Posts

Maximilian · May 12, 2015

Marsu42 said:
Maximilian said:

while still struggling with EF and EF-S lenses

Click to expand...

Can you elaborate what the problem(s) with ef/ef-s lenses are?

I displayed the slower focusing times in the OP (0.2 vs. 0.5 vs. 0.8 sec).
There are no problems mentioned about accuracy/precision, just speed.

I don't know the reasons/problems why they are so much slower.
The technical background is not discussed in the test, just the results. Sorry.

If any problem(s) are hard to fix, this would be one of the reason why Canon designed ef-m lenses ... but it kinda defeats the purpose as the charm of the m cameras is that you can use your whole lens arsenal just like that and w/o major drawbacks?

Looks like there is a drawback. And looks like I did right

to choose a 100D over waiting for a M3 as small but flexible setup.
AND this reason makes me think of the need of good quality wide aperture EF-M lenses. ???
Otherwise EOS M is a dead horse for me. :

Of course just for me. Others might want to live with the compromise of small size and small aperture.

Lee Lounsbury · May 12, 2015

Well looks like this has now become a video only lens..

Thanks for your answer!

martti · May 12, 2015

Hello. I got the Xiomi 10400 external power source directly from China -sent to me without postal charges.
I have an HTC cell phone where you cannot change batteries so you have to pay attention that you leave the house in full charge. And of course the a6000 runs dry in just a couple of hours.
The XIOMI seems to put in quite a current as the camera was fully charged in two hours.
Nice and warm!

A handy little gadget, not expensive at 41 dollars, either.

jdramirez · May 12, 2015

Here was a shot I did tonight (and since it is of my daughter, I don't mind sharing)... I know some may say it is too contrasty and her right eye is in shadow due to the lighting setup... but I'm fond of it.

Actually, if there are any multi flash experts out there... I 'd appreciate some advice. I don't know how to set the flash on the st-e3-rt to get the desired effect of tracking their swing. I get close, then I screw it up. I know I'm 1 youtube video away from figuring it out... so you don't even have to explain it... just say... this video will do you up right.

Lee Lounsbury · May 11, 2015

This is pretty spot on, filming in bright daylight will make for a high shutter if you're not careful, and thus a "choppy" feel. Remember this simple rule: Shutter speed= Framerate x2. So if you are recording at 30p, set the camera to 1/60. That would be my first guess. You can try using ND filters to give you a better control over your shutter in bright light.

If that doesn't work, try using a rolling shutter correction in post (Can be found in FCPX or Premiere). Even following the shutter speed rule, quick pans can cause rolling shutter distortion and also give that "choppy" look.

Also because you do have the 7dii (excellent choice) there is the ability to record 60 frames a second. As long as the medium you choose to upload the footage supports 60p (such as youtube) this will make for much much much smoother motion. Just remember that 60p now means 1/125 shutter.

Tinky said:
Coukd be a couple of things...

Rolling shutter, dslrs have a slow scan, so the difference between the start of the scan and end of the scan is sometimes perceptable. Vertical lines go a bit diagonal. Usually only an issue with very fast objects, or rapid camera movements. The 180 rule (shutter speed set to double the frame rate) can mitigate to an extent, sontry using 1/50th or 1/60th shutter speed for PAL or NTSC respectively (i.e. 24 or 25 fps, vs 30fps)

or it coukd be combing,:

Your camera is progressive. Traditionally tvs have been interlaced. this is a viewing environment problem. you need to keep everything progressive in post, from your transcoding / interpretation settings, through your timeline settings, and your encoding and output settings. most modern lcds will detect a progressive signal and display it correctly.

if you do happen to go interlaced at any point you may split a progressive single field into two interlaced fields displayed a fraction apart, this will actually look ok on a briadcadt monitopr as its a 50i system, but will comb on your computers progessive monitor.

The breaking up part sounds more like this.

It may also be if you've set a lossy gop / mpeg mode, that the spatial data is being over compressed, try changing this.

Aglet · May 11, 2015

FWIW, Fuji XT1 firmware update looks pretty significant in the AF features, bringing it closer to DSLR abilities.

http://fujifilm-x.com/x-t1/en/firmware/#1stPage

Aglet · May 11, 2015

dilbert said:
Aglet said:

Tokina has aimed for low distortion, uniform sharpness, low aberrations, flat-field and very smooth bokeh with their new 24-70 f/2.8 lens for full frame. Looking forward to seeing how it performs in further testing but the samples here are a good start. no swirly bokeh!

www.kenko-tokina.co.jp/tokina/atx24-70.html

Click to expand...

All that they need to do now is add IS and they'll have a winner!

+1
IS is really useful in this FL!

meywd · May 11, 2015

I expected the Sigma 150-600 Sport to be as sharp as the 100-400 II, which is not a lot to ask with the ART series outperforming all except the Otus, but after i saw the images at TDP I lost all interest in 3rd party telephotos, so since the Sigma 150-600 C is the lower end, its doomed to perform even worse.

clostridium · May 11, 2015

Lots of good suggestions already - I appreciate everyone's answers. I'm in the process of checking out the options, here is a quick summary of what's been brought up:

Vest from outdoors store (like Orvis, Cabela's) - I will have to browse around and see how that compares to the one I've already got, this could work for the specific problem at hand but wouldn't be likely to be multi-pupose for other needs (which is fine if not really expensive)
Domke photog vest - looking into this online. A bit more expensive but well regarded. I need to determine whether I'd be looking to integrate vests more into my usual photographic adventures. I had not originally planned on this but worth thinking about.
Birdsasart vest (I think this is the xtrahand vest http://www.vestedinterest.com) - impressive, warrants investigation. Would be a similar story to the Domke vest- I think I'd have to be committing to going with the vest on a more regular basis for the price.
Hummer safari vest (what I've got) - cheap, already in hand, pocket sizes are somewhat limiting. There is a combat photographer version that seems to have larger pockets in front - not sure if people have experience with this one.
Scottevest - need to do more research, it would be nice to find something other than random blogs that like this thing for photographers. I've been hoping to find a photographer that has an experience (good or bad) and can specifically comment. Will keep digging.

A key aspect of this need is that I'm OK with a solution that isn't designed for hauling larger objects like lenses all the time. It's also OK if it doesn't hide the presence of such items. I'm not sure much of anything could do that short of very bulky coats. The airline personnel don't really seem to care what you carry on your person so it's not a big deal if it shows that I've got lenses crammed into pockets. I just need to be able to sit down in the seat.

I wasn't able to find information on which vests don't taste good for predators. I suppose I could spray lots of
the stuff we use to stop our cats from eating things and hope for the best.

NancyP said:
Shop at your local hunting and fishing emporium (eg, Cabelas, Bass Pro big box stores). Yes, it will be in camo, most likely, but a few plain vests are available in the general clothes departments (as opposed to hunting clothes department). Lots of versions out there, but many will be hot because many are designed for deer and duck seasons. Most have a huge back pocket as well as front pockets.

Art Morris lists vests on his birdsasart site, made specifically for photographers, in khaki.

hoodlum · May 11, 2015

Kipon posted a video showing the adapter with the 70-200mm f4. AF seems very fast but I would stick with center focus and reframe to ensure it focuses on what I want. Overall better than I expected and faster than Canon Liveview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIFwXztcOzA

ahsanford · May 11, 2015

cosmopotter said:
You may be technically correct that the new IS USM versions did not replace the older, brighter lenses but have you noticed that the EF28mm F1.8 is in fact disappearing? It is gone from the Canadian site but still shows up on the US site (probably because they have stock). The older EF35mm is gone from both sites.

Considering that both of these lenses debuted in the 90's, just like the EF50mm F1.4 AND that they are disappearing, I think it is fair to say that they were replaced by the new IS USM lenses. By the way, I asked a Canon rep about this at a trade show a while back and they confirmed the old 28 and 35 non-stabilized lenses were on their way out.

As I understand it, if the lens got the 'non-L IS refresh' treatment 2-3 years ago, the prior lens was discontinued. So the old 24 2.8, 28 2.8 and 35 2 are no more. you might find straggler inventory in one-off places, on eBay, in the Canon Refurb store, etc. but major online dealers should list it as discontinued.

But the 28 1.8 USM is alive and well for sale as new -- B&H and Adorama both have it in stock. I'm a US customer, so it might be a regional decision like not selling the EOS-M.

- A

vscd · May 11, 2015

...but focus stacking has nothing to do with the lense, does it? ???

Bennymiata · May 11, 2015

I find that a very good feature of the 5D3 for macro is the silent shutter mode.
When I use my 60d or 70d, the loud shutter noise can frighten the bugs away.
A good technique to use is set the camera to continuous focus and high speed motor drive.
That way, if you sway a little, one of the burst should be OK.

Ebrahim Saadawi · May 10, 2015

RLPhoto said:
gjones5252 said:

This is turning into a silly discussion. I agree with previous posters saying that the negative viewpoint about 4k is mostly coming from photographers.
I do both photography and videography and often at the same time. I would greatly benefit from having 4k.
There are two ways my media is delivered. Either on massive screens that are using either led or multiple projectors or by internet.
These screen have higher resolution the 1920x1080 and it would be awesome to see it in a high resolution. When my pictures come up on the screen they look amazing because the resolution is higher than the screen. If i only delivered then pictures that were around 1920 x1080 they would not look nearly as good.

As far a internet delivery 4k still has advantages. Post stabilization. I mostly work in run and gun environments and I would have no worries about having extra stabilization opportunities.
ALso 4k looks great when it is then output at 1080p.

Crazy viewpoint but I am thinking about even getting a XC10!! I often have to cover conferences and I would be able to use this as a main event recording cam on a tripod. And it gives me multiple angles. I want wide angle? boom 100% view. I want to zoom in and scan around so it looks like i had a camera operator back there the whole time. Best part is its all still in 1080.

There are far to many people complaining about what in the long run is essentially an amazing thing.
If your a photographer stop complaining. This whole video thing hasnt in fact added cost to your camera, but more than likely has increased the sales of canon products dramatically. More sale+more r+d=more developments=better end product for all involved.

If your a videographer stop complaining. If you dont need and arent getting certain features then dont use the ones you dont need and find the accessories to solve the ones you dont have. You chose Canon for reliability, lenses, and quality. Be happy your getting those every day. Not everyone else is as lucky.

This forum used to be a lot more positive with just one or two people getting in fights with Neuro. Now its like the most negative place to hear about canon stuff.

Click to expand...

Skip the XC10, Get a panasonic FZ1000 for 800$.

-Broadcast approved codec

-4:2:2 305mbps vs 24mbps 4:2:0

-Rotating grip

-Stronger built (chuck states it's 1dx/c100/300 build materiel)

-Canon Log vs horribly baked-in profiles

-12 stops of DR vs 10

-Dual media Slots

-A video optimized sensor from the ground up with native 4K readout (no downscaling/lineskipping/binning), larger photosites meaning better lowlight performane too, it just has a different image league ad different sensor from the fz1000, just because they share the approximate size!

-Much less rolling shutter

-The lens optical quality is said to be high-end L league performance but video optimized and shows no breathing, it's not just the numbers on the barrel that determines glass.

-AF is perfect vs unusable

-10bit 4:2:2 HDMI output

It baffles me how all over the web people are implying it's a comparable camera to the fz1000 and rx10 just because they have a similarly sized sensor! Look at the above specs, a completely different league of camera from the still great rx1000&rx10

agierke · May 10, 2015

Quote from: eosuser1234 on May 04, 2015, 10:41:59 AM

Investing in good equipment pays off especially if you are trying to become a pro photog.

My understanding is that being a pro photog is about earning money, not spending it. Thus it is reasonable to get the best reliable(!) tool for the job after a total cost of ownership calculation (purchase, repairs, loss of value over time and return of invest of high-end gear).

as a pro, my approach is to get the right tool that does the job reliably and spend the money once. if that means i pay a higher price to start so be it. what i dont want to run in to is spending alot of time problem solving or find that i got a piece that comes up short in a situation simply because i wanted to save a few bucks.

costs go beyond just the ticket price. time and effort involved can be an unquantifiable cost that you will pay if you don't get the right tool. failure to perform or intermittent performance can cost you a shot or a whole job which can lead to costing you a client. these types of costs can grow large quite fast, so my mind is to spend more up front to get the right tool that i know will be reliable. i wont hem and haw over a couple of hundred bucks because i know if i get it wrong it will cost me far more in the long run.

Masa@CanonRMRs · May 9, 2015

The silver EF-M22mm F2 STM is for white EOS M bodies, most likely for M3 white.
Canon doesn't sell the M3 in U.S. so you won't see it in the market.

I have no idea why Canon won't sell M3 in U.S. though.
Don't you guys like the mirror-less cameras?
Is it too small for you, or something?

bluemoon · May 9, 2015

Keith_Reeder said:
Where's the "never had to send it in, and it's bloody fantastic" option?

I can do this all day long. Slow shutter panning too - about as tough a test for AF as you get.

Huh? Option 3!!!

Pierre

distant.star · May 9, 2015

YuengLinger said:
All time silliest thread ever? You mean, when I'm driving my car, I actually have to steer and brake? But that's too hard! That gets in the way of my tweeting! Boo hoo!

I don't know as I'd go so far as silly. Personally, I might relegate it to the picking the fly poop out of the pepper category.

On the plus side, these are folks striving for excellence -- and I'd never denigrate that.

For a philosophical perspective on why that may be important, read Pirsig's "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance." Fun read even if you're not into "quality."

jrista · May 9, 2015

Marsu42 said:
jrista said:

The output in lightroom will be all about how LIGHTROOM processes the data. [...] Run the same experiment with DPP...you will get obviously different results compared to the Lightroom test

Click to expand...

LR only has camera emulation modes (see "camera calibration, last item in Develop module) and doesn't claim to do 1:1 identical output to each and every camera - but looking at my 6d and 60d the results happen to be pretty close to each other.

As this camera calibration has such a vast impact on the look of the raw conversion, it's all about personal taste anyway unless you shoot with a color card to get a dng profile, "neutral" might con people into thinking it's "unprocessed" or "real".

Aye, LR/ACR are incapable of exactly reproducing the picture styles of the camera. That was entirely my point...that when you see "out of 'camera' color" in a photo you have loaded in Lightroom, your not seeing what the camera rendered...your seeing what Lightroom rendered instead. Similarly, even DPP will not produce exactly the same color as Canon's own cameras, as the curves are not 100% identical, nor is the precision of the hardware executing the algorithm identical.

What you get out of the camera as a JPEG is mostly the result of in-camera algorithms and tone curves that process the RAW data coming off the sensor. Compression algorithms affect the IQ, the color, the quality. Trying to exactly match the literal Out-Of-Camera JPEG with RAW would be difficult and time consuming.

Sure, there is a natural response of the silicon to light, and there are slight differences in the actual RAW ADU coming off the sensor due to differences in CFA. But the significance of those differences pales in comparison to the algorithms that convert those RAW pixel values into full color RGB values in an actual image rendered to a screen.

I am actually amazed at how neutral Samsung NX1 data seems to be when it's rendered (by anything, LR or Samsung's own RAW Converter software). It's the only camera I know of that renders blacks as deeply and purely without any visible color cast:

Even the Nikon D7200 and A7II both have some color cast, and the 6D has a lot of color cast. The NX1 doesn't have the lowest noise, but man, I would take that totally neutral color and super deep, rich blacks any day over all the rest.

I don't know how they did that, but it's a pretty amazing feat if you ask me.

PerfectSavage · May 9, 2015

pwp said:
AcutancePhotography said:

jdramirez said:

Mark me down as annoyed because I have my preferred number of 600ex rt, 3, and now I may finding my self upgrading one at a time... I know I don't have to.... But I'm anal like that.

Click to expand...

You are a marketing department's dream. ;D

Click to expand...

It may come as a surprise, but the 600 ex-rt's will still work perfectly...just like the 580EX's I retired a few months ago. But yeah...I know the feeling.

-pw

Exactly. I'm still using 580EXs and a couple 550EXs with zero issues...and the little 270EXII for family stuff. Do I misfire? Of course, but always my error. Would I like to lose the RTs with the 5s for the built-ins on the 600? Of course, but it just isn't a real issue for me. Improved metering would be interesting to see how overall IQ improves but if you're having consistent issues with flash/metering, I'd suggest it's probably user error, not your equipment. I also can't see them coming out with new flashes and metering that would only work with post-5DS bodies either...like the 5D4 and 1DX2....but they might. You can make the argument people certainly aren't looking to shoot with shoe flashes on the 5DS/SR so it could be a 5D4/1DX2 compatible thing. That would certainly be a major reason to upgrade for all the 5D3/1DX users on the fence, right?...especially the 5D3 wedding/event shooters.

pwp · May 9, 2015

As a very satisfied user of a pair of Godox AD360 flashes, I'd go directly to the new Godox 400 w/s ringflash if I had the need for ringflash. Read up here:
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2015/02/22/review-godox-witstro-ar400-ring-flash/#.VU3kaEbNpFU
http://flashhavoc.com/godox-witstro-ar400-ring-flash-coming/
http://www.godox.com/EN/Products_Camera_Flash_Witstro_AR400_Powerful_Ring_Flash.html

I'd go for this ahead of the PCB ringflash in spite of the fact I already have half a dozen PCB Einsteins and VML's. I couldn't be happier with the Einsteins & the whole PCB system, but I'm increasingly doing more commercial projects with the AD-360's due to being compact, lightweight and easily achieving HSS when triggered with Phottix Odins. For outdoor ringflash use, the option of gutsy HSS will be a genuine plus.

-pw

lol · May 9, 2015

I used to have the Sony/Zeiss 16-80 which was f/4.5 on the long end. I didn't appreciate it then, but I do miss that on the 15-85. I also find the 15-85 not as good in micro-contrast so there is a bit of room for improvement there.

dolina · May 9, 2015

https://vimeo.com/ondemand/bendingthelight

Synopsis

From acclaimed director Michael Apted (The Up Series, Masters of Sex, The World is Not Enough) comes a revealing look at the art of filmmaking and photography. A journey of glass, the documentary explores the relationship between the artisans who create camera lenses and the masters of light who use these lenses to capture their beloved art form.

Bending the Light features never-before-seen footage from inside a premier Japanese lens factory, intimate interviews with lens engineers, and a peek into the world of award-winning photographers and cinematographers Stephen Goldblatt, ASC, BSC, Greg Gorman, Simon Bruty, Laura El-Tantawy, and Richard Barnes.

The Japanese lens factory featured is Canon’s factory in Utsunomiya, Japan

Per Canon Lens Code...

The first letter, "U", indicates that the lens was made in Canon's Utsunomiya, Japan factory. Prior to 1986, this letter is moved to the last position of the date code.

jdramirez · May 8, 2015

I did an event and I used a diffuser on a monopod and a spotlight. So I had my assistant love to different angles do I could get some decent side lit shots... It wasn't easy... I didn't love the results, but it was better than the alternative...

RLPhoto · May 8, 2015

I've been using the Vagabond Minis for a good while now. They are reliable. small and inexpensive. They'll power two 640ws einsteins just fine and should run your 100ws lights even better.

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics