Posts

Ozarker · Apr 15, 2018

Talys said:
@CanonFanBoy - I know exactly what you mean. I own a 7' umbrella, and I love it, though it is often too awkward for me. I often use a 48" umbrella or a 60" rear-illuminated bowens mount softbox (like an octa) instead.

Most of the time when I'm using the 7' umbrella, the shaft is parallel to the ground. In this case, an easy work-around is to use another light stand behind, with a Magic Arm (articulating joint + clamp) propping up the back and releiving it of any stress.

Another possibility is to use a large clamp to hold the umbrella, like the one pictured at the end of the boom here:

https://www.amazon.com/Neewer-Adjustable-Reflector-Photography-Monolight/dp/B01GUQUBEW/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1523596294&sr=8-1&keywords=cstand

The reason being, this holds the shaft solidly over a wide clamp that is a few inches in size, instead of gripping it by a small (tiny) surface area as with a strobe or umbrella/flash holder.

Great idea Talys. Thanks!

Kit Lens Jockey · Apr 14, 2018

Ok, something incredibly weird is going on with the camera's metering with this new focusing screen, and I don't understand it at all.

I wanted to do some solid testing to determine what adjustments I should really be making to my standard metering in light of the fact that I have this new screen in there that the camera doesn't know about, and I know that's throwing off the metering. I decided to mount up lenses of various maximum apertures, and do a side by side comparison, on a tripod, of my 5D4 with the modified focusing screen, and with the other 5D4 I've got that has not been modified. What I did is shoot the exact same indoor scene with auto ISO and the same shutter speed and aperture, and checked to see what I had to adjust the exposure compensation by to get the modified camera to match the auto ISO that the un-modified camera was choosing.

I expected that regardless of the lens, I'd have to set the exposure compensation to underexpose the image a little bit since the camera's metering is reading the light through a focusing screen that generally makes things darker in the viewfinder. Here's what I found, based on the lens...

50mm f1.2L - Modified camera requires -1/3 stop exposure compensation to match the unmodified camera

24-70mm f2.8L II - Modified camera requires -2/3 stop exposure compensation to match the unmodified camera

11-24mm f4L - Modified camera requires +1/3 stop exposure compensation to match the unmodified camera

Canon 2x Extender III with 70-200mm f2.8L (basically an f5.6 lens) - Modified camera requires +1/3 stop exposure compensation to match the unmodified camera

I'm so perplexed as to why the exposure compensation needed to get a "proper" exposure changes like this as I go to using darker lenses. It makes sense that the f1.2 and f2.8 would need a little negative compensation since the modified screen makes the viewfinder darker, and therefore the camera would normally be over-compensating and over-brightening the photo. But why on earth does the metering then go the other way when I mount darker lenses to it? The viewfinder is even darker with those lenses, and yet the exposure compensation must now be set to positive to get the proper exposure?? Makes no sense to me. Clearly I don't fully understand what's happening in regard to the relationship between the focusing screen and metering in the camera.

ethanz · Apr 14, 2018

Yeah, with the custom modes it really makes it easy to drastically change exposure settings.

Click · Apr 13, 2018

CanonFanBoy said:
Looks close IMO.

;D

LDS · Apr 13, 2018

cayenne said:
I'll go look at my meter if I can find it....I didn't set mine up with "T" values....I just used regular f-stop, ISO, shutter speeds for mine.....

Sekonic meters usually use the "T" symbol (from "exposure Time") instead of "shutter speed". It doesn't mean the "T" aperture values on cine lens.

Those with cine features may let also to set it in f/s and shutter angle.

wang890 · Apr 12, 2018

hi guys
I had the 300mm 2.8 IS version 1 for a while and have the 2.8 non IS one from 1991 still in my possession, together with a new 400mm IS II.

just my personal pixel peeping experience, the 300mm non IS is sharper than the IS. I like the size of the old one for my small hand is easier to hold and the IS version 1 is a lot fatter on the body even a little lighter. build quality the old one has a more dense feel and buttons are made from copper not plastic.

last weekend I tested the 400 IS II with my 300 non IS on a 1ds Mark II and I can't tell the sharpness difference, I take the 300 non IS to the field more because it's lighter. but one thing I remember is extender worked a little better on the IS version 1, that is the 2x III, with that said I do get great results with the non IS as well, even at 600 5.6, go down to 6.3 improve a bit.

the 400 2.8 IS II take extenders well even at 800mm it's sharper than both lens at 600mm.

BeenThere · Apr 12, 2018

B&H is now saying this lens is coming soon, and it looks to be a stunner!

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1393485-REG/sigma_105mm_f_1_4_dg_hsm.html

So looking forward to a review of this bokeh master lens.

preppyak · Apr 12, 2018

gsealy said:
The long lead time tells me they are still working out things. If the camera was near ready, then it would shipping in a month or so.

I dont know that Blackmagic has ever brought a camera to market within a month of announcing. The original BMPCC was almost a year to market, orders still being filled a year and a half out. Believe the original BMCC was the same way, took forever if you didnt pre-order Day 1.

Id suspect some people will finally get these in November before discovering an issue that makes people pause.

Good to see the LP-E6 is standard here though, the BMPCC was a nightmare for battery life

pwp · Apr 12, 2018

Thanks for the viewpoint on the old 50mm macro. Shouldn't be too hard to locate one. If this evolves into a usefully large part of my business, yes, a 5DsR would be a useful addition to current 1DX & 5D4.

-pw

Talys · Apr 12, 2018

criscokkat said:
Talys said:

Don Haines said:

dak723 said:

Again, it is easy to dump on Kodak and say they just didn't adapt to the transition from film to digital, but they made most of the initial cameras and a lot of the sensors, too. But it was not nearly enough to offset the almost complete loss of film and related products because there was no digital substitute for them.

Click to expand...

Exactly!

The vast bulk of Kodak was paper, film, and chemicals. It vanished overnight and they were left with huge amounts of infrastructure which had suddenly turned from being assets into liabilities. Everyone knew digital was coming, but the speed at which the p/s cameras took over was astounding.

Click to expand...

Therein lies the crux of it.

A portion of internet forum experts believe that it will be at the same speed at which EF, EFS lenses and DSLRs will vanish, with EFM being too nascent to fill the gaps. Some people hypothesize that Canon will turn into another Kodak because by 2020, DSLRs will be specialty devices.

I don't agree with that assessment at all, because I don't think film vs digital is a good comparison with DSLR versus mirrorless.

Digital vs film had two massive benefits: photos no longer cost anything to develop and you could see your results right away. For those who were never film photography enthusiasts, it's hard to overstate those two benefits. I spent enough money on Ilford paper and chemicals back then to buy a really nice piece of camera gear every year. Because of these benefits, it was easy to look early shortcomings of digital, and then to rapidly buy significantly upgraded models.

The benefits between mirrorless versus DSLR are much more dubious if you're not interested in videography. For some photography tasks, mirrorless are a disadvantage (like wildlife/sports and flash/strobe photography), while for others, mirrorless have some nice advantages (like candids and street photography). But in either case, it's nothing near the difference between digital and film.

And finally, one of the most often stated benefits, size and weight, are practically all in consumer lenses, with pro lenses being as large or larger than DSLR counterparts, making the slimmer bodies an ergonomic disadvantage.

So, will mirrorless continue to gain traction? Absolutely, I think so. The lure of WYSIWIG is high, and the concept of grabbing frames off a camcorder is an appealing one. It's not a fad, and it's not going away. But at the same time, it's not a silver bullet and I think that DSLRs will remain more popular for a variety of tasks for the perceivable future.

Click to expand...

I don't know how many years you are talking with "Perceivable Future" for recording frames off a camcorder. I don't think it's as far out as many people think it is. You are seeing this happen on the consumer level with phones already - when you go to take a picture, the camera has already been taking video before and after the shot and some models allow you to choose the best of several pictures. As this becomes more widespread and expected, DSLR makers will need to incorporate that into their hardware as well, or risk being irrelevant to the regular consumer where quite a bit of the money is. I perceive a future where the camera has a setting for sports photographers and wildlife photographers where it just starts recording as soon as it is held up in a manner that suggests you are about to press the button to capture. Capturing will just tell the device "Hey, save the last x amount of time and post x amount of time" so that you can choose the image later.

This may be a great way for someone with a smartphone to take the best photo that they can, but it's a terrible way for a photographer to take great photos.

One reason is that the shutter speeds of video recording are not the right shutter speeds for photography. Another important reason is that a lot photography is great because of modified light - that could be strobes, long exposures, reflectors, using short flash durations, filters, whatever. You just can't do that in the "record and pull a frame" paradigm.

I agree that smartphones and simple to use devices are crushing it in winning over people who want nice photos who have no desire to engage in the hobby of sophisticated photography. However, if you want to stand out from the pack as an amateur, and surely if you want to be paid as a professional for fashion, celebrity, corporate, weddings, events, sports, wildlife, or whatever... it's not going to be with the "grab a frame from a video" paradigm for a very long time yet.

Valvebounce · Apr 11, 2018

Hi Matthew.
Yes the Needles are good, but the battery, a longish walk or an expensive bus ride (no public vehicular access) above the Needles is much more interesting especially when you get to the rocket engine range!

Cheers, Graham.

dhr90 said:
Valvebounce said:

Hi Matthew.
Sounds like you were quite close to visiting the island then! Do you ever come over here?

Cheers, Graham.

dhr90 said:

Valvebounce said:

Hi Matthew.
Nice shot, if you know the Mayflower Park, I was roughly where the road turns away from the water to leave, may have been slightly more towards the ice cream van! mmmmm ice cream!

Cheers, Graham.

Click to expand...

Thanks Not quite the same place then, I was about halfway along the pier where the RedJet departs from. Always a great choice to capture fireworks with reflections over the water

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I have been over a few times over the years, we usually go view the Lymington Ferry though. Can't resist a trip to the Needles.

9VIII · Apr 11, 2018

The couple looks great.

WARNING: Constructive Criticism Ahead!
All I can see on the product shots is dust. Add a rocket duster and microfiber cloth to your kit and blow off/ wipe down every surface before taking pictures of small objects.

Architect1776 · Apr 11, 2018

Canon Rumors said:
1,400MB/Second Data Transfer Speed Reaches New Milestone
NAB, LAS VEGAS, NV – April 8, 2018 1:00 am Pacific—ProGrade Digital, founded with a mission to provide the highest quality professional grade digital memory cards and workflow solutions, has become the first company to publicly demonstrate the CFexpress™ 1.0 technology with 1TB of capacity.

Will Canon adopt this in the next round of cameras?
That would be very nice if both slots were this new format so that the next round of cameras aren't obsolete as soon as they are introduced.
Or have an interchangeable card slot module so they could be upgraded if possible.
Not a technician here but hate obsolescence and it appears that CFast is headed that way.

Sbiriguda · Apr 11, 2018

Hello,
I would like to buy a remote for a Canon Powershot SX60 which I use as a "battle" camera for birdwatching and outdoor shooting. As far as I know there are 3 options:

1) wired remote
2) wireless remote
3) Canon Camera Connect app (for Iphone in my case)

I am considering this one:
https://www.amazon.com/TW-283-E3-Wireless-Shutter-Release/dp/B004BZMGMA/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?ie=UTF8&qid=1523449738&sr=8-1-spons&keywords=PIXEL+TW-283%2FE3&psc=1&smid=A2RDVNSPRYPCFK

Do you have better suggestions? They say the wireless range is like 10 meters (some people say about 20)
Not enough perhaps?
Is it worth it or it is just a waste of money and I can use just the Canon app?
How about the additional features (time lapse, etc.) which one are more relevant?
Thanks

razashaikh · Apr 11, 2018

I liked your perspective.

NancyP · Apr 10, 2018

3X teleconverters were never worthwhile in the film days - too much image degradation. That said, there have been people who stack teleconverters with spacers in order to get "any" image, however suboptimal.

Grimbald · Apr 10, 2018

Hmm, I do have the 15-30 Tamron and I'm very happy with it, but as pointed out, the filters are a pain. I've spend more on filters for this thing than the lense itself, and if I could go back in time I'd probably just get the 16-35mm III.
Unless you do alot of handheld wide angle filming, you simply wont need IS that much at this focal lenght.

Valvebounce · Apr 10, 2018

Hi Neuro.
Thanks for the info, I was mainly looking on my iPad so not able to use Phil Harvey’s exif tool. I think I have tried this in the past and could not get it to work, my limitation not the software!

My research was based on looking through Jeffrey’s exif viewer which is web based so works on my iPad, and using the exif in Flickr which seems to not show the temperature for the cameras I listed as “no” the reference to FoCal was that I know it can read and display the temps of my cameras, but as I don’t own the 1Dx or 1DxII I am unable to verify those.
Also I was not specifying (though it may have seemed that way, edited original post!) that the 1Dx or 1DxII did not have it only that it was not visible in the platforms I had used.
Another thought, why don’t info tabs that display exif display all of it, (customisable of course to show what we want) what is the point of keep improving exif if you can’t read it in Windows, Canon DPP DxO etc? Ahard to use reader is not ideal!

Cheers, Graham.

Ian_of_glos · Apr 10, 2018

For many years I have used Hoya Pro1 filters and I have found them to be well made and durable. However, last time I bought a filter I noticed that there is now a much more expensive option - the Hoya Ultra-Pro Filter.
Has anyone compared the Ultra-Pro with the Pro1 filters and if so does the Ultra-Pro justify its very high price tag?

Maximilian · Apr 10, 2018

Interesting comparison.

Thanks for sharing, docsmith.

hne said:
Is it eating stars?

Bryan didn't do any astro shots, so no information here.
But maybe you should ask him to add that to the test 8)

Jeffrey · Apr 10, 2018

What, me worry?

If new gear comes out and the image quality is superior to the gear I have, then I move forward in purchasing the new gear.

Speculation is just that; somewhat entertaining, but nothing to be concerned with until we see images from the new camera.

Click · Apr 9, 2018

Very nice shots, snappy604.

RyanV · Apr 9, 2018

jeffa4444 said:
Owning both the 5DS and a 6D MKII plus able to use work 5D MKIV my biggest frustration when going back to the 6D MKII is the D pad as opposed to the joystick for moving AF points in portraiture. Its much faster on the 5DS and 5D MKIV.
For landscape work I do find the articulating screen useful and the slightly lower weight of the body and in the most part the IQ is not an issue. the 5D MKIV is a better low light camera than either the 5DS or the 6D MKII and with a better spread of AF points something Canon compromised deliberately on the 6D MKII (contrary to what some may say its useful having a wider spread of AF points even when shooting landscape).

All that said the 6D MKII for its price against the 5D MKIV is a great camera and if its your only camera it will do everything asked of it without being special in any of them.

Thank you for this concise and straightforward answer to the question. Learning a lot here thanks to posts like this..

AJ · Apr 9, 2018

Jack Douglas said:
Sad that the lowly mirror is taking such a beating. it's probably one of the most used human objects, well, minus the slapping that is.

Jack