December 22, 2014, 03:48:00 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 - Famateur

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 21
136
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: AF problems with 70D and fast lenses
« on: February 19, 2014, 01:04:41 PM »
Thanks for the link. Anyone care to translate the gist of the article/video into English?  :P

I have a 70D and EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS, and I've noticed that focus is hit or miss via the viewfinder -- mostly miss. I've invested in FoCal and run through the calibration process, and each time it produces a different AFMA value for a given focal length and distance (e.g. running the calibration process several times in a row without changing any of the setup). The suggested AFMA values are usually anywhere from -1 to +2 or +3.

Calibration Info

1. Tripod on concrete basement floor at night.
2. Constant lights providing ~12ev.
3. Calibrations at distances of both 25x and 50x focal length
4. Calibrations for both 17MM and 55MM focal length

On one occasion, FoCal did not complete the calibration saying that the results were not consistent enough to generate an AFMA value, although the two or three calibrations I did after that (with identical setup) worked with "Good" results.

Unfortunately, I don't have another lens to test with right now, so I'm left wondering if it's the body or the lens. Live view is usually correctly focused, which is what pointed me to AFMA to begin with, but even after calibration, focusing through the viewfinder is unreliable enough that I'm mostly using Live View now so I don't miss the shots.

Is this likely a body or lens issue (or user error :) )? It's just frustrating when I focus on an eye (at shutter speeds well beyond 1/FL) and get a nice sharp eyebrow but blurry eye or even nothing sharp at all. Maybe I should test individual focus points?

Anyway, this is something I'm trying to get to the bottom of -- when I have the time. Any tips or info are welcome.

Cheers...

PS -- One other thought: while it's probably far less likely, is it possible that there's a slight misalignment of either the AF sensor or the LCD overlay in the viewfinder such that the focus point I see isn't really representing the location that the AF sensor is "seeing"? For example, what if the AF sensor really is seeing the eyebrow when the focus point in the viewfinder is over the iris? Just thinking out loud here...I should probably set aside an afternoon, channel my inner Neuroanatomist and do this in as structured and scientific a manner as possible...and maybe borrow another lens while I'm at it.

137
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 11:11:02 AM »
If true, and if it was released especially for the 7DII, is that more evidence that the 7DII will be aimed at videographers? Not being into video myself, is a 38MM full-frame equivalent field of view considered desirable for video? Obviously, the STM part is. Then again, there doesn't seem to be a rumor of IS with this lens, so maybe not?

138
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D II looks like its going to be a disappointment.
« on: February 13, 2014, 05:11:31 PM »
I'm going to wait and see what's finally announced, but if I had to make a guess, I'd say it's hogwash. The only thing separating these "specs" from the 70D are one more frame-per-second burst and a bit more weather sealing. Without an articulating screen or WiFi? Then it's back to about even with the 70D, or a bit behind. Doesn't seem likely, to me.

If there's any substance to the specs, my bet would be that it was from an early prototype from before the 70D release. I've always surmised that the 7DII was set to be released earlier, but there were problems/delays. They had to release the 70D, but pushing the 7DII to a higher level to differentiate has extended the delay we've observed even further. Just my take on it, anyway...

PS: Now I know to include a bogus weight in "leaked specs" if I want to hook a few more suckers... :)

139
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Sony A7R With Canon Glass
« on: January 29, 2014, 03:32:13 PM »
At this point Canon just needs to concede defeat and us the Sony sensors.

Given Sony's financial struggles (particularly the Moody's downgrade), I can imagine a scenario in which Sony sells off its imaging division in order to stay afloat in other areas (TVs, computers, phones, etc.). I wonder if Canon might consider buying Sony's imaging division and/or patents. That could be exciting. Although, the downside is that there would be less pressure on Canon to innovate, so we'd get the short-term gain of Sony's current sensors, but could that be at the expense of long-term innovation/competition?

It'll be interesting to see what happens. My guess is that Canon is always working on new/innovative sensor tech. Whether/when we see it, of course, depends on effectiveness of the tech, reliability, production capability, competition, market conditions, et cetera. Canon may move slowly, but I'd be very surprised if a significant jump in sensor performance doesn't come along in the next 1-3 years.
That Sony's consumer electronics  are not doing  so  well does not include Sony sensor division.
The Sony imaging division has 50% of the whole sensor market today, and Im not talking about few SLR sensors
Sony has 50% of  the whole sensor market = mobile phones,computing,surveillance plus  several other areas .

That's an excellent point relative to the sensor market. If I understand your point correctly, you're saying it might not make sense to sell off a division that is doing well in its sector. I'm curious, though, what proportion Sony's imaging division is to the rest of Sony and/or what that division is valued at, should it be shopped to other companies. Could the success of the sensor division make it more attractive to sell if the company needs an infusion of cash to stay afloat?

Obviously, I don't have all of Sony's financials in front of me, but it's interesting (to me, anyway) to contemplate the possibility of Sony selling off its sensor/imaging division, where Canon could be a potential buyer...

140
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Review: Sony A7R With Canon Glass
« on: January 28, 2014, 10:38:35 PM »
At this point Canon just needs to concede defeat and us the Sony sensors.

Given Sony's financial struggles (particularly the Moody's downgrade), I can imagine a scenario in which Sony sells off its imaging division in order to stay afloat in other areas (TVs, computers, phones, etc.). I wonder if Canon might consider buying Sony's imaging division and/or patents. That could be exciting. Although, the downside is that there would be less pressure on Canon to innovate, so we'd get the short-term gain of Sony's current sensors, but could that be at the expense of long-term innovation/competition?

It'll be interesting to see what happens. My guess is that Canon is always working on new/innovative sensor tech. Whether/when we see it, of course, depends on effectiveness of the tech, reliability, production capability, competition, market conditions, et cetera. Canon may move slowly, but I'd be very surprised if a significant jump in sensor performance doesn't come along in the next 1-3 years.

141
Animal Kingdom / Re: Sparrow Hawk vs. Dove
« on: January 17, 2014, 08:49:07 PM »
Great images. Would have been a pity to find your camera with a a 16-35mm lens and a drained battery ;)
Did you read my mind?  ;D ... my bro-in-law has lots of fruit trees in his backyard with full of fruit in Melbourne, Australia, and lots of birds come to pick on those fruit throughout the day. Anyway, during my vacation a couple of weeks ago, I stayed at his place for a few days. One day my bro-in-law calls me to the kitchen window (facing the backyard) to show a beautiful King Parakeet perched on one of the branches, providing for a fantastic photo opportunity. So, I ran and grabbed my camera bag from the bedroom, pull out the camera to find it mounted with a 16-35mm ... so I pull out the 70-200, unmount the 16-35, mount the 70-200, change the settings point it at the bird and the battery was totally drained, so I insert a freshly charged battery and the camera says "no card" inside ... by this time, I was getting really upset with myself, so I rush back again into the bedroom to pull out the CF & SD cards in the card reader (which I had planned on using to download the images to my laptop) ... I come back again to the kitchen window, with the CF card properly inserted into the camera, raise the camera to the bird who was still posing for me ... only to find the f@%@ing CF & the SD card full ... so I go back and get another CF & SD card, point the camera towards the bird, only to find it flying away ... I was so pi$$ed off with myself that morning. :-[
Good story :) Mine is a bit shorter, but same consequence. I got a distant tail picture of a running arctic fox who had been just outside my tent, feeding on the leftovers in me storm kitchen from the night before. That was the first time I had seen one in the wild and they are veeeery rare.

While my fox was a regular fox, and not an artic one that happen to walk past my parents in law´s house in Åsane, Bergen, Norway. They have lived there for more than 30 years, and never seen a fox. The night before I had been shooting pictures of the fjord with a tripod, f 16, and the in-built delayed shutter..... It still irritates me, and it is several years ago :)
This sort of thing happens to me many times (as recently as a week ago) ... trying to press the shutter button for a quick action photo, only to find that I had left the bloody camera on 10 second self-timer mode from the previous session >:(
Last weekend..... Just settling into my bird-blind in the yard and a pair of pine grosbeaks land on the feeder... check ISO, check shutter speed, check Fstop, and press shutter.... followed by ten seconds of flashing orange light and BEEP! BEEP! BEEP! as the birds flew away..

LOL! I wish I could say that never happened to me...today.  :P

142
Contests / Re: ViewBug Photo Contest Winner for November
« on: December 19, 2013, 11:26:41 AM »
Beautifully done -- and I agree on the natural feel of it. It's nice to see an image where the greens aren't pumped-up to unrealistically saturated levels (at least on my monitor).

I kinda like that the shape of the cave opening makes it look like an eye...

143
Software & Accessories / Re: Good idea to upgrade to LR5? Regrets?
« on: December 04, 2013, 11:46:14 AM »
FYI, there's a significant issue when upgrading from LR4 to 5.2, with any images where the spot removal tool was applied: http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lr_5_2_is_not_rendering_correctly_photos_with_spot_removal_applied_in_lr4

It's better in 5.3RC, but the behavior still isn't identical to LR3/4 - so depending on the particular image/edits applied, you might need to replace the previous spot edits.

I do really like the new Spot Removal and Radial Filter tools, though. For me, those alone are reason enough to upgrade, and aside from the hassles mentioned above, I haven't had any issues with 5.2/5.3RC.

I had issues with spot removal being treated differently between version 5 (my first installation) and 5.2. I think it had to do with introducing feathering for the spot removal tool in 5.2. All the spot removal I had done suddenly had feathered edges, requiring much of it to be redone. Thankfully, I had only been using Lightroom for a couple of weeks.

As far as performance goes, I'm on an ancient (six years old!) laptop and manage. I have to be careful not to have too many photos open at once, and the more brushes I use, the more it lags, but I'm getting by. Despite my computer's inadequate hardware, I'm quite happy with Lightroom and can't imagine what I would do without it.

By the way, when I jumped aboard the Lightroom bandwagon, it already had the radial filters and paintable spot removal tool. However, I use those two tools so often that if I had a version without them, I'd upgrade just for those two features.

I hope this was helpful...

PS - Here are my sucky hardware specs :):

HP Compaq nc8430 (circa 2007)
Windows 7 Ultimate x64 (Upgraded from Windows XP Pro)
Intel Core 2 Duo T7200 2.0Ghz
4GB RAM (Upgraded from 1GB)
7200RPM HDD (Upgraded from 5400RPM)
1680x1050 Display

It may be old and battle-worn, but with some hardware and OS updates, it has stayed relevant enough for me to use it as my primary work computer nearly every day for six years (including some graphic design, multimedia, et cetera). It even got me through the laptop display resolution drought where everything was offered with a miserable 1366x768 resolution (I love me some wide spreadsheet action  :P). Obviously, when I eventually replace this workhorse, I'll appreciate the huge jump in performance for things like Lightroom, but I'm doing okay as-is.

144
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Not Coming to North America
« on: December 03, 2013, 11:01:04 PM »
So I was looking on B&H for a Fuji equivalent of the 1DX. My search was unsuccessful...  ::)

I find it curious how worked-up people get about the future of Canon and its survival as a company based on a consumer product in a market that (currently) is very small -- all manufacturers combined.

It also seems that some have assumed that every new camera model released must be of significant advancement so as to justify everyone upgrading from the previous model, and that if it doesn't meet this requirement, the company must be asleep at the wheel or on the verge of collapse. Do we hear the same predictions of doom every time Disney releases a movie like Beverly Hills Chihuahua 3? Will Disney crash and burn because every movie isn't at the level of The Incredibles or can't compete with the latest Oscar candidate for Best Picture?

How easily we forget that each of us, individually, doesn't represent the entire market. If Canon makes product decisions that don't meet my needs (or wants), it's more likely that market conditions don't warrant it than that the company is inept in recognizing and then meeting the market's needs. The M2 is simply a refresh of a consumer product to keep it "current". It's intended as a first-time mirrorless purchase, not an upgrade from the first M. Apparently, Canon management concluded that it was not worthwhile to release this refresh in the North American market. I assume that is based on market and cost analysis and not ineptitude.

When I see the end zones of NFL football games lined with mirrorless Sony, Nikon and Fuji cameras in favor of the current crop (bad pun, sorry) of professional gear, maybe there will be cause for alarm. If it ever gets to that, though, I'm confident it still will be mostly filled with Canon gear.

[/soapbox]  :P

145
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Gets Official
« on: December 03, 2013, 03:12:10 PM »
I just wonder what is the purpose of rectangle with "EOS M2" on top of the camera (on left from hot-shoe, where "L" and "R" mics where on "EOS M")?

Is it something like "plastic cover for Wi-Fi antenna"?

At first, it looked like there's a USB symbol on it, so my guess would have been a flap to cover the USB port. I've never seen one on the top before, though, so on closer look, I think that's a focal plane symbol and the rectangle is just from assembly of that part of the body.

Any other guesses?

146
Look Canon, no view finder and no flash? F**k it, I'm going to have to buy my wife a Sony Nex 6. Damn it.

Why do you think I just bought a Fuji x100?  Canon is asleep at the wheel, and hopped up on Ambien and booze at the same time, while texting and driving.

It'll be fun to put these comments in a forum "time capsule" and then read them back in a few years. From the sound of them, Canon will be smoldering wreckage by then.

More than likely (in my opinion), Canon is making strategic, market-driven decisions that will help maintain its dominant position as an imaging solutions company. Such decisions will never please all segments of the market alike. It seems more probable to me that we're missing some key pieces of information that are driving Canon's product decisions than that management suddenly became drunk on profits and market share and are driving the company into the ground.

To those who think otherwise, you might consider A) Applying for a management position at Canon, or B) Buying stock in Nikon and Sony (should be a bargain right now). For the latter, you make your money on the "buy", right? Right?  ;)

147
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Specs Revealed?
« on: December 03, 2013, 11:05:07 AM »
I dunno about comparisons to an SL1 with size. When I compared them the SL1 in store with my EOS-M it was still noticeably smaller. Crucially the difference between pocket (albeit large/coat) and not.

True...and my M is a lot smaller than my 1D X.  But, add an EVF, popup flash, a rate button, etc., then compare it to next year's SL2 (the World's Even More Smallerest dSLR), and see how they measure up...

If it's smaller, maybe they'll call it the SL 3/4.  ;D

148
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Specs Revealed?
« on: December 03, 2013, 10:55:44 AM »
If this rumor is true, I think it's evidence of Canon beginning to make mirrorless the new point-and-shoot market.
Every single P&S that I can think of had a build in flash. The M has to have it to be considered a P&S replacement. The 90EX that came in the kit I got is not any more powerful then a build in flash, and it is a pain to attach whenever a flash is required. I had a hell of a time explaining that to my wife (the M was for her).
Excellent point. Even on a DSLR, I like having a built-in flash to use for fill for sunny/back-lit scenes and/or catch lights in the eyes. They'll eventually need to add a pop-up flash to the EOS M, in my opinion.

On a P&S, the flash is very close to the lens axis - rather than fill flash and catchlights, you get deer-in-headlights and red eye.  An M with an EVF and a popup flash...that's a 100D/SL1. Smaller is better!

In low light or at night, I would totally agree. That's when I pull out my 430EX II. For daylight fill (like someone sitting in shade or at the beach with the sun at their back) , I've been very pleased with the results from my G12's built-in flash.

By the way, it's a hoot seeing peoples' expressions when they see a 430EX II on a G12. :) It looks much more at home on my 70D.  :P

EDIT: Just thought I'd add that perhaps the reason for success with the built-in flash on my G12 is that the flash output is very easy to adjust. Press one button, then turn the dial...

149
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS M2 Specs Revealed?
« on: December 02, 2013, 05:04:17 PM »
If this rumor is true, I think it's evidence of Canon beginning to make mirrorless the new point-and-shoot market.

As camera phones devour the point-and-shoot market, Canon needs a new consumer-level bread-and-butter line that's good enough to be a clear advantage over camera phones but low enough in feature set to avoid cannibalizing the DSLR market. It wouldn't surprise me if Canon introduced several slightly different flavors of the the consumer-level M. For the consumer market, I doubt any of them have any clue which generation of sensor is in the camera, and they probably don't care. If it's cheap enough and has nifty enough features and is easy to use, the consumer market will be happy.

Obviously, neither the current M nor the M of this rumor represent a serious attempt by Canon to show the world how the ultimate mirrorless body should be done. If/when Canon decides to make such a statement, I'm confident it will be nothing less than spectacular. Meanwhile, we can all speculate on what will motivate Canon to do it...oh, and take some pictures between forum posts. :)

Every single P&S that I can think of had a build in flash. The M has to have it to be considered a P&S replacement. The 90EX that came in the kit I got is not any more powerful then a build in flash, and it is a pain to attach whenever a flash is required. I had a hell of a time explaining that to my wife (the M was for her).

Excellent point. Even on a DSLR, I like having a built-in flash to use for fill for sunny/back-lit scenes and/or catch lights in the eyes. They'll eventually need to add a pop-up flash to the EOS M, in my opinion.

150
Pricewatch Deals / Re: 3 Hour Deal: Adobe Lightroom 5 for $84 via B&H
« on: December 02, 2013, 04:02:50 PM »
Wow! And I thought I got it for a steal at $99 a few months ago. Crap. At $59.99, It's such a low price that I'm tempted to get it -- even as a gift or maybe to have a license for another computer. Nah -- I should probably use the money to buy more RAM so I can run the copy I have with less lag...  :P

I wonder if this means it's the last non-subscription version of Lightroom.  :-\

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 21