November 27, 2014, 07:14:04 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 ... 596
Lenses / Re: fast f-numbers
« on: November 19, 2014, 08:47:34 PM »
T numbers are more accurate, but stills photographers are creatures of habit.

F numbers are accurate for depth of field, T numbers for exposure.
Few photographers continue to use manual exposures, the ones that do have learned to adjust exposures to their liking.  I've used manual exposure most of my life, decent auto exposure cameras are relatively new, and there are lots of gotchas that can mess up things. 
As we convert to mirrorless, and exposure is taken from the sensor, that should improve things a little.

Lenses / Re: 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM - Loud noise from IS
« on: November 19, 2014, 08:39:15 PM »
IIt sounds sort of like the noise your computer hard drive makes with the motor that controls the read/write head - except, it's louder than your average HDD.

If you want "frightening IS noise", try the 100L - its plastic body makes this hdd-like sound resonate a lot. For me, it only occurs when pointing the lens up- or downwards at some time, but when I heard it for the first time I was sure the lens was broken.

The only IS noise I hear is from my 300mm f/4L  It clunks so loudly that I can feel it.  That doesn't mean that others are quite, my hearing is poor at best.

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 5.7 Now Available
« on: November 19, 2014, 07:37:04 PM »
For me, it's not showing up as an update from the Adobe Creative Cloud app.   Maybe it's going to be standalone only.   Ducking under my desk now......

The Adobe CC app needs to be rebooted.  Close it and restart your computer, then restart CC.  Lightroom 5.7 will appear as a Install, not as a update.  I installed it last night.  I figured out how to get it to show by trial and error.

Software & Accessories / Re: No LR 5.7 version for CC (yet)
« on: November 19, 2014, 07:31:47 PM »
I installed it last night.  Close CC, reboot your computer and restart.  Then click install rather than update.

Lenses / Re: fast f-numbers
« on: November 19, 2014, 07:30:00 PM »
Its even more complex than that.
You also must take into account light loss in the glass, subject distance, and as far as light reaching the sensor of a digital camera, the micro lenses at the edges of the sensor pickup up less light due to the angle of incidence.

Lenses / Re: What's your favourite focal length?
« on: November 19, 2014, 04:25:29 PM »
I prefer to frame a photo properly, rather than using 600mm when 35mm is proper or vice versa.
A favorite focal length just doesn't compute. 

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom 5.7 Now Available
« on: November 19, 2014, 12:12:47 PM »
Adobe is burning through the 5.x version numbers pretty quickly ... can v6 be far behind?

Normally, they release a new version every year, but its now 1-1/2 years since version 5.  Since they release a new sub versions to keep up with new cameras being announced,  a few new sub versions are normal and expected.

Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8II or F4 for Zoo Shoot
« on: November 19, 2014, 11:22:04 AM »
I've owned all of the Canon EF 70-200mm lenses, and currently have the f/2.8 MK II, merely because I use it in extreme low light.  Otherwise, for outdoor use or carrying around, my f/4 IS was my choice. 

The f/4 IS lens is wonderful, and plenty good wide open.  You will not have a need for f/2.8, so why carry that monster around?

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Adorama's unadvertised deal on 7D2
« on: November 19, 2014, 11:11:23 AM »
That's interesting that buyers were also able to get free overnight shipping and extended warrantee thrown in at that price when they asked.
Sales indeed seem to be slow.  I don't think there is a issue with the Camera, just that money is tight, and many are holding off on buying.

Yet another issue in the news today.  The fix they released to the networking problem does not work for some.  Where have I heard that before?

....the bloating software that goes with Windows......
There's a misconception.
Windows does not include bloatware, never has. If you were to install Windows from scratch, you'd see that there is very little software installed.
You'll get Paint, NotePad, WordPad, a photo viewer, Internet Explorer, some basic utilities and a few simple games.

Whatever bloatware you see on Windows boxes is installed by the device's manufacturer like HP, Dell, whoever, it's not Microsoft's doing or fault.

I went searching for bloatware complaints on the Surface Pro, it seems that it has very little.  That surprised me.  I have no issue removing unwanted software from a computer when I buy it, it may take 20 minutes.

Looks like a nice deal. What 3rd party made the lens caps? I think I remember in a previous post you said it was Chinese.
Cheers :)

Yes, I bought them on ebay over a year back, about 50 or more of them of varying sizes up to 82mm.  So far, they are working great, and I haven't lost any.

And it features one of the new center-pinch lens caps!  8)

Its a third party pinch cap that I use to be able to remove the cap with the hood installed.  They cost $1.50, so if its lost, its no issue because I bought 10 of most common sizes. 
The buyer can have the original one along with the pinch cap if he reminds me to put them both in.

Sigma has indicated that they were working on one, but also sounded like it might never happen. 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Is IQ better with smaller files?
« on: November 18, 2014, 12:05:49 AM »
I read a comment or a post recently which inferred that a 7D II file shot as a jpg at one of the smaller sizes was inherently cleaner than a larger file at similar settings (ISO etc).

Is there any truth to that statement?  If this is crazy talk just say so.

  I bring this up because I own a 7D and if someone can tell me that a Medium Jpg is 10x cleaner than a Large or Raw ... I'm locking those settings in today.  Moreover, is that the case with all cameras?  Is this phenomenon a jpg exclusive or is it the same with Raw?  I mean, I have printed like 40 files of size 8x10 and nothing bigger. So if I can get cleaner images that will print at that size amazing ... Awesome.. 

Why isn't this 'feature' advertised?

The short answer is NO.
Someone is pulling your leg.  The smaller files are made by using more lossy compression, throwing away resolution and image data.  You can reduce a image size, and make all the details and noise smaller, but the image is smaller as well.
So, if you view a image at 800 X 600, it looks cleaner than at 5600 X 4200 just because its so small.
You can use more NR to get cleaner looking images, but this is done by blurring the noise in a image to it is not as apparent.  There are lots of variations of NR methods, but its just in how the areas are selected to be blurred and how much.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 596