Posts

bdunbar79 · Aug 26, 2012

nightbreath said:
Here's a high ISO sample from 1D X: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8936.0;attach=23632 (made by bdunbar79).

If you look at the OOF building roof on a good-quality monitor you'll be able to see segments of 2 slightly different colors. Interesting if it might be somehow connected to the issue mentioned there. This is ISO 25600 shot, so I won't be surprised if something similar happens at lower ISOs on lower-end cameras (due to hardware limitation, for example; just my assumption).

All I heard till now are only statements, that 1D bodies give better colors and better flexibility in what you can do with those in post. It'll be great if someone smart comes here and shares his experience on different camera bodies as I am not able to investigate this by myself :-\

You're right about the shadows on that shot for sure. I however, cannot devote the time unfortunately to see if it can be corrected or not, or if any of that shot can be completely corrected. I had 75 photos to process quickly and unfortunately all we can do is view the IQ at face value. If you do have the time, I am more than willing to give you the RAW file. Just let me know if you'd like it.

bdunbar79 · Aug 26, 2012

In my signature file or web icon, I made up a flickr account with all of my photos that I shot at the first 2 soccer games so far. Feel free to PM me with any criticisms for improvement. You gotta remember though, like Mark, most of these are in a paper or really small photo on the AU website. The photography website is coming very soon, but still only about 10-15 photos per game will go there. The point is, I have a free place now, sort of, to post all of the 1DX, 1D4, and 5D3 sports photos and I'm willing to share all of them with you. I'd like to post-process a lot more, but turnaround time is fast, but, I can spend extra time because parents and fans often want electronic copies of the photos, so in that case I could spend more time post-processing.

Ashland's main site is simply ashland.edu, then go to the athletics link. Thanks everyone. Looking forward to any discussion/conversations.

Aug 26, 2012

It's a great little head and shoulders portrait lens on a crop. It really shines on my film bodies however and I love using it as a cap.

Aug 26, 2012

I'd go with the 100-400 - you need all the focal length you can get sometimes, but the versatility of a zoom really helps. A wide-ultrawide too - depending on where you go, sometimes the animals get close. In Ngorongoro crater, lions walk right up to the Land Rovers. Consider renting a 500/4 II (and bring a solid monopod if you do).

tiger82 · Aug 26, 2012

anyone have any suggestions for good photo ops in Mt Rainier and Olympic National Parks as well as places to stay. If there is a better forum, please let me know. Is Mt St Helens a doable day trip from Mt Rainier or should I spend at least a day or so to do it justice? I'm planning on mid-July, early August 2013.

I forgot to add that my mobility is limited. I can handle moderate terrain but not strenuous climbing or steep trails.

kaihp · Aug 26, 2012

Canon has released a series of downloadable tutorials for the 5D Mk III that can also be viewed on the LCD

http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/products/eos_5d_markiii/5d_mark_iii_on_camera_tutorials_resource_list.shtml
Around 3.8GB in total

K-amps · Aug 26, 2012

Godsend opportunity to upgrade to the MK.II ;D

moreorless · Aug 26, 2012

Ellen Schmidtee said:
Question is how many photographers would like to buy a lens they would have to upgrade when upgrading the camera.

Again this seems like a reason for creating a TSE adaptor for the M, people would be using EF lenses that would still work should they upgrade to a FF DSLR in the future.

Canon's TS-E lenses do not autofocus. The electronic contacts are used to control the aperture & record EXIF, but focus is still fully manual.

Yes I know but if your talking about an adaptor then the EF lenses used would still autofocus when used on a regular DSLR or with a regular EF to M adaptor.

So the investment is much less specialised, your paying for an adaptor but the lens you use with it you may already own or also use normally with AF intact.

Like the lensbaby, only with better optics & electronic contacts?

I actually thought of buying a Lensbaby Edge 80, but the price is too high, at least for what seems to me like a semi-toy.

I'm talking about something like the Hasslebland tilt/shift adaptor but without the built in teleconverter as you don't have to deal with the issued of the increase flange distance. Unlike the lensbaby it seems to me that results from such an adaptor could potentially be close to those from an actual TSE lens.

akiskev · Aug 26, 2012

Whenever I use my S5 (rarely), I get impressed from the results.

For comparison reasons here is a shot with my 30d + Zeiss 80-200 f/4 (I LOVE THIS LENS) :

Menace · Aug 26, 2012

I just say thank you very much and carry on shooting.

On occasions usually when i have the 70-200 with the lens hood, I just say "I'm compensating"...

Menace · Aug 26, 2012

Looks like you are having fun. Do share more

Menace · Aug 26, 2012

A friend of mine uses continuous LED lights for his video - they are available in various sizes depending on you need and budget.

Cheers

Menace · Aug 26, 2012

Dylan777 said:
I went with the 16-35 II for the better corner performance and the extra stop of light.

The price of 17-40 is about half of 16-35, but if you shoot from f4 to 5.6. you gonna spend alot of time in PP.

It comes down to what you shoot and at what aperture(s); stopped down you'll get similar performance from the two. I'd suggest save a bit longer and invest in the 16-35 - it's more versatile esp with that one stop faster aperture.

Cheers

pwp · Aug 26, 2012

I traded my 300 f/4is on a 300 f/2.8is. The 2.8 is absolutely brilliant, but I often wish I'd hung onto the f/4 as well. It was pin sharp wide open, was completely hand holdable & weighed next to nothing compared to the 300 f/2.8 which meant I took it with me far more often. And it focuses much closer than the f/2.8. I shot a lot of food with the 300 f/4is. It looked brilliant.

IMO it's one of the true performance bargains in the Canon L lens lineup and would be difficult to improve on, especially for the price. The current lens has a lot of fans.

I doubt we'll see this lens updated for quite some time.

-PW

Aug 26, 2012

3

Nate · Aug 26, 2012

Thank you guys for the helping!

So far I am processing this info, and I am looking for alternatives.

Please fell free to continue this post with further more information.

Bosman · Aug 25, 2012

Don't do it!

bdunbar79 · Aug 25, 2012

Jamesy said:
I have seen them on Fred Miranda occasionally used for 4.5k U$D.

Does anyone know if the 5D3 AI Servo fix for this lens extends past the one year warranty period? Is it a service advisory like the light leak fix that can be done at any time regardless of warranty status?

I think anytime Jamesy.

mdm041 · Aug 25, 2012

So sad...

2n10 · Aug 25, 2012

T3i with EF-S 17-55 at 55mm, f8, 1/250s, ISO 100

17mm, f5.6, 1/100s, ISO 100

blaydese · Aug 25, 2012

sama said:
Canon X5 (Japanese version of 600D)
with Tamron 17-50 Non VC version

I've seen that camera, they have some down the street
from my house here in Okinawa. So interesting that
there are different model numbers from USA to Japan.

Keep up the great work! Please post more pictures.

Peace! 8)

davidbellissima · Aug 25, 2012

Thanks for your reply Jason. Yes I checked the switch and toggled it. I removed the card and reinserted it, however the error reappeared a few shots later.

Your point about the CF card being better is not really valid in this context. It is not like I am making a choice between which slot to use, but rather the fact that I use the CF slot to write RAW files whilst simultaneously writing JPEG files to the SD card purely as a backup. Two CF slots would be best, for sure!

Thanks again for your comments.

RLPhoto · Aug 25, 2012

Aglet said:
RLPhoto said:

While these are interesting, They don't showcase anything that couldn't be done on a d30.

Click to expand...

HA!
Nice try. ;D

That's only +2 EV and 63% fill light on Adobe ACR 6.7
Either of those settings alone can show up banding noise in dark areas in some low ISO canon raw files. (I'm discovering there's sometimes more to it than that tho, can vary with Canon shutter speed)
Addenda: I can actually drag fill light to 100 to start to blow out the sand in the LR corner and it only shows a little chroma noise that could be removed with basic NR and still show plenty of detail.

see below from the d800 for a sample of low DR scene that's NOT at base ISO:

- 1st is a 1/10th linear scale of the whole frame
- 2nd is a full crop

take a guess at the ISO

I'll provide a few clues: f/8, 1/20s only a few points of luminance NR, May 25th, 7:50PM MST, in shade, about 53.5 degrees N latitude. ACR 6.7 using 10 pts of luminance NR on top of the default 25 pts of chrominance NR.
Ancient 55mm macro for glass.

I'd LOVE it if my 5D2 came out this clean at those settings.

check my tech blog for the dark noise comparison if you want to see impressive lens caps shots.

I really shouldn't clutter this particular thread with this so I'll likely delete this & other images Sunday
MEANWHILE: did you guess iso 800?... nope
1600?... not it either.
That's ISO 3200 performance on the d800. Still pretty clean in the dark areas. and lots of crop-ability

Yep, I could do that shot w/ the D30, excluding the ISO 3200 and the 36MP. 8)

2n10 · Aug 25, 2012

LOL, thankfully I did not make that mistake. Those are shots from 3 different tanks. I have a 75 gallon reef, a 75 gallon planted tank and an 8 gallon planted tank.

charlesa · Aug 25, 2012

For once he admitted Nikon lost out against the 1DX... that is one superb DSLR!

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics