October 21, 2014, 10:07:24 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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 575
61
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/

62
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.

63
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.
 
 

64
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

65
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.

66
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.

67
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.

68
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.

69
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.

70
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.

71
Canon General / Re: seeimpossible.usa.canon.com?
« on: October 06, 2014, 10:46:37 PM »

Why am I not surprised?  Canon seems to struggle with all their software. This was likely not Canon, but the Ad Agency who hired some offshore outfit to do it for $10.

Hey hey, don't blame the offshore guy, it passed QA, then its Canon problem :D

You are Correct, Canon approved the ad, but apparently did not think to view it in Australia or other parts of the world!
 
I hope whatever product they are advertising is done better ;)

72
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Woe and Pathos in the Sigma 50 Art?
« on: October 06, 2014, 10:31:44 PM »
I've found that most, but not all lenses need AFMA.  Generally, you can improve focus accuracy, but some times its already perfect.  Reikan Focal does a super job for me, with my 5D MK III, I can calibrate zooms in two places (Wide and Tele), and all my zooms benefit, none are perfect at the ends of the zoom range.
 
Cameras also have variability.  Very tiny distances are involved, so there is a tolerance, and sometimes a body is at one end of its tolerance and the lens at the other so you can end up with two in-spec components needing a 10 AFMA.

73
EOS Bodies / Re: Upgrade Path Advice...
« on: October 06, 2014, 10:22:54 PM »
AF of the 6D is just fine at the center point, but it tends to be weaker at the outside points.  Certainly better than my five 40D's were.  As much as I liked my 40D's, its a pleasure to use FF.  The sharpness of every image in the central area will improve, but there is usually weaker edges than a crop.
 
I never had a issue shooting action with any of my cameras, I rarely used the machine gun approach, but just relied on timing and anticipating.  I did use my 30D once to try and capture the end of a bull whip as it breaks the speed of sound.  That was difficult.  It is not a wonderful image, shot at 17mm and then cropped severely.  The person was supposed to hold the paper in his hands while the whip cut it in two.  In actuality, they had carefully pre-measured the distance so the tip of the whip fell short.  The paper had already been torn, the person just pulled it apart at the right moment.  Its Show business!  I also made a Video DVD of their show for them which they copied and sent to potential venues who might hire them to do their show.  There were three who used the whips, and a girl who held flowers that were actually cut with the whip. The guy that did that was amazingly accurate.
 
 

74
Buying the Tamron used is a risky transaction, the quality is variable, and some have reported issues.  You either need to check it out carefully, get return rights when you purchase, or get a warranty.  I will buy a used lens only if I get a low enough price to pay for a $300 repair and still have a used lens price.  I can't do a deal like that often, but it happens.
 
For me, that means a used price for a apparently functioning lens like this of $750, maybe less, since I can buy new gray market for $900.

75
Lenses / Re: 50mm f/1.4 Canon vs. Sigma
« on: October 06, 2014, 09:49:33 PM »
The Canon 50mm f/1.4 is better optically on FF than the old Sigma.  On APS-C, the Sigma wins easily.  Sigma has problems with AF on the old lens, and as far as AF accuracy, the Canon is better, but still pretty poor.  It has a lot of variability.  The Canon 50mm f/1.8 has dismal AF consistency from Camera to camera, the 85mm f/1.8 is much better, but the Sigma 84mm f/1.4
 
 
One place to see the results of many lenses is in the Blog of the Reikan Focal lens information tool.  This is real world results uploaded from various testers.  Some of the lenses may need service, but you will see the issue right away.
 
You can use the tool to compare results of various cameras and lenses, but only the combinations that had a lot of testers. 
 
 
http://www.reikan.co.uk/focalweb/index.php/online-tools/lenscamera-information/
 
 

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 575