Messages

706

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 5D MK 3 Corrupted Video Files?

« on: May 08, 2012, 01:04:48 PM »

@ Axilrod: So it is the card that is at fault here in that it should be reformatted before each shoot? Are there specific cards less prone to these type of failures? 

I'm just starting to do videos and I'd like to avoid these problems.  Thanks.

I have 10 Sandisk Extreme 16GB and 32GB cards and have been very happy with them overall.  I've recorded 80 bands since August and these were 3 camera setups so there were a lot of CF cards involved.  Out of all those times I can only recall running into corrupt files once, maybe twice, and I never could figure out the cause.  The strange thing was that the corrupt files were surrounded by files that were perfectly fine (for example band records 8 songs in a row, 4th and 5th are corrupt while others play fine), I'm still not sure what caused that exactly.  The only thing I can think of is maybe being swapped between cameras, copied, and emptied over and over caused the card to have trouble overwriting data (since it's still there even after you delete it or format the card).  So I can't say for sure what caused your corrupt files, but yes it's generally good practice to format your cards after you get the data copied.

The only other time I have had to pay to recover files was when someone accidentally formatted a card that hadn't been copied over yet.  The companies recovering the stuff are making a killing, they send you a "custom repair kit" for $99, but most likely they just have a few different repair kits that they send depending on the situation and then act like they have some genius making you your own personal recovery app.

Overall the Sandisk cards are very, very reliable and I believe the only reason I have run into issues with them is volume and frequency, I just shoot so damn much on so many different cameras that I was bound to run into issues eventually. 

707

Lenses / Re: Canon Refurb Store ... Not Such A Good Deal

« on: May 07, 2012, 12:47:02 PM »

So a single accessory costing more than B&H makes the entire refurb store "not such a good deal?"  I agree it is strange, but they still have plenty of great deals there.

708

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Gear Choice - suggestions appreciated

« on: May 07, 2012, 12:44:55 PM »

I would throw the Tokina 11-16mm into the mix, it's nice to have something ultra-wide on an APS-C sensor.  70-200mm is just really long on an APS-C sensor and very difficult to shoot handheld.  You may want to also consider the 17-55 f/2.8 IS, which is the best general purpose zoom for a 7D IMO. 

I think if you only get the 50mm and the 70-200 you'll quickly start to feel like you need something wider.  50mm is a portrait focal length on an APS-C sensor, which is pretty tight and can feel limiting at times.  It would be worth going to a local shop and testing out some lenses just to get a feel for what each focal length gives you. 

709

Lenses / Re: 300mm F2.8 L IS II vs Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 AF APO EX DG OS HSM any opinion ?

« on: May 07, 2012, 12:05:25 PM »

I don't know where you heard that the 120-300 was better than the 70-200, and I seriously doubt it's as good as the 300 f/2.8 IS II.  Just look at the charts against the 70-200, it's no contest IMO.:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=381&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=0&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

Even with the 1.4x extender the 70-200 is noticeably better.

As for the 120-300 vs. 300 f/2.8 IS II, again, no comparison.  Even at f/8 the 120-300 isn't as sharp as the 300 at f/2.8:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=381&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=0&LensComp=739&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

710

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: My first wedding Help!

« on: May 07, 2012, 11:47:36 AM »

Make sure you have a light tripod or monopod, as 50-150mm on an APS-C sensor is pretty tight and hard to shoot handheld with.  Just try and shoot as many pictures as you can, the more you have all together the more keepers you'll end up with.  If you aren't sure you nailed a certain shot make sure you snap a few extra just in case.  It may be worth renting a 2nd body and keeping the 17-55 on one and the 50-150 on the other, but if you're not comfortable with 2 bodies that could end up hurting you.

Either way just keep in mind that most people at the wedding aren't going to be as critical of the pictures as you are, so just try and have fun with it.  No matter what happens you'll learn a lot and be that much more experienced the next time you get an opportunity to shoot.  Good luck to you!

711

Lenses / Re: Shooting people with a 16-35... Any good ?

« on: May 06, 2012, 10:16:17 PM »

Yep. This thread wouldn't be complete without mentioning Platon http://www.platonphoto.com/, a portrait photographer who makes creative use of perspective distortion.

Anyone know what lenses Platon uses? I'm especially curious about what he used for his UN world leader portraits.

He shoots Hasselblad so I'm sure one of their very pricey wide-angle lenses.  It's probably their 28mm, which is about as wide as a 16mm on a Full Frame DSLR. 

As for the OP, yes the 16-35mm is a great lens and you can have a lot of fun with it.  It's not as great wide open in my opinion but at around f/4-f/5.6 it's pretty damn sharp. 

712

EOS Bodies / Re: Why did Canon Release the 5D MkIII (pure conjecture)

« on: May 05, 2012, 10:19:10 AM »

* if you have any doubts that Canon is ripping you off, just look at the video side of the market; BlackMagic is selling (still not shipping, but that will come in august) a camera that puts all the canon, sony, panasonic, etc, models to shame, for $3K (with $1500 of awesome software included); Canon could do the same, with a bigger sensor, for $4K; yet they prefer to sell it for $40K; good for them, but just don't expect me to buy it (ok, the C500 has some things that are better than the BMC, but some are worse too; definitely not worth the price difference unless $30K is just small change for you)

It's idiotic to try and compare the black magic camera to the Canon Cinema line.  It appears that Black Magic was actually aiming for consumers, while Canon was clearly aiming at industry professionals with their Cinema EOS line.  I know it sucks they didn't make anything in our price range, but it's clear to me that stuff is for the big boys.  I doubt you'll see any blackmagic cameras on any sets with it's joke of a 2.4x crop.  And you talk about both these cameras as if you have used them to produce dozens of films, but it's all just speculation until they actually get released.

713

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron EF 24-70 f/2.8 VC in Stock & Quick MTF Review

« on: May 05, 2012, 10:11:53 AM »

1) Nikon D800 is better than the 5D3 in almost all aspects, even video.
2) Very overpriced Canon Cinema division got destroyed at NAB by Black Magic and Sony who stole all the buzz.
3) Now Tamron fills the I.S. niche that #1 feature in the 24-70 that Canon customers were begging and pleading for, but Canon failed to deliver.

1) That's an opinion, there are plenty of people that prefer the 5DIII.
2) The Black Magic camera is very cool, but geared more towards consumers.  The Cinema EOS cameras are for the film industry.  See how many Hollywood productions end up using the BM camera, I'm sure it won't be many.  2.4x crop is a joke (I know it's useful in some applications, but obviously you can't shoot everything on it).
3) I'll agree with you on this one, but the 24-70 II really hasn't been tested yet.  I don't think IS is very essential in that range.  You'd think that no one had ever taken a good picture with a 28-70 or the current 24-70 the way some people cry about IS, people have done just fine without it.

You say "non-Canon fanboys" prefer the D800, which is pretty much saying "Nikon fanboys prefer the D800."  You can claim these products as failures all you want, but I guarantee you all of them will sell well within their respective markets.  The 5DIII has been selling like crazy, if it was that bad of a camera no one would buy it.  The D800 is a great camera, but the MP count makes it seem better than it really is. 

714

Lenses / Re: Which wide anlge zoom for new 5D3?

« on: May 04, 2012, 03:03:57 PM »

+1 for the 16-35mm, I wasn't very impressed with the 17-40 at all.  There is a reason the 16-35 costs 2x more.

715

Lenses / Re: Am I equipped to rip?

« on: May 02, 2012, 10:35:11 AM »

So I'm trying to round out a good artillery of lens for all around use. I have the 16-35 2.8 ii and I am about to purchase the 50mm 1.2L and 70-200 2.8 is ii with the lens rebate. Does everyone think that's an all around good set of three lens? I shoot a lot of video and all around general photo

Yes that's a great setup, now go shoot and stop worrying about gear.

716

Lenses / Re: Am I equipped to rip?

« on: May 02, 2012, 10:34:45 AM »

My recommendation
24-70 2.8
50 1.4, or 1.2 although i love my 1.8
70-200mm 2.8 is ii

He already has the 16-35mm so selling it for the 24-70 would be a pain in the ass.

717

Lenses / Re: Am I equipped to rip?

« on: May 02, 2012, 10:33:11 AM »

If you are willing to go manual focus, the Zeiss 50 KILLS the Canon lens. (My walk around lens is the Zeiss 35mm) On the other hand, I prefer the 70-200 f4 or the 70-300 f4 lens because they are cheaper, lighter and perform equally well as the 2.8 lens unless you actually shoot wide open, where the 2.8 lens shines.

But you certainly can't go wrong with your proposed kit.

The Zeiss 50's are better than Canon in some respects, but in absolutely no way do they "kill" the Canon.  I love both, but they both have their advantages and disadvantages.

718

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: FC1 USB Focus Controller

« on: May 02, 2012, 10:28:30 AM »

It's been out a while, it's decent, but the focus action is kind of choppy.  I'm waiting for the Manfrotto remotes to be released, they're friggin' awesome.
http://www.manfrotto.us/product/8709.1018696.54581.0.0/MVR911ECCN/_/HDSLR_CLAMP-ON_REMOTE_CONTROL
http://www.manfrotto.us/product/8709.1018696.54581.0.0/MVR911EJCN/_/HDSLR_DELUXE_RC_FOR_CANON

719

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: SmallHD vs Zacuto Z Finder

« on: May 02, 2012, 10:02:41 AM »

I did not know that the framing is so depending on 720p vs 1080p. So, you reckon I can't see the framing of a video or a LV still over the smallHD? There is no point of using this one then. What is it good for?

@Axilrod: yes, the new LCD is quite good but (without Magic Lantern yet) there is no focus assist, peaking, zebras, false colour etc etc. Probably enough for my use though. I am quite curious when Zacuto will bring up the new 3.2" Z-finder. Some people complain that at a 3xmagnification with the Mark II you are looking at the gaps between the LCD pixels and not at the pixels... Is the 2.5x better? The Z-Finder is less than half the price of a SmallHD! Unfortunately you can't do 1:1 on the back LCD during video for better focusing. The EVF do this.
A Dilemma!

I kind of agree about the Mark II and the Z-Finder 3X, it does make the image kind of blocky, but I can't imagine the 2.5x being THAT much better.  The EVF however looks excellent under the 3X Z-finder.  I forgot that the current Z-finders won't fit on the 5DIII screen, but I'm sure Zacuto is on top of that.

720

Lenses / Re: Battle of the 50mm's (1.2L , ZE 1.4, ZE 2.0)

« on: May 01, 2012, 01:38:14 PM »

Do you shoot video or stills mainly?

I love my 50L, but I used the Zeiss 50 1.4 last weekend and was very, very happy with the results.  It's not so great wide open, but at f/2 it really shines.  All the Zeiss glass seems to have better edge sharpness than their Canon counterparts.  And from what I understand the ZE 50mm f/2 Makro is significantly better and will probably be the one I end up going with.  If you are shooting video I would absolutely go with the Zeiss glass, but if you're doing stills mainly I'd go for the 50L.