April 20, 2014, 03:01:32 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 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 21
151
Lenses / Re: 50 1.4 on 5d3 anyone?
« on: December 11, 2012, 09:44:04 PM »
Have not had the 1.2 version...

This I can say about the 1.4 version, and I've had an older one, and now a current one (the same design).

The image quality _can_ be very good from about f/2.0 out.  From f/1.4 ti f/2.0... expect a certain creaminess in addition to the very shallow DOF.

Both of my own copes were fairly inconsistent in terms of focus repeatability.  When shooting fairly close, at f/2.0 my own lenses would not focus the same place twice... the margin of error for very precise focus is somewhat hampered by the design of the mechanism.  Realistic apertures of f/4-f/11 were consistent enough that you'd never see a problem, and results are very very good.  Its that shallow DOF area... that the lens has a bit of an issue with.  Not an AFMA issue, but a "make the lens do the exact same thing twice" issue.  Mechanical slop, in other words.

I like the lens.... optically very very good for a 50/1.4 - one of the best out there...  so use the slight caveats to judge its performance for your own needs.

I hope someone can say the 50/1.2 is mechanically tighter and consistent repeatable focus is not an issue.

152
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D soft images
« on: December 11, 2012, 07:08:26 AM »
I got a 7D not too long ago... same thing.  Soft.

Went nuts trying to make corrections with the AFMA - which worked, but only for one distance at a time.

That is, I could dial in very close, medium close, moderate distance or long range/infinity, but ... it would throw the other distances all to hell.

Using about a dozen different non-L and L lenses, zooms and fixed focal lengths... they all did the same thing.  All were very good, with minimal corrections on my 5Dii

Sent the camera to Canon, got it back in my hands 9 days later.   They replaced .. I cant remember... it was a lot of stuff, and its a night and day difference.  The lenses still need a good bit of AFMA, but.. its all good, as they focus from very close to infinity with no problems.   

I'm happy with it - in fact for the majority of my work, I can see the 7D being the go to camera.

153
PowerShot Cameras / Re: Who Invented the Video Camera?
« on: December 10, 2012, 07:00:00 AM »
From Wikipedia (with references there)

The first VCR to use VHS was the Victor HR-3300, and was introduced by the president of JVC at the Okura Hotel on September 9, 1976

Video technology was first developed for cathode ray tube (CRT) television systems, but several new technologies for video display devices have since been invented. Charles Ginsburg led an Ampex research team developing the first practical video tape recorder (VTR). In 1951 the first video tape recorder captured live images from television cameras by converting the camera's electrical impulses and saving the information onto magnetic video tape.

154
Lenses / Re: 16-35L or related primes
« on: December 09, 2012, 09:48:03 PM »
Keep the 16-35L, use it for most situations - its image quality is quite good, and its a pleasure to use, and you pretty much always have the right wide on the camera when its mounted.

Get the 24/1.4L - about half way through the range of the zoom, and its fast, for low light.

OR

The 24/2.8 IS USM might be ok for low light... but I think I'd rather have the 1.4 L lens instead.

155
Lenses / Re: 24-105 f/4L kit lens on 6D
« on: December 08, 2012, 08:18:26 AM »
You cant go wrong with the 24-105.  It will do what you need it to do for the vast majority of all shooting, and do it remarkably well. The only concern is perhaps weight.   

156
Software & Accessories / Re: Yet another tripod thread...
« on: December 07, 2012, 07:47:10 PM »
FWIW... I still do well with two tripods.

One is a very old E.Leitz NJ Tiltall that has been refurbished a bit but still gets the job done.

The other is a very heavy (about 28lbs) Majestic dual tube per leg unit with their 3way head on it.  That one does for anything, and I've trudged it thru the Everglades at times... dunno if I can do that these day.. gettin old.


157
Software & Accessories / Re: Bag challenge: pro body and two primes
« on: December 07, 2012, 07:32:41 PM »
Domke F2 - or the other one (dunno the number) "little bit smaller" I think its the F3

Get it in olive.  Then, take out the insert and bottom piece, and wash it with a little bleach.  You'll get a funky faded olive with tinges of brown and tan... does NOT look like a camera bag at all.

158
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 6D Under-Exposing?
« on: December 05, 2012, 11:14:52 PM »
Not that the 6D is on equal footing as the old 400D, or 350D...

But both of those cameras had some exposure "issues" as delivered.

I just sent mine in for adjustment, which they did at no charge (on my old 400d).

I just said - turn it up a half stop.  It came back turned up a half stop. 

 :-\

159
Hello, I may be obtaining these 2 lenses in the next few weeks and had a question about if I need a slim filter for the 17-40 and/or the 24-105.  I prefer B+W filters and have them on most of my lenses.   

Slim if you want to stack.

I'm using Hoya HMC on all mine, standard thickness, even the 16-35II, and no extra darkening at the corners.  However, if I stack there is.

Its a judgement call... I don't like to stack filters anyway.  Just take one off, put other one on. 

If you're using a CP, then you'll need a thin one, as those normally run thicker by design.

160
Interesting short....   I like it.

Gal has a nice tushie too.

161
Lenses / Re: Is this the normal bokeh for an L series lens
« on: November 30, 2012, 11:47:05 PM »
I seem to recall something about wide aspheric lenses (or lens elements rather) doing the "disk effect" or "target effect".  Something to do with internal reflections from the non spherical element... I just spent a while looking for that... can't find it... but I "think" it was on one of the Leica web sites that caters to very high end testing of lenses.

162
EOS Bodies / Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« on: November 29, 2012, 05:35:11 PM »
@CharlieB

Please could you enlighten us all and tell us precisely what it costs (the nearest $ will do, round-up the cents) Canon to make the 5D3 or 1DX?

You are the fountain of all wisdom :P

edit: using your screwed up logic Porsche could produce a Carerra Turbo for less than $10,000 but hey those mean Germans just won't do it...eh?

If you want to discuss things on the basis of manufacturing practices, and how market analysis derives the "suggested selling price", and how marketing derives the feature/benefit set (and the price point) and how engineering must then find a way to make it profitable, fine.  If you want to be a sarcastic asinine twit, leave me alone. 


163
EOS Bodies / Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« on: November 28, 2012, 10:52:49 PM »
There is a basic lack of understanding here... of how manufacturing works.

Two noted issues "sensor cost", and "Canon should be able to make X, Y, and Z"

These are irrelevant issues.  They always have been irrelevant.  They will continue to be irrelevant.

There is one thing, and only one thing, holding up (or down) the price of any product - and that is - the marketplace.

Canon could do sub-$1000 FF SLRs any time it wants to, and do it profitably.  Because it can, does not mean it will, nor mean it should.

Its all about features/benefits vs selling price.  What determines that?  The marketplace (you and me).  Anything is only worth what we are willing to fork out for it.  If Canon's market research has missed the boat, price adjustments will follow... either up or down.

Its all about what the marketplace has to offer... in terms of consumer buying and in terms of competition.

And thats it.

Canon will offer a sub-$1000 FF SLR when the market conditions call for it.   

164
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 3 different kits with the 6D
« on: November 25, 2012, 09:20:04 AM »
The 24/105 is gonna be bigger than the 24/70, but....

Me personally, I prefer to have the reach and not use it, than to be wanting it.

The 24/105 - maybe not the most stellar quality, but in all regards its a cut above most.  A little larger... yes.  But it covers a whole lot of territory with one lens.  USEFUL territory at that.

165
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Got my (new) 7D back from repair
« on: November 25, 2012, 09:17:32 AM »
Well....

I'm ok with the camera - so far - as it is from repair.  Spent most of the afternoon calibrating things.  The camera will do what I want - I got it for long lens work mostly, some macro work.  And to be a little smaller/lighter than the 5Dmk2

The real problem lens - the 28/1.8, dialed in fantastically, with -4 AFMA.   This was not a surprise as it did the same setting on the 5Dmk2.  FWIW, the AFMA adjusted the close end, and pretty much left infinity alone - which was a major concern, since the 7D previously had linearity issues.  So far so good.

The 50/1.4 needed zero correction.  Close close to infinity.  Perfect. 

The 20/2.8 was a mystery... on the 5D2, all the lenses needed -4 to -10 correction, including the 28/1.8 and 50/1.4..... but on the 7D, the 20/2.8 needed + correction... +6 to be exact.  I didn't expect that.

Same thing on the 16-35/2.8II... +5 correction.... and it gave me fits.  It does ok at true infinity, but near infinity seems to be problematic with this lens, it might go back to CUSA.  Gotta do more with it, on the 5D2, and see.

The 100/2.8macro dialed in +3

And the 24-105/4 dialed in -2

I can see the 5D2 needing all the lenses shifted one way ... I can understand that.  What I can't understand is how the same lenses go + and - on another body.  Strange.

I got the burst mode one time.  But, I shot the camera at a social event in all sorts of conditions last nite, and it seemed ok.  I "could" have ridden the release that one time... I'm thinking... but we'll see.

More over - I put 1500+ shots thru this camera just testing it and trying to make things work before I sent it in.  I got a good feel for it.  The camera as it came back from Canon was far "snappier", faster maybe... I don't know how to really describe it... more responsive.   The AF and feel of the camera when shooting was different, by a very noticeable degree.

I've got more lenses to test and calibrate to the camera... the 300/4 especially, as I tend to shoot that wide open, or just 1/2 stop down with the 1.4x (to keep it crispy).   After that the rest can wait.

And.... another thing I've found - a CLEAN sensor.  I can't detect ANY dust on it at all.   And... zero hot pixels.  None.  I can't see one.  They must have done some super map out job for me. 

Now to send back the 5D2 and have the joystick fixed.....


Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 21