December 21, 2014, 01:12:17 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 - killswitch

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 14
Lenses / Lens got sprayed with mists from waterfall. TODO?
« on: May 31, 2013, 11:51:02 PM »
Was shooting the Bridalveil Fall in Yosemite, and it was windier than usual that day. I was using the 16-35 II, and I had a ND filter on. After the shoot, I realized the mist from the waterfall nearly soaked the interior of the hood. Like soaked it pretty well enough that there was a small pool of water inside the hood, and front of the filter glass. I have wiped the lens down, but do I need to take extra measures to make sure its dried well enough. I guess I am a bit paranoid.

Tried opening in Canon's ImageBrowser EX, and in there the preview thumbnails of the corrupted RAW files are just blank, and wont open when clicked on it. What intrigues me is that the file size appear to be normal. I managed to retrieve an embedded jpeg off only one of the corrupted file which can be viewed/opened like any normal file. However, the rest of the corrupted files can't be viewed or opened =(

Hey folks, I came across this site:

Anyone used this software before? Anyone had any success with this app before? Thanks for your input.

Ok will look into it. Also if it matters, when I was shooting it was taking something like 10-15secs for the camera to write a single image onto the SD card. Also, the SD card was a class 4 memory card.

Software & Accessories / Help! Fix or convert damaged RAW files =(
« on: May 28, 2013, 07:04:12 PM »
Anyone know of any apps that can fix/or atleast convert damaged raw (CR2 format) files? When importing into Lightroom I get a 'Files appear to be unsupported or damaged' prompt. I tried opening them in PS, but no success. I was using a 5D3 and at one point I borrowed a Transcend 32GB card from a friend of mine, as all of my cards ran out of space at the time. The files appear to be of normal size, but I cannot open them.

PS: One of the damaged file did import into Lightroom, and is viewable. Only 15% of the image did not record when it was saving into the card. The damaged part of the image ofcourse did not render).

Any advice is appreciated.

There goes one more flower.
5D3 100L. Crazy windy day, fortunately I had a flash to freeze them all.

Beautiful color!

Lenses / Re: +18 AFMA out of the box....return?
« on: May 17, 2013, 01:05:02 AM »
I'm not really an AFMA expert, but the problem is as such.

lens is -15 and the body is +4 making the total adjustment 19 notches till AF is perfect.

Then you get a new body and the same lens.  The lens is still at -15, but the new body is at +9, so now you are at 24 notches till perfect. 

And if I'm wrong, please feel free to correct me out there.

So it is really about the lens, because let's say your body is +15 and your lens is +13, then you only have 2 in total difference.  So when you sell it to someone without AFMA, their body is -10 and the lens is +13 for a total difference of 23... which could be a real problem. 

So my presumption is that you want to make sure that you are identifying whether it is a combination of body + lens which is getting the high number or whether it is the lens itself.

Thanks jdramirez. Yeah, that made sense.

Lenses / Re: +18 AFMA out of the box....return?
« on: May 16, 2013, 07:09:43 PM »
I recently bought a used 16-3L II and it seemed soft at first. After a quick AFMA, Focal suggested +12/13 on both ends. It was tested under very good lighting conditions(+15EV) and on a stable tripod. That AFMA made it a lot better though. But do these extreme values imply something is seriously wrong with the lens and need to be checked/calibrated?

Landscape / Re: Sunset landscape
« on: May 15, 2013, 04:20:05 AM »
This was a handheld shot, using the Canon 60D and one of my all time favorite lens the Tokina 11-16 f2.8. I forgot the name of the vista point, but its from the Lake Tahoe trip last year.

As We Go Down by Dhanad Islam, on Flickr

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
« on: May 08, 2013, 03:46:00 PM »
One of the first shots from the 16-35 f2.8L II (used) I recently bought. At first I was disappointed in it's mid frame resolution. The focus was a bit off, and after a quick AFMA (+-12 on both ends =O), it started to perform a lot better. This was handheld, probably would have been a lot sharper had I used liveview and my tripod.

Spring Fever by Dhanad Islam, on Flickr

Lenses / Re: Poll: Most Wanted New Lenses of 2013.
« on: May 06, 2013, 07:52:28 PM »
Most of these lenses already exist, a 14-24mm 2.8 would fill a hole in the Canon lineup for those who want an UWA similar to Nikon's stellar 14-24. If it ever comes out and is as sharp as the current 24-70 II then I think we'd have a winner.


14-24 f2.8L

Lenses / Re: Anyone upgraded from their 24-70L to 24-70L MKII?
« on: April 30, 2013, 01:43:04 AM »
Thanks for the insight folks.

I tried 3 copies of mrk I (2 new + 1 used), none of them could gave me the results I'm looking for.

YES...mrk II has better contrast and much sharper at f2.8. This is my most use lens. Follow by 70-200 f2.8 IS II and of course 50L when there almost no light.

Many posters ended up buying this lens after they posted similar questions ;)

Dylan, after getting the 24-70 MKII do you feel you have been using the 16-35 less and less for landscapes and wide shots? Or, the 16-35 still gets used quite often? I am asking because I have the 16-35 II, and wondering if I will end up using the 24-70 MKII more for landscapes than the 16-35 II and may end up giving up the wider focal length for better resolution.

Lenses / Anyone upgraded from their 24-70L to 24-70L MKII?
« on: April 29, 2013, 09:41:33 AM »
I was looking at my photo library and wanted to get an idea what focal length I mostly shoot at. Having various lenses at different point in time, the library indicates over 50% of my photos are taken using the original 24-70L alone. I have used it at weddings, family events, and for walk around. It has been a workhorse of a lens for me, and while one had to be lucky to get a good copy of it, I feel mine was not bad and am mostly happy with the images it gave me.

I am not looking to buy the MKII just yet, but if the contrast and sharpness (I dont care about corner sharpness but center to mid/outer frame should be sharp) is significantly improved over the original 24-70L at f2.8 then I might consider upgrading to the MKII (somewhere down the line).

I was wondering if others out there made the jump from the original 24-70L to the MKII, and noticed the improvements in real world situations, especially in terms of sharpness wide open at both ends.

Software & Accessories / Re: Screw-on ND filter for 16-35 II
« on: April 27, 2013, 12:02:00 AM »
You shouldn't see additional vignetting with the F-Pro mount on the 16-35L II.

Thanks a lot for that chart neuro. That helped! ^_^

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 14