December 22, 2014, 12:14:44 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 - skitron

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 35
So are all of the third party lenses still focusing correctly with this firmware version? I'd hate to think Canon would sabotage them with a firmware update but can't put it past them if they sabotaged third party batteries.

32 inspired me to take my 1dx - 85 1.8 combo out on a walk this morning to see if I might come upon something of interest.   

usually I slap my trusty 24-105 on for "walk about" photography, or sometimes the shorty 40, but this was a first for the 85 1.8. 

not a "street shot", but I like this image.  cloudy and gray here today, and considering the setting, i went b/w using nik silver efx.

iso 100

thanks for your the future I'll be using this combo again for "walkabout" photography.

That is a brilliant composition IMO. Very well done.

If/when Sigma updates their 50 1.4 into the Art line, they should make it a f/1.2 just to annoy Canon. Would be awesome!

Well, maybe not to annoy them, but do the new one as f/1.2 and then keep the current 50 to fill the current price point.

LOL, they just need to make sure they do to the current ones whatever they they did to mine when I sent it to them *before* they all hit the store shelves instead of *after*.  Mine was a problem child as delivered, but very well behaved after a trip in for service.

LOL, so when can I pre-order???

As for the 50, I've been pleased with the existing one after I sent it in to service the "front focus up close, back focus at distance" syndrome. They totally fixed it with a firmware update. That said, I'd definitely want to see if the ART version 50 is better than the current version 50 after being dialed in.

Lenses / Re: Canon L Glass is currently priced at over $1200 / pound
« on: April 20, 2013, 03:39:04 PM »
LOL, I'm on the "hamburger diet". Everything I have is in the $486 to $779 per pound range.

None of that fillet mignon priced stuff in my bags!

I've often pondered the same question as OP, so dug around and found this post:

Easy read, but enough info to understand the technical.

Basically there are known and expected phase detection errors at the individual phase detect cell level and those are dealt with in code when the camera is manufactured. AFMA allows you to "mop up" at a global level.

The phase detection process as a whole is a hybrid of open and closed loops. Basically if a phase error is detected beyond what has already been documented in code during manufacturing, instructions are sent to move the lens to a specific focus. It keeps checking the results and sending further instructions to the lens until it confirms. So in this respect it is closed loop.

However, the Phase Detection sensor and the Image Detection sensor are two entirely different physical entities operating on two distinct and separate light paths. By definition, using the PD sensor to derive an ID sensor focus state is open loop in nature. An "in focus" state on the PD sensor results in an "unknown focus" state for the ID sensor evey single time. And it is only by making assumptions about the physical relationship between the PD and ID light paths and sensors that the ID sensor focus state is derived and in fact *assumed*.

LOL, after seeing how this works I'm surprised it functions as well as it does.

The way to close all process loops is to place the PD cells in the same physical light path and focal plane as the ID cells. Seems like I heard something along those lines recently.

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: April 20, 2013, 11:41:09 AM » is 1dx and d800 lifted the same in the shadows and from a contrast rich motive
This is a strait comparison which shows two different sensors signal/noise in shadows and the cameras are exactly the same exposed...

Not taking sides here, but what software was used to do the lifts? Point being all softs are not all going to do it with the same quality. The Canon shot looks like a total mess compared to what I get from 5D3 shots doing similar lift.

Lighting / Re: YN-622 Reviews?
« on: April 13, 2013, 09:00:22 PM »
well i just got my 622 triggers and a 565 and got to mess around with them for a little bit with my 6d. This is my first time ever using wireless flash and here are some results. If you guys have any advice, it is gladly welcome. I'm still reading about flash and everything photography related so i'll gladly listen.

I found Speedlighter's Handbook by Syl Arena extremely helpful. For the noob (like me), it's all about lighting angles and shadow hardness control using a single light. I'm amazed at how far you can go just doing the basics. One thing I like about his book is it combines an instructional tech reference format with a cookbook format, making it very quick to find a recipe but also learn what makes the recipe tick.

Lenses / Re: Added dandelion chips to my lensbaby and samyang 8mm
« on: April 02, 2013, 04:12:21 PM »
thats not good, did you try calibrating the AF confirm too? it seems like a pretty complicated process which i didnt do
obviously the 8mm just about everything is in focus most of the time anyway
and the lens baby i didt worry about calibrating as its a freaky little lens anyway

My Rokinon 35 is a Nikon mount so I use an adapter. The thickness of the adapter I dealt with by programming the AF offset in the chip. It's not any tougher than programming the other data except you have to guess what value, but even that was easy and got it second try. Then fine tune using in-camera AFMA the normal way.

Pretty frustrating that everything functioned properly then this wide range of confirming focus. If I were to hazzard a guess, the range it confirms is equivalent to about 12 AFMA basically a game of roulette when at f/1.4 and close subject distance.

Lenses / Re: Added dandelion chips to my lensbaby and samyang 8mm
« on: March 31, 2013, 05:18:35 PM »
Got this European dandelion in, installed and programmed it.

The good news is that it functions as advertised.

But for me anyway, it sadly does not work as advertised.

The issue with it is that the range of focus that it confirms is so large that it is basically useless for me.

I can AFMA it such that when slowly focusing from further out, when it first confirms, it is in focus. The problem is it just keeps on confirming as I continue to slowly focus closer in, and then I have this massive front focus.

The Chinese chips that support AFMA have a very narrow range that they will confirm, which is great. But unfortunately they don't work with 5D3 for some reason.

I need the AFMA since this Rokinon (Samyang) lens is a Nikon mount and I'm using an adapter. The thickness of the adapter is too much for the in camera AFMA to compensate by itself....

I guess it's time to punt on this lens, which is sad because I really like it.

Lenses / Re: Best tele prime for full frame?
« on: March 25, 2013, 03:50:03 PM »
I vote the 135.

LOL, I was a happy camper back in the film days with nothing but a 50 and a 135. I sure wish I would have gone that route to get into DSLR decades later...

I'm underwhelmed with my 100L for focusing in low light even with assist beam. It is in i believe AF group C so not surprising...

EOS Bodies / Re: Are 5d3 owners happy with the video, ALL i?
« on: March 25, 2013, 03:29:05 PM »
My 2 cents (probably about all it's worth...) is the video grab looks like it was taken with a stock picture style and has not much apparent DR as a result. Plus looks like no sharpening in post. To me, these are the more noticable issues than noise.

I've not done much video with 5D3 but did do some testing to gear up for doing some in the future. My findings are that there's a pretty substantial difference to the look when using a picture style optimized for video like FLAAT or similar and then applying a RGB S curve in post as a basis for further grading refinments (if desired), as opposed to using a stock Canon still shot picture style.

For noise reduction, the Red Giant NR plug is pretty good, as is Neat Video NR plug (I own both) and I'd probably say the Red Giant product is the more flexible and easier to use.

Lastly, the softness is pretty easily handled to at least some degree with Adobe's native sharpening tools.

But yes, I'd agree what comes straight out of the camera could stand improvement.

As for all i-frame, I did see a test of moving cars at a distance that were very tiny within the frame and the all i frame looked smoother in the motion of the cars. Again, I've not spent much time on video with my 5D3 yet but that test leads me to believe all i frame is maybe helpful under certain conditions, and of course as already mentioned, if storage is not too much of an issue, it may help when you dump it into your NLE.

Jmo, ymmv, yadda, yadda.

Lenses / Re: Best sports lenses for Canon 7D
« on: March 25, 2013, 11:07:08 AM »
Another lens to consider is the 200mm f/2.8 L if you can do without the zoom on your long lens. It is as good as the 70-200 IS2 long end, very light weight and compact comparitively speaking, mint used for about $500. I actually have both of these lenses...bought the 70-200 IS2 new and bought a mint 200 f/2.8 for $460. It's very difficult to tell them apart when doing comparison shots.

Nice thing is it would get you into a very good longer lens for not much $ if you buy used and you can always turn it for what you paid if/when you want to go for the 70-200 IS2.

The 70-200 IS2 is a fantastic lens but that thing is a boat anchor, so there is a certain desireableness to the compactness and light weight of the 200 f/2.8 that keeps it around here despite the redundancy "shot-wise", especially given not much $ tied up in it.

Lenses / Re: Teleconverter
« on: March 24, 2013, 08:46:51 PM »
I have the 70-200 IS2 and the 1.4 TC3 and very pleased with that combo. But that keeps me at f/4 wide open so still useable in less than ideal light. IQ hit is barely even perceptable. I realize you are asking about the 2x but chimed in anyway in case you decide to consider going "shorter".

If anyone if worries about AFMA, then they aren't the target audience for this camera...  The people who are the target audience are those who say, of look cool, it has video!

there are plenty of people who can only afford a xxxD body.
they spend more for lenses and AFMA would be usefull for them.

Of course I would love a lexus, but if I could only afford a Hyundai, I wouldn't expect to get high end lexus features in the Hyundai.  If you can only afford this camera, save up like just about anyone has to do, or if your set on getting this level of camera, send in your camera/lenses to be calibrated together...

LOL...and Canon service will set AFMA in their service menus that can't be accessed by users...

The point is it costs them nothing to add it and it would be yet another sales bullet. Just think of all the buzz there would have been right here in this very thread if it was announced it DID have AFMA?

The point is, even a Hyundai has cup holders in it...

Skiltron, the point is the average rebel user isn't an above average photographer... it's a person who goes to costco and see's a rebel as splurging...  It's the realtor that would rather do their own photos rather than pay for a pro to do them for them and wonder why the photos dont look right...  It's that soccer mom who wants to take the photos of little jimmy and dont give a rats butt about the horrid noise...  Then they read in the manual that oh yeah, it has afma, and has NO clue how to do it, or dont even read the manual in the first place and dont even know it's there... then canon has to deal with the morons who buy the camera, reads about afma, and then calls them asking how to do it, and have their employees on the phone with the people for 10-15 minutes at a time trying to talk them through it, wasting their time and money...  It's stupid... it's advanced... It's like getting a hyundai accent and complaining it has a stick shift saying it should have pedal shifters instead.  It's more than enough camera for what that target market is aimed for.

So why does it even have modes other than full auto then? And why does it have 18 MP? After all, they don't know how to use anything other than full auto and they certainly don't need 18 MP in a crop body. And why NINE AF points? Everyone knows they are only going to use the center point or just leave it in "focus point roulette mode" and they'll never even understand what all those other points are supposed to do.

So, you are totally missing the point.

The point is 1) sales bullets count and 2) people who buy these things often, if not usually, find somebody they know who is "into photography" to ask before they buy.

I guarantee most who are "into photography" would say to them "AFMA is good to have though you may never need it with your f/3.5-f/5.6 lens." "But if you ever upgrade to one of those expense $350 50mm f/1.4 lens, you'll probably want that feature."

Just like you probably would tell them, "you may not use them, but 9 AF points instead of just 1 is good to have".

Consumer goes "Hmff, I didn't really follow all of that, and I'm not sure I'd buy a seperate lens that costs that kind of money, but if so and so says I might need that AFMA thingy, I should buy this newest model just in case."

And of course the same holds true if they were reading all of the reviews and blogs stating the same thing, had Canon provided it.

LOL, and to tie back to the car analogy, do you have any idea how many car sales are closed because of cup holders and storage nooks?

So to me, it is just stupid to not match your primary competitions sales bullet when you can do so for zero investment.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 35