Posts

Etienne · Apr 13, 2015

expatinasia said:
What time is the Blackmagic press conference. Really looking forward to learning more about the URSA mini. Still can't believe it is only US$ 2995.

I'm curious about the mini, but wait for the reviews. It ends up about the same price as the Sony: $4999 for the version with 15 stops DR, and you have to add another $2000 for the shoulder mount and Viewfinder. There is no viewfinder on the base unit, so it's almost a must to buy the $1500 view finder.

I'm hoping this is the killer camera of the year, and still $9000 less than the C300 mk II, with viewfinder and shoulder mount

JohnDizzo15 · Apr 13, 2015

Off the ledge for now. LOL.

Viggo - Wish I could get one of those used half off deals.

Hawaii - I had the 24-70II but traded it for the xt1, 56, and kit zoom last year. Ended up picking up the tamron VC a couple months later. Never use that one for stills though.

Apr 13, 2015

Re: Canon Products Selected for Esteemed Technical Image Press Association Awards for 21st Consecuti

LetTheRightLensIn said:
If they had highlighted large buffer, 10fps, advanced AF system combined with high reach, then fine. But they highlight ridiculous stuff and then just randomly list the Canon product spec sheet list.

Some random copy editor threw the word "exciting" in the middle of the list of features just for some variety in the prose. You're making way too much of it, best to just get over it.

degos · Apr 12, 2015

IS is lovely for non-moving subjects ( e.g. if you can persuade the dinner party to stop talking for a moment ) but unfortunately in Canon's eyes means the opportunity for huge price premium.

The 50mm 1.8 is affordable even for a kid wanting to move-up from kit lens. A few months saving pocket-money and he can have his first prime lens.
The 40mm 2.8 is next but probably not of much interest to such a beginner ( max aperture fairly useless indoors )
Then there's a yawning chasm to the old but reliable mid-range 50 / 85 / 100.
And then another leap to the recent IS-overhauls of the wide-angles aimed at the amateur / low-budget video crowd.

If they go bells-and-whistles on the 50mm 1.8 replacement they won't have anything on the market under £100. Perhaps that's what they want, but I think it would just corral young & beginning photographers towards mirrorless.

Don Haines · Apr 11, 2015

I wonder how big the market would be... Cell phones are already good enough quality for the masses, and those that really want quality and know better reach for a DSLR.... after all, the P/S market is seriously declining... How much room is there in the middle for a compromise camera?

lintoni · Apr 11, 2015

DPReview has some "real world" samples, if you're interested -

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/albums/lensbaby-velvet-56-samples-gallery

IgotGASbadDude · Apr 11, 2015

charlesa said:
IgotGASbadDude said:

StudentOfLight said:

I'm sold on not buying a 1D-X, it doesn't have a silent shutter or headphone jack.

Click to expand...

How interesting our differences are. I shoot mostly concerts and sports, neither of which do I give a care about the sound of the shutter. Especially the concerts . . . ;D And if I have to shoot silently, I'll break out the 5D3.

As for the headphone jack, who shoots video with a 1DX anyway? ???

Click to expand...

Try shooting ballet or a classical concert with the 1DX shutter cluttering away... you will get plenty of killer looks from patrons and organizers alike.

Exactly my point.

If I need silence I have the 5D3.

Otherwise, who cares what the sound volume is . . .

Mitch.Conner · Apr 11, 2015

distant.star said:
.
DJI introduces today a new Phantom.

http://www.dji.com/product/phantom-3#page1

Here's Jeff Cable flying it around the Golden Gate...

https://youtu.be/KuKBWZuAdAE

It looks fun. I'd really like a Cinestar 8 though.

Mitch.Conner · Apr 11, 2015

A better way to test it is to use a mirror as mentioned above. I use a standard chart with mini star charts added along the periphery so that I can test for decentering and sharpness simultaneously.

If you look back at some of my (not that much) older posts, you'll see I was struggling with my 70-200/2.8 IS II lens and what looked like decentering to me. It went back to Canon multiple times and was a massive pain in the butt. I think it's fixed now. I need to really thoroughly test it one day, but things look better so far.

FWIW, it wasn't until I joined CPS that anybody at Canon took me or my lens seriously. The folks at CPS were confused as to what (if anything) the non CPS techs were doing. Ultimately they gave it to supposed best tech, and I think he fixed it.

Ruined · Apr 11, 2015

BobAaron said:
I have both the 7D and the 7dii. I had the 7D for nearly a year and the 7Dii was supposed to be an upgrade for me.
Both cameras were set to the same exact settings (or as close as possible given that the shutter speeds have slight variations, etc.). I was shooting horse races using both the 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II and the 3oomm f/2.8 L IS prime lens. On day one I used the 7D and 7Dii with the 70-200 lens alternating cameras one race after the other. On day two I alternated cameras race by race using the 300mm. RESULTS: Both the 7D and 7Dii shot identical quality shots using the 70-200mm. Using the 300mm prime lens, only the 7D shot in-focus shots one after the other. Nearly every shot taken by the 7dii was blurry. I spent a solid week testing and retesting. Same results.

There is something inherently wrong with here. Compatibility issues? Maybe? I sent the 7Dii back to B+H which honored their 30-day return policy.

Now my search for an upgrade to the 7D continues. I thought the 7Dii would be that upgrade but it turned out to be a huge disappointment!

Regardless of all the unrelated banter in this thread, I do believe a larger than usual number of 7D2 bodies were released with major autofocus problems. There are too many postings like this across many forums and Canon is replacing hardware in many cases to fix it or making hardware adjustments.

JonAustin · Apr 11, 2015

david72 said:
Hello,

sorry to bring up again this old topic but I had the same issue with my 5Dmark3.
It was only 3 months old.
The context was: my 5Dmark having in the card slots both a SD card and an CF card coming from my old camera.
Verified:
- adding the Compact Flash card generate the error code 20
- removing the CF card avoid this error code.
Since, I have only SD card, and this error code have not appear any more.
Hope it can help.
Regards

Hi David,

You don't state how long ago you experienced this error, so I don't know if your 5D3 is still under warranty or not, but it sounds from your post like you're only using your 5D3's SD slot now, and avoiding using a CF card to prevent the error.

It's up to you, of course, but if I were in your shoes, I'd try formatting your CF card in another Canon camera (or a PC), and then try it in your 5D3 again. If that didn't work, I'd try a different CF card. And if that didn't work, I'd send the camera in for service.

The SD slot works fine, of course, but the CF slot is much faster ... an important feature when you're firing off rapid bursts. Also, without the CF slot, you're missing out on other great features, such as the abilities to:
- store duplicate images on both cards (automatic backup),
- shoot different formats / resolutions of the same image to each card (i.e., RAW on one, JPEG on the other),
- copy images from one card to the other

I hope you do (or did) get it fixed.

And finally, I found it amusing that Canon's Error Detail for Code 20 is stated as "malfunctions related to the mechanical mechanism" ... are there any other kinds of mechanisms?

charlesa · Apr 11, 2015

Gura Gear for me, hands down. Top notch products.

PCM-madison · Apr 10, 2015

I agree with the other recommendations. Here is a self portrait taken along Artist's drive. There are also interesting historic sites like Scotty's Castle, locations where important movies were filmed, etc.

Mika · Apr 10, 2015

Regarding 24-70s, I own the Mk I, and have not tried the Mk. II - yet. The reason? I'm happy with my Mark I. My decision to stay was also based on the better specs of Mark I.

How you ask? I can get closer with Mark I, which tends to suit the majority of situations I use the objective. The out-of-focus rendering seems to be better too, I tend to think Canon intentionally made the objective behave this way to smoothen the background. I do occasionally use flare as a compositional element, so it has not been bugging me.

Then there is the subjective read-my-mind type property of Mark I. I don't know how, but with Sigma's 50A, these objectives not only seem to fulfill the vision I had, but can even up it a bit (or occasionally a lot!)

I have never had problems with field curvature of Mark I, that is probably again because of how I use the objective: I don't typically use it for landscapes, but for situationals.

But then again, I'm a hobbyist, and not a professional.

danski0224 · Apr 10, 2015

kennephoto said:
I've been thinking about adding a tele lens to my arsenal but can't figure out which way to go. I rented the 100-400 II and compared it to my 70-200 2.8 II with the 2x and the 100-400 was better but not enough to justify buying it yet. I like that the 100-400 II is much smaller in my bag than the 70-200 with 2x. So I have also been looking in various classified and looking at old 300 2.8's and 400 DO which seem price wise seem to be hovering a tad higher than the 100-400 II. If I get either of those tele lenses I could have a 600 and 800, but when I go to thedigitalpicture.com and look at his test charts the 100-400 II is better or equal even with extenders! Is there any reason for me to consider higher prices of these old lenses? Also why are these old teles still really expensive even when they are beat up and not serviceable anymore? In case you're wondering I just want to use the lens for casual photography small prints to hang around the house and share with family.

The old lenses are the only way for the average enthusiast to get into the Canon "big white" club. Look at what a 300 2.8 VII costs compared to the non-IS USM version.

It is possible to find the "old" non-IS USM lenses in excellent condition, but yes, being unserviceable in the event of a breakdown is a concern. I certainly would not want to buy one that looked like it rolled around in the trunk between uses for years.

That said, they were designed to be used by professionals so they are robust. You could buy another one if the first one breaks and still spend less than what a VII lens costs.

The USM and IS version lenses (VI, I guess) may be close to being unsupported at Canon, if they are not there already.

I guess it comes down to how much you are willing to spend or risk.

The one difference that hasn't been mentioned yet is minimum focus distance (MFD). The 100-400 is a champ there. The VII big whites are also much improved with respect to MFD over the original USM non-IS lenses.

The new ones have very good IS and the non-IS ones don't... sounds stupid, but it is a difference between the two.

One place to compare physical dimensions, weight and MFD of Canon lenses: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1334232/0

Optically, there is little difference between the non-IS versions and the VII versions. They are supposedly the FD manual focus lenses updated to EOS, and some of those FD lenses are cheap in comparison and many can be converted with an Ed Mika kit.

There is much love and hate for the VI 400 DO. Make sure that you can check it out in person.

DARSON · Apr 10, 2015

Random Orbits said:
DARSON said:

neuroanatomist said:

dcm said:

I just saw that this head appeared on RRS website again
http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/Monopod-Heads/MH-02-LR-Head-with-indexing-lever-release-clamp.html

Click to expand...

That is the LR with the lever lock. The pro uses a knob. The LR was much more popular than the Pro.

Click to expand...

I should mention that it is not pro version but still this one reappeared after some time of being removed from RRS website.
Thanks for correction

Click to expand...

Zeidora · Apr 10, 2015

Have no experience with it, but I see a problem of strain on hot shoe when bending the flexible guides. The flash does not seem to offer TTL exposure control, so you are restricted to full manual control.

I do like those types of arms and mount my Canon MT-24 heads on 2 Wimberley Plamps, that I modified with flash shoes. The plamps then attach to the tripod legs. The Canon twin macro can be put in manual mode, which I use for z-stacking, but also offers TTL exposure control.

Additionally, the light guides on the Venus are fixed length, and on the MPE 65 fully extended, may be a bit short. I occasionally remove the MT24 body from camera body and connect via TTL flash cable. Canon only makes one short flash cable, so got some from Flash Zebra, and those work very well and seem to be quite durable.

ajfotofilmagem · Apr 10, 2015

Do you know what the sales period used in this list?
Considering it was a period of at least 30 days, we can conclude that:

Canon 50mm fantastic plastic remains the first choice of non-kit lens from the crowds. 8)

Canon STM 10-18mm and also 55-250mm are a great success.

The Canon users consider the Tamron 70-300 VC better than the Canon non-L. :

The Nikon users consider Tamron 70-300 (old model) good enough.

Nikon 35mm F1.8 DX is a great choice of fast prime.

Sigma 35mm Art is very seductive, and is stealing sales even models 50mm.

Steve Balcombe · Apr 10, 2015

ashley said:
Thanks for all your suggestions, opened the file in Photoshop and couldn't replicate the pink in the highlights so does appear to be Aperture (which Apple have abandoned). I thought it was camera related becouse I couldn't get the problem on my 40d... don't know why a newer camera should be such a problem for it.

Because the RAW files differ in some way - this is why RAW converter updates are needed for new models

ashley said:
PS - what is baloney?

Poor quality 'luncheon meat' type of sausage, the name being a corruption of Bologna. Has become a slang word for 'nonsense'.

StudentOfLight · Apr 9, 2015

Maiaibing said:
JimmysPhoto said:

TELL ME WHY!

Click to expand...

My guess is that light metering/WB has deteriorated slightly since the emergence of digital cameras - because its less critical than it used to be.

Having used light meters a lot in the film days - when we were dependent on getting the lighting 100% correct from the outset - it seems to me that metering was more reliable on the top bodies back then.

Of course my 5DII is not Canon's "top body" so maybe this is the obvious reason. Just like your 5DIII combo is not.

On balance I can understand if manufactures think that with digital they can go a little cheaper on the metering. And the truth is that I'm still doing better overall with my WB today due to the ability to adjust in post.

If I'm shooting RAW I don't care too much as the color can be ~~twerked~~ tweaked as required in post~. On the odd occasion I shoot JPG or mRAW then I spend some time taking a few test shots and adjusting both Kelvin and Tint with the RGB histogram. On most of my cameras K and color shift are easily accessible via the [Q] info screen so it's no big deal to quickly make an adjustment.

cosmopotter · Apr 9, 2015

Re: Canon developing high-magnification, long-focal-length broadcast field zoom lens supporting 4K p

Local Hero said:
Khnnielsen said:

So this is for 2/3 inch broadcast cameras, which shoot in 4k? Do they even exist yet? I know that Sony make a camera which produce 4k from a 1/2 inch sensor, but I have never heard of a big ENG styled camera with a 2/3 inch sensor and 4k.

Click to expand...

There are 4K 2/3" cameras from Sony, Ikegami and Grass Valley.
The Sony and GV haven't quite shipped yet, but are very close.

This lens is big news are there currently are no 4K 2/3" lenses.
Previously the best lens to use was the Canon 95x HD lens for this sot of thing.

You missed the most important one - Hitachi:

http://www.gearhousebroadcast.com/blog/2014/09/gearhouse-jumps-into-4k-with-huge-hitachi-uhd-camera-deal-at-ibc2014/

Hitachi has already shipped 50 UHD cameras that use 4 2/3" sensors. Pretty cool if you're in the broadcast industry.

lintoni · Apr 9, 2015

Marsu42 said:
MiamiC70 said:

Anyone think we will see v2.0 firmware for Canon 70d anytime soon?

Click to expand...

But rejoice: The first alpha of Magic Lantern for 70d is out, that's much better than any Canon fw update could be.

The 5D3 doesn't have a v2 firmware and that's been out for 3 years, but Magic Lantern has added much more functionality to my camera than any Canon firmware update will ever do.

TWI by Dustin Abbott · Apr 8, 2015

NancyP said:
I don't adapt K mount, but any bayonet mount has some inherent need for precision mounting. I bought a cheapo Bower Nikon F mount to EF mount converter, the lens wiggled a bit. Disconcerting, especially if one is doing long exposures. I bit the bullet and paid 80.00 for an F-to-EF adapter (Fotodiox PRO, not plain Fotodiox), because it was designed with a leaf spring, as are the name-brand mounts like Novoflex - problem solved, the mount is very solid now. So don't cheap out on bayonet adapters. The screw mounts, on the other hand - a perfectly good M42 to EF mount can be had for 5 bucks or less, due to the simplicity of design and milling.

That's some great information. I am considering doing this for my C/Y to EF mount for my Zeiss Planar T* 1.7/50mm. It's a great lens, but the mount is loose, and by adding a little double sided tape I have further reduced infinity focus...and it wasn't great to begin with.

JonAustin · Apr 8, 2015

I rarely shoot in hazardous conditions; probably the greatest hazards my lenses face are salt water spray and sand at the beach. In those conditions, I'll use a UV filter; otherwise, my front elements are only protected by their lens hoods.

The longer I've been doing photography this go-round (since 2003), the less I clean (or feel the compulsion to clean) my lenses. I will echo other posters here; a blast of clean air (bulb blower) and a brush of a lens pen is usually all that is needed. If that's not enough, my second step is to fog the front element with my breath (if you haven't recently eaten or been smoking, your breath is nearly 100% pure water vapor) and wipe off with a clean microfiber cloth.

Microfiber cloths have become very readily available, inexpensive and high quality over the past few years. I buy them by the bag (a dozen or so for $10 or less), and always keep a clean one with the camera I'm carrying. When it comes time to wash, I replace it with a new one. After being laundered, I repurpose it to other, progressively less sensitive tasks (starting with cleaning scanner glass and PC screens) ... eventually they are demoted to household cleaning rags.

I have some more sophisticated / expensive optics cleaning supplies (PecPads & Eclipse solution), originally purchased to clean sensors, but rarely use them. And with the sensor cleaning technology in my 2½-year old 5D3, I haven't needed to clean its sensor once. (The mirror and focusing screen are another story, however.)

jeffa4444 · Apr 8, 2015

Rumors have circled for months about a C700 to take on Red & Arri and made up or not many of these would need to be true to take them on. It would need:-

4K 14Bit
15 stops DR
Global Shutter
CFast 2.0 and either Codex for raw especially at high frame rates or similar data packs from Canon
Full frame / Open gate (cinema not FF stills)
Rec.2020 color space
lens metadata, roll, pitch & yaw for blue / green screen & set-mapping

The big question is the sensor size shown here as 32.4x18 - Open Gate film is 1.33:1 or 24.92mm x 18.67 and for anamorphic its 20.96x17.53 2.40:1 projection aperture so not quite Open Gate in height but could accomodate anamorphic origination. Thats huge because no Sony, Panasonic or BM camera can properly handle anamorphic nor either Red currently that has been a massive selling point for Arri with the Alexa XT.

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics