Messages

481

Software & Accessories / Re: Your Personal 7-Point System

« on: December 09, 2011, 07:50:48 PM »

... Anyway, what does DPP stand for?  And is it better to use for my RAW images than what I currently use (Adobe Camera Raw in CS5 & Lightroom 3.5)?
Thanks

Didn't see this answered yet so...
DPP = Digital Photo Professional - Canon's included RAW image editor.  Is it better?  I doubt anyone would say yes.  I've only used LR and DPP.

482

Software & Accessories / Re: Your Personal 7-Point System

« on: December 09, 2011, 05:34:37 PM »

I second "unfocused's comments & request (good grief 6 more posts since I started typing this).  I too have been reading the "earth shatteringly" post with great interest especially since I have 7D and it is my first digital SLR (in other words, I still have lots to learn in the digital world).  Some of the questions which have been going through my mind are how do you get the sharpest and highest IQ images possible from your gear.  I'm more interested in from the gear as opposed to PP.  (PP is a whole other topic.)

For example, I always shoot in (large) RAW, lowest ISO possible, and the optimum aperture setting.  My Picture Style is set to standard and usually with highest sharpening.   I do a great deal of exposure bracketing and when appropriate I use IS.  I assuming I am doing everything correct to get the sharpest and highest IQ but I'm always interested in others expertise and experience.  I do use LR and DPP but I'm a rookie at PPing.

1.  One question that pops into my mind from time to time, based on things I read, is what size of image will give you the highest IQ.  I assume it is large RAW or large superfine if you shoot JPEG.  Is this true?  If so, why would you use a lower image size and normal as opposed to fine (JPEG) aside from conserving CF and disk space, or maybe maximize your burst buffer?

2.  From jrista's post "The 7D, unlike other canon DSLR's, has ISO 80 as a base, making ISO 160, 320, 640, 1250, and 2500 ideal."   I've never heard of this, this is very interesting.  Can someone confirm if this is theory or fact?

As always I appreciate you sharing your experience, expertise and time helping others.

BTW, I do not have any IQ issues (that I know of) with my 7D.

483

Software & Accessories / Re: Let's talk about RAW software

« on: December 06, 2011, 11:09:59 AM »

I mostly use DPP only to check IQ at the AF point position(s)--I love that feature.

It would be great if it really did that.  Unfortunately, it simply displays the AF points centred in the frame, with the active one(s) in red.  So if you lock focus, recompose and shoot, the AF points are in the wrong position.

Excellent point, I'll have to keep that in mind so I don't mislead myself

484

Software & Accessories / Re: recommend me a backpack

« on: December 05, 2011, 09:28:27 PM »

Check out Tenba's backpacks.   Lots of models and sizes. Good website with lots of images and videos.
http://www.tenba.com/Categories/Backpacks.aspx

I have the Shootout:  Daypack
http://www.tenba.com/products/Shootout--Daypack.aspx

It's not a "perfect" backpack but it's close--not sure if a "perfect" backpack exists.   

485

Software & Accessories / Re: Let's talk about RAW software

« on: December 05, 2011, 09:20:05 PM »

At only the third posting in this thread, and I'm already going to (sorta) hijack it--but I'm at least faithful to the title.  Sorry!   

... I have noticed that sometimes when I open a RAW image in Lightroom that it briefly (maybe a half second) appears one way and then...ummm...hard to describe, but changes and often seems to darken.  Is this ACR applying some sort of logic?  Is there a way to see it without those "changes"?  Often the .5 second glimpse looks better to me than the "final" image (with what little I can see in a half second.)  But whatever the case, I feel like I am not truly seeing the RAW image.  Thoughts/recommendations?

Sorry don't mean to add to the "hijack" maybe its time for new thread.  I too see this same condition in LR as described by thepancakeman above. 

Response from JR:  Did you check if in Lightroom you are using a preset when importing your photo such that every photo you import are "processed" a certain way (like reduce exposure by 1/3 stops?

The other thing I can think of is the settings for the preview of the pictures.  Check in your File/Edit/Catalog Settings/File Handling menu and check the quality of your image preview, this could also explane the sudden change.  I use 1440 pixels for my preview and medium quality settings...

I still consider myself a rookie with LR but I'm not aware of any preset or others settings that I have created that might cause this.  There was a minor update that I applied the other day and it seems like this began after that--can't be sure though.  (I'm out of town at the moment so I can't check what version I'm running--it's 3 something).

Hopefully someone can verify this strange behavior.


Regarding the actual subject of this thread, I have only used the RAW editors in DPP and LR.  Both have their pros and cons.  I mostly use DPP only to check IQ at the AF point position(s)--I love that feature.

486

Australia / Re: Are these USA Canon rebates really worth it?

« on: December 05, 2011, 12:17:50 PM »

By the way, if anyone needs a rationalization for buying Canon lenses, this is a fun article:
http://www.canonpricewatch.com/canon-lenses-better-stocks/

+ 1 for Canon Price Watch.com.  I visit it almost as frequent as CR.

487

Australia / Re: Are these USA Canon rebates really worth it?

« on: December 05, 2011, 09:51:02 AM »

...Right now is the best time to load up on Canon lenses.  I have not seen price as attractive as from B&H Photo Video for example in the past year.... 

I mean, I got the 70-200 f2.8L IS II and the 35 f1.4L for a total rebate (both lenses) of ~$600-$700 compared to their prices during the summer....

I know what you mean, I just spent most of my "photography allocated" money on a 16-35 and now I'm seriously considering the 35 1.4 before the rebate ends.

My biggest concern is Canon might be right around the corner to update this lens since its quite old (1998).  I wish they would update the optics and add weather sealing.  I need a crystal ball.  Well, I've got till the 7th to decide.

488

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D for 1374.64

« on: December 05, 2011, 09:39:30 AM »

RC:

I have a 50/1.4 and 70-200/2.8 IS mark I.
looking for a good wide-angle. 16-35 is the obvious choice... how do you like your lens?
I cant decide between a zoom wide angle or go with Prime. mainly I take pictures of my kids. 50mm is awesome indoor.. need something little wider.

Just got my 16-35  a few days before Thanksgiving.  The only shooting I've done so far is some test shots in my backyard.  Got a string of days off starting this weekend so I'm going to do some serious shooting. 

I'm assuming you have young kids which actually enjoy being photographed (unlike my teenagers).  I would look at the 17-55 and of course the 16-35.  Check out my post http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,1217.15.html as to why I chose the 16-35 over the 17-55.  Maybe  the 35 prime is wide enough.  Great rebates going on right now.

My other lens are 100 2.8 Macro L IS and the 70-200 F4 L IS.  My shopping list is a 24-105, 35 1.4 and a 50.  I plan to use the 35 and 50 for portrait shooting on my crop body.  How do you like your 50 1.4?  The 50s drive me crazy.  I wish Canon would improve the the build of the 1.4 and add Ring USM or fix some of the optics of the 1.2.  I read and read about these lens and I don't know which I would choose.  I'm willing  to save up and fork out the big bucks if a lens is really worth it.

489

Lenses / Re: Dust on EFS 17-55 f/2.8

« on: December 05, 2011, 08:53:27 AM »

... however unless you'r taking the lens to the sahara's or shooting in the middle of a dust storm, I dont see many situations in which this lens would be rendered useless.

Just bought my 16-35 2.8 L a couple of weeks ago.  I spent a considerable amount of time deciding between this lens and the 17-55.  My question was even posted here on another thread.  (BTW, those who posted comments about the dust and such I appreciated  your comments and expertise very much!)   I was going to rent the 17-55 but ended up not doing so, so I have no hands on experience with this lens.  That being said, these are the reasons I went with the 16-35:

• I do live in the southwest where we have a very high level of particulates pretty much year around and I do a lot of outdoor shooting and in those dusty conditions.  This lens would be exposed to much harsher conditions than many so this was a concern.  (US residents might recall the news coverage this last summer with our spectacular dust storms.)
• I also like to shoot in wet weather such as our summer monsoon season.  So weather sealing is very important.
• I agree with others that this lens is quite pricey for not being weather sealed.  For another $600 I felt the 16-35 was a better value.  Besides I'd have to buy a hood an case if I went with the 17-55. (Of course I spent $105 on a filter for the 16-35 to complete the weather sealing so I guess that is almost a wash.)
• Much better build quality.
• And last and least, it will be compatible with my 5D3 when I get one.

I'm happy with my purchase and if I was to do it again I'd still go with the 16-35.  Of course if funds was not an issue, I 'd order the 17-55 today and enjoy a very sharp lens on my 7D.

490

Animal Kingdom / Re: Birds!

« on: December 04, 2011, 06:26:54 PM »

Very nice!  I like #2 best.  What were the exposure settings for #2?

491

EOS Bodies / Re: 7D for 1374.64

« on: December 04, 2011, 04:45:52 PM »

Yes, great price.  7D owner myself, paid $1,525 fall of 2010 for mine from Amazon.  What lens you getting or do you already have lens?

BTW, if you sign up for an Amazon CC, you should get a discount on top of that plus points from your purchase.  I just bought the 16-35 2.8L and had enough points to get a $105  B&W UV filter for free.

492

United States / Re: Prime lenses you currently own or on your wishlist.

« on: December 02, 2011, 09:25:08 PM »

Currently I own only 1 prime:

100 Macro 2.8 L IS - obviously for macro work and I'll use it for tight portrait when I get a FF.  I'm amazed at how sharp this lens is.


My current wish shopping list in order:

1.  24-105 f4 L - need to get this zoom first to compliment my 16-35 so I have a wider focal range
2.  35 1.4 L - Excellent "normal" lens for my 7D.  Plan to use it for portrait (full body, group).  Besides, I need a fast low-light lens.  However, I'm dragging my feet.  This is an old lens (1998) which needs updated optics (soft edges wide open), plus weather sealing.  I'm hoping this updated in 2012
3.  50 1.4 or 1.2 L - need to do more research -  for tighter portraits.  This one is driving me nuts.  Would like the 1.2 for build, speed, and bokeh but I can't ignore all the negative comments for such a high price.
4.  Once I get a FF (5D3), I plan to get 85 f1.?
5.  TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II - I love architectural photography

493

Landscape / Re: Some new works.

« on: December 02, 2011, 09:34:42 AM »

Wow, awesome shots!!  Like #1 best.   

494

Software & Accessories / Need some clarification on LowePro lens cases

« on: November 30, 2011, 10:09:43 PM »

I’m putting together a walk-around setup for 1 body and two lens that will be more comfortable than my small Tenba shoulder bag (which does not work very well when walking around for several hours).

My walk-around gear:
7D
16-35 2.8 L
24-105 F4 L (don’t own this yet but 95% sure this will be my next lens)

Been looking at several top loader bags and I like the LowePro Toploader Pro 70 AW for these medium lens.  For those times when I want to carry a second lens (24-105 in addition to the 16-35) I need a good lens case such as the LowePro Lens Case.  My goal is to find a single lens case which will fit each lens (separately of course) without being too loose or too tight.  This should not be a problem since these two lens are almost the same size:

16-35 – measures  88.5mm x 111.6mm
24-104 –measures  83.5mm x 107mm

Using LowePro’s online bag finder, searching by lens model, it recommended the following lens cases:

16-35 – 9x13 cm case
24-104 – 11x11 cm case

I was surprised that LowePro recommended two very different cases so I searched by lens dimension, the results remained the same.  Looking at some online reviews (Amazon), I found some contradiction to what LowePro recommends as opposed to user’s findings.  One more variable is the hood.  Are these cases sized to hold the lens hood with lens?  I could not verify this.  So what seem like a very simple task, run the bag finder tool, pick the case, then order that case  has turned into a bit of  confusion. 

So my question is:   Can anyone out there provide some clarification on these (or other) lens cases for these two lens and whether or not the case will hold the lens hood.

Thank you all!

495

Site Information / Re: Password recovery issue

« on: November 30, 2011, 09:35:01 AM »

Had the same problem while on the road with my tablet.  Used the recovery process (multiple times) but received no email.  Had to wait until I got home to look up my p/w.

As far as I can tell the p/w recovery function for this site is broken.