phoyager said:

wsmith96 said:

farmdwg - one thing that I found that helps me decide is to go to 500px.com and type in the camera and lens in the search bar. It gives me an idea of what the kit can do. [...] you can see the IQ in those situations.

Click to expand...

Personally I would be very careful! Postprocessing can do A LOT to a image and this is much more valid when we are talking about 'online'-resolutions. It's a quick job to bring a bad image, be it because of the photogs skills, the lens and/or the camera, to a point where it looks fabulous, as long as viewed only on a screen at low resolution. Online galleries are swampy terrain when it comes to judge a photog or some gear.

Click to expand...

I agree with you that it's not fool proof. I figure that some level of post processing will be done at some point in the OP's workflow. It was just a suggestion.

I thought climatization takes no less than 20 minutes, and 30 minutes is usually very safe.

Having said that, I am a little reckless with my gear and have never done the plastic bag treatment, so far I have never had an issue.

Though I have never had gear fog up on me.

I used my Mark IV up to ISO 12800 and my 5D MK III up to 25600. Obviously at those levels, there is noise, loss of detail, and a very narrow DR so exposure is critical. The nice thing about the 5D MK III is that it does not lose a lot as it goes to 25600, but its not beautiful either.

I sold my MK IV to get a smaller camera due to carpal tunnel syndrome, but do miss it for its reach, it was a wonderful camera.

Here are 1:1 samples with no NR or sharpening, but color and exposure corrections. They are not resized, they are what they are, focus errors and all. I think you'll see why I liked the MK IV.

1D MK IV at ISO 12800



D800




5D MK III

7enderbender said:

While on the subject: the 24-70 f/4 doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever to me. I simply don't get it.

Click to expand...

Why not? It's no more costly than the 24-105 used to be a little while back. It has much improved optical quality. Improved IS. It's smaller and lighter.

Zv said:

cayenne said:

I've been learning my way around photoshop.

I see how you can create a logo and store it as a brush, and easily "stamp" your logo on images.

I'm curious....that process is ok if you're only doing a few images at a time.

But what if you have 100+ images you need to get out with a logo or watermark on them? Do ya'll program a PS action for this or what?

I've not gotten to 'actions' yet....but have heard about them.

Thanks in advance,

cayenne

Click to expand...

If you create a logo in photoshop and then save it as a PNG you can then use it in Lightroom. In LR go to edit > edit watermarks > and then click on the "choose" button in the Image options tab in the top right hand corner (you can also click on the "Graphic" option too which does the same thing). Find the PNG file and boom you're done. Now you can select multiple images and export with your watermark.

Click to expand...

Or better yet, create it in illustrator and save as .eps (if you have Illustrator).

bycostello said:

don't get too bogged down on it, as most people won't care....

Click to expand...

It matters hugely if you're doing it right... I'm not saying its a deciding factor, but an effective name/logo is one of the single most important variables you can invest properly in

Responsibilities and pay will vary from photographer to photographer... Some may even expect you to work for free for a few jobs until you get a reputation and a proven worth. Many may expect you to use their gear, many will expect you to have your own gear or rent your own gear with the $$ they pay you. Editing i would guess would be primarily the primaries or first shooters role, but on occasion of they already have a crew with them, may just want you to cull your own images. I once gave a second shooter a task to cull their own images and they went on vacation before sending me the files. I almost fired him. Everything is negotiable, but make sure you get everything in writing and signed upon so there is no hurt feelings or miscommunication either way.

I have done this in the past.

My lens of choice is the canon 8-15 F4L. I have tried a few other fisheyes and it is superior to the cheap prime fisheyes on the market (samyamang, sunex, etc). You can use any lens for a 360 but really you want to stream line the process so that means 8mm on full frame


It works on both apc and full frame. Obviously full frame is easier. I get great 360x180 shots hand held even in low light. But I have a cyborg brain.

For serious work I use a nodal ninja head on a tripod.

On small LDR tours:
I import to Lightroom and preprocess then export to ptgui pro.

For large tours:
Auto pano is better, but please note that it uses Time to determine what photos belong to what pano. And it will get tripped up if you take a long time for one pano and do another one quickly.

You should really understand and experience how that works before shooting a long tour.

Disclosure: I have a business relation with canon.

hhelmbold said:

I am still having this err80 problem and have the latest firmware. I first thought it might be a lens issue, but now realised it's not since I got the error with a different lens. What I am wondering if this has to do with the notice Canon sent out regarding the lubrication on the 1D X? I have not yet had this done and my camera is one of the models that needs it, maybe someone can confirm if this is related?

Click to expand...

I've got the `Err 80` showing on the screen yesterday (August, 19th) with the red lamp glowing all the time even when I turn off the camera. Error appeared after I switched lenses. Latest firmware is installed.

Does anyone have any new information regarding this topic?

jdramirez said:

sagittariansrock said:

If I was in the OP's place, I'd call Canon Service back and ask them on what basis they determined it was an impact damage. It is a fair question to ask. In fact, I'd write to them so I have a record of their response.
I can understand being frustrated by poor customer support and wanting to vent, but this is what I'd have done before (and in addition to) expressing myself on this forum. My 2 cents.

barracuda said:

Perhaps the pragmatic lesson is to become a CPS member if you own enough equipment to qualify.

Click to expand...

I have enough equipment, and believe that $ 100 to be well spent, but unfortunately I don't make any money from photography to qualify.

Click to expand...

sell some boudoir photos of your neighbor to your wife. done.

Click to expand...

Good one, but USCIS would be on my ass ;D (I am on work visa)

Yea, the reason I ask is I have a couple of Sigma lenses. Optically ok. But had a boat load of trouble with one of them. So kinda afraid to spend allot of money on lenses of this kind. And optically they are behind Canon. Just wait until they appear until I decide to try or not I guess.

I have the Yongnuo 568EX II and a pair of YN 622c's. They all play nicely with my 5D3. I use flash very frugally, so could not justify the investment in Canon hardware.

Thanks everyone, I'm going to rent it have it here by Friday.

syder said:

chasinglight said:

cayenne said:

Don Haines said:

Forgot to mention this.... Turn IS off on your lens or it will become part of your soundtrack.... Or better yet, get an external mike, or take a phone, get a sound recording app, and let it sit by the people and mix it in at production time.

Click to expand...

Thanks for all of the advice!!
I have the Rode videomic I keep on the shoe....I got a Rode stereo mic, if I had help I'd set that up too maybe...

On the other hand, I'm guessing this will mostly end up a montage with music over it...so, sound likely not that big a deal.

I'm meeting with the organizer this weekend to see what's exactly expected. this is a non-paying gig for charity.

On rental lenses....what would be the best to get?

85 f/1.2? 50 f/1.2?

I have the 85 f/1.8...so, should I got for renting the 50 f/1.5....

I was hoping since my 17-40mm, while being f/4...would still be usable at the wider angles...?

Thanks for all the advice so far.

C

Click to expand...

I know he rode video mic is a well regarded mic, but please be aware that if you are in a noisy area, like a bar, it's not much better that the built in mic unless its on a boom pole..meaning it won't get the job done. Moreover as someone else said, beware of IS noise, the rode video mic mounted to the hot show WILL pick it up; make no mistake!. If money is an issue get yourself a cheap wired lav mic like the audiotechnica; believe me it will make a world of difference!

Click to expand...

???

The OP said this was going to be a montage shot to music. WTF is he going to be mic-ing up?

If you're recording dialogue in a crowded bar your suggestions are sensible, but that isn't the case here.

Similarly, for an unpaid charity gig, telling people they NEED a second camera, assistants and to hire/buy in a load of L lenses is comically over the top. My advice would be that if it isn't a paid gig, unless you specifically want material for a showreel or similar, then not to bother renting gear, or buying anything especially for this.

As with any project, scope out your locations in advance, if possible with your camera so you can take a few test shots to see how the lenses you have will deal with the lighting conditions.

Click to expand...

This shoot...will start from a restaurant (private rooms and on the balcony) in Jackson Square in the French Quarter in New Orleans.

Footage taken there...and just outside, so I'll likely to be able to get some sounds that is usable there...and most likely I'll be on foot with all the women, as they bar hop into the warehouse dist. This will be easily a mile or so as the evening goes.

I don't expect to get my usable audio later as more bars are hit and more alcohol is consumed...but who knows?

I'll post more as I learn more about it.

If your in LA, it should only be a day or two to to the Irving facility in CA. So if you send it out on Monday, it should arrive there on Tuesday or Wednesday. You may have it back by Friday or Monday of the next week. It should not take long at all.

The 50 1.8 is a great starter video lens for the price. Great optics, and it'll get you used to setting your exposure and manual focus. Sure, it's a little tight on a crop body but there's nothing like it for the price. I say buy the 50 and start shooting, upgrade later!

Are you at the wind up? Lots of bluff and bluster, I don't think any answer is going to be good enough here...

racgordon said:

Also at the most the need is going to be for a 1:2 or 1:4 reproduction ratio (assuming a 24x36 imager).

Click to expand...

It's worth noting that the reproduction ratio is irrelevant in terms of imager dimensions, all that's doing is cropping the projected image circle, the projected 1:2 or 1:4 ratio will be the same at the focal plane whether you are shooting on film, 135 format digital or APS-C cropped digital (or even APS-H digital)

The sensor crop is relevant in terms of effective angle of view, and this in turn determines perspective and working distance, and therefore depth of field, but it has nothing at all to do with reproduction ratio.

In practise this is less important these days for most users as digital cropping, large screen projection / high resolution printing can usually get you to where you want to be.

I'm struggling to think of any 'macro' lenses that will actually deliver 1:2 max these days, probably only the Canon 50mm f2.5 springs to mind. 1:1 macros are usually marked for 1:2, 1:3, 1;4 etc.

I think you are using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. We aren't doing drum scanning here, so you don't have to calibrate daylight film to flouro light, a grey card is all you need, shoot RAW and you can even play with it in post, at 16bit pull downs.

As for shadow noise, this really does ring troll alarm bells. QUITE LOUDLY.

Apologies if I'm wrong. Say hello to photoshop. Say hello to Adobe Camera Raw.

Your old way of working is dead. Set whatever you buy to adobe RGB from camera to software.
Calibrate your monitor.

Wrattens etc are dead.

If I've got you wrong I apologise. There are just some cues to your writing and archaic terminology that seems to be either trying to test our knowledge or expertise, or is at the wind up.

Maybe moderate your tone and you'll get more kindly moderated answers.

I think there would have to be some permanent elements to adjust for added distance to the focal plane, then the swing in elements.

OnOne Perfect Resize will help you to enlarge to very large,their Genuine Fractals does an amazing job at keeping artefacts at bay.

Voigtlander makes a 20mm
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/676633-REG/Voigtlander_BA295AC_Color_Skopar_20mm_f_3_5.html
and a 28mm
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/890581-REG/Voigtlander_bd296e_28mm_F_2_8_SL_II_Lens_Canon.html
(as well as a 40mm like Canon).

They seem to be well built and highly rated, but the downside is they are manual focus only.

Vossie said:

You sell your organs cheap. An average kidney should be able to yield you more that $1000!

Click to expand...

It's all relative.

mustafa said:

roadrunner said:

The current Canon lineup at 50mm is abysmal at best..........

Click to expand...

Isn't this a bit of an exaggeration? To what purpose?

Click to expand...

You're right, it was a bit of an exaggeration. I apologize for that. I try to stay away from responses like that =)

More realistically, I should have said decent at best. I don't feel that would be an exaggeration. I'm a wedding/couples portrait photographer, so my needs don't cover everyone's needs. The Canon's 50mm F1.2L's weather sealing, while nice, isn't really completely necessary for me.

Here's my run down of Canon's current lineup, and why I refuse to make another 50mm purchase until they refresh it, or until Sigma comes out with their new 50mm.
Canon 50mm F1.2L - Great build quality, but the optics aren't up to current standards. Note, I did not say the optics suck, but they could clearly be better. This is a recurring theme across all their 50mm lenses right now though. Also, the price is far to high for me to even consider over their much more reasonably priced 50mm 1.4.

Canon 50mm F1.4 - The best value out of the line up, I would say, but it is still softer than I would like for making a purchase in 2013. Also, the autofocus is in need of an update. All-in-all, a decent lens.

Canon 50mm F1.8 - A great lens for the price, but at $99, just about anything would be a good deal. It is just as sharp as it's more expensive siblings, has abysmal build quality, loud and slow-ish autofocus, and not the best looking bokeh. I own two of these.

So yes, it isn't abysmal. But I would say it is in need of a refresh, and very soon. I'll make due with cheap, toy-like build quality of the 50mm f1.8, but I will definitely buy a new 50mm if and when Canon chooses to release one. I would much rather buy from Canon than Sigma for a few reasons, the 35mm is the only Sigma I own, but if Sigma were to release a new 50mm on par with the 35mm, and they priced it $400-$500 cheaper than the 50mm L, I would definitely purchase it.

Hopefully that clears up my post a bit with less exaggeration.

dirtcastle said:

mustafa said:

roadrunner said:

The current Canon lineup at 50mm is abysmal at best..........

Click to expand...

Isn't this a bit of an exaggeration? To what purpose?

Click to expand...

If you look at Amazon lens sales, Canon 50mm lenses are at #1, #5, and #38. The Sigma 50mm is at #65. I'm not saying sales is everything. But clearly the market doesn't agree. And I'm not saying Canon's 50mm lenses couldn't benefit from improvements (they each have shortcomings). Canon's 50mm f/1.4 might be delicate, but it's gotta be one of the best deals ever.And, not only is it sharp as hell, but it's IQ and bokeh have serious character.

Click to expand...

Like I said to Mustafa, I did exaggerate a bit, but I don't think the top-selling lenses on Amazon is really indicative of quality.

For example, I even mentioned I own 2 50mm 1.8's myself. While a great value, it's poor build quality, focus, and bokeh quality aren't awesome. Sure, it's awesome for $99, but I'm looking from a professional perspective here.

Same goes for the 1.4. I think that is the best value out of Canon's lineup, but like you said, I feel it's build quality, auto focus, and corner sharpness could be improved quite a bit.

Canon's 1.2 is soft in the corners and extremely expensive. If you need this lens, you need it. But for me, I don't need weather sealing. It is nice, but not necessary, and I just don't feel like that justifies the cost over the 1.4.

As for Sigma's 50mm being #65? Good. I've used that lens, and I liked it better than all of Canon's... when it worked. Consistency was shoddy at best, they definitely have some quality control issues there. Basically, I'm not happy with the 50mm landscape across the board, which is why either Sigma releasing a 50mm Art on par with the 35mm Art, or Canon releasing a new 1.4 would make me very happy.

Thats good news. Glad I was able to help.

I bought it in the media markt

Thank you for your helpful messages ! I'll take the B+W MRC F-Pro !

I don't want to skip the filter because I will occasionally use the 6D for hiking/mountaineering in bad weather conditions.

ScottyP said:

It seems everyone on the face of Earth wants a 50mm that is as sweeeeeet as the Sigma 35mm.

My prediction as to why they haven't yet released same is that Sigma wants to incorporate OS/IS into the lens. Maybe that takes more time to perfect? Any way you look at it, Sigma is KILLING it.

Click to expand...

Not Me, I've been screwed too many times by Sigma. Maybe they are waiting to see if their lenses work with the new dual pixel live autofocus. Sigma has had poor reverse engineering of Canon's AF system, and it can stop working anytime Canon upgrades it or adds a feature.