February 27, 2015, 12:06:49 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 - Studio1930

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 16
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1dx, or d800e?
« on: October 15, 2012, 04:59:55 PM »

200 f2- nothing prepares you for how heavy and awkward that thing is. No way I would carry it around a wedding, and wouldn't be too excited about taking it along on an engagement shoot. It felt so unbalanced on the d800.

Yeah, a 200/f2 will be unbalanced on a non-pro body without a vertical grip.  Put the 200/f2 on a 1 series body and you will notice a big difference (much more balanced).  I would not judge the Nikon 200 f/2 on a d800 when you are thinking about getting the Canon 200 f/2 for a Canon body (possibly a 1Dx).

Normally, glass is a better investment than bodies and is kept longer.  I would go with the 200 f/2 (which I own and use with a 1Dx).

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 200 f/2L IS
« on: October 15, 2012, 12:02:55 PM »
Yep, love my 200 f/2.  Wouldn't trade it for anything. You just can't match that f/2 look with this much compression.  Butter smooth.

Lenses / Re: Canon 16-35mm II + Reikan FocCal Pro --- Tips
« on: October 10, 2012, 08:58:16 AM »
And for pro users, don't forget a quick dust check.  8)

Lenses / Re: Canon 16-35mm II + Reikan FocCal Pro --- Tips
« on: October 06, 2012, 10:09:28 AM »
Please share thoughts on the quality scores - how valid/reliable are comparisons BETWEEN cameras/lenses ?
Do 'sharper' lenses (70-200 II, 135) actually score higher or just more consistently (once AFMA has been done) ?
Is it 'fair' to use the absolute value of the quality score to make a sharpness comparison between the 24-70 @ 70 with the 70-200 @70 (or the Mk II version of the 24-70 @ 70) ?

I understand that the test is designed to optimize the AF mechanism between one body and one lens, and thus reduce shot to shot variability in focus distance measurement/lens motor operation, but can we draw conclusions between different combinations once we have 'optimized' a camera body/lens pair ??

I found that setting up the test a different way will result in different quality numbers. Sometime the difference is drastic. One of my lenses was reporting a quality of about 400 or so and the next day I set it up differently and got qualities numbers in the 900s. I think it can be something as little as having a different angle to the test chart.

EOS Bodies / Re: 1DX lock up?
« on: October 04, 2012, 10:27:12 PM »
The pro shop that I buy all of my gear from doesn't sell Lexar Cards and has warned me against buying them for Canon cameras suggesting that Canon and Lexar have had issues in the past and that Canon doesn't officially support them. I have no idea what any of that means but I just buy SanDisk Extreme cards to be safe. I would love to hear if your problems stemmed from the cards as I'm extremely interested in the new Lexar 1000x cards. They seem like a better fit for the fast frame rates of my 1DX, but at ¥70,000 a pop in Japan, that's a huge investment to be wrong about.

I had Sandisk cards die on me in my 1 series cameras so I switched to Lexar 1000x 16 GB cards and have had no issues after 50K or so shots on a 1DX.

Lenses / Re: 24-70 II or 70-200 II
« on: October 04, 2012, 10:23:19 PM »
What body you putting this on?  If it is FF then the 70-200 is my choice due to the compression (I love compression).  If it is going on a crop body then you won't like the 70-200 indoors.

Lenses / Re: Canon 16-35mm II + Reikan FocCal Pro --- Tips
« on: October 04, 2012, 10:21:09 PM »
So your sharp lens will now be even sharper. :)

Lenses / Re: Canon 16-35mm II + Reikan FocCal Pro --- Tips
« on: October 02, 2012, 04:49:29 PM »
Very sturdy tripod.
Very bright lights (I use studio lights with modeling light all the way up set very close to the test chart).
Print chart and mount on a black foam board and clamp foam board to adjustable stand.
Calibrate at different distances and you may get different results.  I pick the one that fits my shooting style the most.
Save your results to view them later and see how close they were.
Save settings in spreadsheet to recall later when you accidentally clear your camera settings.
Print both charts and use the horizontal squares chart to verify focus points.
Check the aperture values of your lenses too to see where they are not sharp anymore (around f8 and up for mine).
TURN OFF IS or you will probably get very bad results.
Use live view to manually focus for aperture tests.
Watch live view zoomed to see if walking around moves your floor and can be detected which means don't walk around your camera while waiting for results (depends on floor type).

Like a good neighbor, State Farm is there.  :P

Seriously though, there is no way to tell how long you will need to dry them in rice since you really don't know how much water got in them (if any as some of those devices are weather sealed).  Get them to a qualified repair center (if you can find one) or just turn them on and give them a try.  Either way, I would be prepared to either reschedule the upcoming shoot or contact your favorite rental store to rent some gear while the other is being repaired.

Good luck.

Software & Accessories / Re: Who uses a handheld light meter?
« on: October 02, 2012, 01:40:47 PM »
I have calibrated my L358 meter to expose to the right by 2/3 of a stop so I don't have to make adjustments to the readings.  There is a way to calibrate those meters to zero them in to whatever setting you like.  When I shot slide, I would calibrate my meter to slightly underexpose and now with digital I have it almost 1 stop overexpose.  :P

Software & Accessories / Re: Who uses a handheld light meter?
« on: October 02, 2012, 12:17:09 PM »
Like a million others here, I have the L358 and I use it for ambient readings and not reflective.  I don't shoot landscapes so I prefer not to meter reflective unless I am simply using the meter in camera.  If I break out the L358 (did this a few days ago for a studio portrait) then it is to setup lights rather than check distant reflective light.

I would think the in camera meter would be just a good and quicker unless your camera doesn't have one (or isn't reliable).  Tayvin is right though, clients love light meters.  You quickly become "professional" in their eyes.   :P

EOS Bodies / Re: 1dX dust in viewfinder
« on: October 02, 2012, 11:54:01 AM »
I have shipped several cameras to Canon.  Keep in mind that you will need to insure the camera and when you are talking about an $$ body like the $8000 1Ds3 (back when it was $8K) or the 1DX, that gets very expensive.  Lots of bubble wrap inside of lots of peanuts (pink non static) inside a box inside of a box.  Body cap on, battery removed, memory cards removed.  Not sent in original box.

Lenses / Re: 85 mm Lens
« on: September 26, 2012, 07:18:39 PM »
I use the 85 f/1.2 for closer work on a 1 series body and the 135 for 3/4 or full length shots.  Both are excellent lenses.  The 85 f/1.2 focuses more slowly and can by tricky to use wide open but gives excellent results.  The 135 is light, cheaper and very sharp.  The 135 will give better compression and a more pleasing shape to a face than a wider lens.


Lenses / Re: Lens Filters -- preference?
« on: September 26, 2012, 07:12:28 PM »
Thanks -- I saw three B&W 77 mm XSPros... 1) Kaesemann Circular Polarizer MRC Nano Filter, 2) UV MRC-Nano 010M Filter and  3) Clear MRC-Nano 007

If I wanted a CPL, I'd choose the CPL - that's for optical effect (reduce reflection, increase saturation, darken blue skies, not to be left on all the time as it costs you ~1.75 stops of light).

If I wanted protection for the front element, I'd choose either 2 or 3 - for a dSLR there's no difference so get whichever is cheaper.

Yep, +1.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 60D actually doesn't need AFMA?
« on: September 26, 2012, 04:10:58 PM »
I don't have a 60D, but put a 200 f/2 or an 85 f/1.2 on there and shoot wide open and see if you still think there are no front/back focusing issues.  You might be lucky and have a perfectly matched body to your lenses, but probably not.

My 1DsM2 was perfect with all of my lenses as well, but that was probably because I couldn't AFMA it and I just didn't know how sharp it really could have been.  :P

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 16