November 22, 2014, 09:15:29 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 - mrsfotografie

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 97
166
EOS Bodies / Re: How do reds come out in your 5d3 ?
« on: August 13, 2014, 01:34:49 PM »
I have often struggled with red objects in my 5d3. I wrote last year about it but did not get any replies. Yesterday while trying out my new 85 1.2 ii, I saw the same issue.

Red flowers come out in an over saturated red haze. The other colors seem saturated just fine, but the reds are over powered so much that the flowers lose detail.

I can reduced saturation in LR, but then the whole image looks washed out... the issue is only with reds.

If I reduce just red (Red channel only) , then it lacks punch, although I get back details in the flower...

Has anyone else observed this?

Looks like your auto white balance is thrown off by the amount of 'green' in the photo (greens look too blue). Try a WB setting of 'daylight' or 'cloudy'. I find this gives the best overall results if shooting in a 'green' environment.

167
I agree i find it a ho hum focal length not wide enough or not tight enough
I really like 20mm though its a really nice wide focal length

I second that. I really love my CZJ Flektogon 20/2.8 although I miss autofocus. A 24mm f/1.4 is already made by Canon so I don't see the need for Sigma to do this too. I'd rather had a 20mm f/1.4 with a close focusing distance of 19mm like the Flek. And yeah, I know there's the 20mm F1.8 EX DG by Sigma but that lens is dated, it has no hypersonic AF (HSM).

Sigma made a 35mm f/1.4 that beats the Canon 35mm f/1.4 on many fronts, including price  and it has been a big seller so I suspect Sigma will see a makrket for a 24mm.

I agree the 20mm is dated but honestly its AF is plenty fast for a wide angle prime. It does have a weird dual clutch system which is a poor mechanical workaround to engage or disengage the focus ring vs AF or MF. It is not a big issue for me, but it is possible to set the lens in MF mode and have the focus ring disengaged as well.

168
Software & Accessories / Re: Unsharp Mask in DPP
« on: August 12, 2014, 01:07:17 PM »
How do they differ in the way they sharpen? When would you use one over the other and how much sharpening is usually required and how much is too much?
I just "googled" "how to set DPP by default to 'sharpness' instead of 'unsharp mask' for 5DMkIII images?" and couldn't find the solution to your dilemma. Maybe Canon can fix this in a future version.

Without going into technical details, 'unsharp mask' is contrast based and strongly sharpens edges. 'Sharpening' is a more overall effect, sharpening not only the edges but smaller details too but less significantly. The unsharp masking has quite an image altering effect, significantly boosting apparent sharpness but it also causes contrast changes at the edges themselves, not something I like. The unsharp mask creates more of a 'wow' effect, but the normally sharpened images are more pleasing to look at for longer.

169
Lenses / Re: Going native at 400mm
« on: August 12, 2014, 12:59:42 PM »
When in a pinch the 70-200mm F2.8 MKII with 2x converter work pretty well. I only have the V2 converter, its easier than carrying two lenses and the IQ is pretty good IMO close to the 100-400mm at 400 but the AF is slower... but with the 5DMKIII I missed very few shots, also the 4 stop IS works great with the 2x.

Couple of recent examples, all commercial. As you can see, they are very sharp, and two of the below are very quick and the combo had no trouble.

BMW CSL 1973, Batmobile, Colin Turkington, Jet Super Touring Car Trophy, Silverstone Classic 2014 by TomScottPhoto, on Flickr

What are your shutter speed and aperture for this shot? EDIT: ƒ/5.6  400.0 mm 1/250, I checked on your flickr page.


I've recently rediscovered my 100-400L given good light (from behind, it looses performance when shooting against the light). This is a quick an dirty crop, at f/7.1, 1/1000s. I'm waiting to see if the 100-400L II will be announced because the versatility of a zoom is kinda nice to have at the race track (I thought differently until I shot this event).

170
EOS Bodies / Re: Suggestions of a Canon MF announcement at Photokina!
« on: August 12, 2014, 12:19:32 PM »
I see what you did there.

 ;)

It would be strange for a manufacturer renowned for their AF camera's...

I see it too now, I guess that's what happens when you don't fully read into the topic  :-[

171
I agree i find it a ho hum focal length not wide enough or not tight enough
I really like 20mm though its a really nice wide focal length

Is that opinion based on full frame use or aps-h?

172
EOS Bodies / Re: Suggestions of a Canon MF announcement at Photokina!
« on: August 11, 2014, 02:25:35 PM »
It would be strange for a manufacturer renowned for their AF camera's...

173
Software & Accessories / Unsharp Mask in DPP
« on: August 11, 2014, 02:18:01 PM »
Has anyone found out yet how to set DPP by default to 'sharpness' instead of 'unsharp mask' for 5DMkIII images?

I find the 'unsharp mask' effect to be too strong and prefer the more subtle sharpening of the old fashioned 'sharpness' setting (default for my MkII).

So I always have to remember to 'select all' and then change the sharpening setting, would be nice if I could 'forget' about it  ::)

Thanks ;)

174
Lenses / Re: lifespan of IS motor?
« on: August 11, 2014, 12:14:59 PM »
Hello, I've recently purchased my first lens with IS on it. Do to guys leave IS on all the time even when not needed such as a scenario with lots of light and high shutter speeds or do you guys turn off IS? To be more specific, I have the 70-200 IS ii and  I guess I'm trying to "prolong" the life of the IS if possible because I'm sure it's not cheap to fix.

Funny I worry about a lot of my gear a lot of the time but I have absolute confidence in the IS/AF/electronic aperture system. Most electronics last longer than you would expect. FWIW the AF and electronic aperture in my 03/1988 MkI 50 mm f/1.8 still work like a charm.

No pun intended, but if you worry about your IS breaking maybe you should shoot primes wide open too and in permanent live view mode using an electronic shutter so you don't wear out your:

IS
AF
Aperture
Mirror
Shutter
Zoom mechanism

So what I mean to say is, please stop worrying and enjoy your fabulous 70-200 and remember, it's a pro lens and these are built to last.

Disclaimer: Use, but don't abuse your gear like some pro's do ;)


175
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Dustin Abbott Reviews Tamron 28-300 FF
« on: August 09, 2014, 08:45:52 AM »
It will be interesting to see if Canon release a 28-300L II as rumoured and if so how it compares.

I think a new 28-300 from Canon is plausible, just not that it will be an L lens.

176
Lenses / Re: Thoughts on 70-200 f/4 vs 70-300 vs 100-400?
« on: August 05, 2014, 01:27:14 PM »
It's amazing how close the 70-300L comes to the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, something I had never expected or even dreamed of until I started using it.

I remember getting flamed for questioning just how much better the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II could be after shooting with the 70-300L. Glad to see my suspicions confirmed.  ;)

The comparison holds true, however that's at comparative apertures. Obviously the 70-200 has its advantages in a certain focal length range ;) In any case there's reason enough for me to own both of these lenses (and a 100-400L).

177
...
Not to be a dissenter... but 24mm hasn't appealed to me at all.  Mind you, I've only shot at f4... so maybe at wider aperture it looks better... when I do use 24, I think... probably could go wider... I can't imagine having a prime lenses at 24... and I'm saying this with all due respect...
JD, I completely understand, we all have our own tastes when it comes to focal length.  I have the same feeling 'could go wider' when I use 35mm and have never loved it, even though it's a classic FL for many people.  For me, I feel that 24mm is the widest you can go without unrealistic perspective distortion and I like the challenge of composing this wide. 
...

The way to use a 24mm is to get up close to the subject. I agree that 24mm is the widest you can go and still have relatively realistic distortion. While 24mm is not for everything, I've found that it's great for paddock photo's at the racetrack for instance. The 24mm really adds wide-angle drama without going to extremes. When you cannot or don't want to get up too close, 35mm is the better alternative.

And FWIW I never thought about the 24mm focal length much until I decided to buy a prime - that changes the game(and understanding of the focal length) entirely because in a zoom, 24mm is probably the widest you can go and in that case, yes usually the thought is 'I probably could go wider'.

178
Canon General / Re: What is your Least Used Piece of Gear?
« on: August 05, 2014, 08:30:33 AM »
Of course, it's quite unlike a camera in the sense that a detailed full colour image is only made in the middle (at the fovea), getting less distinct towards the edges (with no moving of eyes or head, remember).

Yes I have distinct corner softness. In fact I think the MTF is probably still disappointing some way towards the center.

179
Lenses / Re: Thoughts on 70-200 f/4 vs 70-300 vs 100-400?
« on: August 05, 2014, 02:09:04 AM »
But, I doubt if anyone could honestly tell the difference between the two unless testing side by side, they are that close. They are both exceptional lenses. I have never shot with the 100-400.

From my experience, the 70-300L is better than the 100-400L in color, sharpness and contrast. While still a good lens, I (like many others) hope the 100-400 will be upgraded to the type of quality we've become used to (70-200 f/2.8 IS II, 70-300L). It's amazing how close the 70-300L comes to the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, something I had never expected or even dreamed of until I started using it.

180
EOS Bodies / Re: 7DII - where are the leaks ??
« on: August 05, 2014, 02:01:32 AM »
I think that we saw a CR3 posting by CR quite a while back.  However, it did not have specifics.  I saw a supposed leak the other day, but without confirming information, its not really believable.

Here it is... http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/07/eos-7d-replacement-telephoto-lens-in-september-cr3/

Most leaks have come from people printing brochures, or involved with setting up for announcements, and usually happen about one maybe two weeks before.  Canon severely punishes leakers with loss of future business, even if it was a rogue employee.  That's why leaks are hard to come by, and places like CR protect the identity as well as rephrasing leaked information to protect them.  CR may not publish all they have if it can't be sourced from more than one person.

Sometimes early leaks happen, but they are difficult to confirm, and get ignored or downplayed.

If there's no new 7D announced, it may be simply discontinued. Some (internet) retailers are no longer carrying this body, and no question that demand for the 7D is going down. The 7D is yesterday's hero...

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 ... 97