he goes flying and doing much sports.

I would not use anything but FF in light that low.  A 1" sensor is going to be a big compromise.  With people moving in a disco, you need reasonably high shutter speeds, so ISO levels of 6400, 12800 and higher might be needed.  Of course, he can possibly get some sort of image if there is a spotlight on the subject, but to capture the colors in low light is just plain difficult.
 
Also be aware that any laser light show will ruin the camera if the beam hits while the shutter is open.  Its a common issue for newbies who try to take video at a laser light show.  Warranties don't cover things like that either.

57
Lenses / Re: Is FoCal worth ~$150?
« on: October 07, 2014, 01:06:13 PM »
...  For me, a student with basically no money, its not worth it.  At the other end, for a full time, well paid working professional its probably a different story....

As someone relying on accurate sharp images for my job, I fall into the second category, and still don't think it's remotely worth it.

Given how often I change camera bodies or buy new lenses, I can think of far better ways to spend $150 for the business.

It's really not that much effort to do some experiments - trust what you find, rather than any 'received wisdom' on the matter.

Same goes for that old photo folklore of hyper focal focusing ;-)

 
I'd tend to agree with that.
 
 
I've found a couple of lenses out of dozens that were way off, my 85mm f/1.8 and my 35mmL.  Canon adjusted the new 35mmL, and I used AFMA for the 85mm.  If I had had FoCal when I bought the 85mm lens, I'd have had it adjusted, since it took -17 to adjust.  There were big differences from camera body to camera body as well.
 
I rechecked my table of AFMA values and found that my 15mm F/E needed a AFMA of -15 on my 5D MK II, but a +2 on my 7D, so the hyper focal stuff did not bear out.  I might run it again on my 5D MK III and save the curve to see the shape (Broad or peaked).  Generally, a +/- 3 makes very little difference in sharpness. 
 
 
 
I pre-ordered the pro version for far less in late 2011 or early 2012, and I thought the price was steep.  I've managed to get a reasonable amount of use from it, and once I printed targets that were good quality, than its fairly fast to test a lens / body.  I've also found that I can manually do a adjustment and get into the close enough range in less time by viewing at 10X on the LCD.
 
$150 seems extreme to me.
 
I'm expecting Canon to release cameras that have the adjustment built in.  There have been two patents in the past year doing some types of AF optimization, and the dual pixel technology seems to produce very accurate AF if you use live view.

58
Lenses / Re: Is FoCal worth ~$150?
« on: October 07, 2014, 11:41:31 AM »
I was able to pre-order FoCal before it came out initially, I didn't realize that the price had risen so much. 
 
If all your sigma lenses work with their box, that is a better solution for them.  You likely do not need adjustment or AFMA for ultra wide lenses, since the depth of field is so great.  FoCal doesn't work all that well with ultra wides because focus errors make very little difference in sharpness.
 
I'd suggest first doing a controlled test with each lens, Place the camera on a sturdy tripod, use a remote shutter release, and make sure there is no vibration at all.  Be sure to cover the viewfinder eyepiece to keep stray light out. 
 
Tkle a photo of a target at your most used distance for that lens, and at 25-50X the focal length of the lens using the phase detect.  Reset the lens to infinity(or mfd) before each shot, and take 10 or more shots in very bright light.
 
Then, do the exact same thing using live view and live autofocus (You can do both phase detect and live view for each setup).  Compare the images between the phase detect and live AF.  If there is enough difference to bother you, you need to use AFMA.  If not, don't waste the time or money.

59
Lenses / Re: 45mm vs. 90mm tilt-shift
« on: October 06, 2014, 10:52:59 PM »
As a long time user of both (plus a 17mm) I use the 90mm all the time, but the 45mm only rarely. The 90mm is spectacularly sharp, while the 45 isn't quite in the same league and it also has a few optical chromatic aberration problems when tilted.

I had the 90, it was great, but it was not the right focal length at the time, and I am manual focus handicapped because of my old eyes.  I used it tethered to a pc and a 27 in monitor to do my critical focusing, and it did not disappoint me.

60
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 06, 2014, 10:50:22 PM »
Rereading DPR's recent review at Photokina with Masaya Maeda - Managing Director and Chief Executive, Image Communication Products Operations at Canon
 
Here is what he said:
 
"
 Currently no Canon camera offers more than 22MP. Do your DSLR customers ask for higher resolution?  Yes. We know that many of our customers need more resolution and this is under consideration. In the very near future you can expect us to show something in terms of mirrorless and also a higher resolution sensor."
 
Is it possible that "The Very Near Future" is here tomorrow??  I'm not convinced, I'll wait and see in 13 hours.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 574