October 01, 2014, 10:30:45 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 ... 337 338 [339] 340 341 ... 568
EOS Bodies / Re: Is a 46mp Canon EOS-1 on the Way? [CR1]
« on: September 10, 2012, 11:44:30 AM »
The Nikon D800 with it's 36MP sensor produces 75MB RAW files, so a 46MP sensor would result in files sizes of around 100 megabytes per shot, so a 1-2 second burst could fill 1 Gigabyte of your CF card! A longer series of rapid burst could theoretically fill an entire 16Gb memory card. Not to mention increased storage costs/problems.

I'd prefer a 24MP to 27MP cheaper FF body for now (so I could upgrade from a 7D)
I took well over 1000 raw NEF images with my D800 before reselling it, many at very high ISO's like 12800.  The largest file is 52,300 MB, and most of them are in the mid  40mb range.
I wonder why your files are running 75 MB?  You must have a exceptionally noisey sensor.
However, when a raw file is uncompressed for editing, it can be three times the size of the raw.  When applying NR or other complex PP edits, it seems to take forever. It is slow and painful.
I really wonder what it would be like to edit 1000+ images from a 46mp camera?  Very painful is my thought.

I went to our local pro camera store and looked at all the mirrorless cameras.  If you like ultra wide images, forget it.   If you like good optical viewfinders, or any viewfinder at all, you may be sadly disappoiinted.
My impression is that there is going to be a fallout, and some manufacturers will go away.  This might leave you in a dead end position with a lot of money invested in lenses.
Micro 4/3 is likely safe, Nikon is likely safe.  Sony drops models like a hot rock if sales disappoint, they have yet to show any sign of long term support.  I also would be concerned about buying a $1500 or more fixed lens camera (Unless its a Leica).  You will have a lot of money tied up in the glass and as the body becomes obsolete, its a big hit.  The lower end bodies will become obsolete too, but at least you don't see a $3,000 camera depreciate to $300 in 5 years.

PowerShot / Re: Canon S100 vs Sony RX100
« on: September 09, 2012, 11:19:44 PM »
The grass is always greener :)
 However, if your current camera is missing something (like a viewfinder) ---   oops, no help there.
Seriously, the Sony is going to give a higher IQ.  The G1X is going to have even more of the advantages you get from a large sensor.
Read the reviews, there are several competent ones, and if there is something there that solves a problem, go for it.
I'm still waiting to see what Canon announces over the next few days.  So far, I haven't seen a big enough of a improvement in the new models to make me replace my G11.

Cameras are obsoleted in 3-5 years, often sooner.  Having a 3K body with fixed lens that will be obsolete in 5 years or less seems like overkill.  I'd prefer to buy a good lens that will last for 20 or more years, and a  cheap body that can be sold in 4 or 5 years.  With Sony's record of poor product support, they will likely walk away from it in three years.
I think this is a very limited product, aimed at those with money to burn.

Canon General / Re: Canon Warranty
« on: September 09, 2012, 06:50:00 PM »
It is likely that Canon will cover it as long as you have a bill of sale from a authorized dealer. 
However, its not something that you can count on, it might work for five people, but not the next five.

Here is a image of the sun reflecting off a gazing globe.  Its a 100% crop, but no black ring.
The effect is more pronounced the greater the contrast (steep brightness gradient) and smaller the blown image, i.e. stars and hot pixels are ideal to produce dark halos. The sun in your image is more extended and bright also outside the saturated region, so sharpening shouldn't produce as easily visible halos.

This is a straight conversion from raw to jpg in LR 4, all the settings are nominal, no sharpening or NR.
Isn't sharpening applied when using nominal settings? (I'm not too familiar with LR4, but other software apply it by default) If you push sharpening using unsharp mask I'm sure you can produce a dark halo around the bright dot in the right hemisphere. Just to illustrate the effect. (looking closer at your image there actually seems to be a dark edge to the white spots [not the sun] - implying some sharpening may have actually taken place?)
I set all the sliders for sharpening, NR, etc to zero.  Other settings like brightness, highlights, etc were at the zero position.
LR does not actually have a default sharpness, you can set it and save it for different ISO levels of your cameras as well as setup it to process images with pre determined colors, etc.  However, you can turn all the settings bacxk to zero.  Lightroom does not actually change the image, it just saves settings for each image in a database, and they can be zeroed or changed at any time.  Then, when you render a image to jpeg or other format, the settings are burned in for that exported image, but the original is unchanged.
The white spots are deposits left by birds going to our feeded, and indeed might have some black or various colors in them, so I'd not try to judge them from the photo.
As noted, I did not have a blown out image from my 5D MK III, it does a very good job of setting the exposure, and we did not have many sunny days when I was testing it.

I went thru my 5D MK III images looking for a situation like yours, but could not find one.  Here is a image of the sun reflecting off a gazing globe.  Its a 100% crop, but no black ring.  It is not badly blown out, but, if there were a issue, I'd expect to see it here.
This is a straight conversion from raw to jpg in LR 4, all the settings are nominal, no sharpening or NR.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d Mki or 60d (landscapes)
« on: September 09, 2012, 04:06:52 PM »
Hi all.
I'm looking at getting a new camera for landscapes, and have somewhere around the AU$900 mark. So, my question is whether I should look at getting a new 60d (18 megapixels, crop sensor), or a second-hand 5d Mki (12 megapixels, full frame)
Any suggestions/reasons to consider or not consider either body?

They should both do sa good job.  Having a 1 year warranty with a new 60D is a plus.  Plan on buying good glass.  It will make more difference than either of these bodies.
You do not need superwide for landscapes, get lenses with the lowest distortion and CA's. 

Didn't the 7d also have this early on?
The 5D MK II had issues with highlights, and was fixed in firmware.  However, users have tested their 5D MK III's for the issue and haven't found it, at least not in any high percentage of the cameras.
That said, individual cameras can have a issue and need to be adjusted or replaced, it can happen.  The original issue with the 5D MK II was nowhere as bad as the image with the spot on her lip, that is really bad.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D3 Second Curtain Sync - Design Flaw?
« on: September 09, 2012, 02:17:34 PM »

I've been using a variety of flash guns at (Nikon, Canon, Metz, Sunpak) Strobist shoots on my 5D2's for 3 years and have always been able to access the flash menu to change curtain sync between 1st and 2nd. A variety of triggers have been used as well.

On my 5D MK II and all my other Canon cameras, if I do not have a Canon COMPATIBLE flash attached, I do not get the speedlight functions, just a error message.
However, I do not need a Canon branded flash or trigger, just one that is compatible.
Are you really able to access the speedlight functions with a nikon Flash attached?

Lenses / Re: The First Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Review
« on: September 08, 2012, 09:56:16 PM »
I would buy this lens to use at f/2.8.  If it doesn't perform at f/2.8, my 24-105mm L will perform at f/4 or f/8. 
I've had five of the Mark 1 version of 24-70mm L's, and was a bit disappointed in all of them, so I'm pretty cautious about taking the plunge.
I'm also interested in CA's, I tried a Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G with my D800, and CA's at f/2.8 were horrible.

Technical Support / Re: 5D Mark II Won't Turn On
« on: September 08, 2012, 09:44:39 PM »
Unfortunately, issues can happen.  I've never had any of my two dozen or more DSLR's fail, but it can happen. 
Good luck on getting it repaired.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D3 Second Curtain Sync - Design Flaw?
« on: September 08, 2012, 09:40:40 PM »
The setup also will require second curtain synch, which I've never used before. 
And, so You posted a subject title that is picked up by search engines, and now spread all over the internet based on your expert finding?

Not sure I understand your point. I don't have an "expert finding". I have a shot that I'm not familiar with in mind that I need to execute that, based on immediately available info, may require second curtain sync with a manual, off-camera flash setup.  I may discover between now and then that I don't need second curtain sync. But if it turns out I do, I'd like to be able to accomplish that without going through the logistics of putting a flash on the camera just to access the second curtain sync menu.  My specific question was whether anyone else was aware if mounting the flash was actually a requirement to access the second curtain sync menu without first mounting a Canon flash on the camera. 

BTW, I am a software engineer by training and trade and from a software engineering and man-machine interface design view point, it seems utterly ridiculous and short sighted to design the menu system with such an obvious limitation in it, if in deed this is the case.  And that IS an expert (i.e. me) finding.
The point is simple, you are calling it a design flaw, when the flaw is perhaps lack of experience.
Perhaps asking why it is not possible would be a good title, but declaring a design flaw?? 
Since you are a software engineer, and hopefully, a good one, doesn'y it annoy you when someone who has never used your software before suddenly declares a design flaw, rather than asking how it was designed to work?
If they want to do something else with your software, that might be of value to them, but was not part of the design, it the software buggy?

Realistically, you can't expect good photos in the dark.  The best Canon camera for low light is the 1D X, the 5D MK III is 1/2 to 1 stop behind it.
Are you trying to take photos of the screen and have it readable at the same time you get good images of the attendees?
I'd stick to taking photos of the group before lights go down.  You can try it with only light from the screen, but don't depend on it to work out.
Here is a example from a local college play from a rehersal.  Actors are in the seating area waiting to appear onstage.  As you see, lighting varies considerably from the front to the back, so a wide angle view like this one does not work well.
This was taken with a Nikon D800 at ISO 12800, f/2.8  .  A Canon 5D Mark III might be just a shade better, and a 1D X will do much better.  Its pretty dark in the seating area, but likely a lot more light than from a screen.

I've tried capturing images of the sound and lighting crew at our local high school plays.  Its dark in the theatre, but they do have good enough lighting to see what they are doing.
Canon 5D MK II at ISO 3200  f/1.4

There is another thread from a person seeing white X's on a black background.  You might compare notes with the poster, however, he did not yet post a image.  It sounds like a similar issue.

Pages: 1 ... 337 338 [339] 340 341 ... 568