March 01, 2015, 02:29:36 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 - friedrice1212

Pages: [1] 2 3
Lighting / Broncolor Derivative
« on: October 28, 2014, 11:38:24 PM »
I recently encountered an old pack/heads system at a camera show that used Broncolor sockets for attaching the heads to the pack. The owner told me that it was made in France a while ago. I can't remember the name of the manufacturer. In my head it starts with "Godo...", but all I can think of is Godox which clearly isn't French and hasn't made Broncolor mount stuff. The pack was black and had red trims where you would normally find light blue on original Broncolor equipment.

Anyone knows what manufacturer I'm talking about?


Lenses / Re: What was your first L lens?
« on: June 16, 2014, 09:01:47 PM »
24-105 in a 5D2 kit. Then 70-200 IS mk1, 50L, 24L. L is a drug...

Lenses / Re: Which lens to go with
« on: April 08, 2014, 08:04:41 PM »
Mark I is just fine as long as you don't shoot at 200mm 2.8. Very unsharp. And the weight is a big factor. At first I thought that I was a built guy and the weight wouldn't be a problem, but handholding it for a 3h long show made me think otherwise.

Not knowing what a "Global Shutter" is - what would the implications of this be if (hypothetically), it was launched on the (to be named) 7D update?  Is there any benefit to the stills photography world or is it purely a video thing?

It's a purely video thing. The global shutter is the opposite of the rolling shutter. In live view, the physical shutter doesn't move, so the sensor scans the scene 24 or 30 times a second to create frames.

With a rolling shutter, the sensor scans from top to bottom, creating a distortion effect if you pan the camera, because the sensor doesn't actually capture every part of the image at the exact same time.

A global shutter captures the entire image at once, then waits 1/24 of a second before doing it again, so the distortion, or the "rolling shutter effect" is not present. Global shutters are harder and more expensive to incorporate, as the camera has to process large amounts of data at once, in a small period of time.

For still photography using a physical shutter, it makes no difference.

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon 11-24mm f/4 Lens
« on: January 25, 2014, 09:09:33 AM »
"Image height Y = 21.64mm"

This is for APS-C sensors, no? Replacement for EF-S 11-22mm 4-5.6 maybe?

Software & Accessories / Re: Adobe Lightroom for iPad Coming Soon
« on: January 17, 2014, 07:32:59 PM »
99$ per annum? LR5 is 149$ one-time for PC... I don't understand this pricing.

Lighting / Re: Issues with yongnuo yn-622c flash triggers?
« on: January 12, 2014, 10:57:43 PM »
There is no fix for this. It is made this way. Since the 622C relays all information coming from the hotshoe, it relays the commands given by the camera also. If you want to adjust your settings, go to the external flash function settings menu item under one of the yellow tabs (I forgot which one). Through there, you can change the firing mode (M, E-TTL, Multi, ...), power, zoom angle, everything. (The only thing is that the zoom range is limited to 24-105mm, and when using a 600-EX-RT, you cannot take advantage of its entire zoom range. But you have a 580 so it isn't a real problem).

EDIT: (additional info) Every time you change something on the flash and then press the shutter button, the camera sends the signal with the info it gets form the menus to the flash and tells it to override, hence why changing things on the flash is pointless.

I find this more convenient than changing the settings ont he flash itself, as I don't have to move. Everything is controlled from the camera. And you can control multiple flashes too, if you have more triggers.

I use a 5D Mark II, but it should not matter, as it works with basically all modern EOS cameras.

Hope it helps!

Lighting / 50$ monolights
« on: January 08, 2014, 09:08:57 PM »
Hey folks, I just received wind from Adorama that they launched some new monolights. Price is ridiculously low, starting at 50$ for a 120Ws model. There's gotta be a catch somewhere I figure. I almost feel like trying a couple out just to see what they really are. I mean, for 50$ each...

Anyway, just putting it out there. What do you guys think? Sugar-coated bomb or not?*

P.S. Not affiliated with them or anything. Just stumbled upon it.

Lenses / Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« on: July 18, 2013, 07:49:13 PM »
Kind of a sleeper on the Internet because of its age, but certainly not a sleeper in the real world, the 70-200 2.8 IS Mark I. I picked one up for 1200$ the other day and I was simply amazed by it. Sure, it's not as sharp as the Mk II at 200/2.8 and the AF isn't as blistering fast, but it doesn't cost 2800$ with taxes here in Quebec, Canada. I shoot low light dance events with it at ISO 6400, so lens sharpness is the least of my worries. Unless you earn your living with the 70-200, the Mark I is still one hell of a lens. Bang for buck guaranteed!

(Of course if you're gonna use it outdoors at ISO 100 and you're tight on budget, go get an f/4 and skip this old lens)

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark II composition movement
« on: July 18, 2013, 07:36:13 PM »
I shoot the Mark II also, and I had slight issues like this before, but I learned to live with it. I thought that it was because of the 98% viewfinder coverage that does not show me the entire frame. I shot with a T3i/600D before with 95% coverage and found the problem to be more apparent.

Lenses / Re: 24-70mm f4 vs 24-105mm f4 (video + still)
« on: June 28, 2013, 01:27:13 PM »
If 24-70mm f4 IS is parfocal - I would consider that. If it's not - you can not zoom on target and maintain focus.

The 24-105L is parfocal, the 24-70/4L IS is not.

Are you sure about this ? I always thought the 24-105 wasn't parfocal. After reading your post I tried it specifically to test this.

When focusing at 105mm and then zooming out it does seem to hold focus, but this may be the result of DoF on a f4 lens. However when focusing at 24, then zooming in it seems to loose focus.

Parfocal lenses only maintain focus from tele to wide for the simple reason that on the wide end, for the same aperture, the DoF is deeper. If the image is in focus with a thinner DoF, it will be on a deeper one, but the opposite is often not true. Notice that if you zoom to 105 on the 24-105, focus, zoom out, and in again, the image is still in focus.

Lenses / EF mount vs F mount and adapter
« on: June 27, 2013, 10:05:27 AM »
Hello, guys. I'm really looking into the Samyang/Bower/Rokinon manual lenses and I was wondering if there was any disadvantages in using a 35$ F to EF mount adapter from B&H and getting the Nikon F mount version of the lens. The reason behind this is that I have old Nikon film cameras and it would be cool if I can use inexpensive fast primes with them. If the EF version is significantly better on a 5D Mark II, I would go for the EF version.


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Recommendations for a friend
« on: January 27, 2013, 10:36:03 PM »
If possible, new T3i and 50 1.8. This lens is simply amazing, both on crop and full frame, and I'm sure you have heard all about it from so many Canon shooters so I wont repeat hehe.

Software & Accessories / Re: Recommendations for light meter?
« on: January 16, 2013, 10:58:08 AM »
A bit off topic here, but I've been having trouble exposing with Velvia 50 film because of the narrow dynamic range. Will a good light meter help me or the metering inside a digital camera like the 5D2 is good enough? Thanks!

Lenses / Re: Canon 85mm f/1.8 vs Other L and non-L Canon Primes
« on: January 13, 2013, 01:29:11 AM »
85 1.8, 100L, and 85L, I've used all three, though I don't own any. Three fantastic lenses if put in the right hands and the right budget. The 85 1.8 is the best bang for your buck, that's for sure at 359$ right now at B&H. But some people have more bucks than others and that's where the 85L steps in. This monster is an absolute beast, but you gotta know how to handle it. I like to call it a "speciality" lens. If you're getting this lens, it's to shoot it wide open, and that takes a lot of skill. The DoF is so thin that some focussing techniques don't work, such as focus and recompose. By pointing your lens up and down, the subject is already out of focus. And as for the 100 range, I never used the f2.0, but the L is a katana, sharp like no other lens. Shot flowers with it for a project and the results are astonishing. But as I always say, sharpness is overrated, but that's just me. Although for portraits, I find 100mm kinda weird to work with. Again, getting personal here.

Best way to find out is to rent the lenses or get them for a short while to play with them, as I did. I had to choose between the 85 1.8, the Sigma 85 1.4, the Samyang 85 1.4 manual focus, and the Zeiss 85 1.4. Tried them all, and decided to save up for the Zeiss.

Oh and screw the IS version. It's gonna cost 800$-1000$ and it's gonna come in yeah 2547. You want something, get it. Oftentimes, the said "replacements" are way off what we predict. I got a 24-105mm a bit before the new 24-70 f4 IS was announced, and I couldn't be happier.

Pages: [1] 2 3