« on: August 30, 2013, 11:12:21 AM »
mine moves a little bit too. it works fine
If you use RAW and lightroom, it doesn't matter what you set the camera to use for jpegs. Lightroom does not read the camera setting for picture style.
I use Adobe standard for imports to lightroom.
It matters if you use your histogram, the histogram is generated from the preview joeg and that honours the picture style set, even if you don't save a jpeg to your card one is still made and used. Neutral gives the jpeg the histogram closest to the RAW file histogram in post.
Set your camera on a tripod and shoot the same scene in RAW only and change the picture style between shots, look at the histogram on your camera, they are very different.
Title says it all. I've been using Faithful for the most part. In Lightroom, I use the sharpness and clarity sliders EVERY time. I found that using Auto picture style gives me a little more sharpness in my preview. I shoot RAW so I know this is not THAT big of a deal. Just wondering what you guys are using normally.
For stills I just leave it on Standard. Unless I forget because I was recording video for a friend and it's set different. Oh, and for video, the Cinestyle actually seems to work quite well for corrections in post.
Thanks FourmMuppet. I'm looking to upgrade to full frame since I already have a good crop camera. As far as lens go I have an 85mm 1.8, 17-40L, 100-400L, 18-55, 55-250. Still gonna use the 60D for wildlife for the most part but wanted to make sure the 6D could keep up or do better as for as birding goes.
And maybe get him the DMV manual on driving... because it is important to know all of the traffic laws and the theory behind the three point turn and parallel parking.
I have had the 24-70/2.8 II for a couple of months and I realise now that I have not used the 35/1.4 since. Obviously an f1.4 can do things a f2.8 can't but is DOF really an issue for a wide lens? And I have the 5D MKIII so light/ISO is not that much of a problem either. I was just about to put the 35/1.4 up for sale but I simply can not make up my mind.... Opinions are more than welcome.
Question: I bought both a B&W (skylight) filter ($45) AND a lens hood ($20) for my EOS M + 22mm f/2. They are both about the same depth. It seems I don''t really need both and they are adding significant depth to my handy little camera. should I return one? If so, which one?
Honestly, I'd return both. The lens hood for the EF-M 22mm f/2 is essentially useless - it's not deep enough to provide any protection from flare, given the size of the front element and the AoV of the lens. I haven't done the estimate on the EF-M 22 hood, but the similarly-designed hood for the EF 40mm f/2.8 isn't deep enough to protect a 14mm lens from flare, much less the 40mm lens for which it's designed. Futhermore, since it's a thread-mounting hood, any force applied to the hood won't be transmitted to the barrel as with a bayonet-mount, but rather to the front-focusing element with the STM motor connected to it. Not very protective at all.
As for the filter, IMO the big advantage of a pancake lens is it's thin projection from the body. Making it thicker with a filter doesn't make a lot of sense to me (in fact, I would prefer the 'old' side-pinch cap design, since it's thinner than the center-pinch cap that comes with the lens.
I would never have bought the 90EX flash,