March 02, 2015, 02:13:40 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 - johnf3f

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26
Canon General / Re: TESTING CANON EOS-5DS by : CPN.
« on: February 28, 2015, 05:15:48 PM »
Not the camera for me but I think there will be a lot of people who are going to be very impressed with this new beastie! The studio, landscape boys and girls are going to be looking very hard at this new toy!

Canon General / Re: RIP Leonard Nimoy
« on: February 28, 2015, 05:10:04 PM »
Leonard did "Live Long and Prosper" but no one lives forever except, perhaps, in our memories.
He will be remembered long after we have gone - RIP to a man who has touched all out lives.

Canon General / Re: Spartans, What is your profession?
« on: February 28, 2015, 05:02:42 PM »
I am an ex banker. No not one of the rich ones!
I was just a clerk and was made redundant in Sept 2013 at 53 years old. However as I was on the "Old" pension scheme this was the best career move I ever made!
I now have lots of time to pursue my numerous hobbies, especially photography, but am now having to be careful with GAS! I do need to get my priorities sorted out as on Monday I am getting a newer car and it is going to cost MORE than my long lens! I must be ill spending silly money on transport when there are lovely big white lenses out there!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1Dx replacement speculations.
« on: February 26, 2015, 04:11:01 PM »
For the 1DX Mk2 I would like a price and weight reduction - I don't think either would happen!
I am quite happy with the MP count, though a little more might be nice so long as there were no compromises.
I am sure many would welcome more DR, personally I am not that bothered as it has yet to be an issue, but more is still better.
Improved video? Don't even know how to turn it on and can't be bothered to find out how.
More FPS? No thanks as mine is set to 10 fps = plenty.
Overall, except for it's price and weight, I can find no significant limitations in my 1DX - but then I thought that about my 1D4! I am sure the next incarnation will give us better performance that will become "Essential" once we have tried it.

Here's what I've thought about getting for this type of situation (but haven't bought, yet):

That looks a bit like a home made rig that I made to carry my 100-400 when I had it. I am currently looking at a more substantial version of my Mk1 using a redundant Think Tank backpack strap and a 4 inch Arca clamp for my 800 F5.6 or 300 F2.8.
The principle is great and works well but I have yet to try anything with a Big White. A local photographer uses something similar with his 500 Mk2 and walks for miles with it, I think his rig is home made as well but I am not certain.

Lenses / Re: understanding "fastness"
« on: February 22, 2015, 04:57:04 PM »
Interesting thread that explains what I had observed in the past but had no explanation for. The differences that I noted were less but still there.

Lenses / Re: Please give me an advice for an prime lens 300/400mm
« on: February 20, 2015, 06:06:29 PM »
I would echo "Vern's" comments, though my personal combination is a 1DX + 300 F2.8 L IS Mk1 and an 800 F5.6 L IS.
The Canon 300 F2.8 (any version) is simply a superb lens and takes extenders VERY well. If you can carry/afford a longer lens then that is a better solution. However if you need mobility then the 500+ mm lenses start getting in the way - this is where the 300 F2.8 scores.
The 400DO Mk2 is still a bit new on the market. I have tried a few of the Mk1 versions with mixed results. They varied from barely adequate to 2 of the sharpest lenses that I have ever used! The 400DO Mk2 is looking very interesting but I think we should give it a little longer to prove itself before making specific recommendations.
Combining reach and mobility is always difficult so you need to work out exactly what you need and then decide on an appropriate lens.

Canon General / Re: Lost half of my Canon DSLR
« on: February 17, 2015, 03:40:47 PM »
That is bad news. Having had my home invaded 4 times I sympathize. Luckily, for me, they never got much but it is scary nonetheless!
Don't dwell on it, get what you can from the insurance then just get on with your life. Don't let the Scroats who did this get you down! If you do then they have won.

Lenses / Re: Rear Gelatin Filter Questions
« on: February 11, 2015, 05:09:55 PM »
I believe that you are supposed to cut them out yourself from larger sheets. For reference the guidelines on my 17-40 are 31mm square, hope this is of help.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Coincidence or?? MP/SEC
« on: February 11, 2015, 05:04:55 PM »
Not quite certain what you are getting at.
The 1DX uses 3 processors (2 x Digic 5+ and 1 Digic 4) as opposed to 2 Digig 6 in the 5DS so I would expect there to be differences.
The quoted burst depth on the 5DS is 14 RAW files, with my 1DX (at 10 fps) I get 50+ RAW files before things slow down - perhaps this is the difference?

Canon General / Re: dpreview: Canon not listed in "Best product for 2014"
« on: February 06, 2015, 06:08:13 PM »
Sorry dilbert but I don't understand what you are trying to achieve with some/many of your posts.
You often post useful and insightful advice/information and then come up with complete twoddle like this!
Please don't take this the wrong way but do you think that you may suffer from an internet version of Tourette syndrome?
I am not being flippant, I am just concerned.

Lenses / Re: CPN: David Noton on the new EF11-24mm lens
« on: February 06, 2015, 05:56:57 PM »
Looks like a VERY interesting lens - but I shudder to think what it may cost!

Lenses / Re: Best birding/wildlife combo?
« on: February 06, 2015, 05:54:59 PM »
Just a thought but have you considered selling your crop camera and getting a used Canon 300 F2.8? Much as I loved my Canon 300 F4 it is not the lens that the F2.8 is so the 300 F4 could go as well to help with costs. You will loose a bit on the minimum focus distance and gain a bit of weight but I can assure you that it is worth it! I went through a similar dilemma but I am really happy that I went to the 300 F2.8 and Full Frame.
This is a personal view, but I have yet to find a crop sensor camera that I am happy with for wildlife (with the exception of the 1D4). True with a full frame camera you do loose apparent reach but (with cropping) the loss is less than the crop factor would suggest - though it is still there. Against that is the fact that your 5D3 will operate at ISOs that will allow you to actually get the shot!
For reference my "walkabout setup" is a Canon 1DX + Canon 300 F2.8 L IS + 1.4 Mk2 and 2 x Mk3 extenders - the 2 x Mk3 works surprisingly well on the F2.8 and is passable on the 300 F4.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon Plays to the Base
« on: February 06, 2015, 05:20:35 PM »
I read Thom's post, frankly I think he may have been skipping some of his medication!
However if mirror-less suits your needs then go for it! I have tried a few and can find no practical use for them so far - but if they suit you then fine.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: POLL: Do you need 1/8000s shutter speed?
« on: February 06, 2015, 05:09:29 PM »
The original 1D managed 1/16000 sec according to DP review:

If they could do that back then why can't they do it now? Would it be used often? I doubt it but on a "Do it All" camera like the 1DX  I think this sort of facility should be available. After all there are some (me?) who fancy the idea of freezing insect wings, or at least getting close!

Because the shutter curtains are traveling at the same speed, the 1D curtains had less far to travel than the 1DX curtains.

And the 1/500 sync is due to the fact that the 1D had a CCD sensor so had an electronic second curtain.

If you want to freeze insect wings do it now with equally short, and shorter, flash duration speeds.

As mentioned, it's a 1.3 crop camera.  But no 1.3 crop cameras after that could.  But can we see some of your 1/8000 second images with motion blurred insect wings?   And how much light do you plan to dump on the insect?  I shoot with a f2.8 and have to use ISO 400-800 to get 1/8000 sec exposures in full sunlight.  Are you sure you won't light you insects on fire?

I've considered getting a 1D just to shoot 1/16000 sports photos, they are $100-300 on eBay.  Still I think I'd shoot 2-3 good ones and then stick it in the closet.

Not quite sure that I have properly interpreted your post, however my point was that "it would be nice to have" and that they could do it in the past. Also that, in their flagship models, manufacturers should incorporate  everything they can. Maybe you won't need some of the features - I certainly don't, I haven't even looked at the manual to find out how to turn on the video function as life is too short!
Would I like higher available shutter speeds - yes. It is no biggie but it might be handy/interesting occasionally. There are lots of other things I would like as well such as 6 ISO etc..etc.. The shutter speed thing is something that we know they can and have done.
Incidentally if you look at a slow motion sequence of Canon's shutters working one can see that (at high shutter speeds) the exposure is effectively a slit between the shutter blades that passes over the sensor. Therefore the exposure speed is determined by the speed of the blades and the size of the slit so sensor/film size is not important.
This is not a new idea (see Leica focal plane shutters) or the fixed shutters (slits) that RAF cameras used in the 1940s producing the characteristic strip images that my father's squadron (RAF 225 Sqdn) used to shoot in 1942/3.
There may well be issues, such as durability or Auto Focus, which make such high shutter speeds impractical but if this is not the case then I would like to have it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26