gtog said:

I think the "Referral Denied" means you can not access the pdf directly from a link on the Canon Rumors forum since it is not an official Canon site (it is checking what site you are accessing the link from -- the referring site).

Click to expand...

... or use something like the "RefControl" Firefox plugin which has a config option to always tell sites that it originates from the same site, circumvents a lot of cross-domain referer checks. It has a whitelist, too so you can except sites that need the real referer.

With this setup, the download of said pdf works just fine

The gyrostabilization on the OM-D is friggin amazing, works ridiculously well. IQ is great, of course you wont get the low-light performance or DOF. I think the GH2 would be a good addition to your kit since it's not too expensive. I'm not sure how good the footage looks without the hack, but with it the footage looks pretty amazing, especially for a $700 camera.

http://www.petapixel.com/2012/08/24/leaked-photos-of-fujis-more-affordable-x-e1-mirrorless-camera/





Very pretty looking camera! can't wait to see what the price is

Good to hear you managed to get one in time. Let us know how well it works for you.

Hi everyone!
Kinda new here, but I read these rumors every now and then.
So because it's summer, my friend and I decided to work on a small project, being a film.
It's our first time making a short film, so we're still messing around with stuff, but we get really inspired by people like WongfuProductions, Film Riot, FinalCutKing, etc

First things first, camera gear used :
Canon 60D
50mm 1.4
18-200mm 3.5-5.6

More of the film was shot with the 18-200mm, because the 80mm fov from the 50mm just wasnt wide enough, especially for the earlier shots. However, the "hardcore" training bits were shot most with the 50mm
Sexy much?

Anyway, I was wondering if you guys could give me some feedback on what needs to be improved for our upcoming videos? The storyboard was kinda messed up in this one

For this short film, we had no budget and therefore used parks, houses as the set, and lamps as lighting. We do have requests to shoot a dancing documentary and a short music video for a friend dedicated to his gf <3

Any recommendations for lighting (With a budget of no more than $200usd).

Give me your opinions and enjoy our short film "Impossible"!

Remember to watch in 1080P!

http://youtu.be/6GOU237-e3Y?hd=1

Thanks!

Saw this at the The Digital Picture this morning and found this interesting. Not being able to filter a 17TSE drove me to the 24TSE-ii which is the sharpest lens in my bag given the focal length.

Here is the article link:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=2906

I personally doubt whether you'd achieve uniform filtering due to the curvature of the lens.

Nicely done ... good work

When I was still using film I would buy Ilford bulk packs from B&H.

Thank You very much for your answer!!

I agree with WoodyWindy. Especially SX160 looks like an improvement over its predecessor. SX500 is a budget superzoom, and SX50hs will probably be announced soon. (It even has an extra zero, like the Eos line signals steps towards budget-end...)

EOBeav said:

dr croubie said:

Or to quote from that Luminous Landscape article:
"Relax, Bors. The landscape isn't going anywhere."

Click to expand...

No, but the light is. And I'm not saying don't spend 20 seconds making sure it's level. I'm just saying get it close and then tweak it as needed. It's an important element to get right in the field, but not at the expense of paying attention to other things. I just don't see the need for a specialized level like that.

Click to expand...

Well, if that works for you.
I won't harp on it, you've got some fine examples on your photoblog.

I've occasionally rushed to capture the light and had to level in post.
And occasionally I've missed the light setting up my tripod.
But if I have the time, I'll utilize all the precision my equipment will afford me. And I'm still learning to slow down and be deliberate and try to create art after decades of rushing to capture fleeting moments with documentary precision.

Here's a review i did recently of the 30mm 1.4 for video use, it has quite a few examples of the Sigma's performance in different situations (low light, different apertures, etc.)


Yardbless Pro Shooter - Sigma 30mm f/1.4 Review


It's in Spanish but click "CC" for English subtitles (made and uploaded by me, not auto generated by Youtube)

Anyone heard from Brian lately? I hope everything is okay.

pdirestajr said:

Wait, so someone who sent in a 5DII got a 1D mkIV back?

Click to expand...

I bet this person didn't call to complain. He or she got excellent customer service. They made it unnecessary to sell the 5D2 to raise money for the 1D4 upgrade. Or now, that person can afford a 1Dx.

Lloyd Chambers commented on having difficulty using the lcd to focus accurately. He put it down to a change in the way the lcd image is processed. Apparently, the 5D2 used alternating lines which enhanced the contrast while the 5D3 does not.

It's likely that Magic Lantern will be released for the 5D3 next. (sorry - I have no idea when.) When it is, you will be able to use the built in focus peaking with live view.

www.youtube.com/2Fwatch%3Fv%3DiR44GoglHKY&ei=vrc2UM_aDua40AHFuoGQDw&usg=AFQjCNEjEySGd9aWEPzEY2-9Yhv5-CkrkQ video i shot with the 100. great lens for video and for still. would not recomend a non is lens for video unless you have a stabliser rig.

neuroanatomist said:

spinworkxroy said:

Eh, maybe i rephrase my question.

For example, when using zone AF..if for example i use center-weighted metering, but i move the zone to the bottom most left corner (for a landscape shot for example), does the camera do the metering from the CENTER of the screen or does it do metering on the zone at the bottom most left that i moved the AF to?
I'm asking because for example, i'm doing an AF on a rock on the bottom left and i want the exposure to be based on that rock rather than the middle of the frame…or do i have to do an AE lock on the rock, and then reframe the shot?

Click to expand...

Center-weighted is center weighted, regardless of the AF point/zone you select.

When using any metering mode other than evaluative, if you want to meter on a specific part of the scene, you must do just that - set to spot metering mode, put the spot metering circle where you want to meter, press AE lock, then recompose and take the shot. Evaluative biases the metering toward the selected AF point, but still averages the entire scene (and compared it to the database of stored image parameters).

This diagram shows how the metering is weighted (the coverages are from the 7D; the 5DIII is 6.2% for partial and 1.5% for spot - see p. 167 of the 5DIII manual.

Only evaluative is linked to the AF point. On 1-series bodies, spot metering can also be linked to the AF point (or iteratively sampled from up to 8 points in the scene then averaged, called multi-spot metering).

Click to expand...

i found that this is the best answer to this question...

charlesa said:

I got tired of waiting and bought a 400 f2.8 prime instead...

Click to expand...

Good for you - we'll done

RLPhoto said:

The 1Dx fell into a coma.

Click to expand...

No. I think it would be better classified as narcolepsy.

Great review of the 1DX by Andy Rouse an ex Canon now Nikon Wildlife shooter

here is his review:

http://www.andyrouse.co.uk/blog/223.php

Thanks for the replies everyone.

AudioGlenn said:

I have the 24-105 and I've used it on my 60D for video. It works ok... and yes you should use ISO speeds that are multiples of 160. I eventually ended getting a 35mm 1.4L. Much better for video. I now exclusively use that and the 50mm 1.4 for videos.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I've already got the 50 1.4 & 85 1.8, with a 28 1.8 on the way too, which will do most of the low-light stuff with the 5dmkII. However I'll still want a walk-around lens too for weddings.

preppyak said:

The 24-105 will be great if a lot of what you shoot is outdoors, but, its going to be unusable indoors on your 60D, and limited on the 5dII. I guess it depends a lot on what you shoot, but generally speaking, you are better off using low-light primes for flexibility with video, and either having a rig or a tripod involved.

The IS is certainly nice to have if you're shooting a lot of run and gun stuff, but, you'll have to decide if it limits you too much.

Click to expand...

I've already got some primes and a tripod & proper video monopod, but I don't have any IS lenses, & there's definitely times I feel I need one. I understand the limitations of low light videography, and have used the 17-50 f/2.8 on th 60D in plenty of reception halls so know what to expect from it. If the 24-105 on the 5dmkII will give similar results in terms of noise/ISO performance, then I can live with that (and use the primes when I can't live with it!). Do you think the 5dmkII at f/4 at say, ISO 1250 is comparable to the 60D at f/2.8 & ISO 640, regarding noise?

Re: 1DX - issues in low light at reception

helpful said:

M.ST said:

Use the AF-point expansion instead of one single point. The 1D X performs very well under low lightning conditions.

Click to expand...

Amen. There is so little area contained inside of a single AF point that its just a little shaky dark area to the camera. Almost impossible to focus no matter how good the camera.

One point AF in the dark is like trying to look through a long narrow tube at a scene rushing by out of the car window. No context, and it's almost impossible for even our eyes to focus or comprehend what is going on. But without the tube its easy for our eyes to focus out a window or in the dark

The extra points help the camera in the same way.

Click to expand...

Still hunts and takes a while with 8 point expansion. Much, much, much slower than the 1DMK3 in this situation. I'll just use the MK3 for the darker reception halls for now.

thanks though,
Michael

Michael said:

Hi again!

As I started this discussion I would like to thank you all once again for sharing your wide experiences and knowledge which has helped me so much. After a long "inner debate" I'm now buying the 5D mk III combined with the 24-105 L and 70-300L. Yes its an awful amount of money spent but ... you only live once ... and I love photographing... and yes I stay up late at night postprocessing photos ... and I have got an opportunity of a lifetime to travel with my family. I also think about to 'revigorate' my old 450D and perhaps buy a used Tamron 18-270mm as a travelling complement.

Thank you guys out there

Michael

Click to expand...

If money was no object...

I've had the C-loop and the split strap for a almost a week now and have been out on 3 2-hour long shoots, lots of walking around for wildlife. 7D and a 100-400 mostly for BIF so it's a decent bit of weight on it. Lots of brush around the lakes and lots of up and down trails to climb. Strap never slipped or moved over my shoulder, the rig was at a comfortable height and very quick to grab for a shot. So far very impressed. I was a bit concerned about the attachment point to the tripod screw hole, but the thick gasket provided has let me lock the screw down and hold it very well. Best of all it got the regular straps off of the top of the camera and out of the way. I'm looking at their M-plate as an add-on later. My initial thoughts are if you haven't gotten one already I'd recommend giving it a shot.

By all means get a flash, but as others have said you shouldn't expect to be able to use it in public much, so it won't really solve your specific problems - museums and popular churches, for instance, won't allow flash photography at all (nor tripods, for that matter); they irritate other people; and the results seldom look good anyway (there likely won't be a suitable surface to bounce it off) except in very controlled situations such as you don't describe.

I've not tried the Sigma, but I do own the Canon 28mm f/1.8 which tends to get similar reviews. I've not tried it on my Rebel, but the photos I took with it inside Notre Dame Cathedral (which is pretty dark) on my 5DII at f/1.8 are horribly soft around the edges (at least those will be missing on a Rebel) and not that impressive elsewhere; I got much better results with the 24-105 L and 70-200 f/4 IS L at f/4 (their IS helps, of course). The 85mm f/1.8 produced far superior photos than the 28mm, but based on what you've said that may not be wide enough; if it is, I would certainly recommend that. I like the 20mm f/2.8, but that's not brighter enough than what you already have to make a significant difference.

As for the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, I owned one of these when I owned a Pentax K-5, and when it focused properly (a chronic problem with Tamrons, evidently) the results were excellent - but the K-5 has built-in IS, which helps in low light; I've not tried using it without IS. Reviews indicated that the IS version of the Tamron (they call it VR) isn't as good optically as the non-IS version. I suspect that the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 would be better than either - if nothing else, it will focus better and has IS - but like the Tamron, at the wide end the difference in aperture compared to what you already have will have little practical effect.

You complain about the quality of low light photos taken from rides. Assuming the ride was moving, if the light was low enough there might not be any lens fast enough to cope with that!

One last thing - as someone else mentioned, if you're not doing so, make sure you shoot RAW (or RAW + JPEG); conversion software will likely do a better job of noise reduction than the camera's built-in software (I like DxO for this). My Rebel t3i isn't as good in low light as my 5Dii, but I took some photos inside the Madeleine (a really dark church) with the 70-200 f/4 IS L which, with the help of DxO, look remarkably good, all things considered.