November 27, 2014, 12:42:33 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 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 46
571
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).

572
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.

573
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?

574
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.

575
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

576
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.

577
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)

578
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.

579
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"?

580
Canon General / Re: what should i do?
« on: March 17, 2011, 04:18:04 PM »

well this is my gripe about canon, there isn't a cam that has more features than the d7000 in their mid range line, so far all we have from canon is a 60d and now the 600d, so i feel the closet thing would be the 7d.

im wandering if many canon owners who have budget-mid slrs actually decided to switch to nikon d7000 due its many features.

The d7000 is right between the 60d and 7d in performance, and price.

If you already shoot Canon, why wouldn't you just spend the extra $250 over the d7000 and get higher resolution, higher FPS in jpeg, much higher FPS in raw, better video, better AF, full magnesium body.  The only advantage of the d7000 is dual memory slots, but they're only SD not CF (or ideally one of each).

On the other side of the coin though, if you already shoot Nikon, the d7000 is close enough to the 7d it would be silly to switch unless there are other considerations.

581
PowerShot Cameras / Re: Canon Patents 42x Zoom Lens!
« on: March 16, 2011, 02:28:32 PM »
Another fine example of "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should."

582
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk II advice
« on: March 15, 2011, 11:51:56 AM »
strange a scam site is using https? thought that was meant to be secure version of http?

https only means it's ssl encrypted between you and them.  Unless it's an EV (extended validation, costs about $2000) certificate there is no guarantee of the identity of the website, it's owners, etc.

583
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk II advice
« on: March 15, 2011, 11:47:19 AM »
It's a scam.  the site has only existed since 2011-03-04


[bvukich@bvlaptop ~]$ whois laylandelectronic.com
[Querying whois.verisign-grs.com]
[whois.verisign-grs.com]

Whois Server Version 2.0

Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net
for detailed information.

   Domain Name: LAYLANDELECTRONIC.COM
   Registrar: DIRECTI INTERNET SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. D/B/A PUBLICDOMAINREGISTRY.COM
   Whois Server: whois.PublicDomainRegistry.com
   Referral URL: http://www.PublicDomainRegistry.com
   Name Server: MNS01.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
   Name Server: MNS02.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
   Status: clientTransferProhibited
   Updated Date: 08-mar-2011
   Creation Date: 04-mar-2011
   Expiration Date: 04-mar-2012

>>> Last update of whois database: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:43:30 UTC <<<

NOTICE: The expiration date displayed in this record is the date the
registrar's sponsorship of the domain name registration in the registry is
currently set to expire. This date does not necessarily reflect the expiration
date of the domain name registrant's agreement with the sponsoring
registrar.  Users may consult the sponsoring registrar's Whois database to
view the registrar's reported date of expiration for this registration.

TERMS OF USE: You are not authorized to access or query our Whois
database through the use of electronic processes that are high-volume and
automated except as reasonably necessary to register domain names or
modify existing registrations; the Data in VeriSign Global Registry
Services' ("VeriSign") Whois database is provided by VeriSign for
information purposes only, and to assist persons in obtaining information
about or related to a domain name registration record. VeriSign does not
guarantee its accuracy. By submitting a Whois query, you agree to abide
by the following terms of use: You agree that you may use this Data only
for lawful purposes and that under no circumstances will you use this Data
to: (1) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of mass
unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations via e-mail, telephone,
or facsimile; or (2) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes
that apply to VeriSign (or its computer systems). The compilation,
repackaging, dissemination or other use of this Data is expressly
prohibited without the prior written consent of VeriSign. You agree not to
use electronic processes that are automated and high-volume to access or
query the Whois database except as reasonably necessary to register
domain names or modify existing registrations. VeriSign reserves the right
to restrict your access to the Whois database in its sole discretion to ensure
operational stability.  VeriSign may restrict or terminate your access to the
Whois database for failure to abide by these terms of use. VeriSign
reserves the right to modify these terms at any time.

The Registry database contains ONLY .COM, .NET, .EDU domains and

584
EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mk II advice
« on: March 15, 2011, 10:38:53 AM »
1300 Euros is almost certainly below cost.  It has to be a scam.

585
Canon General / Re: Canon Updates Manufacturing Status
« on: March 13, 2011, 08:57:30 PM »
the only upside of this natural disaster will actually be long-term economic recovery for Japan, not the other way around ... but that's pretty much the only silver lining.

prayers and well-wishes for all the people affected by this horrible event in Japan

There is no upside.  Destruction is always a net loss; this time measured in tens of thousands of lives, and trillions of yen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 46