Posts

albron00 · Jul 29, 2013

check the instruction manuals
you can find online int .pdf file

LetTheRightLensIn · Jul 29, 2013

distant.star said:
.
I know there are charlatans with cameras all over the place. And I know this isn't a forum for ranting about bad "photographers," but let this be a caution that if you don't have definite skills (and most here certainly DO) that it's not nice to take money from people for bad pictures.

Recently a member of my family I haven't seen in several years gave me a CD full of jpg images taken by a "professional" photographer. This person was paid $100 for two hours work taking pictures of two teen-age daughters and a couple of family portrait shots out on a seashore location. She dumped all the image files on a CD and gave them to my family member. She had been "recommended" by a hair dresser my aunt uses. Looking at the photographer's Web site she indicates she went to art schools and shot for magazines for several years. I wasn't exactly sure what my aunt wanted when she handed me the CD and asked me to "develop" the pictures and select the best 10 for printing.

Overall, the images are awful. Out of focus, grainy, even badly tilted horizons. The photographer used a Nikon D800 with a Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 lens. A little research suggests it is an inexpensive lens that has a reputation for generating noise on its own. The shoot day turned cloudy with a breeze and misty rain. Setting were typically ISO 2000 around f/4.5 to 5.6. Flying hair can be a good effect, yet this photographer made no attempt not to have it flying across their faces. There are dogs in some pictures (on laps, being held, etc.) and they look scared -- a look I've never seen in a dog's eyes. I was angry when I looked at the pictures and realized she took money from my aunt for this. She even had the audacity to include a document releasing the images for print -- but reassuring that she retained all rights.

When I talked with my aunt she finally admitted she was deeply disappointed with the pictures. She thought perhaps she may be wrong and the pictures really were good, but she wanted me to see them. I had to confirm for her that bad pictures are simply bad pictures. I did soften it by suggesting maybe the photographer was trying for a "soft focus" look with the girls. Also, maybe the tilted horizons were purposed to add "drama." I told her there wasn't much I was going to be able to do but that I would pick the best 10 and have them printed by a good printer.

I cleaned up the files as best I could -- sharpening, noise reduction, horizon straightening, etc. The lens even had mustache distortion that had to be corrected! Then I sent them off to Bay Photo for printing on metallic paper. I'm hoping for the best.

Sorry for the big rant, but bad photography is unfair, and it makes me angry. Not only is the $100 (plus cost for printing) gone, but the expectation of great pictures of cherished family members has also been stolen. The kids and their parents don't live on the seashore, and they can't be reassembled for a do over.

I've often encouraged inexperienced photographers here to take opportunities given -- but only with the explicit understanding that clients know what they can expect. If you're going to present yourself as a seasoned professional, you must produce professional results!

agreed, that said $100 isn't exactly a lot for two hours of shooting and, if it had been for carefully sorted and processed RAWs which would take hours more to do, it would be insanely cheap

what is bad is that many of that type get more clients and press than some really skilled people with solid equipment, but a lot of it is just how much gumption and what sort of a promoter you are, as with well I guess many things in life

mwh1964 · Jul 29, 2013

How about the 400 + 2x extender. I am on my way there and I do hope a 70-300L + the 70-200 + 2x EX will do the trick. I would love the 400 though but money wise that's not an option short term. Enjoy your travel first and foremost.

Jack Douglas · Jul 28, 2013

AlanF you've nailed it.

We've made our compromises for good reasons as have others who prefer alternate lenses. I'm just happy to provide first hand personal information on why I'm satisfied with the 300 so that it helps others make their decisions, including a mild defence of the 2X III extender.

Jack

CanonMan · Jul 28, 2013

Hi. Thanks for the reply.
According to the manual the Evaluative metering uses the whole frame. It seems that when I use the center AF point it seems to change to spot metering but obviously this cannot be true. I think !!!

Marsu42 · Jul 28, 2013

sagittariansrock said:
Those are advantages of an OVF over the LCD screen.

Correct, because this thread is about the 70d-style dual af.

sagittariansrock said:
However, those no longer hold for a proper EVF (except for battery consumption).

I'm also very sure evf will surpass ovf sooner or later, with equal optical quality plus many added features. But imho this point isn't reached yet, every time I look though a Sony "pro" camera with evf I'm getting the creeps, the image simply doesn't come close to what I see with my bare eyes.

sdsr · Jul 28, 2013

It depends what you want to do with it. I seldom photograph things that are moving around fast (and if I did I would probably use my 135L instead anyway), so the fact that the 100L isn't always very fast doesn't matter to me and the IS is very useful as light goes down when I'm not taking real macro photos (I seldom do that, either). A huge advantage to me of the L is its obviously shorter MFD - I may not want to take a lot of macro photos, but I often want to get close enough to take portraits of small things - flowers, kitten faces, etc. - and the three feet/one meter of the 100 f/2 often isn't close enough for me. Never having used the 100 f/2 I can't comment on its bokeh, but it's pretty wonderful on the 100L and, since you can get closer, you can get more blur in the background.

I had hoped to find comparisons on-line of 100 f/2 vs 100L with photos, but perhaps I didn't look long or carefully enough. But I did find this, which compares 85 f/1.8, 100 f/2 & 135 L which, if nothing else, might nudge you towards the 135L at some point (or not):

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=222419

As for the slow focusing of the L, well, it's all relative. Provided you stay within a narrowish range, it can be near-instantaneous, but if you switch from, say, a subject that's two feet away to one that's 20 feet away, it probably won't be and presumably (I've not tried) won't be fast enough for fast-moving sport where the distances keep changing significantly. The only time it's given me a problem, with considerable hunting, was in photographing some glass sculptures (hard to photograph in the best of circumstances) in a field late at night where the only source of light was the dim internal light in each sculpture. Manual override proved useful then (using the focus limiting switch would doubtless help too; I keep forgetting to use it). I've no idea of the f2 would have done any better.

jdramirez · Jul 28, 2013

BL said:
while i absolutely adore my 85 II for portraits, i end up using the 100L more often than not for baby pictures because of the really long MFD on the 85

I noticed that yesterday when I was messing with the doll. Outside of my 8mm and the 24-105... I won't be able to get all that close... but I guess that is what happens when you sell a lens that didn't really have to sell.

GaryJ · Jul 28, 2013

Sabaki said:
I keep imagining slapping my macro lens on this camera and using my finger to track insects etc on the touch screen for critical sharpness.

We May Dream

Sporgon · Jul 28, 2013

LetTheRightLensIn said:
jrista said:

People should just get out and take pictures...

Click to expand...

We do though, maybe even especially us DRippers. I took 360GB of photos over the last six weeks!
And 500GB of HD video!

Good job you weren't using a 75mp camera then .......

wsgroves · Jul 27, 2013

I cant go into a in depth review but I have the 28-75 and the 17-50 tamron and I like them both. My copy of the 17 is a touch sharper then my copy of the 28 but the 28 is years old where my 17 is relatively new.
Both take beautiful pictures for me (guess I have good copies of both). Def make sure you test it out to make sure you get a good copy of it (nice lens if you do).
Yes, it does have the buzzing motor but if you don't need instant instant auto focus it will not be much of a concern. I have no problems using it and getting good shots and im no pro.
It will hunt a little bit in very low light, but I think most lenses do.
All in all its a nice lens for me and the focusing of mine does not bother me.

michael6liu · Jul 27, 2013

Intriguing. It does look convincing.

rumorzmonger · Jul 27, 2013

silvestography said:
There was that guy who started a kickstarter for an external rear gasket that you could slap onto a partially sealed lens like the 100-400 to ensure better sealing, but that has since ended (he got his funds), and I have no clue where you'd actually go about buying one.

The more I read stories like this, the more I think it should be called "fraudstarter"...

silvestography · Jul 27, 2013

My trusty Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC. Works a dream even on my mere crop-sensored t3i/600d.

JPAZ · Jul 27, 2013

If you still have your old camera, consider a refurb from Canon using the Canon Loyalty Program. There's a 60D and a T4i (with a kit lens) for $719 and a couple of T3i's for $400's on the site right now. And the CLP gets a discount off that price.

mc41 · Jul 27, 2013

Not sure if this helps,but i had same problem,I saved photos to external drive,which wasn't formatted correctly and hence the problem.
once i saved all photo's to another external,reformatted the drive all was then ok

serendipidy · Jul 27, 2013

funkboy said:
shashinkaman said:

;D ???

Click to expand...

In my 25 years of use of computer communications, that's the first time I've seen a complete message effectively conveyed exclusively with smileys.

Well done sir.

8)

skfla · Jul 26, 2013

Etienne said:
Lots of patience required for all these goodies to trickle down to my price range :'(

+1

pulsarman · Jul 26, 2013

Arecibo Observatory about 90 minutes west of San Juan and 12 km south into the karst mountains. This is the largest single dish radio aperture on the planet (305 m diameter with Gregorian optics). Look up visitor center days and hours.

lion rock · Jul 26, 2013

To all of you who posted butterflies photos, hats off to all of you. It is not easy as the butterflies are usually very easily frightened off.
I found one that was not living and I took it home and took a photo of the bright colors of its wings using 3 extension tubes and Canon 100L-f/2.8 IS.

(edit) photo is full size no post or cropping.

sambafan · Jul 26, 2013

New Lomography Petzval Lens

I'm sure either Canon or Nikon would love to have this much buzz about a new lens.
Incredible enthusiasm - all it takes is an interesting product!
Looks like a fun, if limited lens at a good price, with lots of perks for early adopters (including a LOWER presale price).

I ordered one, and will post images once I have it in hand (months from now).

Click · Jul 26, 2013

Very good IQ. Great gallery too. Nice job!

canon23 · Jul 26, 2013

Mt Spokane Photography said:
Get a refurb MK 3 from Canon using the CLP program. Trade in a junked film slr or powershot for 15% off the refurb price. Just Google Canon loyalty program. They will want the serial number of the junk camera. It is supposed to be broken. They send you a mail label for it, it goes straight to recycling.

You might also try to see if they will discount a refurb 6D, they have them for $1569 now, and 15% off is better than a MK II.

Thx for the feedbacks All...& the cool info Mt SP...I just pulled the trigger for the refurb mark iii for $2545 that comes along w/a refurb camera should bag

dstppy · Jul 26, 2013

Excellent. Looks like I'm stoppin at the goodwill store tomorrow

Good thing the wife doesn't know about the 7D refurb

xps · Jul 26, 2013

" Canon sold 19% fewer digital cameras worldwide in the second quarter of 2013, compared to the same period last year – with demand for interchangeable-lens cameras falling 4%. However, Canon’s global imaging division sales revenue climbed 4.4% and the firm says it held the number-one spot for photo and video in the UK for the first half of 2013.
Canon 5D MKIII front

Sales of Canon compact cameras fell 26% worldwide from April-June 2013 in volume terms (year-on-year) but demand for the EOS 5D Mark III and EOS 6D DSLRs continued to grow and the EOS 700D ‘proved popular' in Japan over the three months.

‘As for digital compact cameras, sales volume declined from the previous year due to the market slowdown and increasing popularity of smartphones,' states Canon.

The firm says this was ‘despite efforts to increase sales through the introduction of new products such as the PowerShot SX280 HS – equipped with a high-magnification zoom lens that exceeds the capabilities of lenses offered by smartphones'.

Total camera sales revenue rose 0.8%, while Canon's inkjet printer sales jumped 17.3% despite a 3% drop in units sold.

On the future of its camera business, Canon points to a ‘sense of a slowdown in China and Europe', adding that its future priority will be on ‘profitability'.

Operating profit at Canon's Imaging System Business Unit fell 17.5% for the first six months of 2013, compared to a year earlier.

In a statement accompanying its latest business results, the company adds: ‘Demand for interchangeable-lens digital cameras is expected to continue growing, owing to an expanded user base in developed countries along with market growth in emerging countries.'

In the UK, meanwhile, Canon reports that it came top in photo and video sales for the six months to June, in both volume and value terms, and was also 'number one' in compact cameras.

According to figures Canon says it received from market analysts GfK – which GfK would not confirm when approached by AP yesterday – Canon led the market in digital interchangeable-lens cameras and compacts for the month of June.

Separately, news agency Reuters reports that Canon has cut its interchangeable-lens camera sales target to 9 million, from 9.2 million previously. However, Canon UK was not able to confirm this to AP."

from: http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/539870/canon-uk-boasts-number-one-spot-but-demand-dips-worldwide

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics