Posts

Rienzphotoz · Oct 23, 2013

;D ;D ;D

unfocused said:
Rienzphotoz said:

dave said:

For some reason I find the white singlet/bra strap edge repeatedly catches the eye. For me I would probably have covered it up, but this doesn't mean you should have.

Click to expand...

I didn't notice it until you brought it up ... damn, now it is bugging me. ;D ... for the record I would've edited out the distraction ... but the image is awesome.

Click to expand...

Looks like you guys have found your punctum.

;D ;D ;D

Richard Northwood · Oct 23, 2013

Hey folks, not only is this a link to my first ever video shoot, but its also my first post to the site. I've been coming here and reading news for the last couple of years, but thought maybe I would start posting as well in my down time.

Anyhow, this is the first video shoot I've ever done with my gear. I've been gathering equipment for quite some time with the idea of shooting video, but I've always been kind of intimidated. Not only that, I was scared of the learning curve of using Premiere as my only previous video editing experience was using Sony Vegas Pro to make a picture slide show.

So I was sought out by a local night club (disclaimer: I am a consultant to them as well) to create promotional material for their upcoming Halloween Party: Hamilton Horror Story (naturally based off of the popular current Television Show). This is what I came up with:

Sizzle and Koi Present - Hamilton Horror Story

Equipment used include a Canon 5DMKII, an old 50mm 2.5 Macro lens, a 70-200 2.8IS II, a 16-35L 2.8, Cinevate mini handle and pull focus, Benro S6 Tripod Head.

All the visuals were shot in and around the club, and I used the staff as the cast members.

Richard Northwood

dsc888 · Oct 23, 2013

bholliman said:
Vossie said:

I have both lenses. The 24-70 is certainly sharper, but the 50 is 2 stops faster (and much lighter). I use the 50 for dimly lit indoor portraits and in cases I want only want to carry a light setup (in which case I may just as well take the 40 pancake). Opinions about the 50 are quite mixed if you browse the internet, but I do like the look. The lens is quite soft, so I typically stop it down to 1.8 or 2.0.

Click to expand...

+1

I have both lenses and plan to keep both. I also use the 50 1.4 for indoor portraits and shots of the kids. Its certainly not as sharp as the 24-70, but you don't need razor sharpness for portraits. I can achieve better subject isolation with the 50 and the bokeh is very nice.

I completely agree with these 2 guys! I have both and the 50 1.4 is amazing by f2.0 and makes my 5D3 nice and light when I chase my kids around the house. The bokeh is more dreamy at f2.0 and it is actually slightly less sharp than the 24-70mm MkII at f2.8. Primes definitely have their place in your arsenal of lenses and they force you to "think" about the shot more. So try it out and see if it will get your creative juices flowing.

infared · Oct 23, 2013

Eldar said:
infared said:

Eldar said:

infared said:

That is my quote "as good or better"... I read a review BEFORE I bought my lens (I just looked for 20min and cannot find the review...but I did read it) and there were sample photos showing less color fringing with the 17mm TSE II with 1.4X compared to the 24mm TSE. I was in shock. In any event ...I have shot images with the 17mm TSE II alone and with the 1.4X on the lens. I am very critical about image quality...I have to say...unless you are a professional Architectural Photographer and use the lens daily...or desperately need the f/3.5 for some reason or the slight extra swing/tilt..I cannot see buying both lenses. The results are really SURPRISINGLY fantastic with the converter on. It is something I would never even considered doing until I read the article.
So, raise your eyebrows if you want ...but it is a great setup.

Click to expand...

I'm happy for you for you enthusiasm over your 17mm setup, you have good reason to. But the review you refer to must be against the old 24mm TS-E. The version II is optically nearly perfect. Extremely sharp and sharper than the 17mm, CA, flare, distortion and vignetting is very well controlled and color and contrast are absolute top notch. And so is the 17mm. The pixle peepers will probably give the 24mm the highest grades, but to me, the quality differences between the two are academic.

I had not tried the 17mm+1.4xIII combo before, but did yesterday. It works surprisingly well, but the results are not as good as those you get from the 24mm TS-E 3.5L II (the differences are more than academic here). I did not do a very thorough test of how much tilt & shift I got from one compared to the other, but it seemed the 24mm gave me more of both. I'm sure someone else in here has done the comparison.

Click to expand...

OK...this is getting interesting....I think that I stand corrected that The review I read MUST have been comparing the 17mm II+1.4X III combo to the OLD 24mmTSE
So Eldar, thanks for checking that out and giving a personal report (I would but have no 24mm!). Question...did you compare with the lenses stopped down to 6.3 or 8?
The reason I ask is because if you take a look at the DigitalPicture Lens Comparison Tool (only web comparison that I can find), the results look VERY close. (Like say in a 20" x24" print are we going to see a difference?)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=487&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=3&LensComp=486&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

Any pics you can post?
I also apologize for my "perhaps" over enthusiasm.

Click to expand...

I just left on a business travel (currently sitting in an airport lounge), so it will be some time before I can post anything more than text.

In the TDP ISO chart comparison I think it´s clear that sharpness and contrast has taken a fair hit on the 17mm/1.4xIII combo. But the interesting question is of course what you would say looking at an actual image.

To compare with something else; Reuter published the statistics for the 100 best images of the year (2012). Which cameras, lenses, shutter speeds, ISO etc. was used. The most widely used lens was the 16-35mm f2.8L II. And it is beyond question that they have plenty of good images to choose from. If you compare the 17mm/1.4xIII combo to the 16-35 at 24mm f8, you´ll see that your combo is at least as good as the 16-35. So equipment wise you are positioned to produce image of the year quality with what you have.

That was my point..hit the sharpness and contrast a little with PS and who will know the difference. When I soot something with that rig it is always on a tripod and always stopped down..and when I see the real world results there is just no complaint from me! Thanks for the feedback...I am going to check out that comparison to the 16-35 II zoom on TDP!

Marsu42 · Oct 23, 2013

neuroanatomist said:
Sounds like you've got the Mirror Lockup (MLU) function turned on. First shutter press locks up the mirror, second one takes the picture. It times out after 30 s if you don't take the shot, and the mirror flips back down. Live View obviates MLU.

+1 ... and for getting help with ML, their own forum is a much better place: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/

J.R. · Oct 23, 2013

Drizzt321 said:

I see two possibilities -

1) The DR time-bomb will detonate; OR
2) The mirrrorless crowd will have a field day

Cheers ... J.R.

Alrik89 · Oct 23, 2013

skoobey said:
Alrik89 said:

skoobey said:

Is there a massive difference between f4 and 2.8 considering sharpness?

Click to expand...

You shoot stopped down, so why should sharpness at wide-open matter?

Click to expand...

I'm asking at f8 for two different lenses? I don't care about sharpness wide open.

It is not easy, to put the question right, isn't it?
And, wow, you already got an answer concerning sharpness with a stopped-down aperture:

Alrik89 said:

I'm totally constructive. Every lens delivers sharp pictures when stopping down, even crappy low-budget lenses. So, there is no significant difference in sharpness between the macro-IS and the macro-NonIS. Therefore it comes down to another crucial point: the image stabilization.

Click to expand...

Mt Spokane Photography · Oct 23, 2013

The Amazon price jumped back up. It was one of those one day deals.

Triggyman · Oct 22, 2013

neuroanatomist said:
I have the 'holy trinity' – 35L, 85L II, 135L. Well spaced, and a versatile collection of focal lengths. In your place, I think I would be looking at the 85/1.8 next. IMO, it's one of the best values in the Canon lineup in terms of IQ per dollar. The 100/2 is its close cousin in build an image quality, and also an excellent lens. Not sure what body you're using, but I found 85mm on APS-C to be excellent for tight portraits, but 100mm to be slightly too long, at least for indoor use.

Thanks for your advice. I got a 5DM3. Looks like when building up primes, one needs to plan carefully.

In my situation, I didn't plan ahead. I acquired my 1-year old 100mm 2.8L Macro about 6 months after the 24-105.

I just got the 35mm f/2 IS today, and I'm in love with it since it's my favorite focal length and I judged the focus is bang on for my camera body. So it's either the 50 or 85 next. One of those Focal lengths will be covered by the 24-105mm albeit at f/4.

alexanderferdinand said:
If you find an used 135L, check it.
I got mine for €800 (around $1000), and simply love it.
The 85/1,8 comes very close, much cheaper.
Sweet pain of choice, good luck!

Thanks, I will take a look at the 135L, but it's kind of close to the 100mm Macro. Wait, I don't have 135mm focal length...

Valvebounce · Oct 22, 2013

Hi folks.
Wow that poor little pony, don't they enforce weight limits, as in I went for a 2 hour trek in AZ when I was there and they put me on this thing like a cart horse, because of my weight, and I know I weigh less than her!

Also talk about a lame event, you want action look for a British gymkhana, 6 or 8 in the ring at the same time doing roughly the same thing, round the marker at each point and plant a flag , retrieve the flag etc all done at 2 or more times her speed! Now that gets busy and a bit exciting if you are in to things you have to feed but not with gasoline!

Edit

Jim Saunders said:
I take barrel racing to mean like this, rather a different thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8l_Cb7aRopc

Jim

On the other hand this looks more exciting, still think it needs at least 2 in there at the same time. ;D ;D

Cheers Graham.

Rienzphotoz said:
jdramirez said:

emag said:

Ok...I'll ask the one question no one else has.....

What's a 'flag racing' event?

I think you handled the situation well.

Click to expand...

think of a rodeo with barrel racing' that, but with a flag that you have to jam into a pot of dirt at the end of the run.

Click to expand...

I thought I knew what flag racing was (which obviously was incorrect ... I thought it was like drag racing) ... but your explanation has me confused ... now I don't know what is flag racing ... earlier, at least I thought I knew what it was and was blissfully ignorant ... after your explanation I did a youtube search and clicked on the first (below) video that google threw at me ... now I am a thoroughly confused person. ;D
Flag Racing

unfocused · Oct 22, 2013

I struggle with this too and I tend to err on the side of not bothering to charge because it's less of a hassle (if I charged what my time is worth based on my real job, no one could afford me).

Lately though, I've been getting enough requests that I need to address this. A few thoughts based on what I either have done or intend to do.

Whatever you charge, let them know that you are giving them a "friends or family discount" so they don't tell all their neighbors that they got their portraits shot for $XX dollars. Tell that that you would ordinarily charge about $XXX or whatever and that because they are friends you want to do this for them as a favor at a deep discount.

Get them to sign a model release as part of the deal. Explain that the tradeoff for the discount rate is that you want to be able to post pictures to your website to generate more business or use them in brochures, etc.

If they refer someone to you and you aren't comfortable charging the friends of a friend $500 or something like that, tell the new customer you are giving them a discount because your friend Joe sent them to you.

Have business cards printed up if you don't already. I like moo.com. Enclose a half dozen or so cards with the pictures or jump drive or whatever you give the people and ask them to share them if they like the pictures. Even if they don't, it will show them that you are serious and take their business seriously.

Finally, some food for thought: most of my career has been in government/politics. I know a very successful lobbyist and when friends ask him how he decides what to charge people he has a amazingly candid answer: "I check them out and decide what is the most I can possibly charge them that they will be willing to pay, and that's what I charge them."

Drizzt321 · Oct 22, 2013

If the 70-200 2.8 IS v2 comes below $1800 I might be forced to buy it on general principle. I can manage it, but I'd like to pay off my CC before I buy it. But at that price, new, that's just too good to pass up.

Cptn Rigo · Oct 22, 2013

Hi Everyone!

I pulled the trigger with the 24-70L 2.8 II, so I bought his 82mm UV filter... however... the 82mm Kaesemann polarizer is over 200 dlls!!!... auch...

I already have the 77mm Kaesemann polarizer.

Someone has tried to use a 77mm filter with the 24-70L II with an step down filter adapter?

How bad is the vignette?

Thanks Everyone!

Drizzt321 · Oct 22, 2013

bvukich said:
Zv said:

Jim Saunders said:

Zv said:

Jim Saunders said:

I appreciate the weight savings, but I'll take the latitude to run on alkalines if I need to do so. My $0.02. I wonder why the battery pack isn't shaped like the usual 4 AAs? That seems like a good idea sitting here.

Jim

Click to expand...

I use rechargeable Sanyo eneloops. I didn't think anyone used Alkaline anymore!

Click to expand...

I don't, I have rechargeables for all of mine; Still I appreciate being able to fall back to something if I somehow get sideways. This is part of why I have battery grips for both of my smaller bodies too.

Jim

Click to expand...

I know what you mean, it's like a safety net just incase you forget to insert the batteries the night before! (Always paranoid it's going to happen before a big shoot!).

I've never liked the idea of battery grips. I'd rather just chuck an extra battery in my bag. The 5D2 and 7D battery lp e6 last forever. I think I could get 500 + shots easily from one, maybe even 700. With 2 you could shoot a wedding. However, I guess it depends what kinda stuff you do like timelapse etc.

Number of times I've had to change the battery in one day of shooting is almost zero. Sometime all I need is 5D2, lens one battery and 32Gb memory card and I'm set for a walkabout.

Click to expand...

I like the battery grip not only for the extra battery (which is more than twice the shots, if you halve the drain on a battery the run time increases by more than double), but for ergonomics.

An LP-E6 does last a long time though; I shot a wedding on Saturday, gripped 5D3, 4606 shots over 11 hours, one battery was still at 45% the other was at 47%.

Yea, I didn't use to use the grip (5d2, then 5d3), but I recently got the grip for the 5d3 and it's well worth it for the ergonomics for portrait mode. Plus it'll help balance out the 70-200 2.8 IS v2 whenever I get around to getting it.

Rick6961 · Oct 22, 2013

loetleen said:
Just tried to reproduce it again, this time with a 580EXII. Same result, flash never fails. So, 5D MkIII with latest firmware and 600EX-RT or 580EX II no flash problems like you are experiencing.

Is your ISO set manually? Typically it seems to fail more at higher ISO's. Also, my flash is set to ETTL, camera is set to manual shutter as well as f-stop and the auto focus is ON. Take a picture (in a dimly lit room), Wait about 1-5 seconds after the green confirmation light goes out. This is when I experience the problem.

jdramirez · Oct 22, 2013

when hand holding, my first shot is for my finger depression, my second shot I expect to be stable.

Vossie · Oct 22, 2013

I use a b+w UV mrc f-pro filter on my 135L. I did not see any advantage for the more expensive xs-pro as the slightly thicker f-pro does not give vignetting in this focal range. I do use the more expensive xs-pro's on my wide angle lenses.

From time to time I use a LEE 3 stop ND filter on it, to be able to use it wide open in bright light.

CarlTN · Oct 22, 2013

Re: 200 f2.0 first dissapointed customer ever?

eml58 said:
But I also owned the Nikon D800, and my copy had the left/right/upside down/whatever, focussing issue, Nikon "fixed" it 3 times before eventually replacing with a new Body, which I promptly sold, with no regrets.

Would this speak to the likelihood of a used D800 having such an issue? Btw, just what is the issue you're talking about?

BLFPhoto · Oct 22, 2013

Re: IQ of Canon 135mm f/2 prime on a 5DII VS 5DIII??

In short, no. When the shot is well focused, I find no tangible difference between electronic view or print between the lens on either my Mk III or Mk II.

The lens plays well with both camera's focusing systems, with the well-known Mk II AF limitations being no worse or better with this lens.

The Mk III is more effortless focusing with this lens with the wider, and more accurate array of focus points, allowing off-center composition without focus-recompose technique that can be an issue with super-shallow DOF capable lenses like the 135 L. Nevertheless, understanding the Mk II focus system and it's limitations, I've never really had an issue getting the shots I want out of that combination with the 135 L.

preppyak · Oct 22, 2013

What will be really fascinating is that it apparently won't have video recording...I'll be curious to see how Nikon is pricing this. In some ways, it feels like an extremely niche product that would be expensive; on the other hand, the specs seem to indicate they are gonna price it low.

AlanF · Oct 22, 2013

Kernuak said:
As a little perspective. If you cropped the 5DMkIII 1.3x, you would end up with roughly a 13 MP image, compared to the 16 MP image of a 1D MkIV.

That is perfectly consistent with what I wrote about the 1D IV having a factor of 1.1x more reach, not 1.3x. The 5DIII 22.3 megapixels cropped 1.3x in both height and width does reduce it to a 13.2 MP image, as you wrote. If you use a lens with 1.1x more reach (ie 1.1x longer) than that added to the 1D IV, then it magnifies the image by 1.1x in width and 1.1x in height. So the image is magnified by 1.21x, and 1.21x13.2 = 16 MP. In other words, using a 1.1x longer lens with the 5DIII expands the 13.2 MP area to 16 MP.

Don Haines · Oct 22, 2013

ajfotofilmagem said:
I do not know the specific illuminator , but I'm sorry to take your hopes : Illuminator on camera with 98 LED or 140 LED providing terrible light . Let me explain: These LED "high bright " has very low power ( individually) and hundreds of them are still weak . These have LED angle light scatter about 30 degrees , and the index reprodição color is pretty poor . In practical terms , the range is up to 2 meters, the light only illuminates reasonably well the image center ( wide angle ) and the corners are much darker , and the color is greenish inevitably . If the manufacturer had the courage to inform the specifications, we would see that this illuminator does not emit the full spectrum of light , making pale red , or white balance that can correct . Working with LED illuminators for several years , and build my own illuminators at a time when there was only one brand available . I built my most powerful LED illuminators with these 98 LED made in China , but abandoned some time later . Why ? Because there are now LED much better than these "high bright " cheap . All these LED power budget is 0.1 watt maximum. On the other hand, truly powerful LED (CREE brand) even has a single 5 watt LED, the light scattering angle is 100 degrees, evenly illuminating the entire picture, and the overall color reproduction is much better. So every true high power LED replaces up to 50 LED cheap. Here in Brazil, a reputable manufacturer builds illuminators luminance equivalent to 440 watt halogen illumination. Should be equivalent products in other countries, using CREE LED 5 watt each. See the website link of Brazil, and you can look for in your country a similar product.

http://www.elediluminacao.com.br/loja/catalogo-118970-27-iluminadores_on_camera

Thank you for the reply... I was wondering if they were any good... I think I'll stick with my studio light stands for a while.. ( a pair of 300Watt incandescent daylight bulbs)

SoerVolp · Oct 22, 2013

Mt Spokane Photography said:
More and more people are using camera phones, and the Nokia is the best. That means that it approaches the capability of a low end P&S. The Nokia cannot beat even a old Canon Rebel 300D at 6MP. Sensor size is the reason.

If sensor size is the reason then the Lumia 1020 should not only approach the capabilty of a low end P&S, but exceed it... Like, easily.
That phone's sensor is 2/3 inches big, which surpasses even the size of Canons pro-oriented PowerShots like the G16 by quite a bit, and is the same size as high-end point-and-shoots like the pricey Fuji X20.
The almost two year old predecessor of the Lumia, the Nokia 808, even has a 1/1.2 inch sensor, which size-wise almost plays in the same league as Nikons 1 series of ILC's and Sony's sensor-size-praised RX100.

But neither point-and-shoots nor smartphone cameras yet fulfill my imaging desires, which is why I'll stick to ILC's of at least APS-C.
My phone basically just makes phonecalls and plays music. Where I go, my EOS-M goes.

Cheers friends.

fragilesi · Oct 22, 2013

While I'd agree with most of the critique I wouldn't be so harsh on the first one. It's not one I would choose but the good news is that the timing is excellent, not easy getting both player's faces in the tackle and the focus is good. It looks like an important moment in the game so something can be better than nothing.

Maybe even a crop would rescue it a bit . . .

Sports photography involves a lot of luck and skill to get the very best photis and given that I assume you couldn't stand up to get less of the fence that's a worthwhile shot as you develop the techniques.

Pi · Oct 21, 2013

Right now BH and Amazon are offering double dip deals on selected lenses, check canonpricewatch. The last for 24 hours or a bit longer.

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics