July 23, 2014, 06:58:38 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 - CharlieB

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 21
1
Speedlites, Printers, Accessories / Re: PocketWizard, Yongnuo, or Phottix?
« on: November 03, 2013, 05:09:26 PM »
Getting in late I know.....   I made the jump to E-TTL(ii) about two months ago, and have used the YN622.

Zero problems, easy to use, supports all current functions (important to know - no upgrades, but they're cheap).

Have had ONE issue, one time only, and I chalk it up to my own doing.  Was doing a lot of switching between my 5Dii and &d with the YN622 on camera, and YN568 and YN622 off camera.  The YN622 on the camera "froze".  It still fired the flash and worked ETTL, but would not do zoom or other functions.   This happened in extreme testing, and I blame it on all the switching, at least 30, maybe 50 times switched between cameras.   During any sort of shoot, I'd be with one camera and cannot foresee switching unless of equipment failure.  To clear the issue I had to do a reset on the YN622 on the camera.  Takes seconds....easy... back in the game.  It actually took me a while to figure out the issue, but the fix was as easier than changing lenses.

2
For the OP,

Not totally unlike the operation of a modern vehicular engine, the Canon body and lens operate in a closed loop manner.  Both have processors, and those processors have a data bus that joins them, and.... importantly... its not really a finite system, but more of a fuzzy logic system. 

You can have issues with teh camera, the lens, or both.

Here's a weird one - I got an EOS 7D, and it had issues.  Additionally, I already owned a 28/2.8 that become a poison lens for the 7D.  Most lenses would focus ok, not great, but ok.  Mount the 28/2.8 and thenafter no lens would focus correctly...not even remotely so, except at about 4-6 meters, give or take a little.

The 28/2.8 had no issues on any other EOS body - EOS 5's (film), EOS 5DmkII, EOS 400.... all worked ok with this lens.  The 7D had a real issue with THAT particular lens.

I sent the camera to Canon... they changed lots of stuff (so they said).   It came back working fine.   And the 28/2.8 is no longer a poison lens.    Hell if I can say why.



3
Canon General / Re: Consumer DSLRs "dead in 5 years"
« on: October 28, 2013, 07:11:12 AM »
I cant speak for the masses, but...

For me, I could give a fat rats behind what sort of camera it is, as long as I can use it in some reasonably efficient manner to take photographs that suit me.   

Use my phone for imaging?  Of course.  But the quality is terrible, the screen hard to see in daylight, etc etc.   Pixel count does not make up for terrible optics, glare, etc.

Ok so how about point and shoot.  I use mine quite a bit.  Its used at work and for play when I'm out on my motorcycle.  Got one of those underwater PS just for the rain and dirt sealing that it affords.  Imaging... better than a phone, not up to really great quality, but I know some PS do some fantasstic IQ (just not mine)

As for DSLR.... whatever.  I'd happily shoot an M9 Leica if I could try one out first before buying.  It would cover 90 percent of my shooting, and I'd ditch all the Canon gear save the long teles and one body.

If there's a mirrorless that works, has a good EVF.... is small and easy, and has real features not consumer bloat, I'd use it.  Its a tool... an end to a means

4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D sensor dust in one month?
« on: October 15, 2013, 12:11:08 AM »
love my rocket blower... have only had to use it a few times, but when you do... its a LIFEsaver for your photos

5
If your AFMA is within limits, what else is there to worry about?  The Sigma that was off-scale isn't going to be a lot of use but if the rest deliver useful images I'd say use them.

Jim
for that one canon lens with the best results I tested, distance from 1.7-2.2 meter need +8 to +10, distance <1.5meter need +13 to +15, distance > 2.5meter need +15, and I didn't check >2.5 meter as text target is not big enough, the software cannot fint target constanttly; thus I don't think it is useable as it varies a lot to distance, and I haven't test with different Apeture combi yet and think the results may get just worse

I had a similar problem with my 7D.  Every lens would be one AFMA correction at distance, and a totally different correction at close up.   It seems that things would focus ok at about 4-6 meters or so.   Sent to Canon, got it back in two weeks.  They changed a LOT, including a new card slot, release button, entire focusing unit... something else too, I forget what it is.   Anyway, the camera is good to go now.  My 5Dii runs all my lenses at a little bit of -AFMA correction, maybe... -4 to about -6 or so.  The 7D runs everything at +AFMA by a little less, maybe around +3 to +4.   

If you have doubts, send it, AND the lenses to Canon. 

6
Jeeze ...

Anyone who says FF lenses are big... has not been around the rangefinder lenses.  You can get TINY 21mm, 24mm, 28mm.... even 35 and 50mm lenses.  Once you get to about 75mm... they grow a little, but are still tiny compared to SLR lenses.  The 90mm Summicron ApoAsph (arguably one of the sharpest lenses ever produced) is about the same size (more or less) as the SLR counterpart 85/1.8.  It weights a bunch more though, and is priced about... ten times more (more or less).

I was sitting at work today, lamenting the vastness of my Leica M bodies and lenses (snobbery), but... I just cannot justify an M9.  If there is a good FF body that I can use... and it can be fit with Leica M lenses via flange adapter, I'd get it.   If not... I can see the lenses and bodies going to a dealer in NY, in trade for something expensive in Canon land.   

7
Sorry, that thing looks like a Leica crossed with an enema nozzle.
A rectangular enema nozzle in the rectal passage ... most intriguing and disturbing observation  :o ... I sincerely hope you aren't speaking from personal experience ;D

My dear man, "crossed with" not "into".  It retains the properties of both.

However, I retract my statement, and say that instead it needs a charging cradle and a little stiff cleaning brush.   Looks more like a first gen rechargable electric shaver (ca. 1974) to me.

Either way, its bfu for a Leica, which is in and of itself, a piece of elgance.   Don't think there's much more elegant in camradom than an M3 with a 50 Summilux on it.   

8
I own three Leica Ms.   Sorry, that thing looks like a Leica crossed with an enema nozzle.

9
Lenses / Re: Ok, so I took my T3i/24-105 combo to Mexico
« on: October 09, 2013, 11:31:43 PM »

For the most part, walk-around general shooting with this combo was ok.  Architectural-ish wide-angle type shooting -- not so good.   For example:  Sotuta de Peon is the oldest working hacienda in Mexico.  Beautiful, Colonial style structure built in the 1800's.  Interior shots were a challenge if not outright impossible.


Back a long time ago,  the only (and first) camera that I owned was a Nikkormat FT2 and a 50/2.0 Nikor.   Thats it.  So, I shot with what I had, and knew its limitations and had work harder and get some interesting images.  I shot mostly Kodachrome and Tri-X.  Today, I look at some of those old negatives and slides from time to time, and ....I wonder why my images don't have a certain spark to them.   Its because I've gotten creatively soft. 

You didn't have the lens to take the shots you had pre-determined that you'd wanted.   But think of the shots that you didn't take, and could have, because you were wishing for more.

10
Quite obviously, the previous responders to this thread are beyond the age that would remember "Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom', with Marlin Perkins and Jim Fowler, whereupon, on some back of some studio in California, Marlin would "watch from the safety of the helicopter while Jim wrestled the crocodile".   Whereupon, the helicopter was in fact on the ground (the chopper shots of Marlin looking on were often repeated from show to show), and the crocodile was... well it was somthing in the mud, and could have been a deflated weather balloon for all we know.

11
Canon General / Re: Canon LP-E6 Product Advisory
« on: October 09, 2013, 10:34:33 PM »
The situation may also occur when attempts are made to charge non-genuine Canon Battery Packs in the Canon Battery Charger LC-E6. However, the procedure provided above does not apply to the use of non-genuine Canon products.

In essence, does this mean Canon tried to embed a non-genuine battery detection into the charger and screwed it up? Given the recent fw updates that break 3rd party battery compatibility Canon trying the same on the hardware side is a possibility, but man, that's really beyond what *I* would expect of them.

No... it has to do with the current use characteristics of a deeply discharged Li battery.   The charger should be self limiting and causing a "battery error" mode of signaling, as well as cutting the charge current when the current exceeds a preset threshold for a certain time period.  The time period is also preset, and designed to limit the heat build up on the charger's components (and perhaps within the battery pack as well, or both).  By cycling the initial charge cycle, you're getting a battery pack off its voltage floor and as such requiring less charging current.   This happens on obscure power tool batteries that have sat on dealers shelves too long.   What Canon didn't say.... is that if your battery is in such a state, its charged capacity is also greatly reduced.  Rule of thumb - never deep discharge a Li battery, and charge promptly.
I don't think it means that.  But if Canon were to state or imply that the 'fix' works with 3rd party batteries, it would mean they'd have to have validated it with all 3rd party brands...and why would they do that?  Cheaper to exclude them (but the verbal/philosophical push to stick with OEM accessories isn't accidental).

12
Abstract / Re: Beautiful bokeh! Let me see yours!
« on: October 08, 2013, 06:28:02 AM »
What a great thread.  Its a amazing how a good number of folks think that an image with out of focus portions or one that contains orbs of specularity is automatically one that has bokeh.   This thread reminds me that such things alone do not make bokeh.

13
Software & Accessories / Re: good shoulder bag?
« on: October 03, 2013, 07:36:54 PM »
Domke, canvas, choose your color, choose your insert(s).   Been using these for decades... since the mid 1970's.  Nuff said.

14
Some AA rechargeables are a little shorter than std AAs....hence funky operation.  I had battery door failure on two YN568EXii's.  Fix shown here on the forum.  Inside....looked well made.  Large components were shock mounted with hot glue, not just flopping about.  Very neat little cable connectors.  Plasitc case is reasonably thick.  Worth the price paid I'd say.

When switching 622s a lot....I needed to clear memory one or twice to restore full function....Going from 7D to 5Dii.  They got confused.  No big deal there.

15
Lighting / ETTL-II: on camera vs remote; evaluative vs averaging
« on: October 02, 2013, 09:41:07 PM »
First, thanks to everyone for helping me along my quest from old Leica/Film 283 flash to 5Dii/7D ETTL flash.

I ended up getting a pair of YN-568EXii flashes.  Had problems with both battery doors, fixed those.  There are threads on both of that.

Here's my question.

I know the differences between ETTL-II evaluative vs averaging metering, with evaluative comparing the preflash vs ambient on some of the central metering areas (not tied to focusing point) along with distance feedback, if available.  Averaging... just considering the preflash over the central metering areas.  That I've got down.

What I'm having a hard time with, is two things:

a.  Why off camera flash, using the YN622's are seemingly the same as averaging even though the camera is set to evaluative.  Its behaving like averaging for some reason.   For instance - same scene, on camera, evaluative is 2/3 stops underexposed as compared to averaging, however off camera flash is the same, regardless of averaging vs evaluative.
b. Why zooming seems to show that evaluative, only when on camera, is underexposed at certain focal lengths (24-105 and 16-35ii) but is good to go at all focal lengths when used remotely with the YN622 - again, it seems that no matter what it says, you're getting averaging not evaluative when the YN622 is ues.

Any thoughts?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 21