April 16, 2014, 04:41:18 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 - Mt Spokane Photography

Pages: 1 ... 316 317 [318] 319 320 ... 499
4756
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Mirrorless Entry
« on: June 19, 2012, 05:11:08 PM »
Mirrorless cameras are a path upward for point and shoot users, not for DSLR users.   Sales are shifting from P&S to Mirrorless and DSLR sales is also growing.
 
I'm sure that there will be a adapter that lets a photographer use EF & EF-S lenses if wanted, but the whole point is to make a small interchangable lens camera, not one that needs EF lenses and is DSLR sized.
 
If it were a FF mirrorless camera that was compatible with EF lenses, it would be about the size of a current FF dslr, but without a optical viewfinder.

4757
Lenses / Re: Canon 100-400L, Sigma Bigma (50-500), or something else?
« on: June 19, 2012, 10:31:30 AM »
At 400mm, there is really nothing out there that can touch the 100-400mmL or the 400mm f/5.6L in the under $2,000 range.
 
I have owned the 100-400, 400 5.6, 300mmL, and a host of others.  I ended up keeping the 100-400L as being very good, and easy to carry in a bag because its short when telescoped in.  It also has good resale value, perhaps better than the other two.
 
I bought a D800 recently and am selling it.  There is no good low cost telephoto solution that comes close to my 100-400mmL.  The best of a bad lot may be the Bigma 50-500 OS, but I've seen few objective tests.  The NON OS version was not all that good.

4758
Minor Light leaks were reported on the 5D MK II 4 years ago when it came out.  Many other cameras have them too.  They are so minor that they do not affect images, and it has not bothered any photographers these past 4 years.

4759
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5Dm3 Grainy Images?
« on: June 19, 2012, 10:20:12 AM »
Sorry for the delay in responding!  I took a look, and some of it was post-process (had to +1.85 EV in LR4.1 RC2) which was way too much...

OTH, I had some images checked out at the local photography school in a weekend course I was taking, and even just straight conversion images (RAW to JPEG) in the latest version of DPP, there was a ton of grain similar to this, and the instructor used it as an example of excessive digital noise.  Also, in my 550D (t2i) I didn't notice the same issue with finding the proper exposure as I'm finding with the 5Dm3.  Just seems to expose everything a touch dark.

And thanks for the comments on my son - he's the majority of what I shoot, but I'm branching out now.

Sensors can be bad.  They have lots of on sensor electronics for noise removal, and like any electronic item, can be defective or crippled.
 
Return it for another, never wait until its too late.  If you cannot exchange it, send it to Canon with a example of a properly exposed but noisy image.  All digital sensors have noise, even at ISO 100, but it should not be noticible until you get to about ISO 800, and then, a tough of nr might sometimes be needed.
 
My 5D MK III and my Nikon D800 will produce slightly grainy images when viewed 100% at ISO 800 or over with no NR, the D800 is the worst.  NR cleans it up nicely, and as long as its very light NR, the image will remain sharp.  As soon as you have to use a lot of NR, resolution suffers, but even then, prints at normal sizes will look sharp.

4760
It might be a bad memory card.  Try doing a full (not Quick) format.  For CF cards, this will have to be done in a computer, but you can do it in camera for a SD card if you select the option.
 
A full or low level format will erase every memory location, and mark bad sectors so the camera will not try to write data to them and hang.
 
Formatting a CF card in camera does not detect bad memory sectors, it just updates the fat table to indicate that the card is empty.  Its always a good idea to do a in camera format after a low level format in your computer.
 
Other than a bad memory card, I'd send it to canon, or exchange it for another with your dealer.

4761
You need to convert to prorez to edit, mov files are not edit friendly, but prores is.  After you edit, you will want to save as a player friendly file.
 
http://prores-aic-converter.com/?tag=transcode-canon-mov-to-prores-codec-on-mac-os-x-lion


Thank you for the prompt reply.

Hmm...seems pavtube is a pay for application...is there not something from canon (I've been trying to see if the 'log' plugin Canon offers for FCP will work with FCPX) or something open source that will do this?

I know it sounds cheap after spending $$$$ on a 5D3..but just thinking....it is a codec manipulation, and would think something open source would be available ?

TIA,

cayenne

 
Its not likely going to be free, patent licensing fees are involved with mp4 files.  Its worth the $28 to be able to get good results.  It can be much more expensive.  You  can search for a free converter, there may be one.

4762
You need to convert to prorez to edit, mov files are not edit friendly, but prores is.  After you edit, you will want to save as a player friendly file.
 
http://prores-aic-converter.com/?tag=transcode-canon-mov-to-prores-codec-on-mac-os-x-lion

4763
Lenses / Re: Lens upgrade
« on: June 18, 2012, 07:41:29 PM »
I found my 24-105mm L to be much better than the 3 or 4 28-135mm's I've owned.  There is a law of diminishing returns, you spend a lot more money for a relatively small increase in IQ. 
 
However, the build is worlds better, AF is fast, and it likes you to use at at f/4 rather than having to stop down to f/8 to get sharp images like a consumer lens. 
 
You won't be disappointed, if you are, then someone shipped you a bad one.

4764
Issues have been reported with ability to download lens information from Canons servers.
 
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1029&message=41809518&changemode=1
 
 
 Has anyone successfully done this?  Lots of users were having issues yesterday, so I did not download it.  It might have just been a Canon server was down.

4765
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DMKIII Autofocus help required
« on: June 18, 2012, 01:02:29 PM »
F/14 is going to reduce sharpness somewhat due to diffraction, you might actually get a sharper image by moving back a little, using f/5.6 to f/8 and cropping more or using a TC.  And, of course, lighting is everything.  Sometimes, if the sun is not right, or the subject is in a shadow, a flash is needed.
 
 

4766
Lenses / Re: REALLY BAD Lens Scratch
« on: June 18, 2012, 12:15:17 PM »
Aluminum lens filter rings bind without the user doing anything wrong.  Brass is better, but more forgiving.
 
As a emergency fix, try using a wide rubber band around the filter.  That will give you a better grip.  Lens filter wrenches are very inexpensive, and a tool that everyone who uses filters should have.  You can get a pair for $7.95 that fit a 48-62mm filter, and a set for 62-77mm for 8.95 from Amazon.  I have adjustable ones from micro-tools that fit a wider range.
 
http://www.amazon.com/Camera-Filter-46mm-62mm-Filters-Package/dp/B0056483JK/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1340035714&sr=8-3&keywords=lens+filter+wrench

4767
Lenses / Re: REALLY BAD Lens Scratch
« on: June 18, 2012, 11:25:11 AM »
You will have to get a estimate from Sigma, but its likely about $200, mostly labor. 
 
Normally, replacing the front element is not expensive, but it does depend on the lens design and large elements might be more expensive than small ones.  Some people have purchased just the element and replaced it themselves, again, it can be simple or very difficult depending on the design.

4768
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon T4i seems to be in stock everywhere -- WHY????
« on: June 18, 2012, 11:17:11 AM »
Thats the normal pattern, Rebels are made by the millions, in a very high speed factory, and stock is built up 2well before a announcement.  Nikon does the same with their consumer bodies.
 
The pro models are more difficult to make, and have lower production rates because they only sell a relative few.  Canon and Nikon have never been able to accurately estimate initial demand.

4769
It would indeed be better to let CR publish rumors, then the totally absurd ones can be ignored.
 
If you have a rumor, and its reliable, send it to the CR guy.  If its one of those third hand kiddie wishful thinking ones that do not make sense, don't post them. 
 
People pick this stuff up and pretty soon, CR gets blamed by people who believe everything they read.

4770
Lenses / Re: Did I get a bad lens...or user error?
« on: June 17, 2012, 07:47:51 PM »
Yes, it's user error.  All the photos are tack, save for the last one, shot at a slower shutter speed and at 55mm.  You were probably just moving around too much as you shot it. 

Know that as a base rule, whatever shutter speed you're shooting at should be a 1/x of whatever lens length you're at. This helps to combat camera shake. 

Example: If you're shooting with a 50mm lens, you'll need AT LEAST a shutter speed of 1/50th to get a sharp image with average camera shake.

he is shooting with a crop so he should be shooting at 1/1.6x focal length.. if he has decent steady hands.. if not, 2x would be a good easy rule..

Yes, the old 1/effective focal length (1/1.6 X FL) was ok for 5mp sensors, but for 18mp sensors, double the minimum speed, for 50mm on a crop camera, try to use 1/160 or 1/200 sec to reduce motion blur.  To test a body, use a tripod, or a really high shutter speed, 1/640 or 1/1000 to pretty much eliminate motion as a factor.  you will be much happier when you get the shutter speed up. 
 
The 24-70mm L is very unbalanced on a crop body, so it gets more handheld movement than a better balanced lens.

Pages: 1 ... 316 317 [318] 319 320 ... 499