Posts

Mt Spokane Photography · Oct 14, 2013

The extra cost of the kit with lens is $600. if you can find it sold separately for less, grab it.
Big Value sells a split kit for $720 for the lens and 1769 for the body, total = $2489.

Adorama sells a USA model with Canon warranty for $2499 plus a 4% store reward ($100) which will buy a nice memory card, or a spare Canon battery and have enough left over to get a nice memory card for half price.
If you wait for a one day special deal, you might save $100 on ebay and break even with the Adorama deal, its pot luck.

Mt Spokane Photography · Oct 14, 2013

I'd certainly keep it, they make high end gear.

Mt Spokane Photography · Oct 14, 2013

The 40mm STM is excellent and doesn't cost much. Its a very small lens.

mb66energy · Oct 14, 2013

Drizzt321 said:
mb66energy said:

Eldar said:

Considering how much money we plow into these bodies, this could be a way to protect that investment. New sensors, speciality sensors, crop vs. FF etc. with firmware upgrades for improved processing etc., could let bodies live longer than the current "too few" years. But I guess you would need to upgrade your processing power as well, so I wonder how realistic it would be.

Click to expand...

That's true - especially the money for (good) bodies. And we invest time to learn how to operate (master?) such a camera. Exchangeable sensors would help me to use the sturdy and reliable 40D body with a video capable sensor.

In my opinion you are right with your remark about processing power: A new processor is a must for new sensors and the CPU cost is a minimal factor. Additionally the ADC design is connected to the sensor technology and must be on a "sensor-processor"-board.

I am happy that I use a 600D instead of a 7D which provides similar IQ - I do NOT shoot sports or other action so the speed of the 7D isn't necessary for me.

Click to expand...

Actually, a lot of the video is needing a more capable CPU & firmware, not the sensor. Although I'm sure there's a bit that can help out with that.

Something to think about for anything that's interchangeable...is the physical interface. Can you make a physical interface that has the tolerances, especially for changing a sensor, that also can provide something robust, with enough features so that you don't need to change it every generation, _and_ is small enough so that you don't get too big a camera. Just look at MF, even digital. There's a separate 'back' which is really the entire sensor & CPU & firmware along with memory card slots & external ports. As big as most small APS-C DSLR bodies. Sure, it's a much bigger chip, so you could compact some of that downwards, but it's still pretty bulky and not so easy to handle.

I have opened a 40D's back after it was fallen down from 1.8 m onto solid rock (with a holster bag) and it seemed dead (finally it was the broken battery compartment door which hasn't closed the interlock switch anymore): The camera is basically empty or better well tidied up. I think it would be a no brainer to make sensor/ADC/cpu units exchangeable.

About tolerances: Old style manual focus cameras had exchangeable screens and viewfinders like the F1n. I think precision was crucial because gaining good focus adjustment relied on the screen. A similar mechanics/mechanism should be well suited for sensors. Or think about the film "management" ...

LetTheRightLensIn · Oct 14, 2013

dr croubie said:
http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2013/10/world/how-to-be-a-photographer/index.html?hpt=hp_c4

Hah pretty spot on, although I think he is misguided on the last one and he sounded like someone being cliched and doing a bad job about writing about how to be a bad amateur photographer more than actually pulling that one off well.

Sith Zombie · Oct 14, 2013

Mt Spokane Photography said:
Sith Zombie said:

The D7100 sounds like the way to go, it'd be a great wildlife set up with that lens. Or you could temporally move to Nikon rumours and await news of the D400 ;D

Click to expand...

The person I bought the D300s from said his D7100 was not suitable for wildlife and was poor at tracking. He has several Nikon bodies and uses his D800 which is good at tracking. Do you use a D7100 to track BIF?

I seriously doubt if we will see a D400 soon, and certainly not for what I paid for the D300S, which I think was a very good price.

I'll probably sell the 200-400 eventually, but I do buy lenses locally on craigslist when the price is right, then play with them a while and keep the best ones if I find myself using them. I have a old Nikon Film body (several actually), but none of them was really suitable for a really nice lens.
I'll keep the D300s and use it as a 2nd camera to my 5D MK III. I might then sell my old 40D.

I'v used it for an event, and thought it was pretty snappy, good accuracy too. Didn't use it for BIF though and I guess thats the ultimate test for an af system. Congrats on the D300s tho, looks like a great camera!

Mt Spokane Photography · Oct 14, 2013

Hannes said:
Are the lenses canon or another brand? If they are sigma for example you may find it easier sending the combo to sigma but if all images are unsharp with +20 afma I would suspect the body

You can't register non Canon lenses at CPS.

awinphoto · Oct 14, 2013

mackguyver said:
awinphoto said:

I just looked... is this equipment insurance or health insurance... I was looking for health/medical insurance... it appears this is equipment insurance.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I'm still in my Monday morning fog :-[. I misread your post, but in terms of health insurance, I'm guessing PPA will probably do what the MLA (Modern Language Association) and other creative groups have done and drop their health insurance due to Obamacare. If you're reasonably young and healthy, your best bet is a high deductible plan with riders for Rx and a handful of office visits. That keeps your premium low, but is what's called catastrophic insurance, which means that if you get really sick or injured, you'll have to cough up $4k or whatever your deductible is to cover the bills. I did this when I was younger with the theory that I and my family could scrounge up the money should I fall of a ladder or something. Humana and United generally offer pretty good plans.

Otherwise, you'll have to take your chances on the new exchange. Just be sure not to buy the really cheap plans from unheard of companies. There's a company out of Texas called UICI that has changed it's name 10x and operates 100 shell companies. They are the scourge of the insurance industry (I have 10 years in this world) and have had the unfortunate luck of having to deal with them for my wife's claims. If you've ever seen The Rainmaker, they are the real Great Benefit. Go with a brand company, Blue Cross, Cigna, Humana, United, and you'll have the same lousy insurance as the rest of us, but you won't get totally screwed.

Thanks for your input =)

mackguyver · Oct 14, 2013

rmfagan said:
Oh, and no spills are breaks. I did secure insurance beforehand, as suggested on here, which made the whole experience much more fun since I wasn't paranoid about dropping CPS's 400 II. But nonetheless, I avoided getting trucked on the sidelines or dropping the monopod rig while switching out and shooting the 70-200.

Great work and it must've been a blast to shoot the game. That's on my photo bucket list, but with Florida State being my local university (and having no ties to it), I don't think I'll be doing it anytime soon.

I'm happy to hear that the insurance gave you some piece of mind. As I said, my CPS loan of the 800mm was nerve-racking, particularly at one moment when I forgot to lock down my tripod head and it almost crashed all the way down the ground. I caught it just in time, but that could have been expensive! Of course that doesn't compare to a 300+lb linebacker falling on you!

I hope you get to shoot some more games

AcutancePhotography · Oct 14, 2013

I wished Pentax would come out with a full frame camera.

But, that K3 looks like a sweet camera. Looking forward to reading some test reviews. For the price, you can't beat it.

The K5 and now the K3 are making me re-look at my decision to go full frame.

Bruce 101 · Oct 14, 2013

Sporgon said:
Very briefly and talking FF: it should be very good across the frame when stopped down a little from 70 to about 120.

From 200 to 300 it should sharp in the very centre stopped down 2. But the mid frame will be soft. Don't even look in the corners.

It's overall performance is much more suited to crop sensors.

I agree with most (maybe all!) of this.

But, the non-L 70-300 seems to perform best on a full frame @300mm if the center is your primary concern. If you believe the TDP charts. Otherwise, it's better on a crop.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=358&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=3&LensComp=358&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=3

FWIW, I have found the non-L 70-300 to perform better - particularly @300mm - on the Sl-1 than it does on the 60D.

I too am really wondering about the accuracy of the TDP charts as to the L version of the 70-300. If you do a comparison of the L version to the non-L verson in the center @300mm, the difference is noticeable but not huge. Of course, across the frame, there is no comparison - even at f/8:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=358&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=3&LensComp=738&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=3

And at f/11, (I know, I know, who uses f/11 on these lenses...) the L and the non-L appear equally sharp in the center on full frame:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=358&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=4&LensComp=738&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=4

If you are using the non-L 70-300, you just need to know its limitations to get the best bang out of it. But it is possible to get sharp images from it all the way to 300mm.

AvTvM · Oct 14, 2013

RGomezPhotos said:
RVB said:

This Zeiss Flickr accounts shows a selection of images taken with the 55.. I believe this one is by Lloyd Chambers http://www.flickr.com/photos/carlzeisslenses/10185277475/#

Click to expand...

One word: WOW!

This lens is SO CLOSE to medium format... Even the D800 isn't enough to fully utilize the lens. You get the resolution, but not the tonal range.

Again: WOW!

Your "WOW-ing" is meant satirical, right?

The linked picture is just another addition to the gazillion of poorly composed, ultra-boring cat pictures on the net. I hope it is taken with an iphone since it would be an insult if it were to come from somebody allowed to use a $ 4k Zeiss lens or a MF camera. ;-)

Oct 14, 2013

Thanks. It was used at a charity ball at the weekend which raised £50,000+

expatinasia · Oct 14, 2013

Interesting. Surprised more here do not have the miniature.

dgatwood · Oct 14, 2013

Definitely second the opinion of doing it in software. The way I usually do it is:

Boost the contrast as needed, then tweak the exposure to suit.
Tweak the color balance away from blue a bit, then tweak the red-green balance as needed.
If necessary, use split-toning to add a bit more yellow/orange in the highlights.
Go back and push the shadows and pull back the highlights and blacks to suit.

Usually with those tweaks, I can get a decent-looking picture even on pretty nasty days. As always, YMMV, and the devil's in the details.

Oh, and occasionally, I bump up Lightroom's clarity slider and reduce the saturation.

LetTheRightLensIn · Oct 13, 2013

xvnm said:
Hi,

We all have seem charts and charts in most lens reviews showing how IQ (sharpness, vignetting, CA) varies with aperture.

What about focus distance? Does it affect IQ to focus closely vs. at infinity? And lens distortion?

yes, it can even change the focal length too!

many lenses become poor near the MFD, a few become slightly worse at great distances instead

some of the tamron 17-50 28-75 lenses tend to be strong at infinity or longer distances that at say 6-8' distances.

70-200 f/4 IS is very sharp at 200mm f/4 at maybe 4.5' and farther, but shoot it 200mm f/4 at MFD? it looks worse than using a coke bottle!

Hydrogen · Oct 13, 2013

ScottyP said:
Correct. Looking for the Mitros+, which is the new one with the built-in wireless transmitter & receiver trigger. Not the regular Mitros flash.
Cannot find it, though others seem to say they know where it is, and how much it is. I am unable to find it using either Google or the Phottix website. Am I just missing it? Is it available in Asia, but not available in the US?

Looks like it's available now:
http://www.phottixstore.com/store/phottix-mitros-ttl-transceiver-flash.html

Dylan777 · Oct 13, 2013

Cali_PH said:
So, latest rumors from that site:

- Official announcement due October 16th; potentially due out in December
- 2 models, A7 (24MP sensors, about $1700 US, $1998 w/kit 24-70) & A7r (36MP $2198 body only)
- New sensors; details not specific
- Interesting rumor that initial offering will include lens mounts for free (Canon, Nikon, Leica). If true, I'd guess manual focus only. Could be smart as there are few native lenses expected at launch.
- Focus peaking, eye AF, Wifi, 1/8000 shutter, weather sealed tiltable screen, no IBIS.

I gotta admit, if this thing performs well, I'll be tempted to try one out with my Canon lenses for landscape shots!

The rumor pictures look good. They claimed AF is faster than RX1 - which is a plus. If body size is slightly bigger than RX1, I'm all in with 36MP, A7 R + Zeiss 50mm f1.4 to start. I would like to add 14, 16, or 17mm and 85mm zeiss to this compact system. I hope Fuji will release some FF retro soon. I LOVE-LOVE-LOVE the looks of X100s.

I might end up keeping just one 5D III + 70-200 and/or 135L.

Pierre Bonenfant · Oct 13, 2013

Hi all,

Here's a couple of shots from my sport gallery. All images are from the Laval university ROUGE et OR teams and

were taken with the 1DX and various lenses.

You can see the all the precise exifs on my gallery: www.pbase.com/pbon

1. Soccer

2. Basketball

3. Football

4. Rugby

Don't be shy to visit me and leaves comments at www.pbase.com/pbon

Pierre

bestimage · Oct 13, 2013

Folks, I have similar question on the subject matter, I do portraits and weddings, I have been thinking to upgrade my lights from Elinchrom to either Broncolor or Profoto. I like bluish tint of Bron while I heard so many good things about Profoto also, I like bluish tint of bron while I feel that Profoto is crisp but flat and slightly warmer with no accent like Bron. I Being in Canon system, my feel is that Canon lenses are little bit on cooler side, so my question is what system would be best in combination with Canon, Bron or Profoto. Your input will be greatly appreciated, thank you all in advance.

Xarathion · Oct 13, 2013

Pi said:
Hard to draw any conclusions from downsized images.

It's a little clearer on the Part 2 YouTube video if you watch in 1080p. He does a zoomed in side-by-side image comparison in Lightroom, moving around to different parts of the frame.

PKinDenmark · Oct 13, 2013

Vern said:
Very nice work w the 24TS - here's a shifted one of the Cathedral in Uppsala.

Hi Vern - what an impressive cathedral - and a very good interior photo. I like the colours very much.

scottkinfw · Oct 13, 2013

Really nice shot, difficult conditions!

sek

Jim Saunders said:
So this happened today, under miserably unpredictable light which was barely possible with a 1Dx and a 70-200 f/2.8L; I'd have given my foot - well, someone's foot - for a 135 f/2.

Jim

thearsenal · Oct 13, 2013

Last Sunday (October 6, 2013), I shot some pictures at a local football (soccer) club. Because the other team was better than the team I support, the action took mostly place on the other side of the field. I managed to shoot some decent pictures though.

I used my 50D and my 70-200 2.8 L.

jdramirez · Oct 13, 2013

Joshua said:
jdramirez said:

gary said:

Avoiding who was right and who was wrong in these circumstances, the Priest should not have made the ultimate threat to walk away from the wedding, no wonder the bride looks mortified, unforgivable

Click to expand...

maybe they, the bride and groom, will get something out of it... like the one couple who got married on the Colbert report.

Click to expand...

I don't get it, what happend to the couple who got married on the Colbert Report? By the way, shouldn't a priest be used to camera clickings as his profession comes with this sort of public interest? To me the priests thread to walk away is a "No-Go" in regard of the feelings of the bride. She was for sure shocked and mortified - just at the noment that should be her finest in her life. I feel sorry for her and am missing the priests empathy.

the government shutdown prevented them from getting married at the Jefferson memorial... so they were on a show like today and then on the same trip they got married on the Colbert report. it was really funny. I'd encourage you to go see that episode.

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics