July 31, 2014, 04:59:11 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 - wsmith96

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 26
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 60d results - the bird feeder
« on: July 17, 2014, 07:24:54 AM »
Update - regarding the question of my LR settings.   I have sharpening set to 25 with a radius of 1.0 and detail of 25.   Luminance noise reduction is at 30 with detail at 50, contrast 0.  Color noise reduction is at 25, detail 50, smoothness 50.   Adjusted exposure by .98, color 5200.

Btw, I didn't post the blurry pics.   I'm pretty sure the problem is me.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 60d results - the bird feeder
« on: July 17, 2014, 12:45:21 AM »
You said that the images looked a little soft but that you did edit in LR.

Question were you shooting raw or jpeg.  How much in camera sharpening was selected?

If Raw did you sharpen in LR? My work flow is usually to use bridge to adjust raw images and  I usually boost up the sharpen to about 70-75 and the radius to 1.2-1.4 and luminance as needed to get rid of grain. 

The other thing is that shooting at 2.8 give yourself a pretty narrow dof, I try to shoot at 5.6 if the light permits and at least with a 5diii go up to 2500 iso if needed.  The 7D and presumably your camera is not as friendly of high isos but I go to 640-800 or 1000 so to get shutter speed higher for the tweety birds.

The temptation to blame micro focus adjustment t is there but I'd look at some of the other variables as well.  Sounds like you have a good set up to get great picts.  More cardinals please.....

Do you put orange halves out?

I haven't blamed AFMA yet, just making an observation.  I did shoot in Raw but I don't remember all of the settings I used in lightroom.  I'm not in front of the PC I edit on.   You may be right on the DOF.  I'll have another go at it this weekend and will up my aperture to f4 or f5.6.   Last, I put out regular bird seed and sunflower seeds.  I have not tried orange halves.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 60d results - the bird feeder
« on: July 17, 2014, 12:23:04 AM »
60D is a good camera, here is my try with it and 60mm macro ;)

Nice shot.  I have the 60mm as well and will have to give that a try.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 60d results - the bird feeder
« on: July 17, 2014, 12:19:11 AM »
Overall, I was happy with the pictures.  I did have a lot of OOF shots that I will chalk up to my mistake, but I have also noticed that other shots I've taken with other lenses seem soft too.  I'll investigate this more in the coming weeks.  I hope I don't have to have my lenses/camera calibrated, but if I do then I do.

The 60d is a great camera for macro or tele shots, and for that kind of money it's a steal.

The one problem is the missing af micro adjustment (thanks, Canon!) so if slightly oof shots occur you never know if it was the phase af normal variance or a systematic error. I'd advise you to get hold of a camera with afma (for example the 70d) and then test your lens(es). If there is a large afma requirement, you can get it adjusted by Canon service. The 70-200L is such a premium lens so that it's probably worth the hassle.

I have a friend with a 50D.  I'll see if he'll let me borrow to test against.   I don't have a real camera shop close by to check it out.   I'm not necessarily saying that my lens or camera is off, but it would be nice to have something to compare to.  My previous camera, T1i, I didn't have any issues with any of my lenses.   I'm betting it's me.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 60d results - the bird feeder
« on: July 17, 2014, 12:15:29 AM »
My 60D has been a great birding camera for the last 4 years, coupled with the 400mm f/5.6L. Yep, chickadees are fast, and noisy. You are doing well. Have fun.

Thanks NancyP!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 60d results - the bird feeder
« on: July 17, 2014, 12:14:19 AM »
The great think about chickadees is that you don't need hunting blinds to get close.... all you need are some sunflower seeds and a lens that focuses within half of an arm's length....

The 60D is a fine camera.... enjoy!

Holy cow Don!   That is a far better way to attract birds than what I did :)

Lenses / Re: Camera setup for dental clinic
« on: July 16, 2014, 01:36:05 AM »
I have a good copy of the 60 macro, but no ring flash.  I can tell you that the 60 macro can produce some amazing photographs.  If you choose to use a crop camera, you will be happy with the results of the 60 macro.

Lenses / Re: Year of the lens....a joke....?
« on: July 16, 2014, 01:32:58 AM »
remember, lens in the subject line is not necessarily plural.   Canon's already delivered 2, so I guess it can be considered an over-achievement.

Rebel T5 doesn't count? Why?

Good Point - I completely forgot about this camera.   Was expecting a Rebel T(x)i.

I find it odd that we have not seen our annual update to the rebel line up.  Anyone hear of anything?  I thought it would have be an announced by now.  I guess there's a lot of work going on regarding DPAF to get it right.

 Just an observation.

Lenses / Re: Yes! Finally, the 70-200 f/2.8 II
« on: July 14, 2014, 10:31:12 PM »
Leave your feet on people! Let's not let the rest of the world, Non Photo Gentiles, think we are a bunch of weight conscious weenies!

Image Quality over weight or get out of the darkroom. (Or Internet Forum)

I'll cut you some slack if you are injured, disabled and whatnot...there's the 100L 2.8 Macro for that.

I guess I'm a weenie half of the time.   ;D

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 12, 2014, 06:18:33 PM »
I hope there is some truth to this rumor.  I've had a long telezoom on my list for a while.

Thanks, I'll check it out

EOS Bodies / Re: Unknown lenses with Canon Explorers
« on: July 12, 2014, 11:57:46 AM »
why would someone use an EF-S lens on a 1D?   I believe it is a typo.

Software & Accessories / List of plug-in's for photoshop/LR
« on: July 12, 2014, 11:28:15 AM »
  I was watching an adobe tutorial about extending photoshop with plug-ins.  They referenced a blog that had a collection of 43 plug-ins (free and paid) of what the article recommended as the best.  The 'best' is always subjective, but I thought the CR members here might like a reference and I wanted to share it.  There may be something here you haven't seen yet.  Article was written in March 2014.



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 26