April 16, 2014, 10:39:22 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 - bvukich

Pages: 1 ... 36 37 [38] 39 40 ... 46
556
Software & Accessories / Re: Thoughts on 430EX
« on: March 25, 2011, 11:27:50 AM »
Doug,

Thanks for dropping all this knowledge on us.  You are a true asset to the CR forum community.

557
Sports / Re: Cars cars cars (and some bikes)
« on: March 25, 2011, 11:08:16 AM »
Looking good.  What lenses did you use?

558
EOS Bodies / Re: 3 More DSLR's in 2011? [CR1]
« on: March 24, 2011, 03:21:53 PM »
...unless it's a "square full frame" AKA 36mm x 36mm...

A mirror that can cover a 36mm sensor would need to be at least 50.91mm tall.  The film plane to flange distance on the EF mount is only 44mm.  You would have to go mirror-less to do a FF square sensor.

559
Software & Accessories / Re: Yongnuo ST-E2 vs Canon ST-E2
« on: March 24, 2011, 03:07:22 PM »
I tried the eneloops and also some Costco alkaline batteries, same result with both. The eneloops are recommended in Syl Arena's book which is why I use them, but maybe there are better ones out there. The 2CR5 in the canon unit is 6V however, and as it is a lithium battery, I guess it probably has more oomph than NiMH.

My first instinct on battery selection for a ST-E2 clone that takes AAs would be eneloops.  It's something that should be low drain.  If fresh alkaline batteries didn't make a difference (higher voltage, 1.5v vs. 1.2v, current when new is comparable to a mid-grade NIMH), then I doubt higher current NIMH cells will change much either, but it's worth a shot if you happen to have them.

Most likely though, it's just a design limitation.  You have to cut more than just profit margin to get something down in price that far, design and component quality are the only places it can come from.

560
Software & Accessories / Re: Yongnuo ST-E2 vs Canon ST-E2
« on: March 24, 2011, 01:39:38 PM »
I know eneloops are no good in a flashgun

I didn't know that. I've been using them in my 550EX's and 580EX2 for years.

Try some low internal resistance NIMH cells some time, they have a higher capacity, and can supply more current.  Your flashes will cycle significantly faster.  Only downside is relatively fast self discharge rate.  Let them sit for a month and they will be half dead (actually closer to 25% a month self discharge). For anything that will be sitting for months with relatively little usage, like a remote control, use eneloops; I have a few sets, they're great.  For high drain uses, like flashguns, there are better alternatives.

561
Software & Accessories / Re: Yongnuo ST-E2 vs Canon ST-E2
« on: March 24, 2011, 11:53:09 AM »
Nice writeup.

I find the recycle times being an issue really odd.  Do you have any low internal resistance NIMH cells to test with (like PowerEx, etc)?  They can provide a lot more current than high internal resistance cells like the eneloops can.  I know eneloops are no good in a flashgun, and while I wouldn't expect the ST-E2 to need high current like a speedlight, it's worth a shot.

562
Canon General / Re: Canon falling behind in sensor performance
« on: March 23, 2011, 01:01:17 AM »
Canon and Nikon really are a horse a piece.  Each has their strengths and weaknesses, but they both have good SYSTEMS as a whole.

Sony could have the greatest sensors in the world, but they don't have lenses, they don't have flashes, and they don't have third party support.  In the current market, I could never recommend that someone buy a Sony dslr, no matter how good the sensor tests in DXO.

OK, just browsed their more-fancy-than-functional website, there is more depth to their lineup than last time I looked; so I'll gladly eat crow on that one...

...still wouldn't buy one though.

Commitment to the market is a good point.  Sony has a long history of coming up with proprietary versions of standard technologies (DAT, Mini-disk, ATRAC, Memory Stick, HiFD, UMD, SACD, BETA, etc.); and dumping them when they don't take off as well as hoped.  They also have a recent incident of being hostile towards customers (rootkit fiasco).

563
Canon General / Re: Canon falling behind in sensor performance
« on: March 22, 2011, 05:43:25 PM »
Canon and Nikon really are a horse a piece.  Each has their strengths and weaknesses, but they both have good SYSTEMS as a whole.

Sony could have the greatest sensors in the world, but they don't have lenses, they don't have flashes, and they don't have third party support.  In the current market, I could never recommend that someone buy a Sony dslr, no matter how good the sensor tests in DXO.

564
Canon General / Re: Canon 7D noise observations
« on: March 21, 2011, 02:56:45 PM »
It could be a loose shim on the image sensor's trans-nebulizer - probably caused by the higher than normal gravity we have recently experienced from the "super moon". It should settle back into place in a few days. ;)

Is that a single exposure?

565
EOS Bodies / Re: Should I wait?
« on: March 21, 2011, 02:46:57 PM »
That looks great.

I've never tried video, but I think shooting stills at a bowling ally is much more technically challenging than even the worst lit wedding.  The difference in light levels between on the lane, and off the lane (or even just on the approach/skirt) is HUGE.  If you could use a flash it would be easy, but without, it's nearly impossible to keep the background from being severely (or at least distractingly) overexposed, and have the bowler properly exposed.

566
Canon General / Re: Canon 7D noise observations
« on: March 21, 2011, 02:28:57 PM »
It's probably an artifact of the demosaicing process that converts the raw output of the bayer type sensor to RGB pixels as we know them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demosaicing

567
In fill mode the camera will meter primarily on available light, and use the flash for fill.  (still put FEC to -1)

With my 5DII and a Speedlite, my decision is not whether to apply a negative FEC, but how much negative FEC to apply...usually anywhere from 2/3 to 1.5 stops.

I use -1 as my starting point, and that's where it stays 90% of the time.  The only time I've really had to change it is if I'm bouncing off a colored wall, and it's metering funny; or if I need to overpower a mixed light source.

568
I also noticed they were a bit harsh.  I was going to PM you about it, but since someone else brought it up...

Assuming you don't want to go full manual on your flash:

Put the light sphere on the 430 (if you have the newer version that fits both 580&430), set your FEC (flash exposure compensation) to -1.

Or, don't set the head to 90deg, go up one click and the flash/camera will switch from direct to fill mode, but still be fully automatic (as in TTL vs. M).  In direct mode the camera assumes the flash is primary light, and will often look quite harsh even with a diffuser.  In fill mode the camera will meter primarily on available light, and use the flash for fill.  (still put FEC to -1)

569
Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
« on: March 19, 2011, 11:24:21 PM »
I kinda like the green slime photo.

Granted, I wouldn't want every photo like that, but that one looks cool.

570
EOS Bodies / Re: 60d low light test
« on: March 18, 2011, 03:30:37 PM »
Was it Auto WB, or Auto Exposure that kept "jumping"?

Pages: 1 ... 36 37 [38] 39 40 ... 46