Posts

HurtinMinorKey · Dec 16, 2012

Glidecam HD2000.

lol · Dec 16, 2012

robbymack said:
This is really a great idea but I gotta know how it would have been any different had you just taken a step or two backwards and accomplished this in one shot not needing all the extra work?

This technique is about blurring the foreground fence, which means getting as close as you can to it. If you back off, the fence would become more visible again. That's typically an impractical amount of work to PS out. Besides, the work required is minimal. The pano function in PSE is pretty much fire and forget. Add the files, push go and assuming the quality of the input is good enough, you're done. Just have to hope the subject doesn't move too much during the pano, and you don't move to cause the background to shift.

I have also done wildlife subject panos for a similar but different reason. Sometimes I just run out of zoom range on the 100-400L, and stepping back is not possible for many reasons, nor is 2nd camera with wide angle on it available quickly enough. My only alternative is therefore to take multiple shots in rapid succession.

Marsu42 · Dec 16, 2012

Obviously it didn't take much work to add 6d support (the d600 sensor only had been available in a beta release in 4.1, then final in 4.2) - supposedly because not much has changed by Canon from the 5d3 tech... here are the links:
- http://www.metrodcphotography.com/review/canon-6d-raw-sample-images/
- http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2012/12/camera-raw-7-3-and-dng-converter-7-3-now-available.html
... but now at last everybody can really compare the 6d to the older 5d3 & 5d2 sensors with the raw samples floating around like

Area256 · Dec 16, 2012

PeterJ said:
I do quite a bit of amateur food photography and get largely the same results with auto white balance, as per other suggestions get a target of some form to white balance.

The only other thing I'd throw in there is that things are easier if you don't have mixed lighting, the shot looks like you used a flash, and I'm guessing that was the case considering ISO 640, f/2.5 and 1/250th. For food you'll probably get better results going down the path of a tripod and longer exposure times. Sometimes a single flash can give some pretty unnatural looking shadows on food even if you bounce it.

Looking at the image, I don't think a flash was used there. If you are going to use flash with food photography getting an umbrella and light stand kit for like $60 will make a world of difference. (you'll also need a cheap sync cable or radio trigger if you have more money) If you are going to shoot with a mix of flash and artificial interior light, add a colour gel to your flash and that should fix any mixed color temp issues (use a 1/2 or full CTO or CTB depending on the other light you are working with).

Dec 16, 2012

porting has begun!

http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=3904.0

Dec 16, 2012

there wasn't a public announcement on the main page but the 650d printed hello world last week

progress thread:
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=3697.0

Stu_bert · Dec 15, 2012

MrFotoFool said:
Great shot. I live in Arizona (not near Page, though) and could fairly easily drive up there on a two day trip. However, I have never been and likely never will for one reason. Everyone I know who has gone in the last decade says that it is always full of photographers with tripods no matter when you go and you have to fight for a place to get a shot. Just too popular and too small of a space.

Am I wrong about this?

I've been twice to Lower Canyon and thrice to the upper. Upper is indeed busier, especially in high season, but my most recent visits to both where Jan (2011) and Mar (2012) and you often had sections to yourself. Most people on the lower respect photographers and will happily wait the 20 secs of a long exposure! Time wise, you want the sun overhead to get best illumination to the bottom, but if you prefer more contrast then adjust accordingly.

Upper Canyon you have to do tours, Lower you can just drive up and park and do your own thing. The extended tour is certainly worth it. In March I went twice, and still never completed all of it. I also did the upper and the only down side is the guide makes the pace and suggests pictures. Lower is cheaper and although it does not have such wide openings as the lower, then does not quite have the same majesty as the upper does, but I find it more enjoyable.

Off season make sure you pack gloves etc - it really is quite cool down there, tripod of course and pack a wide angle and a mid-range zoom, spare battery...

For general info on other photographic opportunities, check out Laurent Martres Books...

Policar · Dec 15, 2012

The 17-55mm f2.8 IS is amazing in that way something that underwhelms you by virtue of having no weaknesses is. Resale is good, too. And it's sharp and the right set of focal lengths for portraiture and landscape (could be a little longer for portraiture, I like 85mm on crop). Some weird, gnarly CA but whatever... No distortion. Punchy, nice micro-contrast. I liked it for stills and for video. It's the lens I miss most now that I've gone to FF. Build quality was as good as my L lenses.

And to be perfectly honest, I preferred the 18-55mm kit lens to the 17-40mm L on crop. I like the 17-40mm L much more on FF, even though the corners are bad. It is a fine lens by f8 and it's contrasty, but so is most everything else.

AudioGlenn · Dec 15, 2012

so to sum it all up, the majority of responses vote for "FF for landscape photography". You can use the APS-C sensor with a 10-22 if you'd like but it might take a little extra work in post.

I just went full frame so I'm still a noob. What I can say is that I notice qualities in my photos from the 5D mkiii that I NEVER noticed from my 60D. It was as if I could "feel" textures in the photos... and that's with the same lenses. I'm saving for a 16-35 2.8 II to complete my 2.8 zoom trinity. For now, 24mm is wide enough for some casual landscape shots. I have the 60D and 10-22mm on hand until I can sell it to put more money towards the new 16-35...or hopefully a 14-24 2.8L.

As far as opinions go, I think neuro does a great job of helping others (on CR) out with real world experience and accurate data. I've done my share of reading too much into what's written on the forums and getting offended when I didn't need to be. Let's all just enjoy the holidays and post up some great Winter Landscape pictures! I hear winter time is great for that style of photography =)

roguewave · Dec 15, 2012

neuroanatomist said:
Not all Canon users. But again, while their Measurements are useful, their Scores are not, because they are biased (only considering base ISO for some parameters) and not fully disclosed (weighted formulae but what weightings?).

Bill Claff's data are also quite good (and mirror DxO in many regards, but give some additional insights - worth a look if you haven't seen them.

I agree that DXOmark overall score does not tell the whole truth. In fact, no single number can do that, because no matter what formula / weights are choosen, somebody's priorities are going to be different.

However, the individual Measurements also show that for the most part (high iso being the exception), Nikon's sensor is superior. Considering that D700 outperforms 6D on almost every spec besides the sensor - autofocus, fps, viewfinder coverage, dual card slots - it's clear which one is the better camera.

candyman · Dec 15, 2012

Ordered mine (5) two weeks ago. Still no sign, waiting patiently

msmith0807 · Dec 15, 2012

@ paolo80 and distant.star - Thanks for the recommendation. That seems to be the main book that I keep stumbling upon when I have been looking. I will be buying it and giving it a read.

Kernuak said:
After the manual, here are a couple of other documents from Canon.

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/education/technical/inside_canon_eos_5d_mark_iii/EOS_5D_Mark_III_AF_setting_guidebook.pdf

Thanks again Kurnuak I had a quick skim of the pdf link and it seems to be a lot more in depth then the manual. Exactly what I was looking for. I will have to give it a good read later today.

HeavenHell · Dec 15, 2012

I went with the EF 300 f/4L. Thanks for all the advice and well thought out comments. This is a great community.

Dec 15, 2012

I just put up a second set of raw files from the 6D/5D3/5D2:

http://www.metrodcphotography.com/review/canon-6d-raw-sample-images-2/

This is along with the raw files described here:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11648.0

Brymills · Dec 15, 2012

RLPhoto said:
tron said:

RLPhoto said:

PackLight said:

RLPhoto said:

PackLight said:

RLPhoto said:

neuroanatomist said:

PackLight said:

Wide open, f/2.8 at 24mm I expect a lens this expensive to have abolutly no vignetting.

Click to expand...

The 600mm f/4L IS II costs $13,000 and has about 1.5 stops of vignetting wide open. :

Click to expand...

The 24L II is $1500 and it has 3 stops of vignette.

Click to expand...

This is typical of a board with "Rumors" in its name.
We start by talking about the 24-70mm f/2.8 L II shot at 24mm, jump to the 600mm II and then it somehow turns in to the 24mm f/1.4L II ???

Click to expand...

The New Rumored 24-70 2.8L III will have Zero vignette at all focal lengths and perfect IQ. It will weight in at a reasonable 500 Grams and a MSRP of 1299$ including canons all new 7th generation Image Stablizer providing 8-stops of compensation.

This could be a "rumor" right?

Click to expand...

Might be
Can I pre-order now?

Click to expand...

Sure, If you've got a spare billion dollars for the R&D. ;D

Click to expand...

No, no, no, NOOOO this will be 24-70 2.8L IV not III. You are too optimistic ;D ;D ;D

Click to expand...

And we will still complain that the nikon 24-85 F/2.8 IS has more reach and we should jump system. :

Is the 24-70 2.8L IV still EOS mount or the newly rumoured EOS II which converges EF, EF-S and EF-M to a single standard mount?

Work finished for the year, so off to do some testing!

Dec 15, 2012

ok, nobody knows.

schmidtfilme · Dec 15, 2012

Thanks a lot Rav

Andreas

AudioGlenn · Dec 15, 2012

mine makes noise while zooming too.

sagittariansrock · Dec 15, 2012

EvillEmperor said:
The more I have been shooting sports, the more I see that portrait shots make better ones than landscape. Can anyone give me advice on how to shoot (interesting) landscape shots for sports?

Depends on the sport, doesn't it? For example, the one below would have been pretty odd in portrait. On the other hand, when I am shooting a group game, and focusing on the activity (like a bunch of players vying for the ball) landscape is better. When I am looking at an individual player dribble for example, I choose portrait.

IMO, you can capture the atmosphere of a team game better with landscape in many cases. I am also interested to hear what the pros and more experienced amateurs have to say.

ChilledXpress said:
MotoGP 2012 Qualifying - Laguna Seca, California by David KM, on Flickr

bleephotography · Dec 14, 2012

TrumpetPower! said:
bleephotography said:

Thanks for the advice, but I tried all of that in ample light with live view (as Neuro suggested) with varying settings and it still didn't improve.

Click to expand...

Then sending it back was the right decision. Here's hoping the next one delivers!

b&

Well, I just got my third copy of the 24-70 II in and preliminary report is that it is slightly sharper than the prior two out of box, and quite sharp after default sharpening in Lightroom (on a Retina display). This is before AFMA. I am about 80% satisfied, so here's hoping AFMA improves it by +20% for +100% satisfaction ;D

On a side note, it seems to be sharpest at f/2.8 and doesn't improve much, if at all, stopping down all the way to f/8, whence it slowly seems to decline.

infared · Dec 14, 2012

Hey..this is a Canon Website....I am not taking this nonsense.
Now the thread has no content whatsoever! ;D

funkboy · Dec 14, 2012

I use the 24-105L as the "standard zoom" on my 40D and it balances perfectly. Feels right at home.

The 6D is extremely close to the 40D in weight & dimensions (which is why I'm considering one), so I think you'll be just fine.

That said, there are two accessories that I use to prevent fatigue setting in when I'm shooting for a long time:

One is a wrist strap, which when snugged up tightly creates a sort of "bond" between your right hand & the camera.

The other is a comfortable neoprene neck strap so that you can get the weight off your wrist when you're not shooting.

CharlieB · Dec 14, 2012

The 7D is working pretty well for me these days. I'm ready actually use it shooting social events.

Area256 · Dec 14, 2012

Badger said:
OK, I hesitate to post this because I don't want to be seen as one of those posters who seem to complain about everything. So, before I complain, (or make a suggestion to Canon) I will say I just came from a 20D to the 6D and I am happy as a pig in slop. I am also not a professional photographer and can go days without using my camera.

Here is my complaint. I wish Canon would have included an auto off for GPS or a physical switch to turn it on or off. Its been a couple of days since I've picked up my camera and last I saw it, the battery was at about 75%. Now its at 50%. Yes I know I can go through the menues to turn GPS off, but that is kind of a pain. I also know that most of you don't seem to care about GPS and will probably leave it off given the chance, but I think it's kind of cool to have and in fact want my pictures geo tagged.

To be clear, I love this camera but if Canon is listening, how about an auto off for GPS? I would rather have that, and have to wait a minute to acuire a lock than to pull my camera out and find the battery dead...(maybe thats the answer, Ill take the battery out every time I put the camera away)

I registered both WiFi and GPS to the "My Menu", that way I can access them quickly. I've also gotten in the habit of checking the top LCD when I put my camera away. It'd be nice to have an auto off feature, but I can live with it.

Harv · Dec 14, 2012

Axilrod said:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=405&Camera=396&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=829&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

There ya go, it looks like the 35 is indeed crushing the 30. I know charts aren't everything, but it's a large enough of a difference to make that conclusion.

These are with two different cameras. The 30mm is mounted on a 30D (1.6 crop, 8MP) and the 35 is mounted on a 1Ds III (full frame, 21MP). Not a good comparison.

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics