January 27, 2015, 09:40:19 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 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 622
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Preparing for the switch
« on: January 09, 2015, 01:33:41 PM »
Since the photographer and subject matter are 90+ percent of the value of the image, new gear would not improve my photos significantly.  I'm comfortable with any major brand.  The exception might be in taking photos of extreme low light subjects, or extreme high DR subjects, where hardware can make a difference.
As you get into the extremely high MP crop bodies, it requires a lot more skill to acquire sharp images, so the so called reach advantage is often offset for all but very skilled photographers.  A used 1D Mark IV is a good compromise.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D750 Light Leak Fix
« on: January 09, 2015, 01:21:28 PM »
There was no light leak.
All cameras use sticky backed shields (Tape) for internal light shields, usually, they are custom stamped out to a shape that matches, and either stick in place, or are held by screws.  However, if a part is improperly  manufactured or assembled, it must be modified.  Every camera manufacturer has had issues pop up, some are fixed by software, some by firmware, and some by hardware.
Apparently, the Nikon issue is due to mis-positioning of the AF sensors which results in internal flare due to reflections.  That's why a piece of tape does not fix it.
Nikon USA has issued an update to its communication around issues with flare in some D750 camera bodies. Following a statement in late December that the company was 'looking into' the matter, Nikon has announced that it will inspect and if necessary service affected cameras at no cost. Reading between the lines, Nikon's statement appears to support the hypothesis that in those cameras which have been affected by flare, it is caused by the position of their AF sensors.
The service will be initiated at the end of January and further details are contained in Nikon's statement (below).


Right now, it looks like the CC format is a win-win situation.  $10 a month keeps you up to date with the latest features at a price about equal to a upgrade every other year, and it produces a steady and predictable income for Adobe. It also eliminates having to sell the media at wholesale prices to dealers, who then mark it up to make a profit. It eliminates the expense to Adobe of a switch over to a new version every year, which results in huge numbers of old version media that must be either destroyed or marked down.  Marking them down results in lost sales of the new version, so its a double whammy on costs.  Then, Adobe never knows for sure just how many copies of the new release will sell, so its feast or famine.
I started using Photoshop when a Adobe Friend got me a copy of version 3.5 in the late 1990's, and have renewed it about every other version since. 

Canon General / Re: Weak Yen Spurs Canon To Bring Production Home
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:58:48 PM »
This makes good business sense.
Canon production of Cameras, and likely other products is falling, and they would have to lay off some very experienced Japanese employees who might just move to Tamron and Sigma.  Then, shutting down factories is also very expensive.
Moving production  back to Japan will keep workers employed, and factories running.  I think its a good choice.
Nikon might do well to follow up.
Another big factor is likely the political unrest in Thailand, which threatens production there.
While this is a old article, its certainly a factor in bringing more production home.

EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 5D Mark III Replacement Talk [CR2]
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:45:43 PM »

Be good if they could do an electronic Anti-Alias option that you could turn on and off on the camera and hopefully the MK 4 will come with 4K Video which is coming more and more common.[\quote]

All Digital cameras have a electronic high pass or anti alias filters in the electronic signal processing.  I once saw a video of a Canon engineer discussing the measures that Canon and everyone took to eliminate Moiré.   It works in tandem with the optical filter to give a sharper cutoff of high frequencies that cause Moiré.  Electronic filters alone aren't enough, so cameras without high pass filters do have Moiré, more or less depending on several factors.
While its true that you can reduce resolution of a high MP camera with Mraw or Sraw, that does not eliminate the issues with Moiré, and it also begs the question as to why pay more for a high MP camera and then cripple it.
A high MP body will likely new either a Digic 6+ (NEW), or dual Digic 6 processors in order to have a reasonable
fps.  The higher power usage will be a hit on battery life as well unless we see a new and larger battery.

Lenses / Re: Why not uppdate just the IS
« on: January 08, 2015, 08:59:40 PM »
Why doesn't Canon simply uppdate the IS in great optics like the 300 4L? With four stop IS, I guess a lot of people would pay a few hundred more. Is it so costly to change production or do you have to change the optical design as well?

Why not just update the transmission in your 1991 Automobile?  There is more than just the IS that needs updating.  The design is good, but its 24 years old.  It does not have coatings on the lens elements to prevent reflections from the sensor, which reduces contrast.  It is also not all that sharp compared to newer lenses, and suffers from LOCA's or purple fringing.
I would not pay $500 more for it with better IS, it does not compete at that price.  For its existing cost, its a good lens that allows those who are trying to save money to purchase.  Many sports shooters turn off IS in any event, since it does not help with moving subjects.

Lenses / Re: Canon 28-300L 'super-zoom'
« on: January 08, 2015, 04:41:17 PM »
I've had the 35-350mm L and the 28-300mm L IS.  They are both nice lenses.  I managed to buy them used locally from craigslist sellers, and after using them a while decided that I needed faster lenses.
For outdoor use in good light, there is nothing that can match them in a superzoom lens.
Here is a shot from the 35-350mm L at 350mm

And from the 28-300mm L a couple of years later.  Its a 100% crop since the robin was far away.


Canon DO technology is probably much better but also more expensive. So far most of DO patents were for superteles  like 600/4, 400/ 2.8 etc. (AFAIR no patent for 300/4 DO and several patents for 300/4 with traditional optics).

I've seen Canon DO patents recently for almost every focal length.  However, since they shorten the lens length by allowing the light to be bent more, they are most useful at longer focal lengths.
The technology is more expensive, Canon has issued several patents recently based on resin lenses with a radial dispersion of particles embedded in the plastic.  It has also been mentioned that they are extremely difficult to produce, and have a very low yield, so we are unlikely to see any unless they are able to control the dispersion of the particles.

My recommendation: the Manfrotto 694CX monopod (B&H $157), the Manfrotto 234 tilt head(Amazon $37), and the Wimberley C-12 clamp (B&H $79).  That comes in at $273, to drop the price if needed consider the 680B monopod (B&H $70 for a total of $186).  The 680B is 0.5 lbs heavier and 5" shorter, but should still be tall enough once you factor in the head and clamp height and the fact that your eye level is shorter than your overall height. 

Personally, I had the first setup for several years (although I had the 694 Magfiber 'pod vs the newer but basically identical 694CX).   I used that setup extensively with a gripped 7D and 100-400L (original) or 70-200/2.8 II + 2x TC , it works great (and I'm also 5'7").  I did eventually switch to the RRS MC34 + MH-02 Pro, but that was only beacuse I got the 1D X and 600mm f/4L IS II and at >12 lbs that's more than I wanted to put on the Manfrotto head.

Important note - the 234 head is discontinued (which stinks) so the only thing available from official Manfrotto outlets is the 234RC which saddles you with the RC2 plate/clamp system that you should avoid (as you know, by wanting Arca compatibility).  The 234RC has the clamp integrated, so skip it.   However, the 234 (no clamp) is currently available from some 3rd party sellers on Amazon, including some Fulfilled by Amazon (in fact, for $37 I might just buy a couple in case I or someone I know need one down the line once they're all gone).  You simply mount the Wimberley C-12 on that head and you're good to go.  I like the Wimberley clamp for that application over RRS/Kirk options because the C-12 has three set-screws around the main 3/8" hole that prevent twisting off, but you could also go with an Kirk clamp like the QRC-2.5" ($85) and use some Loctite Blue 242 on it.

Hope that helps!

I have a similar setup, a reged CF monopod, manfrotto 234 and kirk clamp.  It works fine for me.  As noted, you may have to hunt to find the discontinued Manfrotto head.

Software & Accessories / Re: Blackrapid strap slips
« on: January 07, 2015, 10:59:31 PM »
I'm glad to hear that.  Mine has been fine, but its a different model.

I doubt if Canon will put out a phone with their name on it sold by a no name company who procures them from a no name Chinese company.  Even Sony won't do that.
Kodak's new devices— a 4G handset, a tablet, and a connected camera—will actually be made by Bullitt Group, while the Kodak company provides the name and caché. Bullitt's in a similar relationship with Caterpillar, which has a line of rugged Android devices.
If this sound vaguely familiar, it's because Polaroid has gone down this same road to little success, lending its name to a series of entirely unremarkable Android tablets. There's an outside chance these new Kodak devices might be worth a damn, but it's far more likely they'll just be sad reminders of how much those little yellow boxes used to mean to us.
So, Kodak Licenses the name to Bullitt Group which does not make anything either, just imports products with valuable brand names on them.  I wonder who might repair one of these?

Canon General / Re: How long does Canon repair usually take??
« on: January 07, 2015, 04:20:21 PM »
You need to tell people where you sent it, this is a international forum.  Was it in Australia, Canada, France. USA, etc.  Some countries do take longer, and, if parts are out of stock, that could be a issue.
In the USA, the Canon web site status is typically not updated, so it may have been shipped back already.  Call and ask.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: POLL: Do you need 1/8000s shutter speed?
« on: January 06, 2015, 08:43:11 PM »
I've never used it, or 1/4000 either.  The fast shutter speeds are way down on my list of desirable features.

Lenses / Re: New Canon 100-400mm Mk2 lens with 2x extender mk3
« on: January 06, 2015, 08:40:42 PM »

Do you think this combo should be limited to the 1.4x which can at least auto focus?
I have a 5D mk3 camera.

Yes, if you want to use a 2X, its going to be best with manual focus, and very difficult using live af on a tripod.  The 5D MK III was originally limited to f/5.6 AF, and Canon revised the Firmware to allow it to try autofocusing at f/8, but F/11 is going to be difficult.
I've had my 1.4X TC on since I received it, and it focuses ok but not great.  I did not even bother to try with a 2X, I've  tried it before with my 100-400mm L MK I in live view, and it mostly just hunts.
I will try the 2X later on, but have no time right now.

Looks like a cool lens.

And what a great example of Nikon "innovation": a "DO" lens a mere E-L-E-V-E-N years after Canon's first, the 70-300mm DO IS, hit the streets.

Well done, Nikon...

Does Canon use the Phase Fresnel lens element schema?
No.  Canon does not have to use software to remove flare caused by the elements.
At $2000, it should not be necessary to use Nikon software to clean up the image.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 622