5D MK III Images

[revup67]

taken at Holy Jim Falls, 6-1-12, southern California.  F10, 18mm, ISO 100.  Canon 5D Mark III and Canon 16-35
USM L II.


Holy Jim Waterfalls June 2012 by Revup67, on Flickr

[revup67]

Graduation 2012 - Taken on 6-2-12 with the Canon 5D Mark III & Canon 50mm 1.4 USM @ 1/320, F2.2, ISO 100, hand held, exposure 0.00. no flash, 6:15pm, AWB.  Slight post processing (decrease) on Red tones.  The girl's skin tone was perfect however the male had a bit of reddish skin color (natural) so dropped it down a notch.   Converted from RAW to JPG then to JPG resize 1920x1280.

The girl's hair appeared fuzzy on first post.  Turns out it was the 1920 x 1280 file size.  This then is a 1024 from flickr.  Click image for larger file (1920x1280)


Matt   Chelsey by Revup67, on Flickr

[96Brigadier]

HDR processed through Photomatix 4.2 using the Raw files, 7 bracketed shots from -4 to +4.  I didn't do any tweaking in Photomatix, just took one of the presets ("Photography" if I remember right).  Shot with a 24-70, 24mm ISO 100.  I also took the same shot with the in-camera HDR mode which produced a shot that was significantly greener.  I'm usually pretty happy with how the 5D3 HDR mode performs, in this case Photomatix gave me a more realistic shot.

[revup67]

I didn't do any tweaking in Photomatix, just took one of the presets ("Photography" if I remember right)

This is a fine program especially with the improved speed over the previous version 3.x.  I've been experimenting with tweaking some of the default presets and have gotten much better results.  I initially kept choosing the Photographic preset as well until I noticed the shadowed areas were much darker than the original and in fact I was losing DR.  I reverted back to Default or Enhanced.  Tweaked those some and saved my own templates to get more natural proper results.

[samthefish]

Boston skyline - 20 sec exposure.

[awinphoto]

Donner Lake

[jeffabbyben]

revup67 or anyone-can you explain the "blurry" left upper corner on the full sized version in the Holy Falls picture.  What is the cause of that?  Is that always present on the canon 16-35mm lens.  I purchased one and then sent it back because I noticed this in the left and right 1/5 of the frame at wide angles less than 20mm.  Is this present on all wide angle lenses and am I just being to picky?

thanks

[Tcapp]

revup67 or anyone-can you explain the "blurry" left upper corner on the full sized version in the Holy Falls picture.  What is the cause of that?  Is that always present on the canon 16-35mm lens.  I purchased one and then sent it back because I noticed this in the left and right 1/5 of the frame at wide angles less than 20mm.  Is this present on all wide angle lenses and am I just being to picky?

thanks

When you spend as much as we do on these lenses, there is no such thing as too picky. Aim for perfection.

[revup67]

revup67 or anyone-can you explain the "blurry" left upper corner on the full sized version in the Holy Falls picture.  What is the cause of that?  Is that always present on the canon 16-35mm lens.  I purchased one and then sent it back because I noticed this in the left and right 1/5 of the frame at wide angles less than 20mm.  Is this present on all wide angle lenses and am I just being to picky? thanks

I think you are referring to my Holy Jim Falls picture?  This was an HDR so I did stack 3 images.  Also, they were handheld and I was balancing on some wood / rocks which doesn't help.  It was a pain to get to this point on the hike and taking a tripod would have been far more beneficial in taking an HDR.  That being said, these ultra wide angle lenses are known for having softness in the corners.  Take a look at this link:  http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=412&Camera=453&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=412&Sample=0&CameraComp=9&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0 there you will see at 2.8 the corners of this lens are not the best though they are improved over the Mark I version of the 16-35mm L.  The corners are always your weakest link in any lens. This being an UWA zoom (not prime) will only exaggerate this even further.  It's possible that an out of the box lens may not be properly aligned as well.  I've discovered this prior and use the micro adjustment feature within the camera and The Lens Align tool by Michael Tapes to fine tune to perfection.  I hope that helps to answer your question. 

[jeffabbyben]

thanks for all replies.  I did expect softness wide open but i still had a significant amount of this artifact at f11 on both sides ( I noticed you shot your image at f10 and only see the artifact on the left upper corner).  I thought the distortion would go away by the time i got to f5.6 and when it didn't I sent it back.  I have been debating whether to try another copy or go with a fixed focal length.  Thanks. 

[revup67]

if you can get your hands on a lens align that may help.  There are a few online software programs regarding alignment that may be worth while seeking. 

Do this on a tripod if you have.  Try taking the same photo without AF, use MF.  Set your camera to magnify 10x just prior to taking your shot then fine tune the MF in Live view and use the multi controller to scroll over to the upper right or upper left corner of your choice.  Once fine tuned as sharp as you can get it, take the photo with a cable release if you have or 2 second timer (mirror lock up if you like).  Now take the same photo with auto focus.  Then compare the two.  It wouldn't surprise me if also the auto focus assembly was having any issue on the lens or even the camera.  This has happened to me and I had Canon repair / replace the focus assembly on the 400mm 5.6.  This lens was right out of the box and had an issue so anything is possible.

[Tammy]

5D Mark III, Canon 100-400 F/4.5-5.6L, @400mm, F/5.6, 1/125, ISO 500. 50% crop, resized.


http://a2.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/456810_4116639077531_78801716_o.jpg

candid shot of a friend, his wife and 8 month old. @200mm, F/5.6, 1/125, ISO 500

http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/415808_4132727639735_2097388564_o.jpg

.

[revup67]

Falls Canyon waterfalls..Trabuco Canyon, CA 6-10-12


Falls Canyon Waterfall by Revup67, on Flickr

[nefarious]

HDR - Skunktrain Fort Bragg

[Northstar]

A shot from a rodeo i attended recently with my 5d3 and 70-200 2.8 ii....a KILLER combo IMO.

I was shooting w/ a friend who has a Nikon d200..we could barely see his images on his Nikon's lcd,(not to say they weren't good images, it's just that the outdoor sun made reviewing his images near impossible)  The 5d3 just made the shooting experience so much more enjoyable because you could clearly see the image on the 5d3's screen....and they looked fantastic.  IMO, this is one of the most underrated features of the 5d3, the fun factor of instantly seeing your images clearly.