Messages

16

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT

« on: February 27, 2013, 11:08:56 PM »

Just for the record, my bitching is more about wanting more functionality and redesign than cheaper price.  Just swapping optical for radio communication isn't a big game changer in my book and doesn't deserve my money.  I would like to see Canon do something truly great and shake things up using the big advantage they own... integrated camera functionality together with several models of great performance flashes with reliability and simplicity of use.  After all this time knowing what is out there in the aftermarket and designing the current new camera bodies and new flashes, this is all they came up with?  How unimaginative and incremental.  Yawn.

17

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT

« on: February 27, 2013, 10:42:09 AM »

Although now that I think about it, perhaps an integrated high capacity battery system on a full size flash might be a good thing with even faster recycle time and longer life.  Let me think... use the same LP-E6 battery in the flash too... hmm.  That might be something cool...

Not a good idea to use the camera battery.  Li-ion chemistry is optimal for sustained, moderate-current discharge, and a flash needs brief, high-current discharge to fill the capacitor.  A Li-based battery in a flash means long recycle times (that's one reason why the popup flash on a Rebel/xxxD is very slow to recharge, whereas a 430EX II with NiMH batteries can keep up with the first part of an 8 fps burst.

Yeah, excellent point neuro.  Forget I said it.  Something in the back of my mind was dogging this idea and that's why I did the "eh... naah" thing at the end.  I couldn't put my finger on it.  Plus, more expensive batteries that can't be charged in the field are also a drag.  Since eneloop batteries came on the scene, my flashes work great for a long time and I loooove those eneloops.  Sanyo needs to somehow apply this same reliable and foolproof battery technology to the economy.   

18

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT

« on: February 27, 2013, 09:55:30 AM »

Well, good point and you may be right but don't they already have different models for different countries?  That's just part of the game.  Just a few more hoops for the lawyers to rangle and the design techs to manage.  Shouldn't be a show stopper.  Maybe pick an available freq that works in both countries?  Or have two freq.  Pretty easy to manage two different freq or RF modules at the assembly level I would think.

19

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT

« on: February 27, 2013, 08:37:56 AM »

Hence the natural thought progression of ... lose the ST-E3-RT controller all together and put that functionality into the camera itself.  Now just carry one flash and let it live on the camera when not used off camera.  One flash, multiple uses.  Simple but for some reason not within Canon's grasp to offer.

Putting ST E3-RT funtionality into the camera is a great idea and I think it is "within Canon's grasp to offer" ... but IMO it would have negative imapact on the camera with:

• decreased battery performance of the camera (as it also needs to provide additional power for that function)
  
• If they produce new powerful batteries to support the camera with the in-built ST E3-RT functionality, the cost will add up not only for the camera but also in having to buy spare batteries (going by Canon's recent pricing strategy, I bet it will be very expensive) ... also those who are not interested in wireless flash photography will have to pay for a feature that they do not want.   
  

1.  Wireless flash RF wouldn't affect battery life that much.  It doesn't seem to affect the 600 series flash's battery life much does it?  The flash only uses four AA batteries, no special high capacity batteries there.  Although now that I think about it, perhaps an integrated high capacity battery system on a full size flash might be a good thing with even faster recycle time and longer life.  Let me think... use the same LP-E6 battery in the flash too... hmm.  That might be something cool...  Eh, Nahhh.
2.  Cost is rarely a reason to not do things in photography.  Canon charges somewhere around 10 million percent profit margin already and everyone seems to pay it for whatever they choose to release lately.  Just look at the 1D-X, 1D-C or 1D 4K or even the 5D3 as examples.  Not to mention the newest lens prices lately running into the stratosphere.  Somehow I don't think integrating flash control into the camera will make much of a diff.

20

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT

« on: February 27, 2013, 12:30:44 AM »

An efficient light weight lighting kit is more valuable than an expensive heavy lens that you will rarely use.

I guess I'm not sure how two or three 600EX-RT flash units along with possible stands, light modifiers and batteries can be considered "light weight" compared with a lens but you're right if compared to a bunch of studio strobes.  As for subjective value or assumed rarity of use compared with a lens, my flashes come out a lot less than my lenses in the types of walk around journalistic shooting I do.  And these large flashes are actually larger than most lenses, the 70-200/2.8 being one exception.  (I use a small RD2000 flash most of the time but I would love to have something similar in size from Canon that was controlled ETTL wirelessly directly out of the camera.)  YMMV.  My flashes would be used a LOT MORE if I could control one off-camera flash straight from the camera and not be forced to have a big ass flash attached to my hotshoe for the sole purpose of controlling another big ass remote flash that was the only one I wanted to use in the first place.  (Carry two large flashes just to use/control the single active large off-camera flash = stupid PITA to me.)  The ST-E3-RT controller is about the size of the RD2000 flash I use now but still requires me to hand carry the 600 flash because I can't mount the 600 anywhere.  That's dumb.  At least put a hotshoe on the controller.  But no!  Find a pocket, backpack or between your knees for that flash when you can't hold it all the time in your other hand when focusing, etc.

Hence the natural thought progression of ... lose the ST-E3-RT controller all together and put that functionality into the camera itself.  Now just carry one flash and let it live on the camera when not used off camera.  One flash, multiple uses.  Simple but for some reason not within Canon's grasp to offer.

21

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT

« on: February 26, 2013, 11:52:02 PM »

"Canon wasn't even kind enough to keep backward compatible TTL light communication so you could keep using all of your now obsolete and soooo 2010 pre-600 series flashes."

Nobody cares if you are a stick in the mud, or if you can't realise the value of a manufacturer supplied option, to you it might not be high, to others it is good value. When compared to a 580 EX II and a PW the 600 is a bargain.

But where on earth did you come out with that rubbish? The 600 is 100% compatible with all previous optical ETTL flashes.

Well, I'm not sure how illustrating the obvious on my comments about myself and value perception is productive but whatever. 

As for the backward compatibility, that actually isn't rubbish.  I just neglected to be more specific because something came up and I had to run.  (I'll edit the post right away.)  The ST-E3-RT controller (which was my mental focus at the time) is NOT backward compatible with optical and WON'T control anything but the 600EX-RT.  The 600EX-RT as a master is supposed to control everything according to specs but I've read in some places where folks have had some issues or group/zone limits or something with the older flash models mixed in with 600 units used as optical slaves.  Since I don't own a 600, I can't really speak to that, that's just hearsay.  At any rate, it does sound realistic that if one wants the 600 series stuff to work best, one should not try to mix old and new and that seems to be a pretty common opinion.  So backward compatibility is probably a moot point anyway and that's too bad.

So with that said, I would expect upgrading to a 600 series only flash system to be quite expensive.  Well over $1000 at least for just two units and nothing else.  Everyone has their own priorities and budgets.  As I said before, not a big deal and it's all good for them if that's their choice.  Just not good for me.  I don't think I ever said others wouldn't benefit.  But if one already owns 580 units and some kind of satisfactory RT solution, PW, RP, YN or whatever works, I don't see much value in replacing it all with a minor upgrade such as the 600 series.  It's just not that much of an improvement in that scenario, which happens to be my situation and likely many others'. 

22

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT

« on: February 26, 2013, 06:52:59 PM »

I realize that if the 600 series flash system solves problems or works wonders for someone, they should be happy to have the new features.  I just think that for the combined price of 3 x 600 series flash units + a transmitter I would rather keep what I already have that works (about the same) and get a 70-200 f/2.8 IS L v2 or something that adds more overall value to my kit.  But that's just me.  We all buy what's important to our individual needs.  It's all good in that regard!   

23

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT

« on: February 26, 2013, 06:33:51 PM »

OK, I read (semi read + skimmed) the review and I found it well done.  Thanks!

Unfortunately, the new Canon RF flash system still leaves me underwhelmed/disappointed because I think there are so many things they could have done and didn't.  It seems fairly rudimentary and limited for the money they are charging.  An incremental upgrade considering what is already available from RadioPopper, PocketWizard, YN, etc.

Integrated camera wireless control is what I want and halfway expected from Canon after all this time.  I want a small Canon RT flash alternative like the compact SunPak RD2000 form factor that I can hand hold or use on camera without the need for wires or another large on camera primary flash.  I want simple wireless flash zone control like the PW AC-3.  Instead we get another expensive, complicated menu driven master/slave dedicated flash design that simply replaced TTL light communication with TTL RT communication.  Wow.  Yawn.  Canon wasn't even kind enough to keep backward compatible TTL light communication on the ST-E3-RT controller so you could keep using all of your now obsolete and soooo 2010 pre-600 series flashes.  The 600 series flash stuff just seems more like a small incremental way to take a lot of my money than a true innovation or evolutionary RF flash system to really wake things up.  And WiFi is not the way to do anything other than low priority network data transmission.  To use it for much else where fast response is mandatory will result in delays, latency and interference.

Sorry to be such a stick-in-the-mud here but I think I'll pass and just keep using all my old 430/550/580 series (now junk I guess) stuff with YN radio triggers that work like a champ.  And the YN triggers even have AF assist lamps and a hot shoe on top, unlike the single function ST-E3-RT.  Take that Canon!

24

Lenses / Re: Canon 6D (Body Only) which lens to purchase?

« on: February 26, 2013, 05:58:11 PM »

Honestly, I'd get the 24-105L kit lens - it's a great lens, very versatile, and well priced when bought as a kit.  Budget permitting, supplement it with a fast prime like the 35/1.4 or 135L, but having the zoom lens will allow you to make an informed decision on what focal length prime(s) best suit your needs and style as it develops.

++1

Get the 6D + 24-105 Kit and enjoy!  Great deal, very useful.  Good performance, good weight, looks pro but isn't super heavy, very versatile, etc.  The f4 + IS along with the great high ISO performance of the 6D along with a little tweaking with Lightroom and you will love the available light pics you make with this camera + lens combo.

Later get a good flash and a good wide zoom like the 16-35 v1 and you'll have a great lens kit for both wide and semi long and you can fill light in daylight or indoors.

25

Lenses / Re: 70-300L AF IS goes *CLUNK!* (??)

« on: February 26, 2013, 05:50:43 PM »

FYI UPDATE - 70-300 IS L w/ Kenko 1.4X PRO 300 Teleconverter DGX
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002C6QC3E/ref=oh_details_o04_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I got the new Kenko TC above.  IS seems to work great, no "CLUNK!"  when stabilizing using the Kenko TC.

END FYI UPDATE.   

26

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6d w/ eos remote and tablet connection?

« on: February 26, 2013, 05:33:48 PM »

I've used my 6D with both the iPhone 4S and my Android Galaxy SIII and it worked fine.  I've been super busy but I'll try to get around to trying it with my wife's Nexus 10 soon.  I don't see why it wouldn't work fine.

One thing that is annoying with the way Canon did the 6D WiFi is when it goes to sleep, it resets the WiFi to OFF so you have to go through the connection process all over again.  The only way to avoid this is to disable the camera sleep timer.  I really wish they would have come up with a better way to do this.  Maybe something intelligent like power down the WiFi radio to 2% and only shut it off after a longer period and let the camera sleep separately.  You know, something elegant and functional like laptops have done for years.

Oh well...

27

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D MKII USB 3.0 very important

« on: February 21, 2013, 09:25:57 AM »

OK, I'll bite... Here's my thoughts...

1.  All things like USB3, WiFi, Bluetooth, Gigabit Ethernet, GPS, WiMax, Integrated Broadband, etc are simple small chipsets that are fairly modular and easy to integrate into most designs given the effort is put forth in the firmware to write code to address them properly.  (Firewire, Thunderbolt etc from Apple are usually avoided due to the excessive patent fees they demand for inclusion.)  The design problems are usually issues with power, heat and RFI Interference.  The cost of the chipset could be a factor but I doubt it.  It's more the cost of everything else that revolves around adding the feature... circuit board design, testing, etc.  Add more stuff to the mix, more things can go wrong.

2.  Tethered Shooting has its place but IMO, Wireless Tethered Shooting is the future however it is implemented.  Same goes for network access.  And Flash Control.  Honestly, wires are a pain but unfortunately they are less expensive and more reliable if proper care is observed with the connections and strain relief is used.  Once wireless solutions evolve to the point where they are totally reliable, inexpensive and power efficient, no one will use a wire if they don't have to.

MY ideal DSLR would have fast WiFi, reliable integrated wireless flash and shutter control that is universal (not proprietary) and even maybe wireless charging.  Maybe bluetooth too?  Most of the roadblocks are power related IMO.  I am anticipating the day when the flash has a hot shoe on top for backwards compatibility but the camera easily communicates with the flash wirelessly (without a master flash) and I can simply grab the flash and move it around while shooting without extra devices (ie PocketWizard) attached to both or the need to have a master flash on the hot shoe just to talk to the wireless flash.  I was sort of expecting the 5DIII or 5DX to have this but unfortunately, all they did was add some RF to the new 600RT flash and charge a mint for it.  Big whoop.  Not much improvement there if you ask me.  The writing is on the wall for the need of true integrated wireless flash control.  Why doesn't Canon just do it right already??

28

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Spec List [CR2]

« on: February 21, 2013, 08:57:18 AM »

EMI/RFI Shielding has little to do with permeability that is being discussed.  I worked in a lab a long time ago that used simple screen mesh (like on a screen door) for shielding an entire small room.  It was well GROUNDED.  And only a specific range of frequencies were being attenuated.  (You can only minimize the signal to a lower level, you don't actually block it entirely.)  You can even shield (attenuate or minimize) with a thin coating of special paint or foil tape.  It all depends on the frequency range and power levels in question.  Radio frequency engineering is a complex subject.  You see simple shielding all the time.  Inside your laptop or cell phone.  Inside your microwave oven door.  The grounded door mesh completes a simple Faraday Cage and along with the metal box, it shields you from the microwaves inside.  It works well because it is engineered for those specific frequencies and the fixed orientation of the radio wave emission.

Bottom Line is that if an EMI/RFI Engineer wants to use plastic instead of metal regardless of permeability, I'm not going to question the design because I want to assume they did a little testing and determined that to be the best solution.  Even if a metal enclosure passes the signal, the effective range will likely still be better with a non metal enclosure.

29

Lenses / Re: Exposure and focusing help with tilt/shift lenses

« on: February 18, 2013, 02:10:13 PM »

So my question:  Am I correct in assuming that if I were to rent a TS-E lens to shoot a basic building type shot, is the popular Canon 24 TS lens the one to go for?

Depends on if 24mm is wide enough. In urban settings, sometimes you cannot back up far enough...

But at least I can hopefully get the dog to move forward a few steps!   

30

Software & Accessories / Re: new 13" MacBook Pro

« on: February 18, 2013, 01:29:35 PM »

For serious editing, I'd never use a laptop. too expensive, outdated too quickly, Run too hot, screens too small, too slow.

Desktops are far more powerful for less $$$ and could be built to any spec needed, upgraded, run cool, and can have large screens.

Ditto.  I see this question often about getting a mac on a budget.  It's like buying any luxury item cheap.  Please understand that the words "BUDGET" and "MACBOOK" don't exist in the same sentence.  If budget is a factor, you'll get a lot more value for your money with a desktop system, good display, extra RAM and an SSD drive running Windows 7 Pro x64.  Use Lightroom 4 and perhaps the Adobe Elements/Premier package.  Get the software with an Academic discount if you qualify.

As has been discussed here over and over, Macs are great if you have the funds but you will pull your hair out trying to get a mac on a budget.

Disclaimer:  This isn't a mac bashing statement.  It's just a fact.  Please don't let this start a Mac vs. PC flame war.  I'm merely stating my experience with regard to the OP's point that a "budget" is a factor.  Apple doesn't sell anything to people with a budget.  Except maybe Apple TV.  (Assuming you don't start buying content from them.)