Posts

AudioGlenn · Aug 11, 2013

This is funny. (no offense to the op, I just mean that I share your grief).

We went to WPPI in Vegas with my core team (5 of us at the time) and asked someone to take our picture. Everything was set up beforehand. You would think that at a convention for wedding photographers, that we would be able to find a photographer competent enough to take the shot with proper leading lines, composition, etc.... HA no chance. We eventually found someone who was nice enough/interested enough to have a mini lesson on composition from our lead guy and we got our shot.

The point is, what was obvious to all of us as photographers was not clear to any other photographers at this convention FULL of photogs. I'd lower my expectations to avoid the frustration but be open to guiding someone through to get the shot you want. I also wouldn't expect that because someone is carrying a dSLR that they know how to use it.

Again, I feel your pain.

jdramirez · Aug 11, 2013

terminatahx said:
The 7D is an excellent body for the price, but based on limitations you've experienced with your current body, the 5DIII is the clear choice. The only downside being the and fps slightly slower than the 7d.

I'm guessing you meant to say being the "MONEY".

I want a Porsche Cayanne... but I guess I have to settle for a Honda Pilot. But the Cayanne is the perfect car for me, except that I can't afford my house.

RAKAMRAK · Aug 11, 2013

Thank you Mr. Neuro. Thank you very much.

Northstar · Aug 11, 2013

Your shots are nice, but i would like to see more "faces and emotions" to go along with some of the beautiful scenic shots you've shown....the famous Muhammed Ali / Sonny Liston shot comes to mind as an historic example.

If you google search the "best sport images of all time" you'll find that roughly 1/2 of them are shots showing emotion of some type.

that would be my critique of your photos....very nice scenery, but not enough emotions/expressions/faces.

good luck.

Northstar · Aug 11, 2013

nice shots, I like the shot of Paddy!

gordonbb · Aug 11, 2013

Mt Spokane Photography said:
How can we help you? A 5 year old lens fails. Get it fixed or buy a new one.

Sorry, thought it was fairly clear from my post that I was going to get it repaired. Not deriving my income from photography and thus not using my gear as much as other users of L lenses might I was surprised that the lens had failed with what appears to be an intermittent electrical fault after, I would guess, about 10 - 20,000 exposures.

What I am wondering is if others have had similar issues with the 24-105?

I am not going to use a third party to repair the lens nor do I intend to attempt any repair myself. I know that with the lens retailing for $700 or so these days dropping $300 on a repair leaves little residual value in the lens for resale.

Kernuak · Aug 11, 2013

Another shoot I did on Friday evening at an exclusive location oipened up for us.

Dreaming by Kernuak (avalonlightphotoart.co.uk), on Flickr

Playing with Hair by Kernuak (avalonlightphotoart.co.uk), on Flickr

The Orangery by Kernuak (avalonlightphotoart.co.uk), on Flickr

Under the Arch by Kernuak (avalonlightphotoart.co.uk), on Flickr

mrsfotografie · Aug 11, 2013

Sporgon said:
mrsfotografie said:

Thanks all, had a great day photographing 'living statues' with fill flash. Alrhough it felt a little bit confusing at times I'm pretty happy with some of the results Here's a sample:

Click to expand...

Well I think in your original post you said you wanted a straight forward technique to give a natural light.

I couldn't tell you've used fill in flash in that picture !

Sporgon, thanks! Exactly the type of result I was looking for; flash without it being obvious. I even wrote your simple guidelines on a sticky note as a reminder. I ended up shooting most of my pictures in Tv because light conditions were varying too much (clouds, sunshine) to shoot fully manual. I did use the camera in fast flash sync as well. I'm really happy and think I've reached a milestone today (but still have much to learn).

mrsfotografie · Aug 11, 2013

DARSON said:
I finally got it but it was quite a challenge to catch the best shot.
I was shooting with all 3 lenses but at the end 70-200mm F2.8 IS L USM was the winner.
Thank to all for input

Cool! We're curious about the result

chauncey · Aug 11, 2013

I can see how using a bellows system could be used for macro work in the studio but...would be cumbersome in the field though.
That 35% decrease in lens sizes, I suppose could be made up by cropping your image...those Zeiss 500 mm lenses...are they mirror lenses?

tazdog · Aug 11, 2013

Thanks for the reply's folks

brad-man · Aug 11, 2013

I'd be interested to know how Sony's licensing agreements for their sensors (particularly exmor) are structured. Do they simply sell their sensors to other companies to do with as they wish? Or does Sony have control over what "types" of cameras their sensors are used in by other manufacturers. If the latter, then Sony could dominate the FF mirrorless market for some time to come. The only competition being a $6000 Leica shouldn't be much of a problem.

notapro · Aug 11, 2013

I have had positive experience with Rogue flash gels.

http://www.expoimaging.com/product-detail.php?cat_id=13&product_id=25&keywords=Rogue_Flash_Gels_-_Combination_Kits

The "gel band" is easy to use and manage. Seems to be a viable option for flash units, Canon or otherwise.

mycanonphotos · Aug 10, 2013

The 100-400 is already a killer Lens. Some individuals don't understand the requirements in engineering for such a design of a straight f4 and of course the R&D behind it.. If Canon can robustly improve its IQ, and IS then it's a solid improvement much like the 70-200 IS II. If Canon takes it a step further and can improve its breathing by making it a twist zoom (WOW).. I rather enjoy the push pull but on the other hand HATE the breathing it has during zooming in and out. It has a rather nice Bokeh at 5.6 throughout its zoom range so I'm not worried about it being a f2.8 for any extra... having the 100-400 with its capability to drop it on an APS-C for extended range or putting an extender on it for full frame is paramount for long range wildlife and sports work. O ya, I'd appreciate it if they could improve the hood mount as well. When Canon comes out with the new 100-400 I'll buy it hands down regardless of what they do to it...( as long as it has a better IQ)

dgatwood · Aug 10, 2013

mrsfotografie said:
Two focal lengths aimed at the same target???

That would be my guess as well. One camera probably triggers the other one so that every close-up shot is paired with a bit longer shot just in case the cropping on the close-up isn't quite ideal.

winglet · Aug 10, 2013

This whole discussion makes me happy, just to hear lenses described in terms other than their sheer ability to render sharpness or based on some DxO lab test. Makes me feel like the "character" of a specific lens might actually still matter!

The 50 f1.2 is one my favourite lenses, it's become my walk-around favourite even more than the 24-70 in that it forces the "sneaker-zoom" and more thought for composition. Wide-open takes some practice, but the effort is well worth it. The lens itself has been around long enough that it's profile is well-known and easily corrected in post with Lightroom or Optics Pro if you're into that sort of thing.

But I just love the pop this lens gives. If you can get a deal on one I'd say go for it, as the only real downside is cost.

AlanF · Aug 10, 2013

Very, very fast and accurate. Apart from the modern feedback loop technology employed in the newest lenses, the wider the aperture the more the light that is used for processing and the greater the sensitivity. Remember, your lens focusses at its widest aperture when stopped down.

hrjoe · Aug 10, 2013

Dylan777 said:
Thanks kaihp

Last 10yrs, I travel to China 3-5 times a year. I'm well aware of Chinese holidays. That's why we hoping to get the build schedule beginning of 2nd week of Sep.

This year, the mid-autumn festival takes place from September 19th to 21th.
--> Chinese Mid-Autumn Festival Dates

David Hull · Aug 10, 2013

LetTheRightLensIn said:
David Hull said:

Aglet said:

David Hull said:

The noise has never bothered me in these things it has always been the banding.

Click to expand...

EXACTLY
I'd have kept my 5d2 and 7d if it were not for the plaid/stripes.
FWIW, the 5d2 felt pretty crude in some ways anyway so I certainly don't miss it as much as the 7d.

I'm also interested in seeing whether the outer area of the 70d sensor that is NOT dual-sensel equipped will provide a slightly different noise pattern than the main area.
I can sometimes make out the crop area of my d800's sensor IF I do things just right and push it really hard from a dark frame shot; and that's not as much of a structural difference as dual vs single sensels.

I'll do a lens cap shot as soon as I can get my hands on a 70d. I'd like to see how much better it may be than my 60d in terms of FPN.

Click to expand...

A lens cap shot would be good to see. I think that is the best way to see what is really lurking down there.

They must be doing something different in this sensor because all of the sudden they are able to read out 40MP at 7 FPS in this thing while the best they seemed to be able to do with the 5DIII was 22 MP at 6 FPS which is almost 2x the processing speed still using the so-called DiGiC 5+. Maybe in the process of doing that whey also cleaned up the FPN somewhat.

There has always been confusion on the forums and the threads with regard to the DxO measurements and some of the so-called “comparison tests” that people love to show. The DxO result is really showing random noise effects but the thing that shows up so strongly in the ad-hoc demos is really the pattern noise.

I find that the 5DIII is a significant improvement over the 5DII and supposedly the 6D is even better so perhaps they have finally figured out how to read out the sensor nicely.

It will make the threads a lot more fun for a while anyway ;-)

Click to expand...

Well the 5D3 solved the pattern banding at low ISO in ONE direction but it still has oooodles of it the other direction so IMO it does no better in that regard than the 5D2, hatched or striped it still sticks out to the eye.

Now the 6D did do better more like back to the old 1D3/40D days.

It seems that the 70D MAY, still no full black frame so it's hard to be sure, also the test pre-production cameras have often had much better banding than release cameras, bit it seems it may have fixed the banding and clumping problems so that the low ISO shadow noise now has the nice character of Exmor more or less.

However, at least going by the masked area, the regular fine grained shadow noise is actually maybe a trace worse than the 7D if anything.

So on engineering DR it seems they have still made zero progress, most likely. But at least they may have finally fully solved the low ISO banding issues so you will at least be able, most likely, to get the most out of the shadow SNR that they do provide you with (although it seem still maybe 2+ stops behind Exmor for that). It may be all but entirely free of pattern banding and chroma and luma blobbing. But still quite noisy for the fine pattern noise. Anyway it might be a lot, lot nicer to deal with than most canon cameras other than the 1Ds3 and 6D and 1Dx and a decent deal nicer to deal with than those and like Exmor in that regard. But again the StdDev of the random black frame noise appeared to be very old school again.

The 5D3 did seem to improve high ISO banding of all types over the 5D2.

The striped pattern noise is pretty easy to deal with using available noise reduction tools which represents an improvement as far as I am concerned.

epsiloneri · Aug 10, 2013

Thanks! Indeed, my lens copy doesn't seem worse than anyone else's with regard to coma, and the Samyang 24/1.4 appears to be the significantly better option for stellar landscapes.

kaihp · Aug 10, 2013

Ah, OK.... SNAFU in other words. Just a pity that they didn't write this in the effing manual.

Thanks for the clarification.

MarkusXXX · Aug 10, 2013

Frodo said:
I would have thought that the reflectiveness of the digital sensor would have led to a technical workaround. Indeed, would you even need to measure light reflected off the sensor, rather than measure flash directly from the sensor?

If you read the sensor, then you've taken the picture. Maybe there could be special pixels that can be read independently but if there are only a few there would be aliasing problems and with many of them the image quality would suffer.

michi · Aug 10, 2013

So did I.

Mt Spokane Photography · Aug 9, 2013

I presume you have a 67mm thread on yours??

A set of step up / down rings should be cheap, I keep a full set of photodiox step up and step down rings. They come in very handy when I need to adapt something. You can use just one or stack several to get to the size you need. It just takes one to go from 67-72mm.

Just be sure to get a filter wrench.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Stepping-Adapter-49-82mm-82-49mm-DC147/dp/B008H430NU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1376096525&sr=8-1&keywords=step+up+rings

Mt Spokane Photography · Aug 9, 2013

It is often different in different cameras. There are different sensors and different processors. In addition, its something that is calibrated in each camera, and just like autofocus, it can be off.
Realistically, even the best metering systems can easily be fooled, so exposure compensation is commonly needed. Its the same for my Canon 5D MK III or my Nikon D800, easy to fool the exposure sensor.

The 1D X, for example has the ability to use colors.
Here is some info from a Canon Expert about the subject.
http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2011/1dx_rgb_meter_article.shtml

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics