Posts

RGF · Oct 20, 2016

Definitely interesting.

will only new lenses used the curved sensor or can the camera determine the lens and adjusted the sensor to optimize the sensor curvature for that lens.

In the end we might end up with AFMCA (Auto Focus, Micro Curve Adjustment) :

AlanF · Oct 20, 2016

Leica has become a joke. Once Leitz was the maker of the finest 35mm cameras and a pioneer. Now, it sells its name to be franchised by those who will pay to add kudos to their brands. And it overcharges for cameras for those who value a red dot more than anything else.

cpsico · Oct 19, 2016

Re: at 12800 ISO ??

bholliman said:
keithcooper said:

For someone using the 5Ds regularly and appreciating those extra pixels, an example at 12800 ISO somewhat misses the point

I do sometimes push it to 800, whereas my 1Ds3 sometimes got used at 400 and my 1Ds at 200 ;-)

Click to expand...

I try to use my 6D for situations where I need higher ISO, but at times do use my 5DsR in poor light. I've been reasonably happy with 5DsR images at up to 3200 ISO with heavy noise reduction and downsizing. If I owned a 1Dx (Mk1 or 2) or 5D MkIV, those would be my preference for low light/high ISO.

I still consider my 6d my high ISO go to camera over my 5d IV. Don't get me wrong the 5D rocks, but 3200 and up the 6d shows it's worth and has smaller file size to boot. Both focus very well in low light, both smoke my 1ds mkiII in this regard.

rs · Oct 19, 2016

Canon Rumors said:
For the first time with a NIKKOR PC lens, the direction of tilt operation can be made parallel or perpendicular to shift

Finally catching up with Canon - if only it allowed free movement rather than either parallel or perpendicular.

Mt Spokane Photography · Oct 19, 2016

Congratulations Stephanie and Jeremy. Very deserving photographers.

dp3294 · Oct 19, 2016

Has anything been said about if the XC10 will be getting a firmware update to match the XC15 (waveform, etc)?

RGF · Oct 19, 2016

scottkinfw said:
mistaspeedy said:

The world's most expensive lens at 2 million dollars... Leica 1600mm @ F5.6

But I'm sure this lens isn't bad either. Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 1700mm, f/4:

Or if we need some low light lens, the Carl Zeiss' 50mm Planar f/0.70

Click to expand...

Hard to carry in a bag however, even for a Sherpa.

sek

Comes with customized Mercedes SUV to act as mobile tripod

Besisika · Oct 19, 2016

ninjapeps said:
GammyKnee said:

After finding this post I swapped the good quality alkalines I had in both YN-622Cs for (partially deplected!) Nimh rechargeables and bingo! Suddenly each shot was correctly exposed and synched.

Click to expand...

What batteries are you using? My 622Cs won't even turn on when I use Eneloops.

I am using eneloops as well. No problem what so ever, just need to charge them every time before any shoot.
I have been using them for almost 2-3 years now.

https://www.amazon.ca/Panasonic-BK3MCCA8BA-Pre-Charged-Rechargeable-Batteries/dp/B00JHKSN5I/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1476879511&sr=8-2&keywords=eneloop

Viggo · Oct 19, 2016

Valvebounce said:
And the prize for this mornings quote to make me laugh goes to Viggo for this line.

"But let's flip and say you would put the B1 at full power in the Magnum, *minimum firing distance to avoid blindness and burnt eyebrows; 200 ft 8) "

Cheers, Graham.

Glad I could help! ;D

Viggo · Oct 19, 2016

Ryananthony said:
ahsanford said:

Viggo said:

Wonder if they will implement this motor in the 50 and 35 also...

Click to expand...

I can't speak for the 50, but rumor has it B&H is selling a 35 Art with that great AF motor: it's called the 35mm f/1.4L II, and it costs a bit more.

- A

Click to expand...

More then double unfortunately.

Ha! Not only that, but it absolutely kills in every aspect. Good thing I bought it then 8)

privatebydesign · Oct 19, 2016

ahsanford said:
privatebydesign said:

Woohoo,

How many years has that PC 19 been rumored? As long as a Canon 50 1.whoknows! At least they have caught up with the free rotation of tilt to shift.....

Wonder if the latest 70-200 f2.8 is longer than 120mm at MFD?

Click to expand...

Not quite the answer you asked for, but clearly MFD was a concern worth addressing:

"Compared to the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II, minimum focus distance throughout the entire zoom range is reduced from 1.4 m to 1.1 m, and maximum reproduction ratio increased from 0.11x to 0.21x"

Both are formally announced. That text above came directly from Nikonrumors.com

- A

Yep that puts it squarely against the Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS MkII (still a little smaller fl at MFD, but close), Nikon users won't know what to do with themselves. Yes they will, sell another kidney............

Mt Spokane Photography · Oct 18, 2016

I read the DPR article on the A6500. It mirrors some of the comments here, for some users, it will be a upgrade, but worth $400 more??

I'm still interested in the M5 as a replacement for my G1X II, but need to test the ergonomics and the functionality.

mkabi · Oct 18, 2016

May be I watch too many videos and too many slow-mo videos...
And, in my opinion, the fake slow-mo... looks fake...

Next time, try this:
Do the fake slow-mo, but record in 30p...
Use Twixtor/Optical Flow to change it 48p and slow it down to 24p.

Hopefully, that translates better.

Jack Douglas · Oct 18, 2016

sanj said:
My head spins.

Hey Sanj, the other day I had a look at your site via the link below and I was most impressed. You've been very engaged the last couple years, looking back over some of your early posts. Seems your heart is in it.

Jack

StudentOfLight · Oct 18, 2016

Act444 said:
One thing I have noticed at the high ISOs is that the 5D4 has less color noise than the 5D3 (but not necessarily less overall noise). But - the reduction in color noise makes it easier to clean up the files in post, and helps retain more faithful colors which is handy.

Precisely. I used to really hate red color-noise on the 5D-III. The 5D-IV is definitely more color-neutral in the shadows.

Canon Rumors · Oct 18, 2016

HTML:

<strong>MELVILLE, N.Y., October 18, 2016</strong> – Canon U.S.A., Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced that their service operation in Ridgefield Park, New Jersey has relocated to 125 Chubb Ave., Suite 100N, Lyndhurst, New Jersey. The new Professional Service & Support Center is geared toward industry professionals and photo enthusiasts and is designed to support the imaging community in the New York metropolitan area. This facility will be open Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM to 4:30 PM on a walk-in basis with no appointments needed.</p>
<p>At this new location, Canon will showcase many of its latest imaging products in the professional products showroom with a Canon technical expert on-site to demonstrate product features and answer questions. The state-of-the-art facility also offers repair and maintenance operations for Canon’s extensive lineup of professional Cinema and Broadcast lenses, EF series photography lenses, Cinema EOS and EOS Digital SLR cameras, and high-definition camcorders. Repair operations at the facility include six state-of-the-art lens and camera adjustment rooms, Canon’s most advanced adjustment and calibration equipment, spare parts inventory, and experienced repair staff.</p>
<p>“The new facility in Lyndhurst will provide an inviting location for Canon’s existing customers as well as new customers looking to learn more about our products,” said Yuichi Ishizuka, president and COO, Canon U.S.A., Inc. “This move also continues the expansion and improvements of our 100 percent U.S.-based service and support network.”</p>
<p>The Lyndhurst facility is one of three service facilities that Canon has made available to professional clients, joining the Canon Hollywood Professional Technology & Support Center, located in Hollywood, California, and the Chicago Professional Service & Support Center, located in Itasca, Illinois. These facilities provide local support to key markets and deliver an average repair process time of less than two days for CPS customers.</p>
<p>Additional camera and lens service facilities for both professional and consumer clients are located in Jamesburg, NJ, Costa Mesa, CA and Newport News, VA.</p>
<p>For an exciting video tour highlighting the features of the new facility, please visit: <a href="http://www.pro.usa.canon.com/lyndhurst">www.pro.usa.canon.com/lyndhurst</a></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

j-nord · Oct 18, 2016

kirispupis said:
Sorry to be blunt, but my major frustration with this lens so far is that a number of people now have one, but no one's gone outside at night and aimed it up. For my uses, coma is the deciding factor. If it has great coma, I'll buy one. Otherwise I won't. I trust that Canon knows how to create a sharp lens - but I've yet to see them build a 2.8 or better lens with good coma.

Agreed, apparently no one who's interested in its coma has bought one. We all know better than to assume good coma from Canon.

j-nord · Oct 18, 2016

Random Orbits said:
Mikehit said:

The 70-300L is very good but be aware it does not take the Canon teleconverter (but it will fit on a 3rd party converter) and it hard to really look at anything else in that range. There are, of course, the third party lenses and some have a very, very good reputation and they will often be cheaper than the Canon equivalent. One recurring comment on different forums is that the quality variability in Sigma/Tamron lenses is higher than in Canon so if you are very critical of image quality you may find yourself returning one or two to find on that satisfies you.

But also relevant is what sort of sports? If it is indoor sports the lower light levels may need something with a wider aperture and the Tamron/Sigma 70-200 f2.8 are both cheaper than the Canon 70-300.

For field sports you could also look at the Canon 400 f5.6 prime which is still a very good lens but it depends on your reasons for wanting a zoom lens. Sigma has the 150-600 gets very good write up and again is cheaper than the 70-300 but it is quite a bit heavier so is probably worth your wife her hands on one before you actually buy.

One other thing with lenses is that I am never shy of buying second hand and most commercial dealers offer a 6month to 1-year warranty.

Click to expand...

The Canon TC will "fit" the 70-300L when the focal length is set toward the long end only. TDP noted it in 2012, and I tried it on my copy and it was just as they said. In practice, I have never tried using a TC with the 70-300L. There had been issues with 3rd party TCs not working properly with the 70-300L (AFMA settings not retained, etc), so if one is looking for a higher max focal length, I'd suggest a different lens.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=3266

I had a 70-300L and kendo 1.4x, it was a waste of time/effort. AF slowed down way too much and the IQ loss vs reach wasn't worth it. I just ended up cropping if 300 wasn't enough. This was on a 6D. On a 7D, the IQ took a big hit to begin with and I'd never even consider a TC for this combo.

ranplett · Oct 17, 2016

Mikehit said:
ranplett said:

Well, ladies and gentlemen, rccphoto does not approve of such highly sought after lenses, so I think we can close the book on this one. And to think we were all such fools for dreaming about a 24-70 2.8 IS...

Click to expand...

So what you are saying is that if anyone has ideas contrary to yours they should shut up? Reminds me of my grandad whose idea of an intelligent person was someone who agreed with him.

The contrary idea would moreso apply to the secondary poster who disregarded the original poster's entire list of lenses that I don't think would hurt to have.

OP: I want Xmm lens with Y aperture and IS.
SP: Don't care.
Me: Personal opinions don't add much to the convo.
You: You sound like my grandad.
Me: Nah, trying to open up dialogue instead of 'shutting up' as you say.

KeithBreazeal · Oct 17, 2016

KeithBreazeal said:
arthurbikemad said:

KeithBreazeal said:

arthurbikemad said:

KeithBreazeal said:

kaihp said:

arthurbikemad said:

Got any more boring stuff? :-*

Click to expand...

Follow the linky road to Flickr

Click to expand...

Yup! I have a lot of different subjects I shoot.
Let's just cut to the chase... https://www.flickr.com/photos/50428479@N06/sets/72157645177868007

Click to expand...

Ooosh get in! Nice work!

Click to expand...

Thanks I see that a lot of folks hit the "Babes" galley link- my Flickr hits are insane! LOL
The "Dolly Tattoo" seems to be the most viewed. Cropped to within one pixel of "R" rated. ;D

Click to expand...

The pic is hot! And yeah, I'd thought about the crop :-X

Click to expand...

HA! I didn't want to post that photo directly.
It does have that hidden watermark in a tasteful place.

I want to thank all of you for checking that link to make sure I watermarked all the photos. ;D

We have a spike by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr

Oct 17, 2016

IglooEater said:
johnf3f said:

To IglooEater:

"Can't speak about Canon batteries per se, but in Makita batteries, the chips are far from pointless. They extend battery life and battery lifespan, saving the company I work for thousands of dollars."

A properly designed (and remarkably cheap) charger will do this job better in my experience - no chips needed.

Click to expand...

Perhaps- I can only speak through experience, not scientific tests. When Makita started chipping their batteries and tools, it ended our constant run to the store to buy new ones.

johnf3f said:

"In regards to third party batteries, again, in my field we don't bother with them anymore. Yes we could get the cells for a lot less, but they just don't last. They won't hold a charge, they don't provide the life of a similarly spec'd oem, and give up the ghost much sooner. Same with 3rd party batteries."

Unfortunately non - oem packs often contain inferior and under spec cells with the inevitable results! However many have cells of far higher quality, as I have found in the past, 3 Canon BP511 packs dead within 3 years and 5 non oem packs (cost less than 1 Canon pack) still giving better than Canon originals - they were bought in 2005 and 2006 and are still going strong! The problem with non-oem packs is that we don't know what we are getting until it is too late!

Click to expand...

Fair enough. I can't speak about canon, I've only ever bought two canon batteries, and I don't see why I'd buy any more.

johnf3f said:

"On the other hand, I still agree with you that canon oem batteries are overpriced. (Makita too!). But how much is not clear, as they perform dramatically better than their less expensive "equals" and thus have something different inside them."

With the branded packs you know that you are getting decent cells. Non-oem packs - who knows? That is the trouble! There are rubbish packs out there or there are packs like my OLD BP511 packs that deliver 30 to 40% more capacity for more than three times the service life (and still counting!) of the branded packs. It is a lottery!

Click to expand...

yup. I don't gamble. But that's why I said while Canon (and Makita!) oem batteries are overpriced, we don't know by how much. If they go to the trouble of testing all their cells before putting them in a pack, or engineering a cell that won't explode/overheat/etc, it's not fair to say they should sell them at the same price as those from third party manufacturers that don't go to the trouble.

Good points Igloo!

My point is that Canon (+others) ridiculously overprice their packs for example these cells:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00AIOH9VG/ref=pd_day0_23_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=RSQPD5P3VENM9W5JVGWC

nearly 1000Mah more than the Canon ones and of the highest quality (Panasonic own Sanyo) yet even their retail price is a tiny fraction of the cost of Canon packs. As to safety? Then a proper charger is the way to go and these are pretty cheap!

We all want proper performance and safety from our gear and, to be fair, Canon provide it but at what price! If my charger fails then do I spend £399 to replace it or do I make up a new connector for a £25/£30 charger which is FAR better and I already own! If/when the cells in my packs fail do I spend £150 for a new pack with mediocre cells or do I re- build the pack with better cells for £15 - £18?

Nothing wrong with the Canon products except their price - hence the non-oem market. Again Canon/Nikon etc can cure this alleged problem in a heartbeat and still make a nice fat profit on their chargers and battery packs. Even if they sold them at twice what they are worth then we (and I) would be queuing up to buy them! However at 10 to 20 times what they are worth? We start looking for alternatives!

Ozarker · Oct 17, 2016

neuroanatomist said:
CanonFanBoy said:

If the bag goes missing then the FBI and ATF are called in. They will find your stuff and somebody will go to prison for taking it.

Click to expand...

Indeed – since the same travel policies apply to starter pistols, I've read suggestions for photographers who need to check their camera gear to pack (and declare!!) a starter pistol in the case.

I've heard the same and I think it is a great idea. The added bonus being a TSA agent possibly going down because of a starter pistol.

Crap. I just got flagged.

My carry on bag was inspected in Orlando in 2010 and TSA found this (http://hammerheadrifletool.com/). I forgot it was there. He took it out, made the "nail driving" motion and even fingered the spike on the end. Said, "I guess this is okay."

I thought for sure I was going to lose it. Nope. That thing could do some real damage. Nuts.

People with little Swiss Army knives or too much shampoo didn't fare as well.

PhotoSimon · Oct 17, 2016

That's a fair point Mikehit - how you view the image will make all the difference - viewing the same full size, uncropped image should not make any difference

KeithBreazeal · Oct 17, 2016

Add the standard mileage rate and it gets better.
Pretty much spot on article.
No major publisher has stolen my work- which speaks volumes about my photography.
When I sell a photo to a web site, it's a small file.
I have been asked several times about donating or just use permission. I have a rule- if it's a non-profit that
has some redeeming qualities, I will consider free use. Other that that, I have a good & fair rate.
My video archives for broadcast has a fixed minimum of $1,000 for a full license.
Don't undercut yourself, but don't lose a sale over your ego.

Jack Douglas · Oct 16, 2016

East Wind Photography said:
Jack Douglas said:

Thanks very much Go Wild; I love enthusiasm! I'm working my butt off to learn the 1DX II in spite of my 6D handicap.

East W I sure hope you are wrong since that would seem a big blunder by Canon.

Jack

Click to expand...

Oh dear how do I tell my wife I need to spend more money!

In control systems a servo feedback control system can handle speed variation and that's what I assumed, that there were measurement and feedback parameters that made it controllable. I know a stepper motor is a whole different beast.

Jack

Not a blunder, just what the STM motor was designed for. Prior to these new camera models, the focus speed setting was not prevalent. Photogs were wanting faster and faster af speeds....then folks complained it was too fast for video and wanted better control.

Again, canon wants you to buy the equipment for your needs....and of course extra equipment for each.

Posts

Posts

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics