March 03, 2015, 09:58:27 PM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10
61
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Poor video quality or normal?
« Last post by Tinky on Today at 05:03:21 PM »


2. Are there any settings or players (I am using VLC on Windows) who I can calibrate it to get a better result?


Do you know a good editing software for Windows which is not too expensive and can good work and is compatible with the .mov-files, so that I can get a better result than now?
Which editing-codec should I choose (Motion JPEG and .avi like from the Canon ZoomBrowser EX where I can export the .mov files to this)?

A question regarding moiré. Do you know if there is a trick or filter or something I can do in post that the metallic brown (bronze) "moiré-color" can be removed (on water or stairs)?


Hi Julia

I'm on a mac.  H264 (the cameras recording format) plays nice with Quicktime, handily, Quicktime is also the backbone suite of codecs for any editing app.  I can only recommend installing Quicktime 7 and paying the extra $20 for the pro license to get better export options, such as still image from video. 

There may well be a better way of doing it on a PC, I just wouldn't know it having not looked at a PC since XP...

Similarly, there are few cross platform editing suites.  I last used Pinnacle version 10, which was a gift for DVD authoring, I found it creatively limiting for editing.

I do use Premiere, and have an old version of Elements on my Mac (v9) which came bundled with Photoshop Elements.  It's an ok interface, you have the choice between automation and manual control.  It will also use Quicktime Player if the right bits are installed in the background.  The current version may well be 64bit (I would recommend this for the reduction in rendering speed -32 bit can only use 2.5gb of RAM- assuming your OS and PC are also running 64bit)

A lot of 'moire' is actually caused at the editing end, make sure everything is set the same as your camera, that is frame rate and progressive scan.  Some apps open footage on an interlaced timeline unless you specify otherwise.  This causes combing which can look like moire.

There are a couple of tricks to use too, if the moire is mildly distracting then I find .5-.75 pixel gaussian blur filter over the offending shots can bat away many moire issues.  If it persists you may need to garbage matte a stronger filter over the offending area.

There are companies that make insert filters that go into the 'throat' of the camera.  I don't think there would be enough space in an M.  You could always resort to the early days of DV trick of streching some denier tights over an old filter, used to work great on the very early vx1000s when jaggies and moire were truely horrific.

Shooting technique can help, usuing ND filters to force a wider aperture so throwing offending areas out of focus, avoiding tight brick and tiles where possible.

In the camera menu there is a sharpness adjustment (within picture styles) this will affect your JPEGs and your video, but not your RAWs.  Turn the sharpening down a notch if you are having particular issues (although I find the M pretty good in this regard - any camera has the potential, you just need a subject with the right pitch)
62
Lighting / Re: Diffuser for Canon 600ex for event
« Last post by RLPhoto on Today at 05:00:32 PM »
I second the Large Rogue Flashbender and the option to take the speedlite off camera. If you can get some help, A speedlite+umbrella on a mono-pod w/ an assistant moving it quickly through the event will be a life-saver if everything is black.
63
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D MKII
« Last post by jeffa4444 on Today at 04:58:09 PM »
Conservative or not after the Axis purchase of $ 2.8bn Canon still have cash reserves of $ 4.25bn so they are clearly doing something right but equally they need to remember once Nikon was king of the pile and they took their place it could equally be taken from Canon the old saying goes "Innovate or die". 
64
Short answer: No

In studio and on location under tightly controlled conditions I can see good results but if I am shooting handheld there is no advantage over my 10D.
Most of my work is handheld. Tele lenses, 800 odd ISO, f5.6, 1/500. I will not see ANY improvement? :( And why is this so? My first camera was 5d2. Now I am using 5d3 and 1dc - they all have similar mpixs. I do not have any experience with significant higher or lower mpixs. So do explain your theory. Pls.
I have not seen any controlled test of the new 5DS / 5DSr but I suppose it will not show real advantage over the sharpness of 1DX, while above ISO1600.

On the other hand, I hope that we will see a very noticeable improvement over 1DX, when in ISO100.

Time will tell.
65
Lenses / Re: TC generation / lens matching
« Last post by Mt Spokane Photography on Today at 04:55:42 PM »
A TC magnifies and flaws in the image imparted by the lens.  The 1.4X TC I ans 1.4X TC II are optically the same, while the ver III does have less distortions added.

I've found that the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS does take a TC pretty well when compared to the IS ver I lens.  However a 2X TC is noticeably worse.  It all depends on your tolerance for magnified flaws.  Most prints won't show any difference.

Sorry Mt. could you clarify...  do you mean non-iS or did you mean isii compared to ISv1?  Do you have any images you could show of non-is with & without TC?

A TYPO, I don't know what happened to the NON IS I intended to insert.

The NON IS version is really excellent, and overlooked by many.
66
Lenses / Re: Next L Lens From Canon Will be a Prime [CR2]
« Last post by ahsanford on Today at 04:53:32 PM »
As for the 50 I agree. It would be tough if the new one is only f/2, kind of a step back. And I agree that I would probably pass on it (despite how bad Canon needs a decent, consumer level 50) if it was that slow. With how good optics/designs are getting, one of last big advantages primes have over zooms is their (more often then not) faster speeds. That is why I have not understood the new 24mm and 28mm, them only being f/2.8.

But the prior non-L 24 and 28 primes were f/2.8 as well -- Canon simply modernized those prior designs. 

I have the 28 f/2.8 IS and I am truly fond of it.  It's such a sweet spot of IQ, features and size/weight.  It's a perfect walkaround on my 5D3, IMHO.  Unless you are shooting a lot of astro or environmental portraiture, I'm hard pressed to think of a need for f/2 or faster in those focal lengths. 

- A
67
A real, once-in-a-lifetime shot.

Well done!
68
60W are  equivalent to incandescent.
Going outdoors- I'm worried if I will have enough time to do calibration As I live in Middle East and Sunrise and Sunset is much  shorter here than in other part of the world
I saw on DP AFMA tips where Neuroanatomist was using 3 lamps each 150W  for the LensAlign MkII or the DataColor   SpyderLensCal . I cannot find lamps  which are able to accept more powerful bulb.
How about 500W

http://www.aliexpress.com/item/Iodine-tungsten-lamp-holder-lawn-lights-spotlights-solar-lamp-outdoor-300-500w/1437767284.html

500 might do it, but be sure to get a 5500K bulb.

I have a Tota light that is 750 watts and heats up the room as well as giving out a lot of light.  The color corrected bulbs were expensive.

I just bought two inexpensive 32 watt LED work lights to try for photography.  They were rated at 2000 lumens.   I put them with two 85 watt CFL bulbs that put out 4250 lumens each, but the light output of the two alone is marginal.  I just installed them, and have yet to test them for actual photography.

They were on sale for $35 each.  They will at least make fill lights to ease shadows.

2000 lumens is about equivalent to a 200 watt incandescent lamp.

http://www.amazon.com/Snap-On-Work-Light-LED/dp/B00H5GRL3Q

You might also check out the large CFL bulbs, They come from china and are cheap.  They need a light modifier or reflector, or at least, put them sideways to the subject.  Pointing them at the subject without a reflector won't work.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0019HZQPM/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1
69
Lenses / Re: Next L Lens From Canon Will be a Prime [CR2]
« Last post by Luds34 on Today at 04:46:47 PM »
As this is not a 50mm IS refresh rumor (which will undoubtedly not be an L lens), if there was a new L lens on offer, I'd guess the one most in need of a refresh would be:

35mm   f/1.4L - 17 years old
135mm f/2L - 19 years old

Those aren't the oldest L primes, but they are a strong combination of old and in high demand.  My money would be on one of those.

- A

Is the 135mm in need of an update? I haven't heard anything put praise for that lens.

Crudely, there are three camps with the 135L:

  • The lens is stellar and does not need modifying.
  • The glass is fine but IS would be a great add.
  • Sony has a 135 f/1.8 and we don't.  Also: Waaaaaah.  (My rebuttal?  Our autofocus works.)

And deep down, as legendary as lenses like the 135L and 200 F/2L IS have been, old is old:  there's always room to improve resolution for higher resolving sensors, reduce flare, reduce distortion, reduce chromatic aberration, reduce weight, improve weathersealing, offer or improve the IS, etc.

The bigger question is whether those improvements are worth putting off my future non-L 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM.  And the answer is no.  Gimme my 50, dammit.

- A

I like the idea of a 135mm F/1.8L IS. Then I'd have no want for a 70-200II. Even a 50mm 1.4 update with Ring USM will cause money to part from my wallet and no F/2 lens will do for me. A f/2 50mm will only confirm a purchase for the Sigma A 50mm.

A 135 f/1.8 with IS would be one heck of a "I want" lens as well (Isn't this a rumored Sigma Art?). My worry would/will be the price if/when they refresh this lens.

As for the 50 I agree. It would be tough if the new one is only f/2, kind of a step back. And I agree that I would probably pass on it (despite how bad Canon needs a decent, consumer level 50) if it was that slow. With how good optics/designs are getting, one of last big advantages primes have over zooms is their (more often then not) faster speeds. That is why I have not understood the new 24mm and 28mm, them only being f/2.8. 
70
Canon General / Re: 5Ds R Moire and Bird Feathers
« Last post by mackguyver on Today at 04:46:14 PM »
Yes, I have seen moire with my 5DIII + 300 f/2.8 II IS combination a handful of times.  Not enough to freak out and DxO's moire tool seemed to work well on it, but I'm in a wait & see mode on this one.  It could be a much bigger issue with this body.  Besides, after seeing the price drops on the 7DII, it doesn't seem to make much sense to be an early adopter for bodies these days...

I'll see if I can find an example - I know one was a great blue heron, but will have to do some digging and pull up the RAW file to show you guys.
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10