July 31, 2014, 09:40:24 AM

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 - miah

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 9
Software & Accessories / JPEG as a travel alternative
« on: August 30, 2013, 04:36:51 PM »
Like probably most of the folks on this forum I shoot RAW, but I'm considering switching to large-format JPEG and would like some feedback.

I travel. A lot. I do so either on foot or by motorcycle, so space and weight are critical. In November of last year I swallowed hard and purchased a 5D3 to "replace" my T3i, knowing that this body and L lenses would be quite a bit larger and heavier than what I was accustomed to carrying. I did so because my desire for better IQ eventually trumped my desire to minimize weight/bulk. Here's a quick comparison of my old set-up vs new:

OLD: T3i + EF-S 15-85 + EF 70-300DO
NEW: 5D3 + EF 24-105 + EF 70-300L

I presently own a 2011, 11-inch MacBook Air equipped with USB 2.0. The new 2013 MacBook Air is equipped with USB 3.0. The latter would make transferring files between CF cards and computer much more rapid/convenient, though it would also require upgrading to all new USB 3.0 hard drives, as well (I carry 2, 1TB mirrors).

So here's my thought: I could forego upgrading my computer and hard drives, thus saving money that could be spent on traveling instead, and still maintain speed/convenience, if I switch from RAW to shooting JPEG for this trip. JPEG files are so much more compact than RAW that I wouldn't need larger HDDs or USB 3.0 to push the files around.

I'd love to hear some pros and cons while I still have time to exercise either option. Oh, and I use LR4 and Photoshop CS6 to edit my photos. I mention this because I've had good luck in the past when faced with editing the occasional JPEG file.

Thanks in advance for any input you can offer.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: My dead 5D Mark III Story
« on: July 28, 2013, 11:36:42 AM »
Water damage is highly unpredictable and can cause errors, as Neuro said, a long time after it was exposed to water.
Sometimes that high unpredictability works in your favor, too. In 2007 I went over my motorcycle's handlebars into a pit of quicksand in the Amazon. My DSLR was safe in my waterproof panniers, but my Powershot S80 was strapped to my waist in a completely porous little belt-pack. By the time I finally extracted myself from the mess, and pulled the S80 out of my belt-pack, disgusting, muddy water was running out of every orifice. I pulled the battery, let it dry out for several days (exposed to more Amazon-level humidity, all day, everyday), put the battery back in--and it worked!

When I got back to the states, I played dumb and sent it into Canon for "cleaning." They subsequently sent me a photo of what it looked like on the inside: filthy. There letter explained that the camera had obvious water damage and offered me the chance to upgrade to another camera (at a discount). I passed, and am still using that S80 almost every day to this day, 6 years later (it just returned from Thailand, where my wife used it without fail, everyday for 7 weeks).

Now, I don't know whether to chalk this incident up to quality or luck or both, but regardless, I didn't lose a single shot from my trip.

Lenses / Re: 400mm f5.6 - Why ?
« on: July 14, 2013, 11:10:26 PM »
I was in a similar predicament a few months ago. With a 5D3 and a 70-300L, I felt that getting to 400 with a 100-400 was simply too redundant--especially because I love the results I get with my 70-300. I also liked the idea of the 400 f/5.6's lower weight, faster AF and sharper IQ. So, I sprung for the 400 and haven't regretted my purchase one bit. Even with a 1.4X, images are sharp. The AF is very fast. And though it's a bit long in the backpack, it's smaller diameter and lighter weight make for an easy carry. In short, if I had to do it all over again, I would buy these same two lenses.

Footnote: Though I do not own a 100-400, I have borrowed one from a friend of mine on a number of occasions. It's a very nice lens, especially if you only want to carry one. But in concert with my beloved 70-300L, the 400 f/5.6 just made more sense.

Street & City / Egyptian photojournalist captured his own death
« on: July 12, 2013, 02:51:02 PM »
This CNN video is a powerful story about an Egyptian photog who felt his weapon was mightier than the sword. May he RIP.


Lenses / Re: Alaskan Cruise - 70-300L/Crop Sensor?
« on: June 20, 2013, 08:43:20 AM »
I concur. I took a T1i + 15-85 and 70-300 on the Alaska Ferry from Bellingham to Haines. It was great for dolphins and whales and a lot of landscapes that were a fair distance from the ship. A polarizer can really help out on the water to cut glare, but you take a big hit on aperture on an already slowish lens. I'd leave the 200 at home unless weight/bulk isn't a problem and you can pack the whole kit.

Software & Accessories / Re: Advice: Black Rapid shoulderstrap
« on: June 14, 2013, 09:59:16 PM »

Take the FastenR-3 that comes with the strap, and use Loctite Blue 242 to attach it to a Kirk QRC-1 clamp.

OK, that looks like a good solution. Thanks!

Software & Accessories / Re: Advice: Black Rapid shoulderstrap
« on: June 14, 2013, 08:42:46 PM »
All my carriers are set up for Arca Swiss plates (which are on my camera/lenses).  For the BR straps, I use a Kirk 1" clamp on the lugs, and I have the Spider Arca Clamp.

Neuro, I'm also looking at a BR strap, but am confused by statements on their website. I want to keep my Induro Arca Swiss plates mounted to my camera/lenses, so I can pop them off the BR strap and attach them to my ballhead at a moments notice, but it says the FastenR Tripod (FR-T1) will only work with the Manfrotto RC2 Quick Release Plate. From your description, quoted above, I'm unclear as to what you found that works. Thanks.

Here's the BR page I'm referring to:


Software & Accessories / Re: New Macpro teased at Mac Conference
« on: June 11, 2013, 09:54:01 AM »
My Current MacPro left me no Change from USD$11K, so I'de expect the new Machine to be similarly priced, from Base maybe 4k through to Max everything 12k, but what an amazing design, won me, I've been waiting for 3 years for Apple to get their act together & design the new MacPro, worth the wait from what I can see in this.

Someone mentioned Cables earlier, there's a gazilion cables coming out of my Current MacPro, just like there would be if it were a PC, you have to hook up a Monitor, but your Printer will work WiFi/Blue Tooth, only extra cabling I can think of at present is DVD Reader/Writer, so I don't really see Cabling as any more of an issue than current.

I imagine the Apple haters will, other than hate the thing because it's ?? round, will feel it was designed by Steve, with an Oujia Board input.

I'm sold, only issue I have with the whole thing is it's not available until late this year.

I'm with eml58, I have a MacPro now and can't wait to get the new, faster model. The only material difference is that the drives (optical and storage) must move out , which allows the new machine to be smaller and run cooler/quieter. Putting the drives inside was necessary with the older model, pre-Thunderbolt, since internal SATA connections were at the time the fastest available.

I don't know what "work" pwp is referring to; my current MacPro with SSD chews up pretty much anything and this new model will do so in spades. Yes, it will likely be pricey, but so are big white lenses.

paul13walnut5, I'm sorry to hear you've had issues with your MacPro's RAID and graphics card, but those are distinct from the computer itself. I've had no problems with my MacPro, any of its third-party parts, or any of the over 30 other Macs I've purchased over the years. They've proven their reliability again and again in a heavy-use work environment. Finally, opinions on FCPX vary. I personally don't do video (yet), but I know a lot of folks who at first didn't like the X version of FCP, but with its updates have come around to loving it. Either way, these machines are not just video editors.

I'd suggest withholding judgment until this thing hits the shelves and we can see how it actually performs and integrates with our peripherals. If Intel can finally get Thunderbolt off the ground (now with version 2 when there's still a dearth of version 1 peripherals available), we'll finally be cookin' with gas.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Closeout Digital deal on Tamron 24-70 f/2.8
« on: June 01, 2013, 07:38:46 PM »
I have a bridge for sale.  Send me you credit card number
You can search for them yourself.  Posting a link to them gives them free advertising and boosts their google search engine rank..

Ouch! Well, I'm glad admin removed the link. I posted it just so people would know who I was talking about. Thanks for the links you offered, Mt Spokane. I guess it was too good to be true...

Pricewatch Deals / Closeout Digital deal on Tamron 24-70 f/2.8
« on: June 01, 2013, 07:09:17 PM »
Has anyone on CR done business with Closeout Digital?

URL Removed my Administrator.

They're offering the Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 DI VC USD Lens for Canon Cameras--$1299 at B&H--for $949.05. They claim all merchandise is new and they have a 60-day return policy. Still, I wonder how forgiving they are for exchanging "bad copies."


Video & Movie / Re: Wildlife Doc
« on: May 27, 2013, 11:38:57 AM »
Excellent job. Really excellent!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: F/8 Autofocusing impressions
« on: May 20, 2013, 10:45:58 AM »
My car runs fine, except when I try to back up while turning - then the steering wheel locks up.  But otherwise, it works fine.  Maybe that fits some people's definition of 'works fine' - not mine.

But hey, if locking up with AFMA means the Kenko TC 'works' then you could also say the Canon 1.4x 'works' with the 70-300L. If you zoom the lens out to the 250-300mm range, the 1.4x TC can be mounted.  It will AF on the 5DIII, you can AFMA the combo, and your camera won't lock up.  Retracting the zoom will bump the rear lens element into the rubber ring on the TC, long as you keep the zoom extended, it 'works' just fine.

Touche, Neuro, I clearly should have said it works fine--provided AFMA is not required. As stated in my other thread, I'm not happy about not being able to AFMA the lens + Kenko TC combo (although I'm still playing with possible work-arounds). That said, I'm getting well auto-focused shots from my various lenses + Kenko TC combos, including at f/8, and they are quite sharp.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: F/8 Autofocusing impressions
« on: May 20, 2013, 08:24:53 AM »
Someone please explain this f/8 brouhaha to me: my 5D3 + Kenko 1.4x tele-extender + 400 & 70-300 auto-focus (at f/8, pre-firmware update) all day long. I just downloaded the firmware update and will install it later today, but I've been auto-focusing just fine at f/8 for some time. Am I missing something?

The Kenko locks up the 5DIII when used with the latest generation telephotos, and you have to remove the battery to restart.

I found this to be true ONLY when AFMA is enabled. Otherwise, Kenko TC's autofocus fine at f/8 and did so prior to the 5D3 firmware update.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Kenko teleconverter questions
« on: May 19, 2013, 08:40:47 PM »

Yes I got that, and I assumed you used "Adjust by lens", so I wondered if (after removing the current setting) you could set the measured amount in "All by the same amount" and then add the teleconverter. And alternatively if you could set up "Adjust by lens" while the Kenko teleconverter is attached. But the latter will most likely crash the camera at some point so I'm not asking you to try this. I have kenko teleconverters so if I ever get another camera it will have AFMA and I can test it myself (my 600D doesn't do AFMA).

Hmm, interesting ideas. I might have time to experiment a bit with some of the combos you suggest, tomorrow. I did record all of my AFMA numbers for each lens, so there's no risk of losing them and having to retest. I'll let you know how it goes.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Kenko teleconverter questions
« on: May 19, 2013, 07:42:16 PM »
The question is whether the combos with the Kenko TC are giving accurate focus.  Because if they're not, and you can't apply AFMA, I don't think you can state that your Kenko TC actually 'works'.

Yes--they work--the Kenko TC combos yield sharp images. I just want them to be as sharp as they can possibly be, hence my desire to test/adjust them in FoCal.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 9