Patent: Canon EF 10mm f/2.8L USM
You really don't under stand what a patent is do you....patents always come first. Production never comes before a patent.
Of course production can precede patent grant, hence 'patent pending'.
Upvote
0
You really don't under stand what a patent is do you....patents always come first. Production never comes before a patent.
The Tamron 15-30 I used to have was great. Really great. I've thought about that 45mm Tamron, but I just don't know when I'd use it. The 85 you have would be good for my use.
On my Oly, to update the lens firmware you mount the lens on the camera, connect the camera to a computer, and run the Olympus viewer/editor software. If it detects that an update is available, it downloads it onto the computer and then installs it onto the lens. No docks. No shipping out.
They have had this ability for at least 15 years and I don’t understand why nobody else does it.......
If I am being fairly serious about a panorama, I will set the focus and exposure the same for all shots, with the possible exception where there is a lot of difference in the light on one side from the other or there is interesting foreground detail on just one side. But most often I am traveling when I shoot panoramas, so I let the G7X II use auto everything and expect that Photoshop will work it all out. The depth of field of the little lens covers a lot of the scene anyway. I’m mainly just trying to make up for the 24mm equivalent on the wide end. At home I’ll use the 16-35mm lens on my 6D2 instead.I have run into that problem when shooting handheld panoramas in portrait mode, but 99.99 percent of the time they are fine for landscape type shooting.
BIF is something else! when trying to track small birds I love my 7D2 because the AF points cover most of the sensor (more of it than any FF camera). If my skills were better (or if the birds were further away and larger) I could get by with less area, but I am still learning and developing so I need all the help I can get![]()
Canon just released this 8k test footage... https://www.cinema5d.com/canon-8k-cinema-camera-first-official-footage/
At this point, Canon is clearly not worried about size and weight.
Thank you.
I can't say that I have had problems with AF accuracy on either my 5D mk3 or my 5D mk4, but I did spend a long time using AFMA to fine tune all my lenses.
They all perform really well now and I would be surprised if I found that a camera from the EOS R stable produced better results. Generally I only use the cross type AF points so maybe that is another factor.
However, I agree with your main point that this is a period of transition, but for now there is nothing that is compelling me to move to the EOS R system.
Yes, certainly a longer test is better. I had the camera for an hour to test in the hand and have only these impressions. I did not understand how to set the focus point quickly with just the right hand and without putting the camera off the eye. The Canon presenter had no idea.I cannot imagine that a presentation is going to be long enough to figure out how to use the camera.
It certainly focuses extremely quickly once you learn how it works.
You can certainly run the entire camera with the right hand. If you want two hands, you can use the left for support as usual, as well as zoom, focus, and if you want, adjusting the control ring (I have it set for aperture in A P and F modes).
My recommendation is to use the touch bar for AF mode, and the right-hand part of the touch screen in relative mode to move focus point. If you haven't tried that mode, long enough to get used to it, you wouldn't know enough to make a decision.
it was more of a joke. But seriously, the printer part is probably technically the part that uses most of the space. So, it's a printer, and they put in a camera (like those you find in a smart phone).IVY 2in1 instant camera looks like a digital camera with a built-in printer (think Instax Square SQ10) and IVY instant camera like a plain instant camera.
So I played with this a bit yesterday. Set up my 5D3 with a highly contrasty scene - inside looking from darker room areas out to bright blue sky and fluffy white clouds. Set a middling manual exposure of aperture and shutter (can't remember exactly what, but say f8 and 60th), then took seven shots in 1 stop increments from 100 ISO through to 3200 ISO, all without changing the manual exposure settings.
Processed RAW images in Lightroom. Without any processing on import, the 100 ISO was very dark, while the 3200 was very bright. Then adjusted the exposure in LR (+3.0 stops for the 100 ISO, +2 stops for the 200 ISO, and so on to -3.0 for the 3200 ISO).
If the whole system (sensor, plus in-camera processing, plus LR processing) was ISO invariant, each image should have looked the same? Well they sure didn't.
The 100 ISO shot had MASSIVE noise in the pushed dark areas while the 1600 and 3200 ISO shots were not noisy in that area. The sky areas in the 100 ISO shot were nice blue sky and fluffy cloud detail. Same areas in the 3200 ISO shot was totally blown white, and almost as much in the 1600 shot. (White balance was also different at the same colour temp setting.)
After reading this thread and some other info, I had expected to see much less difference. And that would have made sense from the idea that the physical sensor's light gathering capability can't change based on what ISO you dial in. In fact, having seen the results of my simple test, I'm now wondering what the hell is going on in-camera to get this difference - even wondering if the camera can evaluate the scene, compare with your Av Tv and ISO settings and maybe adjust the settings a bit (without telling you or your RAW file) on the basis of an assumption of what you're trying to achieve. Seems unlikely, but I really am sceptical that such a difference would be evident just from the difference between the analogue and digital amplification steps.
Anyway, upshot is, if you got a 5D3, don't think you can set any 'ol number on the ISO dial and fix it later. Not quite sure how, but there's a big difference.
G7X III + CCAPI ...Has there already been a 'Where's the G7Xiii?" post?
Yeah, I can’t remember when, but I think at least the mk4 had it... and so should every camera on the planet..What 1 series? As I understand, from Mt Spokane's excellent link, the newer standard wasn't implemented into cameras until at least the 1D MkIV or more probably the 1DX.
But your findings run contrary to mine. I found the older cameras needed more exposure than suggested and the newer cameras pretty much spot on.