November 28, 2014, 06:21:14 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 - R1-7D

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 20
91
Technical Support / Re: Multi-controller joystick 5D MKIII jumped off
« on: June 01, 2014, 01:08:46 PM »
It's quite common. You can probably just push the joystick back into place and it will work.

The only problem is the rubber bladder/seal is now broken. If you send it to Canon they will replace it; the catch is that the joystick's rubber is attached to the whole rubber bladder surrounding the body, which they will have to replace.


If you don't need the complete weather seal I'd just push the little thing back on and be done with it. I doubt even in rain if it will affect it. After all, the 5D2 never had a rubberized joystick.

92
Nikon has completely given in to the whims of customers in protecting shadows (because we all know the importance of exposing shadows to the point that they are no longer shadows) but that sacrifices highlights at the other end of the spectrum.
Canon focuses on just the opposite, but according to the masses they do not capture as much shadow detail in giving you that greater range in highlights.

Technically, in the scope of capturing light, once the upper end of the spectrum is blown - it is gone - and therefore should be the end protected the most. However the average photographer (aptitude or numerical demographic) has been made to believe that broad dynamic range in the areas of a photo that you were not intended to see (shadows) is the most important part of photography.

93
So what is the consensus on this lens: do you all think it's a safe bet, or should I maybe check back later after these initial production runs?

94
All of this has me quite worried and I am thinking about cancelling my order. I don't mind spending a bit of time with FoCal calibrating a lens, but I don't want to be bothered with having to spend even more money buying Sigma's dock just to calibrate it at every conceivable focal distance. If Sigma can't design a lens that has decent focusing without the ridiculous tinkering they should bloody well just include the dock with their lenses.

I haven't even received my copy yet and I am scared stiff.

Got my new, second copy, 50 Art today. I seemed really great at 0, at least farther away than 3-5 meters. I ran it through FoCal, first once where it said predicted afma +50! I decided to realign my setup as something had to be wrong. Did it again and it switched between +21 and +15. And it kept giving me the old "focal has tried focusing 5 times, but quality of focus varies a lot.. etc" but i continued the test and ended up with +11, I had dialed in +5 in camera. All this done at 50x focal length.

I went outside and +11 at infinity was seriously off, put it back to 0, and it works pretty well. I went through the values for the three other distances between 0 and +11.

I ended up with 0 in camera and the lens via docking set to, +8 at mfd, +6 at 0,7m, +5 at 1,5m and 0 at infinity. For now it seems really nice and consistent and not like the other one I had. BIG pinch of salt if this stays this way, I am not saying it's perfect now, but today it's perfect, we'll see over the next week how it evolves. I hope nothing happens...

95
One of the posters (I forgot to record the name, damn it) at dpreview.com said this on Nikon sensors. I saved the quote to ask Neuro about, but since it seems relevant to this thread I'll just post it.

Quote
Nikon has completely given in to the whims of customers in protecting shadows (because we all know the importance of exposing shadows to the point that they are no longer shadows) but that sacrifices highlights at the other end of the spectrum.
Canon focuses on just the opposite, but according to the masses they do not capture as much shadow detail in giving you that greater range in highlights.

Technically, in the scope of capturing light, once the upper end of the spectrum is blown - it is gone - and therefore should be the end protected the most. However the average photographer (aptitude or numerical demographic) has been made to believe that broad dynamic range in the areas of a photo that you were not intended to see (shadows) is the most important part of photography.

96
Just ordered mine. Fingers crossed that it's a good copy unlike the debacle I had with my Canon 24-70 II.

I'm watching with interest how everyone's repairs come through.

97
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: May 18, 2014, 01:10:35 AM »
I have some recent baby photos!  8)


That's creepy. Nice shots tho...

98
Lenses / Re: Stacked TCs - 1.4x III + 12mm Extension Tube + 2x III
« on: May 09, 2014, 12:45:02 AM »
Sorry if this is a bit off topic, but since we're talking about extenders and extension tubes already I don't see the need to start another thread.


If I use a 2x extender and then a 12mm extension tube...is it possible to use the 100 f/2.8L with this combination?

Yeah, I think I've done that. The 12mm extension tube should make the 2x extender fit any lens (although I'd be careful with ones like the 85L which has a very exposed rear element). With a macro lens like the 100L you'll get a pretty good setup for smaller insect subjects, although I'd stop down and you'll lose infinity focus as always with the extension tubes.

Thanks! I just tried it... Man, unless the camera is on a tripod it's next to impossible to hold it steady. Sharpness really suffers, even when stopped down to f/8.

The lens retained it's f/2.8 aperture, however, which was cool!


Thanks again for the information.

Well remember, the reported aperture won't take account of the extender, since the camera body won't know it's there. So "f/2.8" is actually f/5.6. Also, at that magnification (up to 2x), use of a flash is almost essential. Add a flash, set it to the sync speed (e.g. 1/200), and you can hand hold easily. I was hand holding to 10x magnification today, albeit half resting on a surface (MP-E at max + 2x).


Interesting about the aperture. I was using a flash -- 580 EX II -- at exactly 1/200. Still, at extreme close-ups of subjects...I did not have much luck keeping it steady.

I also found manual focusing was an absolute must. Normally with Macro I like to manual focus anyways, but I sometimes use autofocus to get an approximate...but this lens combo did not want to focus at all. It just kept hunting and hunting.

Anyways, it's cool that this can be done. Gotta love tinkering with all the equipment. Thanks for the help.

99
Lenses / Re: Stacked TCs - 1.4x III + 12mm Extension Tube + 2x III
« on: May 08, 2014, 03:55:20 PM »
Sorry if this is a bit off topic, but since we're talking about extenders and extension tubes already I don't see the need to start another thread.


If I use a 2x extender and then a 12mm extension tube...is it possible to use the 100 f/2.8L with this combination?

Yeah, I think I've done that. The 12mm extension tube should make the 2x extender fit any lens (although I'd be careful with ones like the 85L which has a very exposed rear element). With a macro lens like the 100L you'll get a pretty good setup for smaller insect subjects, although I'd stop down and you'll lose infinity focus as always with the extension tubes.

Thanks! I just tried it... Man, unless the camera is on a tripod it's next to impossible to hold it steady. Sharpness really suffers, even when stopped down to f/8.

The lens retained it's f/2.8 aperture, however, which was cool!


Thanks again for the information.

100
Lenses / Re: Stacked TCs - 1.4x III + 12mm Extension Tube + 2x III
« on: May 08, 2014, 01:51:09 PM »
Sorry if this is a bit off topic, but since we're talking about extenders and extension tubes already I don't see the need to start another thread.


If I use a 2x extender and then a 12mm extension tube...is it possible to use the 100 f/2.8L with this combination?

101
I like how all the concern for this has died off. I still think finding out about which products are affected is extremely important.

102
So if this is about the focus ring and not the zoom ring, my question is: Is there any leaked documentation about the zoom ring clicking sound then?

103
For those claiming this as 'ammo'...  The complaints I've seen (and heard, including video) have all been about a clicking sound from the ZOOM ring, this post is about the FOCUS ring.  I trust that Canon knows the difference.

Or maybe that's the exact reason we aren't getting any help - they got the two rings mixed up in the memo! ;D :P

104
This is the kind of adjustment to internal parts and service advice all companies that care about their customers give out to their service departments as a continual ongoing practice.

Releasing it like this, with no context, or the numbers or percentage of affected units, as Canon know very well, will just cause hysteria amongst a vocal few, many of whom won't actually own the lens, panic amongst many that do but don't have the "issue", inundation of service centers who will not replace anything just because "it made a noise once", and a host of other entirely negative outcomes.

Doing this like this is not a positive thing to do by any measure or rational. You are in a unique position to cause or limit any backlash, releasing confidential documents like this needs to be done with the greatest care, a huge amount of back story and lots of context is needed to justify disclosure of this kind of information.

You have a rational point on this. However, as I stated in another thread, the lack of integrity Canon has shown its customers (me being one of them) makes me completely unsympathetic. Maybe if they were like Apple and went the extra step to help out and make sure the product becomes satisfactory, even with known issues that might not affect every unit, then I would support keeping this information confidential. However, Canon almost goes out of its way to insult its customers. I was personally told I was "hearing things"!

I have had far worse dealings with Apple than Canon, and I have had several "issues" with both.

Dealing with any corporations service arms can be an exercise in futility, I have been asked to send in example images with a lens only to have the unopened CD sent back. Getting to the bottom of issues, particularly intermittent issues, can be very frustrating for everybody, the service centers included. I have found Canon have an excellent hierarchy though, if you don't get what you need from one person you can keep going up, once you get above simple service managers any issues seem to be taken very seriously. I have also noticed a difference in satisfaction from people who use the different area service centers. Were I in your situation I would send it to a different service center.

Apple isn't perfect either, but in my experience they are still the best. As far as service centers go in Canada I am unaware if there is more than one main one. CPS told me to send my lens in but that chances were nothing would be done to it.

105
This is the kind of adjustment to internal parts and service advice all companies that care about their customers give out to their service departments as a continual ongoing practice.

Releasing it like this, with no context, or the numbers or percentage of affected units, as Canon know very well, will just cause hysteria amongst a vocal few, many of whom won't actually own the lens, panic amongst many that do but don't have the "issue", inundation of service centers who will not replace anything just because "it made a noise once", and a host of other entirely negative outcomes.

Doing this like this is not a positive thing to do by any measure or rational. You are in a unique position to cause or limit any backlash, releasing confidential documents like this needs to be done with the greatest care, a huge amount of back story and lots of context. I'd suggest getting the opinion of a very good and expensive internationally savvy corporation lawyer too.

I dearly hope this is not a page hits kind of deal.

I don't think it'll bring a spike in page hits and I understand your points.

My issue is the same as the person that sent me the documents, Canon charging for repairs on a defective design. I am trying to get proof that is actually happening and going over our repairs at Lens Rentals Canada and asking others if they have any data on the matter.

I have no problem with silent recalls and just putting "optical adjustment" on the receipt and charging someone $50 to cover shipping and any other incidental costs and being done with it. However, to charge someone $450 to repair something you know is faulty by design just doesn't seem right to me.

Quite right, CR!

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 20