Messages

61

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Real iso's?

« on: May 28, 2013, 01:48:35 PM »

Based on Bill Claff's data, The canon 30D has quite low readind noise. Any camera after that the read noise has been at least doubled up, includind the 1D-X.  Why???  Is Canon is going backward on the read noise???

It is because you are comparing 12 bit to 14 bit files.

At Building Panoramics we shoot a lot of skys for our library and of all the Canon cameras we've used the 30D was by far the worst for noise, in fact worse than the 20D for some unknown reason.

With regard to Neuro's link, this confirms what I have found in practice. I could never see this '160 ISO is less noisy than 100' statement that's bandied about, but I do find 50 gives noiseless data due to it's 'overexposure pulled back' value.

Actually it was Privatebydesign's link. I can't find the practical link with Claff's data. So the 5D mk2 has the same read noise at ISO 640 as it does at 100 ? Yet shoot a sky at ISO 640a and it's full of noise whereas 100 is ( reasonably) clean. Likewise ISO 125 is similar to 100.

If you're exposing in total darkness with the lens cap on surely you are under exposing never mind how long you leave the shutter open. What about heat generated at these long 'exposures-that-aren't' ?

?

62

Technical Support / Re: Going medium format for studio work?

« on: May 28, 2013, 10:35:01 AM »

My issue with digital MF is that whilst with film there was a significant increase in quality, there was a relatively small increase in cost. Also 35mm film was only something like 22% of the area of 6 x 7 film.

With the latest digital we may have, under certain situation, a very subtle improvement in 'quality', but the difference in cost is huge, so there is no comparison with the quality uplift achieved with MF film, but with up to a 10X increase in cost, not to mention lack of flexibility; more important to some than others. Also when compared the  larger digital MF, FF is actually still 54% of the area.

I have a pal who shoots portrait work the whole time. His work is excellent and he used Hasselblad, but he shoots digital MF just because he wants to, rather than needs to.

If I was going to set up for studio work I think I would try a 1Dx matched with the best Canon portrait lenses and see how I got on. The reason I would try the 1Dx is that I think its tonal graduation is the best on FF, and give it a fighting chance against MF. I don't accept the 'printing big. issue on mp, a 1Dx would go as big as you'd need to go.

Then I'd buy a boat with what I'd saved.

63

1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx

« on: May 28, 2013, 03:49:54 AM »

1Dx 85f/1.2 L II, Shot @ f/5.6 & 1/160th ISO1250

Once again a subtle use of light to produce an atmospheric picture. I particularly like the way you've allowed the two people to lie on the extreme rear plane of focus, giving sharp foreground. I presume you've focused on the slab of meat or even the apples.

I'd be interested to know what time of day it was taken.

64

Canon General / Re: What's wrong with shooting at Small Raw size? (Output if for the web)

« on: May 27, 2013, 05:56:31 PM »

M and s RAW are really useful features for photographers who may shoot over 1000 frames from an event, any one of which may require post processing. When shooting very high numbers of frames file size ( and time ) become an issue.

However if you're not shooting hundreds of frames then unless your processing computer is really weak there's not much point.

You'll get lots of people on here saying you should only ever use your cameras full res, but they won't be shooting hundred upon hundred frames at one session, which by the sound of it, you're not either.

65

1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx

« on: May 27, 2013, 08:15:59 AM »

For you Edward.
It's cheetah day!

Wow sanj ! Have you been practising ?!

Now that picture doesn't need a sky  .  Really good. 

66

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF24-105mm f/4L IS USM

« on: May 27, 2013, 03:34:52 AM »

Here's another couple of shots with the 24-105. As with others find who use this lens, it's not one you would love, but inevitably so many of my pictures are taken with it.

Taken at 105mm, f4 in the last few minutes of sunlight. Once again IS comes to the rescue.

67

Animal Kingdom / Re: MY dog

« on: May 26, 2013, 06:08:34 PM »

My daughter with our family dog.

These images are straight from the camera jpegs. I didn't need to use the raw. Shot on the mkii with 24-105 @ 105 / f4

68

Lenses / Re: Focus and recompose related question

« on: May 26, 2013, 01:35:27 PM »

I know this is a little off topic, but I have always found the single plane sensitive AF points (as found on the 'outer' points of many SLRs)  quite beneficial. Over the years I have often found situations where the x type sensor can become confused, yet find a vertical line ( or horizontal depending on the AF point you've chosen) and the camera can nail focus.

So I'm quite happy that the 6D along with the 5D mk1 and mk2 has this type of outer sensors, and am quite happy to use them for accurate focus, and to avoid 'focus and re compose'. It just means you must choose the appropriate line to focus on.

69

Lenses / Re: 70-300L / 100-400L / Keep 70-200

« on: May 25, 2013, 11:24:39 AM »

Here's an interesting observation:  I shot an event a weekend ago and used over the course of several days: the 135L (and, at times, 135L + 1.4x II), 100L IS, Tamron 24-70VC, and the 70-300L.  I didn't even plan on using it, as I consider it too slow for indoor work.  But I was surprised to find that my sharpest images from the event were actually taken with the 70-300L.

This was taken from roughly 60 feet away, 300mm, wide open (f/5.6).  For this type of work, I find the result pretty stunning.  I've included a 100% crop (the first square crop is already reduced slightly to get the square crop for a portrait orientation shot).

I presume the 70-300 has beaten the 135 + 1.4x due to IS and greater magnification.

Anyway with lenses like this about at these functions I guess there's going to be a lot more male grooming required  before speaking

70

EOS Bodies / Re: New AF Technology Coming in July? [CR1]

« on: May 25, 2013, 07:39:33 AM »

Eye-control. That would be sick.

It also wouldn't be 'new technology'. Witness the EOS 3.

71

Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes

« on: May 25, 2013, 05:48:02 AM »

Our first picture of Conisbrough Castle. This one never made it commercially, but I thought it made quite a pleasing picture in black and white.

The castle is situated in South Yorkshire, England and was originally built from timber. This stone version was built in the 13th century.

72

Landscape / Re: Post Your Best Landscapes

« on: May 25, 2013, 03:54:51 AM »

@nWmR12; I like the tones in the first two. Strong contrast in the B&W without bring harsh, subtle colours in the second.

73

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon beats Nikon in accidental damage tests

« on: May 24, 2013, 01:24:16 AM »

It's a comparison not a scientific test... it would need to be repeated many more times...  I think the message you can take back is that the cameras can take a beating...  more than a lot of people realise!

Well the cameras may be able to take a beating in the sense they still function, but the AF units seem to be the weakest link. Drop a modern dslr onto anything but a soft surface and there's every chance your AF accuracy will suffer.

74

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 5D Mk3 Reliability

« on: May 23, 2013, 02:50:21 PM »

To be fair, I've had to remove the battery on my 5D2 at least once.
I'm sold. Thanks chaps
Do you think £1000 for a near mint body with about 6000 actuations is fair? Thinking of just doing a 'Buy It Now' and seeing what happens. A lot of the auctions seem to topping out at that, so it might be a nice easy buy for someone.


I'm in London if anybody on here is interested too. Comes with an aftermarket grip. 

Harry: you're right with the value on e bay UK. Mint mk2's with box are going for between £1020 and £1100. But my experience with e bay is things like this tend not to sell at 'top book price' if that's the price they are initially set at. I'd go for auction with plenty of close up photos of it.

75

Lenses / Re: Downgrading my equipment - looking for advice

« on: May 23, 2013, 02:14:59 PM »

Try a 6D, keep the 24-105, add 70-300L.  Simplified, lower weight, less to carry,change,etc

OK, hold my hand up; quirky humour humor often just doesn't come across as intended on the forum.

+1 to the 6D. It's a little gem, especially when not using large lenses. For shooting social events, concerts etc I'd choose one of those over a 1D Mkiii any day. It's light years ahead in low light, assuming you are referring to the APS, not the s version. Trouble is a 6D will be around twice as expensive as a used 1D Mkiii but cheaper than a 1Ds Mkiii.

All the Canon non L primes are pretty good optically. You'll generally get more chromatic aberration, inferior manual focus. Personally I would go for the 200 f2.8L over the 135L. It's much cheaper used and has more useful reach.