Messages

121

Software & Accessories / Screen calibration frustration!

« on: April 28, 2013, 01:56:36 PM »

Aaaarrrgghh!!! My laptop screen is driving me insane! I tried calibrating it with i1 display 2 on easy four times and advanced twice and each time it looks worse. I finally gave up and loaded an older profile that looked OK.

My issue is this - there are no contrast or gamma controls for my laptop only brightness. You can change gamma using windows built in calibration program but that resets everything. Is there any way around this? I want to manually change the gamma to 2.2 and color temp to 6500K, the closest I got through i1 was 2.0 and 6600K but it looked a bit blue. The advanced mode doesn't give me an RGB choice it just goes from luminance to flashing square mode.

Also the luminance only goes up to 24 and the recommended is 90. I cranked the brightness to the max and it made no difference.

Am I doing something wrong or do I just have a rubbish screen? Using a Sony VAIO VPC-F13WFX/B 16.4-Inch With 1600 by 900 screen resolution.

122

Reviews / Re: Review - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM

« on: April 27, 2013, 11:36:07 AM »

Watched the video demo of the USB dock. Very impressive, I wish I could AFMA all my lenses at four different points! How awesome would that be?

123

Lenses / Re: 135mm vs. 100mm macro

« on: April 26, 2013, 11:53:35 PM »

I would say they are made for two separate applications. If you need an excellent portrait lens for low light etc then the 135L is the way to go. The IS would only be useful for stationary subjects, for me that doesn't translate to portraits as people tend to move about and figit a lot! The 135L has the extra stop advantage which would give faster shutter speeds if used in conjunction with a higher ISO. You want somewhere around 1/200 s or faster and f/2.8 in my opinion is just not fast enough in low light without hitting the really high ISO levels.

124

EOS Bodies / Re: 21mp Sensor in the 7D Mark II? [CR1]

« on: April 25, 2013, 08:54:18 AM »

Carl, I think calling the 10-22 'worthless crap' is a bit much. It's not without it's limitations I freely admit, but it has got me some fantastic images I couldn't have got with any other lens*. Sharpness away from centre viewed close to 100% does suffer, but does that make it worthless crap? No it does not, and frankly, that's offensive.

jrista, from an old Canon lens brochure I have, it appears to me (and I stand to be corrected) that the EF-S 10-22 optical layout is not that dissimilar to the 17-40L (complete with SUD and aspherical elements), apart from smaller elements, presumably for the reduced image circle.

(*-by this, I mean ultra wide on crop)

I have both lens optical layout on my blog. I have used both lenses and the 10-22 is by no means "worthless crap".

http://zeebytes.blogspot.jp/2012/12/glassware-canon-10-22mm-f35-45-and-17.html?m=1

125

Portrait / Re: Pretty bad...

« on: April 22, 2013, 09:20:29 AM »

What I wanna know is why did the photographer send them all his shots? Did he not even look at them at all? That in it self is proof he's no pro. Idiot. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

126

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]

« on: April 22, 2013, 04:11:19 AM »

Bryan from TDP notes that if you increase sharpness to a setting of 1 in the camera picture style profiles the image looks just fine and is about same as the 550D, 60D etc. It is a non issue. I think the 7D images are plenty sharp and most of the time I just add a little sharpening in post anyway. He also states that this COULD be due to a STRONGER (as jrista said) AA filter, but nothing about it being too strong.

127

Portrait / Re: Simple Portraits - anything to improve?

« on: April 21, 2013, 10:21:38 AM »

Hello all, I'd love to get some feedbacks on the shoot. What would you do differently and why?

http://www.occhio-photography.com/macgyver-we-are/

thanks a lot!

cheers,
r.

Shots look amazing, nothing I would do really, maybe try some different compositions and angles. How about one with a natural smile or reaction? Something more intimate with the camera. But great shots I'd be happy with that result!

128

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: 135mm f/1.8 DG OS ART Next from Sigma? [CR1]

« on: April 21, 2013, 10:07:51 AM »

Wow Sigma are on a farkin mission eh? I hope we see the updated 50 sometime soon, I could use it. I'll stick with my 135L, that thing is sharp enough and fast enough though I will be watching the reviews closely!

Are canon gonna release any lenses this year or what?

129

Lenses / Re: which lens to keep

« on: April 21, 2013, 05:36:16 AM »

Sell the 24-70 assuming it's the first version the 24-105 is more useful for landscapes as it has IS, and the longer end works well for portraits. Use the money to buy a couple of fast primes like a 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 maybe the sigma 35 1.4 just so you have low light / shallow dof ability too.

Actually ideally I would have this - Sigma 35 for low light, Canon 135L for portraits and 24-105L for general use. Tripod and flash is all that is really missing.

130

Portrait / Re: I need your help to criticise my photos :P

« on: April 21, 2013, 01:01:45 AM »

Are these shot with ambient light? I'm noticing a mix of color tones, greens and orange and what not. One way to keep lighting consistent is to use a single light source, make sure it has direction. For this type of situation I'd go with a small softbox with a 1/4 CTO gelled speedlite. Make sure the shutter speed is fast enough to shut out any ambient. If you do want to include sone ambient make sure the ambient light matches the color of the speedlite.

Also move the subject away from distracting backgrounds or zoom in tight enough that there is only the subjects face in the frame.

Also you'll need to bring a reflector to fill in the shadows under the chin and eye sockets. Are you familiar with clamshell lighting? Quick and easy for beauty style shots. You need softer lighting, I can see too many skin imperfections. Also post process the image to soften the skin and bring the skin tone back to normal.

Takes a few years to get the hang of this kinda thing. I highly recommend Phil Steele's site for tutorials on portrait photography with speedlites and his photoshop for beginners. Scott Kelby's books are pretty good too.

131

EOS Bodies / Re: 21mp Sensor in the 7D Mark II? [CR1]

« on: April 20, 2013, 09:28:33 PM »

Rumor or not.

Reality is... the t4i caught up with everything the 60D and 7D had to offer.

So there is a definite need for a serious upgrade, and weather sealing won't just cut it anymore.

t4i caught up with 7D? ... I am curious to know how ... also why "weather sealing won't cut it anymore"?

I doubt people who say these things have ever used a 7D. If they had they would realize that the 7D is a full on assualt tank whearas the t4i is a water pistol in comparison. Let me see them capture a bird in flight with a t4i.

132

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]

« on: April 20, 2013, 09:22:09 PM »

OK here we go, upscaled on photoshop (which is destructive so .... anyway).

I wouldn't necessarily call upscaling "destructive". It is distributive, for sure, as it distributes existing information and fabricates new information...but I wouldn't necessarily call upscaling destructive. It is a better way to clearly demonstrate the difference, which I think is clear now with your latest screenshot. You could downscale the 7D image to the 5D II crop size. The differences won't be as apparent, as downscaling IS definitely destructive, however the 7D shot will pick up additional clarity and sharpness, as well as reduced noise relative to the 5D II shot.

Anyway, thanks for being honest!

You're welcome! Glad we sorted that out. 

133

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]

« on: April 20, 2013, 11:32:46 AM »

OK here we go, upscaled on photoshop (which is destructive so .... anyway).

134

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]

« on: April 20, 2013, 11:24:43 AM »

And now lets zoom in and see. What conclusions can we draw from this?

I can only conclude the 5D II is not upscaled properly, as the books are smaller. There seems to be no doubt the 7D contains more information and detail, though...the books are quite a bit larger (which means every aspect of detail, such as the cracks, contain MORE pixels than the 5D II shot.) Anyway, I give up. Everyone seems to have an agenda, and that agenda doesn't include objective fact. Sorry I bothered you.

All I did is click compare and then zoom, I dunno how LR handles its business but like I said earlier this is likely due to compression. No worries, I am not bothered in the slightest. 

Pop both of those into Photoshop, and scale the 5D II shot so it is the same image dimensions as the 7D. Stick the 5D II upscaled image in a new layer in the 7D image, and toggle it on and off. I think the difference between the two, and what I mean by "resolving power", will become quite clear then.

Wait a min I see what went wrong ... OK yeah you're right I only zoomed and it zoomed an already cropped image so it looks different. I will try the photoshop route.

135

EOS Bodies / Re: *UPDATE* A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]

« on: April 20, 2013, 11:00:06 AM »

Very well if you insist. Here is a side by side shot. one the left is the 7D unaltered image and on the right is the 5D II cropped to look like the 7D. No other adjustments or corrections were done in Lightroom. I took a screen dump and made a jpeg of it. I used a 135L @ f4 and ISO 100, 1/25s. A tripod was used to stabilize the camera and MF via live view mode was used to achieve optimal focus on the face on the Dumas book. This is how it looks without zooming in.