August 23, 2014, 02:00:40 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 - mrsfotografie

Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 88
571
Lenses / Re: Strange Lens Flare (Sigma 35mm + MRC filter)
« on: January 03, 2014, 03:10:04 PM »
Strange. You've now changed to a different lens but get the same result on the same body.

Long shot; you haven't done a wet clean on the 5DII sensor yourself and inadvertently left a fluid smear  ?

I have wet cleaned the sensor about three times since I have this body, but cleaning involves swiping the sensor lengthwise. These flares are at 90 degrees to that direction ;) The sensor really is clean by the way. No fuss :D

572
Lenses / Re: Get a 300mm or 600mm? Oh the agony...
« on: January 03, 2014, 03:01:35 PM »
There are allot of great points brought up. I was also wondering about a 7D as a possibility to give me the added reach. While I'm not rich affording both in the future is a possibility in the future. For now I need to pick one. The Frugal side of me says 300mm is the way to go. But considering the 300 price is halfway to the 600 it's one of those things. No one else can make the call except me.

To answer the folks that said I didn't provide enough info.. Truth is I would shoot what ever I can with which ever lens I had. If I had the 600 I would probably shoot more wildlife. Presently I do allot of autosports. so I think the 300 would be a great lens for that purpose. But I also shoot Macro.. So go figure... LOL

Be careful to consider if the 7D will deliver high enough image quality for you, particularly at higher iso's. Coming from a 5D MkIII you may be disappointed (I just got a 5D Mark III just for this reason). My 7D is still here, but I think I may sell it if I truly find I no longer need it.

573
Lenses / Re: Strange Lens Flare (Sigma 35mm + MRC filter)
« on: January 03, 2014, 02:49:23 PM »
Guess what, it's not the lens that causes the effect. Here's some test shots I just took with my 5D Mark II and Sigma 50 mm f/1.4 all at 1/30 sec and f/1.4-f/1.6:

The flare occurs with the top of the body facing left (first 2 shots), and is gone when the body is turned 180 degrees (second 2 shots). I covered parts of the body with my hands while I was taking the test shots and there's no difference to the flare produced. Increasing the shutter speed to 1/125 sec made no difference. Anyone want to try this out with their 5D Mk II?

574
Lenses / Re: Strange Lens Flare (Sigma 35mm + MRC filter)
« on: January 03, 2014, 02:06:28 PM »
This reminds me of light leaks I got with faulty Hasselblad dark slide light traps. The closet thing that has happened to me in Canonland is a faulty shutter (but turned 90 degrees, different shape to the leak). Try shooting verticals with the body oriented the other way as well - two shots per set-up - and see what happens.
Tom

Hi Tom,

Thanks for your advice, but I tested this already and the phenomenon occurs only with the top of the (5D Mk II) camera facing right ;)

575
Lenses / Re: Strange Lens Flare (Sigma 35mm + MRC filter)
« on: January 03, 2014, 01:50:23 PM »
The filter seems the obvious candidate, I never use one, even though I have a bunch of them around.  I used to use them all the time until I discovered that even the best filters can cause issues.
You can't easily see filter issues by looking at them, but if you can try a different one, that might help to rule it out.
 
The fact that the lens is new is also a hint, Lenses do have assembly errors and other issues.    Still, I'd try a different filter first.  Even a cheap $10 one should be able to help rule out or point to a problem with the filter.

You're right, the filter looks to be the thing that catches the light first (and draws it in) so it is suspect. I think this is my only MRC filter, but I can change it out for a normal filter to see if it helps. I'm not in the mood to test this now, but will most definitely give it a go if the flare remains a problem.

576
Lenses / Re: Strange Lens Flare (Sigma 35mm + MRC filter)
« on: January 03, 2014, 12:58:41 PM »
To avoid taking the filter off, indoors, in your own home, because you're fearful of damaging the front element is a bit paranoid, don't you think?  Just take it off and retest.  This will determine if your (mostly useless and possibly problematic) UV filter (you're using at night) is the problem.

I'm not fearful of damaging the front element in my home. Just lazy enough not to want the hassle of reassembing it all dust-free. In any case, I'm satisfied. There's no way I'm going to use this lens without a filter, so my current test results are good enough. I challenge you to test your copy and see if you can come up with the same results.

Since I have the same setup, 5D3, Sigma 35 1.4 and B&W MRC clear filter , I tried with a bright light coming from the side in a few different scenes last night.

I had no flare or anything that resembles a light leak. I am familiar with light leaks as I shoot Holgas and older film bodies. Sorry I was no help.

You did rule out the filter so the dust/removal/carefulness issue is moot. Since it's on two bodies it's not a leak imho.

The first course I would take is to update the lens firmware via the USB Sigma dock. If that does nothing send it in.

i have a 5D3,sigma 35 1.4 art with BW nano XS (forgot full name , only one was coming with nano and XS)

no problem at all (i always use hood too~)

Well, with the 5D3 I was only able to get a tiny sliver in one or two frames. Not something that would be a problem. That was with the lens fully open and at 1/30 sec. I'm sure it has something to do with the 5D2 but I don't believe it is a light leak. I thought I had an opportunity to do some shooting with the 5D3+35 mm Sigma today but the event (ice sculptures) was so overcrowded, I decided to postpone that one.

577
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: January 03, 2014, 11:27:58 AM »
Here's a shot taken on the River Stour just up stream from where the English artist Constable painted many of his most famous paintings.

A four vertical frame panoramic taken on 6D, + 24-70 f4L  @ 50 mil and a touch of fill flash on the tree and closest swan. Taken just as the sun went down and a mist was beginning to form over the river and adjacent meadows. Twenty minutes later the whole area was enveloped in fog.

ISO 1600, 1/80 sec, f11

The horizon was well off but I think I've got it straight now.  ;)

Beautiful shot! But according to the reflection method, you're off by 0.8 degrees (you need to tilt it anticlockwise by 0.8 degrees). Grid view before correction, and the corrected image below:

Thanks MRS, yes you're right. The meadows on the left hand side do fall away from the river in reality which can make it look off when it is in fact correct. I'll change the original.

Glad to be of help. I need to look into fill-flash more often, as it's obvious what it can do...

578
Lenses / Re: Strange Lens Flare (Sigma 35mm + MRC filter)
« on: January 03, 2014, 11:20:21 AM »
To avoid taking the filter off, indoors, in your own home, because you're fearful of damaging the front element is a bit paranoid, don't you think?  Just take it off and retest.  This will determine if your (mostly useless and possibly problematic) UV filter (you're using at night) is the problem.

I'm not fearful of damaging the front element in my home. Just lazy enough not to want the hassle of reassembing it all dust-free. In any case, I'm satisfied. There's no way I'm going to use this lens without a filter, so my current test results are good enough. I challenge you to test your copy and see if you can come up with the same results.

579
Lenses / Re: Tamron SP 150-600 f/5-6.3 VC Review
« on: January 03, 2014, 11:16:04 AM »
Totally off-topic but what I find much more annoying is the way Canon switched around the zoom ring and focusing ring on the 24-105. Now THAT is irritating.

Switched from what?  Zoom ring closest to the body, focus ring further out is the norm for L-series lenses.  The 'reversed' lens in the group is the 70-300L - but you're right about it being irritating.  I've found that using the tripod collar for the 70-300L helps, since I hold it by that, which places my fingers at the outer zoom ring by default.

My travel telezoom, the Tamron  SP70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di VC USD is that way, too. I'm thinking of upgrading this to the 70-300L. It will be a major upgrade in image quality amongst other features, but as an added bonus , then all my lenses will rotate the same way, but obviously the 'switched' situation will stay. It is a little strange Canon choose to go this route with this lens, the other 7x-300 lenses all have the focus ring near the front element (okay, the 'L' is rear focusing, so that's probably the reason).

580
Lenses / Re: Tamron SP 150-600 f/5-6.3 VC Review
« on: January 03, 2014, 09:32:25 AM »
2)  The F!@#$%N zoom ring rotates in the wrong direction.  Everyone does this wrong (Tamron, Nikon, Sigma) and Canon does it right.   ;D >:(  I'm not sure I could get used to switching back and forth between this one and my Canon zooms.

Actually Sigma goes either way, depending on the lens, sample from their website:

I've used zooms from different manufacturers and have gotten used to switching back and forth on the zoom direction, just like each lens is different ergonomically.

581
Lenses / Re: Strange Lens Flare (Sigma 35mm + MRC filter)
« on: January 03, 2014, 09:21:43 AM »
That's why I always use the lens hood, even there is no sun....

So did the OP, if you read his post...
Yep, she did

He, not she.  MRS are his initials, not the contraction 'Mrs.'

Ha ha thanks Neuro, I know I'm sometimes at risk of being seen as the other sex with those initials ;)

I have great plane tickets though, they always state 'MR MR Smit', ie 'mister mister' :D

582
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: January 03, 2014, 09:14:37 AM »

Nicely done Sporgon...sometimes the horizon can be tricky can't it?


Thanks Northstar. Yes it can, in fact I have an alarming inability to hold the camera level. I think it's probably because I tend to look through the camera with my head tilted to one side. I normally have to rotate my images anti clockwise, and it's surprising just how much image area you loose if you have to rotate even 1 degree.

I found having a grid in the viewfinder helps, but then you may still be approximating wrongly. My 7D and 5D3 have the grid enabled, My 5D2 has a precision matte focusing screen, which comes without a grid unfortunately. For that camera I try to use the AF points as a level, but still I can get extremely tilted pictures too at times. 1 degree is in fact quite a lot already and yes you loose a lot of image real estate.

583
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: January 03, 2014, 09:05:16 AM »
Here's a shot taken on the River Stour just up stream from where the English artist Constable painted many of his most famous paintings.

A four vertical frame panoramic taken on 6D, + 24-70 f4L  @ 50 mil and a touch of fill flash on the tree and closest swan. Taken just as the sun went down and a mist was beginning to form over the river and adjacent meadows. Twenty minutes later the whole area was enveloped in fog.

ISO 1600, 1/80 sec, f11

The horizon was well off but I think I've got it straight now.  ;)

Beautiful shot! But according to the reflection method, you're off by 0.8 degrees (you need to tilt it anticlockwise by 0.8 degrees). Grid view before correction, and the corrected image below:

584
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: January 03, 2014, 08:57:21 AM »
The foolproof way to get true horizons when you have a decent reflection is to pull a guide over the image and use that to level.

Particularly in hilly and mountainous regions what we think is level often is not and shorelines are not necessarily straight. But you can't fool a reflection.

Here is a screenshot of the glacier image. As you can see I pulled a guide over the peak and rotated it until the actual peak and its reflection lined up, it took a 2ยบ anti clockwise rotation.

Thanks for illustrating what I mentioned earlier :)

585
Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes
« on: January 03, 2014, 08:56:01 AM »
Thanks for the heads up, Sporgon. This always seems to happen in this area of Glacier. If I adjust the lake/water horizon, the  mountains don't look straight, so I leave it like this.

I'm going to go back into Lightroom and mess around. Thanks again.

Are you also correcting for lens distortion (barre in this case)? If there is some distortion, you may correct for one side of the photo, and then the rest tilts.

I like these discussions, I learn a lot from them as well.

Pages: 1 ... 37 38 [39] 40 41 ... 88