Messages

181

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon D600 announced - $2100, let's see how Canon response!!!

« on: September 13, 2012, 07:12:43 AM »

A major part of the manufacturing cost is the sensor, large sensors are exponentially more expensive than smaller ones. With today's sensor manufacturing technology a full-frame camera cannot approach the price of an APS-C camera.

Just a little lesson in manufacturing economics.  The cost of manufacturing has nothing - repeat - nothing to do with the price that any product sells for in the marketplace.

The price in the market, even as "suggested" by the manufacturer is always based on feedback from the market - thats you and me.  The lifecycle of a product is not from the ground up, but from the final concept down.  Marketing at a company decides it needs a product with feature set "X" at price point "Y" to compete.  This is all based on marketing research, focus groups, informed decisions, and gut level feelings of the marketing department.  At that point, they go to manufacturing and say "build us this....(whatever)".  There may be some back and forth, especially when new technology will need to be brought in.  The back and forth is more or less to determine the scale of the expected propduct - its product life, the number of units, how they can also use technology in other products... that sort of thing.  At the end of the day - manufacturing's job is to build marketing's product, and do it at the lowest possible price, so that they make the most money.  In a company the size of Canon, manufacturing is a seperate company within a company, with their own bottom line.  They sell to marketing, which in turn has its own bottom line... but... always.... the actual "cost" to make anything, has no effect on its sale price.  The price is always determined by market conditions.  Always.

(the above is the condensed version, proto Readers Digest etc etc)

182

Lenses / Re: Shooting low light event with 50 1.8II or 15-85

« on: September 11, 2012, 06:42:46 PM »

Thinking outside the box...

IS is not going to freeze action, just help stabilize the camera like a tripod or monopod.

Ok, so what did we do in this situation, back when men were men and cameras had film to make pictures....

You got creative.

You may find, that the only good way to shoot will involve intentionally having blur "for effect".   In that case, you may find a monopod suitable, and keep the IS operation - OFF.   You've got a digital camera... experiment a little as you go, find a speed that lets some detail show, but also allows for the dancers action and motion to be blurred.

Just sayin... more than one way to punch out of a paper sack.....

183

Lenses / Re: The 50mm f/1.4: Conclusion

« on: September 11, 2012, 04:52:31 PM »

Turning the good around works as I described as the good is not clicked in the lens is in a bag then the hood slides over the outside of the bag causing the back of the lens hood to be past the front of the lens the. Any pressure goes onto the hood which passes onto the the neoprene bag and then to the outer shell of the body with the lens front safely tucked Inside

Guess it depends if you're using a bag, or a satchel with compartments, or backpack, etc... the idea, taking any stress off the part of the lens that has the glass in it, is valid, as those nubs will either rip, bend or jump out of the slots in the "helical"

184

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: 1964 Leica m3 with 50 and 90

« on: September 11, 2012, 12:04:01 AM »

Condition really matters there.... from that age... if in "mint" condition, it would go for a whole lot.  A real whole lot.
If it looks good, but the shutter maybe is burnt... a whole lot less.
Then there's viewfinder and lens clouding, viewfinder separation (common), fungus in the lenses (destroys the coatings then the glass), general wear tear scratches and dings.  And, there's the ever present "vulcanite" coming off the outside (it gets very brittle and shrinks, splitting, coming off).

Condition is the key.... really, a proper appraisal is needed, by a reputable Leica expert (not some camera shop!)

185

Lenses / Re: The 50mm f/1.4: Conclusion

« on: September 10, 2012, 11:46:02 PM »

I'm basing what I said on having seen the part - its just thinner at the extended end.....  have a look:



The downward arrow is where the engagement nubs would be at full extension, the upward arrow is where the nubs would be when the lens is fully in (infinity).  Yah... I suppose in the middle is good too.  Just AVOID full extension storage.

186

Lighting / Re: Direct Flash - How to make it useful?

« on: September 10, 2012, 10:36:10 PM »

Sorry, a bit off-topic...

Alien Bees Ringflash
http://www.paulcbuff.com/abr800.php

Actually.... a lot of ringflashes let you fire half/half at any variability from full to various ratios per side.  If the photographer had one side turned off... the catchlight might just look like that.

And... there are some "macro lights" that are not even round, but a pair of rectangles mounted very close to the lens axis.

OR... it might be a rig that the photographer came up with himself (that NEVER happens right?!!!?).

Situation is the same - its a flash mounted very close to the lens axis, being half a ring, one rectangle, whatever....

187

Lenses / Re: The 50mm f/1.4: Conclusion

« on: September 10, 2012, 10:30:46 PM »

If you look at the part that gets warped, it happens when the lens is at full extension - close up.  It also happens because the moving part - that contains the glass and heavy parts - is being extended by the part that gets warped - what Canon calls the helical or helix (its really not, but they call it that).  If the lens is "out" and you whack the front a bit, the parts that ride in the slots on the helix will snap out of place, or the helix itself will bend.  There's not much holding things at full extension.

Moral - using the hood - which attaches to the non moving part, helps, it takes abuse off the inner moving part of the lens.  Also - whenever you can - remember to put the lens back at infinity before storage.

Turning the hood around during storage... wont protect the lens.

Its not a great design... it could have been done better, beefier, but it is what it is.

188

EOS Bodies / Re: How can I find out the shutter count on a refurbished 5D Mark II?

« on: September 10, 2012, 07:06:08 PM »

Camera with 3300 shutter actuation's, could have been a store demo, more likely been a loaner at an event.  Also keep in mind that Canon themselves may have run a few hundred through the camera as a test - before and after it being loaned at an event.

Refurbs are not always a hardware refurb, but sometimes a packaging refurb, and nothing more.  Or sold as refurbs - the loaner example being one case of that.

189

Lighting / Re: Direct Flash - How to make it useful?

« on: September 10, 2012, 06:57:45 PM »

The distance is longer than you might expect, the lens longer than you might expect.  The perspective is very "flat" or "compressed".   Not sure if its a "ring" flash, but the flash is almost on axis, very very close to the axis of the lens, just barely above it.  There was no other modifier used.  The under-chin shadow is abrupt... hence no modifier.

Truth be told, some of the nicest direct flash ever, was with that awkward contraption on the old "283", which let you mount a Kodak grey card's white side as a soft reflector.   It worked.

190

Lenses / Re: Any Wedding Lens Advice?

« on: September 10, 2012, 12:25:01 AM »

I dunno... maybe I'm strange, maybe I'm too old school.

Have shot my share of back breaking weddings with 500c/m and 60, plus an 80 as a spare.  Got it all.  Used 283's in Chimera boxes - camera mounted - for light.  Got it all.  Every once in a while, a balcony shot, ok dig out the 250, or add the Mutar to the 80.

Fast forward to today.

Holy crap.... give me a 24-105/4.0, not much worse than the 60/3.5 on the Hasselblad,  Give me TTL speedlights in the same Chimera box on the camera... If I can't do it with that alone, maybe an extra light as fill or highlight... something is seriously wrong.

Just my 2c on it all....

191

Lenses / Re: Upgrading a 300 f2.8

« on: September 10, 2012, 12:15:24 AM »

Cabbit:

My own personal thoughts from someone who has lugged his share of photogear thru all sorts of sippery sloggy mosquito infested trails in The Everglades..... I'd put my dollars into a body that can focus quick as lightning.  Your lens is up to it, maybe not the very best of the focus speed, but not a slagger either.   For sports, nature, especially birds, focus speed gives you more keepers than a lens with 2% better IQ.

There have been times, photographing limkins, scarlet ibis... that tend to stick to the shadows, and come out late and early when the light is not the best... that I could have used IS.  Then again, the last time I slogged thru the 'glades I had film and digital that went to 1600 max, and up to 800 was "ok" with noise.   Better body, higher ISO with acceptable noise... that IQ difference is seeming smaller and smaller.  What makes the keepers?  IN FOCUS makes keepers, and catchlights... get a fast focusing body, get a flash and beam extender Fresnel on the front...for those all important catchlights... if nature is your thing. 

192

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D3 Second Curtain Sync - Design Flaw?

« on: September 09, 2012, 01:45:50 PM »

@CharlieB I believe he has said he verified that second curtain sync is maintained after he removed the Canon flash. 

I took that to mean its maintained in the menu system... wasn't sure if it was actually doing 2nd curtain.

Well aware of all complexities with flash synch... you simply cannot have the start of 2nd curtain travel coincide with the synch.  Synch has to be slightly before 2nd curtain travel begins, and it needs to be enough before that, so that the flash has finished firing before the curtain has covered any of the film gate (sensor gate?).

Not talking HHS here, but good ol' X synch.   Doing a bit of research.... curtain travel time, complete traverse at X synch speed of 1/250 sec, is about 3.5milliseconds, or... 3.5/1000ths of a second.  Clearly, if a longish flash duration of 1/1000 sec is called for, we're gonna have a curtain that is about 1/3 of the way across the sensor when the flash stops firing - IF - the synch is at the beginning of 2nd curtain travel.   Therefore, actual 2nd curtain synch is really "near 2nd curtain" synch, whereas, the synch must occur with at least as much time before 2nd curtain travel, as it takes for the flash itself to fire, and to allow for any systemic delays.

So... I'd say, someplace at least around 1/1500th of a second before actual 2nd curtain movement, you've got 2nd curtain synch, which insures that a long duration (not HSS) flash is fully extinguished prior to the shutter actually starting to close. 

How Canon handles that... speculative, but... its not unreasonable to think they take it into account, and vary the actual synch in relation to the 2nd curtain movement, based on the predicted flash firing time (not HSS).
As we know, with conventional flash photography, the flash duration, not impulse power, determines the effective flash exposure.  The flash is made to fire for shorter times as less "power" is needed.

As far as I know, there is no 2nd curtain synch for HSS, they're mutually implementable modes of operation. 

193

Lenses / Re: Upgrading a 300 f2.8

« on: September 09, 2012, 01:28:52 PM »

Have rented each.  Not a hoot'n holler difference in IQ, in fact... the non-IS may be a hair better.

When I begin to be interested in shooting test targets and charts instead of herons, ducks, and "chicken-like marsh birds", maybe some significance in IQ will grab me by the neck, but until then....nada.

I found IS helpful... but not overly so.   Based on all that - I chose to stay with my 300/4.0L, non-IS, based mainly on weight.  That is, when you trudge thru things, weight is big factor, especially when you have a tripod and small bag of kit with you.

194

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D3 Second Curtain Sync - Design Flaw?

« on: September 09, 2012, 11:54:10 AM »

I don't think this is a design flaw.

Either by way of direct mounting, or coupled external flash (cable, wireless), there needs to be an TTL flash "known" by the camera.

The reason, I believe, is due to the nature of the 2nd curtain synch.  Although the curtain travel time is very fast, at some flash output settings - which are tube firing time derived - you will probably get some unwanted consequences. 

Put another way, 2nd curtain synch actually occurs BEFORE the 2nd curtain begins to move.  But how much before?  It depends on how long the flash tube is going fire in order to achieve what the "camera/flash" system believe are correct exposure.  This may be splitting hairs, but on larger units, the flash tube firing time can be just under 1/1000 second, and no doubt Canon has accounted for this timing factor by limiting the way 2nd curtain synch is implemented.

Moreover... I would not be surprised that if you first set the camera to 2nd curtain, and then went with a non-TTL remote setup, that the camera might "say" its on 2nd curtain, but actually has reverted to first curtain.  I can see Canon doing that.

195

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5d Mki or 60d (landscapes)

« on: September 09, 2012, 11:33:30 AM »

You can get a clean 5D, in really nice shape, for not a whole lot of cash.

Here's the way I see it:  Its a cost effective way to get FF imaging.  The 12mp images it makes are very good.

If you're the kind of landscape photographer that shoots long scenes with medium telephotos (mountains, waterfalls, etc) the 60 might be better.   But if you like wide angles, you can't beat a FF sensor.

My old XTi (400D) was capable of very nice imagery even at its "puny" 10mp output.  You'll not be under-gunned with output on a 5D, unless you're really printing very large.  In that case, the 60D isn't gonna cut the mustard either.