Messages

136

Lenses / Re: first trip to England any recommendations ?

« on: February 24, 2013, 11:47:56 AM »

Ovoid North Devon at all cost.. Its cold, wet and windy 364 1/2 days of the year...

Devon is not egg shaped.

137

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Extenders - Kenko vs Canon 1.4's & 2.0's

« on: February 24, 2013, 01:34:10 AM »

I thought I'd share an image I took yesterday. This is the reason for why I'm looking into magnification, as this is as close as I could get to the little fella with the 100 macro. Would have loved to get more detail!
This was shot handheld so the focus plane is a little off, but oh well Cheers

I notice you have a 5D MK III.  Be aware that neither the Canon or the Kenko TC's will work with the 100L.  The Canon TC's will interfere and will not mount, while the Kenko 1.4X PRO 300 DGX will lockup and require the camera battery to be removed and re-inserted before the TC will function again with the 5D3 and a different lens.  You can get a fully manual TC and use manual exposure with the L, but not autofocus.
 
I hope there is a update to the TC.

The 5D III gets locked up with the PRO 300 and the 300 mm II lenses as well. 

138

Lenses / Re: 400 mm f5.6 non-IS / 300 mm f4 IS with extender 1.4 III or waiting?

« on: February 22, 2013, 01:11:37 PM »

I am a complete newby to Photoshop as I just finished a series of video tutorials and used ACR, Photoshop for the first time on this set of images, so excuse me if I don't fully understand your questions.  In ACR the crop % shows 54 for the seagull and 45 for the eagle.  I believe I settled on Unsharp mask for the sharpening method.  Some of the sharpness seems to have been lost in posting to this website so I have much to learn and improve upon!

What we mean by 100% crop is that the actual pixels you see on the crop  eg 1000x700 is the same as what that crop had in the original digital image (eg a 1000x700 section taken from the 5184x3456 for a 7D). You can use Photoshop to reduce the number of pixels, which is often done in the forums to give images that are smaller and load faster. Did you reduce the size of the image of the eagle as well as crop it?

139

Lenses / Re: 400 mm f5.6 non-IS / 300 mm f4 IS with extender 1.4 III or waiting?

« on: February 22, 2013, 11:49:12 AM »

Are they 100% crops with the same number of pixels taken from the full or have they been reduced in size further? What sharpening did you to to them?

140

Lenses / Re: What are Canon's sharpest lenses?

« on: February 21, 2013, 11:40:53 AM »

Well...the sharpest lens I have and have used without any doubt is the new Canon EF 300mm F/2.8L IS II.  Hell, it is even sharp with a 2x III converter on it. 

+1

141

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 1DX vs 5DIII Wildlife Comparison

« on: February 21, 2013, 06:21:42 AM »

I know you are presenting the bird photo as a rough and ready example and not for publication. You could never get that accepted on the birdpix site for at least 2 reasons: the noise is horrible; it is also over-sharpened as most clearly seen from the tell-tale white lines around the beak. There is also a loss of fine detail from NR. I "upgraded" (or rather got a second camera) from 7D to 5D III for two reasons: the lower noise gives a higher proportion of acceptable photos that do not lose detail because of NR; and the higher number of keepers because of more reliable autofocus. Under good conditions, the 7D is just as good as the 5D III and can be even better because of its longer reach. If I got a 1DX I might be able to make a tiny incremental increase in the number of keepers over the 5D III, but I am not a pro and the difference will make very little difference to me.

142

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: DotTune: Video Tutorial for AF tuning without photographs

« on: February 20, 2013, 03:35:52 AM »

Thanks East. It's clear whatever the reason that DotTune doesn't work for me. The sloping ruler method does because it is a direct readout of where the lens is focussing.  My focus is spot on using it. 

143

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New MFA method

« on: February 19, 2013, 11:41:46 PM »

I have suggested why DotTune fails in the DotTune Video thread.  Maybe failure means the camera should be sent back to Canon for calibration. 

144

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: DotTune: Video Tutorial for AF tuning without photographs

« on: February 19, 2013, 11:39:24 PM »

Maybe DotTune is a test for the calibration of the phase detection calibration of the camera.  If the requirement for AFMA is that the camera has correct calibration and the lens needs correction, then DotTune should surely work because live view and PD will be correctly aligned. But, if the lens is correctly calibrated and it is the camera that requires calibration, then DotTune will fail.  For example, if the camera's PD leaves the factory at effectively -10, then if you test a lens that is perfect using FoCal or the sloping ruler method, an AFMA of +10 is required. But, if you use DotTune, then a reading of -10 for AFMA will be found because the miscalibrated PD will be 10 units less than it should be.  Similarly, if the camera is -5 and the lens is +5, FoCal or the ruler will give +10 but DotTune will give +5.

145

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: DotTune: Video Tutorial for AF tuning without photographs

« on: February 19, 2013, 12:49:00 PM »

Thanks for all the efforts - the video is a great tutorial and involved a lot of work. Much appreciated. Unfortunately, it's not working for my Series II 300mm f/2.8 and and Series III extenders on the 5D III. It's way, way out. This is bad news for me because the dot light is out of step with live view, and I know live view is correct. It;s not your method that is wrong, it is the Canon protocol. It is also very disturbing that there is such a wide span of dot focussing in manual mode. It means that you can't rely on it for manual focussing but you have to use live view.

146

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New MFA method

« on: February 17, 2013, 05:52:23 PM »

Larry
Comsense is not saying he doesn't want to have precise focus. He is complaining that Horshack hasn't explained clearly what he  meant in his reply to my earlier message, Horshack also confused me, and he hasn't replied to my last questions to him, four or five posts back.

147

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New MFA method

« on: February 17, 2013, 12:41:54 AM »

The "0" of my home grown system is placed in the same plane as the target. The ruler rests at about 30deg at the side of a cardboard box and the target is pasted on the front face.  The line on the ruler that touches the target is the 0 point.  The target is perpendicular to the line of sight from the camera.  What is not working is the dot assist on manual focussing relative to focussing in live view.  Does anyone use manual focussing and the dot assist regularly - the spread of 15-20 units is not impressive? Maybe my mistake has been to use the automatic focussing in live view and not tether to a computer and blow up for manual focussing in live view?

148

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New MFA method

« on: February 15, 2013, 11:23:58 PM »

I checked the method again today with the 300 f/2.8 series II plus extenders using a high contrast black cross on white in good light. In all cases, the dot method was way out. Recalibration using the same target and sloping ruler was within 1 unit of previous.

Can you elaborate on the difference in target+methodology you're using between DotTune and whatever MFA method you're using for "recalibration"? For DotTune are you tuning to a flat DOF vs a 3-D DOF using the other MFA method?  I'm asking because when DotTune is used against a flat target with no DOF reference (chart on wall), then you're tuning an unknown point within the DOF plane. It could be you're tuning at the very edge of the DOF range but you wouldn't be able to know this from a flat target. The alternative would be to DotTune against a target with a 3-D DOF reference, like a LensAlign target. I'd be appreciative if you could try this and report back the results. Thanks!

Please explain to me what a 3-D DOF ref is and how I obtain one. I would like to get your method to work.  For the sloping ruler method, as well as using the + target and lampshade, I have printed the FoCal target.  It's not that I do not know what 3D is, but I have never seen a LensAlign target, which I assume may be a low relief 3D, and I do not understand why a 3D target is necessary when a 2D target works for the do it yourself sloping ruler method etc. 

149

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New MFA method

« on: February 15, 2013, 04:13:43 PM »

Last night I used a patterned lampshade with a bulb behind it as I can do this at night easily. This afternoon, I printed a black + on white A4 paper and focused on that.  I did the sloping ruler test on both reproducibly.  I have also checked visually using the standard iso chart. 

150

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: New MFA method

« on: February 15, 2013, 10:12:13 AM »

I checked the method again today with the 300 f/2.8 series II plus extenders using a high contrast black cross on white in good light. In all cases, the dot method was way out. Recalibration using the same target and sloping ruler was within 1 unit of previous.