Posts

ahab1372 · Jun 26, 2013

Recently I have seen a movie production outside with several light panels (LED I believe) about 1m2 (10sqft) in size

cid · Jun 26, 2013

Some photos from Bratislava city downhill (sponsored by some "unknown" energy drink

) Sadly I missed trainings and semifinals :-\
So enjoy only these couple of photos from finals. Shot with 60D + 24-70 II, Tv

city downhill by <CiD>, on Flickr

fugu82 · Jun 26, 2013

drmikeinpdx, good scientific approach to this issue.

tron · Jun 26, 2013

I have met some nice guys and exchanged names and phone numbers. Unfortunately I have also met disgusting professionals!

Now, please professionals DO NOT TAKE ME WRONG. I am not making generalizations in any way. I am just stating the fact (It's a long story...)

Same, previous year I met other people (from different countries) and had exchanged names, contacts and we even went out together that day.

tron · Jun 26, 2013

neuroanatomist said:
tron said:

neuroanatomist said:

I notice you left off the 300/2.8L IS II from your list...

Click to expand...

Are you thinking of it as a lighter/smaller alternative to 600 (perhaps with a 2X) ?

Click to expand...

Partly. But primarily for sports, as my daughters get to that point...

You are not thinking of making someone crazy by shooting first with your Canon S100 ps camera and then presenting the 1DX/300mm 2.8 combo after he shows you his "super" digital rebel as THE camera

? (The crocodile Dundee case...)

CarlTN · Jun 26, 2013

GMCPhotographics said:
funkboy said:

That is exactly the point I was (sleepily) trying to make: I'd guesstimate that 9 in 10 of the folks on forums that say "my copy of lens X is sharper than lens Y, I've tested them both" didn't actually calibrate their AFMA before they did their "testing", and it's awfully rare that anyone mentions that they actually *did* check AFMA beforehand. The same likely goes for people returning lenses because they got a "bad copy"...

Click to expand...

Guys, I'm not in the habit of posting any of my files at 100% on a public forum. I've been using my 85IIL and 135L in a professional manner for nearly six years now. I've used them both on my 5D/5DII and currently 5DIII camera progressions. Since the 5DII became available, I have microadjusted every lens which I currently use. I use Lensalign pro by Colorvision. I've used this to test everything from my Siggi 12-24mm through to a 400mm f2.8 L IS with a 2x TC on it.
My comments about my particular copy of the 85IIL and 135L have been observed on a consistent basis over the last six years. My second photographer's 135L seems a little sharper than mine, but her 85IIL isn't quite as sharp as mine, this is on her own 5DII's which are calibrated to her lenses. It's not MA in these cases but production variance in the optics. It's a good reason why I don't tend to trawl online lens charts becuase each lens is slightly different and most sites only test a few copies at best.
So when I say that my copy of the 85IIL is a tad sharper than my 135L, the emphasis here is on the MY copy. Your milage might vary somewhat.
Judging optical resolution is only one aspect of a lens...we all know how bad the purple fringing is with the 85IIL...and the AF is no ball of fire...or that the drive by wire AF feels a little weird to use...or that it weights almost as much as a 70-200 in a lens which is about 1/4 of the size.
But given the choice, I'd rather use the 85IIL over a 135L.

Interesting, but that preference is really mostly due to the wider field of view, and perspective, from having less focal length...is it not? No doubt you love the color and bokeh.

I've only rented the 85 f/1.2L once. I liked it, but overall not as much as my 135L. Certainly the focus by wire and slowness of AF is not useful. The sharpness by f/5.6 at infinity doing landscape, exceeded that of my 135. But below f/5.6, my 135 was sharper...at or near infinity focus. At closer focus, the plane is so shallow with both lenses, that it really comes down to which bokeh and field of view you prefer, in my opinion. For doing most portrait work, certainly the wider field of view could work better, it seems to me.

I do wish there was a zoom, perhaps from 90 to 125mm or 140mm...that would be ideal. Maybe f/1.4, 1.6. or 1.8. It would likely be light enough to use (much smaller/lighter than the 200 f/2), but larger/heavier than the 85 f/1.2. Of course if Canon built it, it would cost $7k. But they, and all lens makers, are scared to death to build anything with a front element around 90mm. For some reason they all have to either be 77mm, or else jump to 125mm. All of you successful pros would be touting it as mind-blowing, and telling the rest of us that we owe it to ourselves to try one...hahaha.

fluidmania · Jun 26, 2013

pictures are not loading up... Can you check again?

Ginger Jay · Jun 26, 2013

As someone else said, it would be nice if Canon Rumors had a classifieds marketplace forum. Similar to Mac Rumors.

Pandypix · Jun 26, 2013

My backpack is always packed this is where may camera lives the only extras I might pick up are tripod/monopod and my flash I don't carry the flash all the time as it takes up too much space. Keeping everything in one bag ready to go is how I have to store everything for when we are on a road trip and hubby really has no idea what I have.

:

Jim Saunders · Jun 26, 2013

A 40D might keep you until the next generation of bodies arrive, and give you a chance to learn to use the added controls. Among the new choices there are no doubt better opinions to come.

Jim

Jun 26, 2013

expatinasia said:
Hobby Shooter said:

Hey, as you know I've lived there, just moved back though after three years. I'm sorry but I've never heard of it. Had this come up just a couple of weeks ago I could've gone out to locate them. Sorry!

J

Click to expand...

That's cool, didn't realise you had returned to Europe.

I am not a birder, but as I know a lot of people here at CR love taking shots of birds, I thought this would interest some of them.

Yep, since a couple of weeks. Back to Sweden where we today have 17 degrees and rain. My wife had to stay back a couple of weeks more though, they have about 40 degrees and rain in PP now.

Welll well, that's how it goes. We'll be back though, both for travel (already next year for me) and to live there most likely.

Have barely touched the camera since we got back, don't know what to take pictures of. I enjoy portraits and street mostly. Women here are fat and pale, no fun to take pictures of them

and the guys don't have any stories. Gotta get used to that and also try to get out in Stockholm to shoot. In that sense I look forward to the fall as I like grey and gloomy.

I already look forward to getting back, mostly to Vietnam.

cheers
J

CarlTN · Jun 25, 2013

jrista said:
CarlTN said:

jrista said:

CarlTN said:

jrista said:

CarlTN said:

It will be interesting to see if Canon can actually achieve parity with the current SOA sensor, regarding those attributes that people like to argue about. What would be mind blowing, is if Canon actually exceeds those attributes...regardless of the pixel dimensions. It seems to me that if the number is closer to 60MP rather than 45, the performance might be more compromised. Certainly it will be difficult to make use of all that resolution outside the center 50% of the image on most, if not all Canon lenses...even the 24-70 ii.

Click to expand...

Remember that total system resolution is effectively (closely approximated by) the root mean square of the resolution of each component that makes up the system. In a DSLR, to keep things simple, the final resolution of the photographs you make is the RMS of the resolutions of the lens and the sensor. There is no such thing as one outresolving the other. Increasing the resolution of either lens or sensor increases the resolution of the system as a whole, and produces higher resolution photographs.

You get the most bang for the buck by increasing the lowest common denominator, but if you have a lens, like the 24-70 II, and you use it on a 60mp FF camera...you WILL realize better results (all other things being equal...i.e. assuming the best tech available is used to produce said 60mp sensor.)

Click to expand...

That was not my point. My point was as stated. I never said the overall results would not be "better". To belabor my point, since you are intentionally missing it...I will quote myself: "...it will be difficult to make use of all that resolution outside the center 50% of the image on most, if not all Canon lenses...even the 24-70 ii."

I stand by this. Your point does not disprove my point. You might have your own idea about how you define the phrase "make use of all that resolution". I have mine. My point was never that you could not get improved resolution and image quality, from a higher megapixel sensor. Only a fool would argue that. Yet you seem to want to believe that's what I meant. I wonder why? Up to your same old tricks I see.

As for "bang for buck", that is an entirely separate issue altogether, which I hope you realize...and has nothing to do what my point.

Click to expand...

I am not intentionally trying to misquote you... Simple matter of the facts.

I does not matter whether you are talking about resolution at the center of the frame, edge of the frame, or corner of the frame. The basis of "system resolution", which is a convolution of the effects of each and every component, holds true regardless of which region of the frame you apply it to. Sure, poorer quality lenses and wider angle lenses tend to have more detractors to resolution in the corners. That does not mean that suddenly the rules that govern overall system resolution change. Just as much as a higher resolution sensor will improve the outcome of what the lens resolves at the center, so too will it improve the outcome of what the lens resolves at the edge. A higher resolution sensor can never produce WORSE results than a lower resolution sensor, all else being equal.

A horrible lens is a horrible lens, and while you might see marginal improvements in corner resolution with a higher resolution sensor, you experience diminishing returns. An excellent lens, such as the 24-70 II, which performs quite well in the corners, will realize a greater benefit from a move to a higher resolution lens than, say, the 16-35 II (which performs only moderately well in the corners), both of which would benefit considerably better than say the EF-S 18-55mm, which performs terribly in the corners.

The benefit boils down to a matter of degree for every component involved, not whether or not you get any benefit at all outside of the center of the lens. You don't "make use" of resolution...you convolve a result via a functional process as a real-world image passes through each and every lens element, the aperture, the sensor's filter stack, the CFA, and even the pixel well itself. A higher resolution sensor, assuming equivalence in terms of noise, could never "compromise" IQ in any way. Even with a relative increase in noise, a higher resolution sensor, when its image size is normalized to that of any lower resolution sensor, would still produce results that are as good as or better. (The only time I believe a higher resolution sensor can be detrimental to IQ is when there is a disproportionate increase in the amount of noise due to smaller pixels, which to some degree is the case with the 7D (a fact I blame on Canon's 500nm process, which wastes a lot of photodiode space resulting in disproportionately smaller light sensitive photodiode area relative to sensors with larger pixels...a defect I believe a move to a smaller process, such as 180nm, can resolve.))

A far greater concern, in my opinion, for high density sensors than "making use of" any given lenses resolving power would be avoiding softening from camera shake. As pixel sizes shrink for both APS-C and FF sensors, the effects of camera shake will become increasingly magnified. The slightest vibration caused by even a light wind across a camera on a tripod is likely to introduce detrimental softening on a 24mp APS-C or 61mp FF sensor. I've experienced moderate winds that, even on my very stable GT3532LS tripod, introduce some softening, and the 7D is becoming something only moderately dense as sensor technology continues to evolve and push the envelope towards smaller and smaller pixels.

Click to expand...

Where are you quoting "system resolution"? I made no mention of it. I agree on the point of camera shake making its presence more known as sensor resolution increases. Vibration from the mirror, and to a lesser degree the shutter, are also factors. But I'm sure you will find a way to disagree with me on that, or otherwise tell me I am thinking of it in the wrong way.

Click to expand...

System resolution describes the resolution of the final output of any optical system, which is what a camera with a lens attached is. It's a mathematical concept, thus easily provable. I don't disagree about mirror slap and shutter vibration...definitely two things that can contribute to camera shake, and affect IQ as pixel size diminishes.

I was speaking of the ability to make use of all the resolution allowed by the pixels of the sensor, and where they would make less of an improvement towards the periphery. I stand by this. Again, I never said the overall resolution would not increase.

Chris Burch · Jun 25, 2013

1. Don't really like the pose...lighting would work, but with him looking down and seemingly hunched over, his face is distorted (big cheeks, small chin). Possibly all resolved by moving his head up or the lighting on axis with his head.

2. Bad crop, otherwise I like...good lighting...good post colorization. They eyes might be a tad too intense to remain natural.

3. I quite like, but the perspective bothers me a little. Her feet are too big and head too small. Keep the same basic framing and move the camera up eye level and that will be solved.

4. Love the color and composition, but the pose is incredibly forced...no one voluntarily sits like that. A more natural pose would give the picture some life or the model a believable mood.

5. Perfect processing, but same thing here with the perspective. It looks like she's leaning back as she walks and her thighs are bigger looking than they should be.

6. Pretty perfect as is...I would move the crop up a little to get a little more hair in and a little less neck/sweater.

7. Pose is okay for me...would be better if he were smiling. The lighting makes this a miss though. It's too bright (might be correctable in post), but the more problematic part is the angle. It looks like you're shooting across his face and as a result, there's a very sharp shadow under his nose...kind of looks like a mini Hitler stache...def not a good look. If you moved the light in front of his face and about the same angle, you be broad lighting and the shadows would look more natural or at least what one would expect from natural sunlight. I would lower the magenta, too...his lips are way too pink...a warmer tone would mimic the setting sun, too.

Canon Rumors · Jun 25, 2013

I'm glad your experience went well. BuyDig.com has been pretty aggressive (in a good way) to become a partner with Canon Rumors and other web sites. I demand their service and process are top notch and if there's any issues in that regard, I'd pull all their links from the site.

So far so good. As with any retailer, the odd issue is going to come up, and how they handle it will dictate how successful they're ultimately going to be.

Enjoy the lens.

Valvebounce · Jun 25, 2013

Hi RMC
Cool toys, as an ex toolmaker (made redundant) I see the value of the 3d printer. It looks like a great tool and so cool it needs saying twice.
I do have a question, and this is not meant to detract from what you have done, but how does the cost for something like the steady cam work out? Is it comparable to a similar item shop bought or is it cheaper, more expensive, how does the TCO of the printer affect production costs?
I also know it is difficult to put a value on "I made this myself" and that has got to be the best bit.
Cheers Graham.

bglanzbe · Jun 25, 2013

So I just received my new Canon 6D -upgraded from a T2i - very excited! Was wondering if any other 6D users out there have recommendations for settings (coloration, etc.) I should be thinking about for portrait photography.

Would appreciate any other recommendations that folks have regarding the camera!

cookinghusband · Jun 25, 2013

marvinhello said:
dilbert said:

Ellen Schmidtee said:

dilbert said:

Canon Rumors said:

Please note: the new EOS-1D C feature upgrade is only available from Canon’s authorised service facilities in Europe

Click to expand...

And that is because they don't want the firmware being generally available for folks such as ML to examine, learn from and maybe modify.

Click to expand...

Do Canon firmware upgrades patch the camera's firmware, or do they overwrite it in whole?

Click to expand...

They overwrite it entirely.

If it's the 2nd case, then 1D-C owners would have to come to a service facility for each and every firmware upgrade in the future, which I somehow doubt Canon would do.

Click to expand...

If there are only a relatively small number of 1D-C cameras sold (lets say 1000s or at most 10s of 1000s) then the number that need to be serviced by each service center is going to be small.

Click to expand...

Actually, not all service centres are qualified to service high end models such as 1D C, C300/100 and 1D X.

In the UK, only one service centre located Herfordshire is designated to perform this feature upgrade for 1D C. Currently the number of 1D C sold in the UK is about 40 units (inlcuding corporate and rental house)

There seems to be only very limited number of staff( 1person ?) in each country/region who is qualified to repair the 1DC. When I took my 1DC to repair the focus problem last month, one of the repair engineer told me there are a few staff who can repair 1dX but only one can work on the 1DC.
Orginally they said they will upgrade the the firmware for me after the repair, they told me there might be other worse bugs in the newer firmware, they told me if I do not need 25fps better wait till the version.

From what I heard the retail chain store in Hong kong that sell few hundred 5D3/6D each week, they only stock a few 1DC when they came out and do not keep stock after they sold their first batch ( I am very frequent buyer always able to pick my lucky serial number from the stock). I have only walked into another person that uses a 1DC, while I can see load. C100/C300 /1DX. Except for movie buff many photographer do not even know the existance of the 1DC since it is not listed in the DSLR section of canon web site round the world. By guess there must be only a couple thousand of 1DC around the world.

I guess

cookinghusband · Jun 25, 2013

risc32 said:
what does the shutter speed control while shooting video? i have no idea. It's not controlling my camera's shutter. if that is what you are asking, again, i have no idea.

The duration that the CMOS record(cumulate light energy). This is the same for Live view mode. The circurtry in the CMOS decide how long to record( duration to register light) and pass infor to the processor to work on.

yellowkamper · Jun 25, 2013

I do not have a problem with the resolution at 3mt and less I have found it very good right up to the closest focus point not using the macro. But I do get bad focus shift at 3 feet or less.

Canon1 · Jun 25, 2013

I much prefer the Singh Rey 10 Stop Vari Filter. Gives you a full range from 1 to 10 stops. The nice thing is you can focus and compose at 1 stop and then rotate the filter to the level of stops you want and then take your picture.

Whatever you get, variable stop filters are the way to go as your camera cant AF with a 10 stop filter on the front, and you can't see anything through the view finder. I also rarely use all 10 stops. More often I want to be at 4-5 stops. The only downside is it will cause vignetting on UWA and sometimes can add a color cast on wider then 20mm.

Ldweeb · Jun 25, 2013

On the fs100, the camera outputs a 60i signal which the ninja2 recognizes and converts back to clean 24p. However, there are a bunch of ways this can be screwed up, for example if you go into the menus with the ninja on, the signal loses sync and you end up recording Maggie's and interlacing.

Anyway my first instinct would be to see If something similar to that is going on. Is the c100 outputting a true 24p signal or 24p wrapped in 60i? If you look closely do you see any interlacing in the footage when something moves quickly?

expatinasia · Jun 24, 2013

Excellent review as always from TDP (though on this occasion he could do with self-editing it slightly in places).

His summary is also what I expected, and confirms what CPS told me when I asked whether I should stick with the 400 f/2.8 ii or get this new one.

BenKing · Jun 24, 2013

I was pretty close to pulling the trigger on a set of PocketWizards to use with my two 430EX IIs and my 530EX II, but instead went with the Yongnuo YN-622C, and I love them. I haven't had any misfires with them, and they support wireless TTL. I'm really happy that I didn't spend the extra money on the PW setup.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0090BSSZO/ref=wms_ohs_product?ie=UTF8&psc=1

zim · Jun 24, 2013

Hi,

I have a Pixel wireless Remote Control RW-221RX on a 500D

The Pixel is cheep cheerful and does what I want for stills.

Recently I had a need to do remote video, wasn't able to use the above.

The manual says an RC1/RC5 should allow remote activation on a 500D. I have the RC5, again I can't get that to work.

I have Remote control Enabled on the video menu and self-timer/remote control (does that have any affect when in video mode?)

Are there any other settings I need to set?

I'm sure an RC1 would work but I need something that works 10 - 15m behind the camera (like the Pixel does for stills)

Would anyone have any recommendations?

PS If it’s not already obvious I’m a complete novice at EOS video, just stumbled into a very specific need for short remote video sequences.

Thanks in advance

21tones · Jun 24, 2013

Thanks for your reply. I'll have to check that my lens is FDn. Having watched the video about changing the mount I'm not sure I should take it on! Was it easy enough?
Mt. Spokane - thanks for your suggestion that I won't see much difference between APS-C and full-frame at low ISOs. If you are doing commercial work with a 40D it must be okay. I always respect your experience and responses.
I know someone who has a 5Dmk 2 but they are hundreds of miles away and I only see them infrequently.
Next time I do see them I will do some systematic comparisons and then make a decision about buying one or not.
Thanks very much for your help.

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics