Messages

721

Lenses / Re: What's the best deal you've ever gotten on a lens? I'll start...

« on: April 30, 2012, 02:21:17 PM »

I live in Finland, 5D3 costs here is 3800€ what is $5000 So I could get almost 2x 5D3 in US instead of one in Fin.

Wow that makes me incredibly grateful for the prices I've gotten on stuff, I guess there is a tax that stops you from ordering at US prices? 

722

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: What do you recommend? 7D 60D T3i T4i

« on: April 30, 2012, 10:54:07 AM »

A follow to the original question...

The t4i doesn't look like it's going to make an appearance for a while, the 60D was semi-'upgraded' with the 60Da and the 7D is holding fast as it is.

Presently this is the approximate price comparison for the body only versions of each

~650 - T3i
~900 - 60D
~1400 - 7D

CR just posted a deal for the 7D at Adorama for 1199.

This puts the sale price near the middle of the standard pricing of the 60D and the 7D. Is this a too good to pass up price drop? Thoughts/suggestions?

$1199 for a 7D is a great deal, but keep in mind all the cameras you mentioned have the same sensor.  But at that price the 7D is definitely worth getting, it's much more solid than a T3i and is far superior to both on the stills side.

723

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

« on: April 30, 2012, 10:36:58 AM »

Hey everyone, hope your monday is starting off smoothly. Mine isn't all that exciting.

I recently shot a wedding, (video) with the Mark 3 and the MOV files are corrupt. I'm curious if anyone has had this problem, or know of a remedy. One memory card was able to transfer video files and they are readable. The other didn't have so much luck.

I've researched on the web all the "repair" options out there but obviously its too early to reconstruct an 5D MK3 MOV file.

Does anyone know of a remedy? Or a way to reconstruct the MOV files to be an MK3 MOV file versus a standard MOV file?

I'm helpless and desperately need the rest of the wedding to make this video worth viewing.

I've had this happen several times, and yes, the stuff is repairable.  There are sites that do it, I think one of them was $99 but I can't remember the name of the site.  It definitely works its just a question of how much the files are worth to you.  In the future make sure you format your cards before you shoot video on them. 

Edit: Ok I found it, it's these guys http://aeroquartet.com/movierepair/repair

Since they are expensive, you may want to try this first: http://grauonline.de/cmsimple2_6/en/?Solutions:HD_Video_Repair_Utility

Actually now that I look the 2nd one is around $38 for 5 repairs and $130 for unlimited, so I guess it's only slightly cheaper than the first one. 

724

Lenses / Re: Lenses to shoot the Milky Way. Is a 17-40 enough?

« on: April 29, 2012, 10:46:41 PM »

Unless you're stacking multiple images the f/4 aperture of the 17-40 is going to hurt you for sure.  It also kinda depends on where you live, don't expect to see much in the pictures if you live anywhere close to a major city, you really have to go somewhere incredibly dark.  Either way both the 16-35 and 14L are great lenses, it just all depends on your situation.  The 14L is $600 more than the 16-35mm and can feel a little too wide at times.  It's definitely more of a specialty lens compared to the 16-35, but it's very sharp and ridiculously wide.  I only bought the 14mm because I got an exceptionally good deal on it, but the 16-35 is still a great lens and well-suited for astrophotography, the f/2.8 will help quite a bit.  I'd go for the 16-35, I don't know anyone that isn't happy with that lens.

725

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 5D Mark III Magic Lantern wish list poll

« on: April 28, 2012, 04:52:57 PM »

If they can improve the in-camera sharpening algorithm so it looks closer to post-sharpened footage but without the compression artifacts and/or increase the bitrate for ALL-I that would be incredible.  Beyond that, focus peaking and zebras would be really nice.  I don't think I'd use any of the other features.

I have to say even the IPB code grades incredibly well compared to 5DII footage, I wa very happy with the results. 

I'd like to see crop mode, uncompressed HDMI and better framerates at 1080 for sure.  With 17x the processing power of the 5d2 it seems like Canon has to be intentionally limiting the 5D3 or sure.  I'm excited either way.

726

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Hands-on Experience with the 1DC

« on: April 28, 2012, 04:50:57 PM »

I will admit this camera does look very sexy indeed!  Now if only we could do something about its price!

  

Word on the street is that it's going to be released at $11,999, which definitely seems more reasonable than $15k. Either way the footage from it looks amazing, even the Vimeo version looks better than 5DIII's raw footage, and you lose quite a bit of quality when you upload to vimeo. Im sure the original on a good monitor looks absolutely stunning.  This thing definitely has a place in the cinema world and the fact that you can record 4k onto cf cards is pretty impressive.  I do wonder how much of he differences between it and the 1DX are from hardware or firmware.  If magic lantern figures out a way o hack the 1Dx to shoot 4k Canom is going to be pissed. 

Hell I'm excited to see what it does for the 5D3 considering digic 5 has 17x the processing power of digic 4

727

Lenses / Re: What's the best deal you've ever gotten on a lens? I'll start...

« on: April 28, 2012, 03:05:36 PM »

When I picked up my 7D w/ 17-55 f2.8 IS USM got both almost price of 7D body. $1600 of body and $1200 of lens but bought with bundle $2200 good deal for me. Without that offer it would have been around $3500.

So deal was basicly ~40% off lens and body really really happy with that!
And now local store is having weekly lens bundle of 50mm f1.4+lens hood+Hoya 58mm protector for 390€ ~$520 without deal price is 550€ ~$730 gonna get Nifty-Fifty

$3500 for a 7D and 17-55 normally?! Where do you live man?  That setup is around $2600 brand new in the US, and could easily be had for under $2k used.  But I guess $2200 is pretty good if $3500 is what it usually costs there.

728

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Thoughts on my first real shoot with the 5DIII

« on: April 27, 2012, 04:17:54 PM »

Axil....I've been looking at that 100 macro...are you referring to the L version or are you referring to the less expensive version?   or both?

Hey I was talking about the Zeiss 100mm f/2 Makro, although the Canon 100L Macro is an excellent lens and probably the only lens I regret selling.  The Zeiss 100mm is absolutely stunning, some of the highest resolving power out there and  creates almost a 3D like effect the way it separates the subject from the background. 

It's a tough choice, the Canon has AF, IS, and 1:1 magnification and costs 1/2 the price of the Zeiss, which has no AF or IS, and 1:2 magnification.  But I think that has a lot to say about the optics of the Zeiss 100, the thing is just insane. 
If you can't bring yourself to pay that kind of $ for that focal length, you will absolutely be happy with the Canon 100L.  It works great as a portrait lens as well as for Macro stuff and is the only Canon lens with the hybrid IS and it works beautifully, very fun lens. 

729

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Thoughts on my first real shoot with the 5DIII

« on: April 27, 2012, 11:08:29 AM »

Though, I'm not the original poster, I agree with him completely.

The Zeiss lenses are corner to corner sharp on full frame cameras. But for video, it is their focusing ring that truly shines. I was extremely loyal to Canon lenses but thankfully rented the Zeiss 21mm to shoot a film. After using the Zeiss, I loved it so much that I sold the incredible Canon TS-E 90mm to buy a Zeiss 35mm f2.

I did reshoots for the movie on the 35mm Zeiss and everyone has noticed that the footage is even better than the 21mm.

I still use Canon L lenses for photography when I'm not locked down on a tripod, as the manual focus of the Zeiss pretty much negates its sharpness for walkaround photography. But for video, I'm grabbing my Zeiss 35 or renting another Zeiss.

Ahhh that 21mm is the one I truly loved, such an amazing wide-angle lens.  I've heard great things about the 35 f/2, it's an excellent lens especially considering the price and just as sharp as the 35L.  The ZE 35 1.4 was not so impressive, showed a good bit of CA wide open and I didn't think the IQ was much better than the f/2.  But yes they are just the best for video without a doubt.  A lot of people don't realize that the CP.2's are just ZE's in a different housing. 

Have you used the ZE 100mm Makro yet?  Ridiculously amazing, that's the sharpest of all of them.  It's the only ZE lens with master prime optics (which are $22,000-$25,000/lens).  Try it out, it's absolutely stunning.

730

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Thoughts on my first real shoot with the 5DIII

« on: April 27, 2012, 10:58:24 AM »

compared to true 1080p footage. you got some reading to do:
http://www.eoshd.com/content/7631/panasonic-gh2-vs-5d-mark-iii

the mkIII is very soft even among other DSLRs. removing the OLP helps a little but still trails in detail and definitively doesn't deliver anywhere close to the quality of true 1080p. Sorry but for 3500 dollars, it should do better.

I've read every single article on EOSHD, I've used the FS100, C300, played with the Scarlett, and sure the 5DIII may not resolve true 1080p but I still think the footage looks great.  Yes it could look better, but I wouldn't call it "poor" ever.  This is an example of what I would consider "poor quality":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yUi1SVPHwQ
	Small | Large

So sorry, I just can't put the 5DIII in the poor quality category, sure maybe "fair," "decent," or "not quite 1080p" category would be appropriate, but "poor?"  Come on.  5DIII is better than 5DII, which would make the 5DII terribly poor, but if that was the case then no one would have ever noticed it and the DSLR revolution never would have happen, but as I remember that's not quite how things went down. 

And no one that watches the stuff I do is counting lines of resolution, they all think it looks amazing.  You have to remember your audience usually isn't a bunch of pixel-peepers, and 99% of the time they just can't tell the difference.  I still think it's a great camera for $3500, and the stills features more than make up for it's shortcomings on the video side. 

I have to ask, what exactly are you shooting that the 5DIII would ruin the quality of the content/story?  The 5DII has been used on House, 24, commercials, award-winning movies, etc.  James Cameron used it for personal projects, yet somehow it's not good enough for you?  Content is king, and if a couple hundred lines of resolution are enough to ruin your project you probably have no business shooting video in the first place.  At this stage it doesn't matter, you should be able to make an awesome movie with a 5DII or 5DIII, but I guess it's easier to tell yourself "if only I had an Alexa, then I could make the greatest movie ever!"

731

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Thoughts on my first real shoot with the 5DIII

« on: April 27, 2012, 10:50:34 AM »

Thanks for the reply!!

Yeah, I was looking at that Zeiss 50mm. That does look to be the first one that is 'relatively' priced.

I'll likely bag that one after I pay off the initial purchase.  I found my old Nikon FA film camera from years back. It has what is now a cheap, but I read decent 50mm lens on it. I figure with an adapter, I can use that for video on initial purchase....till I can afford the Zeiss.

Just curious...why do you say the 85mm is limiting?  Can you expand on your thoughts on the 85mm?

Thank you,

cayenne

I would say that 85mm is limiting if it was the only lens that you had, since it is fairly tight and considered more of a portrait focal length.  It's still a great, awesome lens, I would just always get a 50mm first since you can do so much more with it.  With the 85mm you would find yourself having to back up pretty far from the subject to get certain framing, but with the 50 not so much.  Either one is great, but if I had to get one before the other it would be the 50mm, that's just a "standard" focal length.  Not quite wide but not quite telephoto, just right.

732

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Thoughts on my first real shoot with the 5DIII

« on: April 27, 2012, 10:48:01 AM »

congrats on your 5d3, I like mine too.  question though, why do you like the zeiss lenses so much? i ask because when i read the lens review sites, they rank the zeiss lenses as equal to or less than canon or nikon glass.

also, where did the canon 135 go?  why wouldn't you keep using it on the new set up?  some would say it's the best lens you own.

don't take my questions the wrong way, i'm just trying to learn more and you obviously have significant experience/knowledge, so i'm pick'n your brain a bit, that's all...

Well since I was shooting with Zeiss glass for the first time I didn't want to throw Canon lenses into the mix.  The Zeiss lenses have their own look and throwing one Canon lens into the mix would have required more color correction.

Aside from trying to stick to the same brand, we were in a pretty tight space and the the 85 made a lot more sense for the situation (the 135 would have been too long).  But there were plenty of cases when I was using all Canon glass that I used the 85 over the 135 and was never disappointed with the resuts, they are pretty equal in terms of sharpness.  I love the 135, it's an awesome lens and one of the few I plan on keeping after I switch over to Zeiss.  The Zeiss lenses are awesome and I wrote my reasons in the last paragraph of the first post. 

733

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark III doesn't live up to expectations in real world shooting...

« on: April 27, 2012, 10:39:02 AM »

Not that I doubt your word, but what conditions are you shooting in to get your "Tack sharpness"? Are you shooting fast moving subjects in a dark environment? If so could you please post examples with the shooting data. I would love to be proven wrong because I do want to love this camera as I spend so much money on it and time adjusting it.

There are thousands of people talking about how much they love the 5DIII's AF and you're worried about a single person proving to you that they are getting sharp images?  Don't you think if they weren't getting sharp images that they would be quick to join you in condemning this camera?  I don't think you should be accosting people on here because honestly the few pictures you posted look like absolute crap especially considering the gear you have. I can feel the arrogance radiating from your self portrait, I'm sure with an ego like that nothing is ever your fault huh?

I'm just saying there are plenty of people out there that have the exact same stuff that you do that are completely happy with the results they are getting, so what does that leave?  Something tells me you have more money than talent. 

Maybe it's the fact that you're moving from a $5000 camera to a  $3500 one, whereas most of us moved from the Mark II.  I don't see why you would expect a cheaper camera to be an upgrade. 

734

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: If you want a 1Ds mk IV....please sign this petition

« on: April 27, 2012, 10:30:17 AM »

I think this petition is incredibly childish and idiotic, I'm sure Canon is well aware of this and probably already have something in the works. 

735

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5D Mark III doesn't live up to expectations in real world shooting...

« on: April 27, 2012, 10:28:50 AM »

I can't get the AF to miss even if I try, I have no idea how this is an issue for you.  Possibly the lens?