8)

http://petapixel.com/2013/11/11/canon-japan-releases-dslr-teaser-video-talks-white-kiss-debut/

This was my idea! xD They had just copied my *detective* skills! xD

Personally I think a small FF mirrorless(rather than a large one with DSLR form factor and mount but no mirror) is always likely to be a limated market simply because of the lens sizes involved(large AF lenses designed for digital as well not small manual film rangefinder lenses) and FF users demands for advanced controls. Sony isn't the only manufacturer with the ability to go after this market, its the only manufacturer desperate enough to given the failiure of its FF DSLR/SLT cameras.

The net is a very poor guide to actual sales here as your dealing with a very small but very vocal group. Just look at the Fuji X system, via net hype they should be earning massive sales yet there still only a tiny bit player in the mirrorless market as a whole, behind even Canon with one rushed body and three lenses.

neuroanatomist said:

privatebydesign said:

neuro,

Do you happen to know of something like that but with a tilt adjustment in it? I really want one for the ST-E3-RT.

Click to expand...

Not as a 1-piece unit. But one possibility would be to use this adapter (they sell via Amazon, too). I'm thinking you could put some electrical tape on the top (single pin) connector hotshoe of the on-camera piece to block electrical contact, then put the tilting E-TTL shoe on that taped hotshoe. You'd have the coiled cord there, just connecting the two stacked adapters, but have a locking tilt mechanism with no need for additional brackets, etc.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that Neuro, worth a look.

P_R said:

Slightly off topic but related, is it worth having ones camera and lenses calibrated? In doing so canon would presumably set all the correct amfa values for the camera and lenses.

Click to expand...

I guess it's worth it if there's a large difference between afma needed for near and far object distance because unlike Sigma Canon's current afma approach doesn't account for that, but Canon service might be able to do something about it.

danleenyc said:

I purchased a 6D from Canon Refurbished and actution was 17 using a Apple Mac app called "Shutter Count" so I was pretty excited thinking my body was new. But later I realized my files started at _MG_9025.CR2. So now I'm annoyed.

Click to expand...

So much utter BS out there as to shutter count.

9025 is NOT THE SHUTTER COUNT it is the sequential file number left over on your card from another camera.

A 4 digit number will never be used to represent a 50,000+ count shutter!

Only one canon camera series can give the user a correct approximate shutter count and that is the 1DX/C but rounded to the nearest 1000 clicks.

Yes many a software out there boast but only Canon depot software can give you the correct activations and then the currently installed shutter count.

I haven't had the occasion to be with my MkIII in freezing or sub zero temperatures yet, I did however have the opportunity to join my 7D in weather that was approximately -5 below zero.

My 7D worked well, I did have issues after about 3 hours at that temperature with the on-0ff switch freezing up. That was it really. Everything else worked well...

Reminded my about a photo I stumbled across a few years ago. I didn't take it but here it is! All the best!

Canon recently issues a service advisory, and instructions on things to try before returning the battery. Basically, they said to repeatedly insert the battery into the charger. The batteries can discharge so low that the protective circuitry shuts them down. Each time you insert it into the charger, it gets a small amount of charge before the battery circuitry shuts off, and on about the third attempt, it may have enough to spring to life.

Its possible that the cold temperature brought the battery down below the shutoff point. The one at home might have self discharged below the point.

Its worth a try.

http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/10/canon-lp-e6-product-advisory/

http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/10/canon-lp-e6-product-advisory/

I still have my d30. I pull it out from time to time to get perspective.

cresantec said:

Lens hood is off. I took a couple pics on my FF to show it better. I don't mind so much but there were a couple shots that had the vignette on the right and not the left. The only thing I can do in post to fix it is crop which sucks when you want to go really wide. No issues on 8mm; It's a full circle. I think I'm going to end up going to Canon service to look it over.

Click to expand...

Not normal at all. My lens vignettes equally in each corner when I shoot wider than 14mm on FF. Have it checked out.

RGomezPhotos said:

Actually, I read in a Popular Mechanics - type magazine just a few minutes ago that a TV maker will be coming out with a 4k resolution monitor in 2014.. For $1500.

Don't think this is going to sell quite as well as hoped...

Click to expand...

Asus is already selling a decent 4K monitor for about $3k. The market overlap for that product and this canon is literally zero. Like the accuracy of your last sentence.

.
No matter how it all ends up going, I have a short-term hope. Given the desperate need to boost sales, I'm hoping we'll see deeper discounts than ever this holiday season. A 5D3 at $1,999 would go a long way toward depleting inventory excesses. At such a price, I'd seriously consider having a second one!

AlanF said:

takesome1 said:

AlanF said:

J.R. said:

AlanF said:

J.R. said:

AprilForever said:

Pi said:

AprilForever said:

A FF camera has a larger area, BUT...
[...]
Has shallower depth of field (NOT always a good thing, ESPECIALLY with long lenses)

Click to expand...

This is a misconception. FF does not have shallower DOF. It only has the option for less DOF when needed.

Click to expand...

Sure it has shallower depth of field 50mm at f4 on a 7D is roughly equivalent to 30mm f2.5 on a 5D. Same framing, shallower depth of field. When shooting birds in flight, I need usually f8 on a 7D to get the bird at least mostly in focus. On full frame? That's f13. To maintain shutter speed, that means ever rising ISO's.

Yes. The Hi ISO advantage disappears.

Click to expand...

And that is just plain BS you are talking. Assuming that you are taking a photograph of a bird with a 400mm lens 50 feet away. Let's see how the DOF works out at f/8 with the 5D3 and the 7D -

7D: Total DOF is 1.41 feet
5D3: Total DOF is 2.23 feet

Click to expand...

I think that there are circles of confusion here! It seems pretty obvious that if you have the same lens it gives the same size image on crop and FF sensors, and if the two images are viewed at the same size on a screen or print they will have exactly the same depth of field. If they are not enlarged, but the FF is viewed at a smaller size, it will only appear to have a greater depth of field.

The arithmetic from the DOF calculator proves that the images have the same depth of field when viewed at the same size. The depth of field is calculated from the size of the circle of confusion. For the 5DIII it is 0.03 mm, for the 1.6x crop 7D it is 0.019. And 0.03/0.019 = 1.6. So, when you enlarge the FF image 1.6x to get the same size image as the crop, you exactly compensate for the difference in circles of confusion.

Similarly, look at the ratios of total DOF of the 5D3 to 7D. It equals 2.23/1.41 = 1.6. The image from FF has to be enlarged 1.6x to give the same size print as the crop, and in doing so you multiply the out of focus regions 1.6x and so reduce the depth of field 1.6x.

Click to expand...

If talking in terms of equivalence, yes.

Click to expand...

I am not sure that he is talking "plain BS". If you obtain the same field of view on the FF as on the 1.6x crop by either standing 1.6x closer with the FF or use a 1.6x longer lens, the crop has 1.6x greater DOF (calculated on the DOF calculator you used). If, as we have agreed, you crop the FF from the same distance with the same lens, 1.6x, then the cropped FF has the same DOF as the crop sensor.

Click to expand...

Sure you can crop your picture and get the same DOF. But then you have turned your FF camera in to a crop body. The amount of sensor you use is the same on both. The difference then is that you have a FF body that you are using fewer pixels on the subject.

But who does this? The whole point is silly because who buys a FF camera with the intention of cropping the pictures down to crop body size.

Click to expand...

You have entirely missed the point - it was an explanation of an aspect of depth of field that had arisen earlier. If you had read the earlier posts instead of jumping to (wrong) conclusions by reading just the last lines, you would have realised that. J.R., to whom I was writing, graciously accepted the argument. There is nothing "silly" about the point. The words "crap", "silly" and "BS" are bandied around too frequently, and often as a substitute for reasoned argument.

Click to expand...

I did read the earlier posts, and the comment is more to JR than anyone. You jumped to (wrong) conclusions yourself.
It is pointless to the OP's comments and this thread to say that you can use the portion of your sensor that is the same size as a crop sensor and you get the same DOF. In general people use all of the crop sensor when the are using crop bodies and they use all of the FF sensor when they are using FF cameras. In some situations they have to crop and this is true with both bodies.

And yes it is "silly" to provide an explanation of how your FF body would perform if you only used a crop sized sensor inside of it. Basically that was the description.

pulseimages said:

OK, well let me know when you want me to show it to your children and grand children.

Click to expand...

*lol*
Yeah! Pulseimages, I will do so, if I need to.
I have an old Nikon F601 (Yes! The dark side...!) and I suppose, one day I will get my fathers AE-1.

But thank you for your offer

Re: Zeiss Otus 55 f/1.4 APO-Distagon Review by B&H Photo

Albi86 said:

Sample images on lenstip:
http://www.lenstip.com/2067-news-Zeiss_Otus_55_mm_f_1.4_-_sample_images.html

As always, the guys over there managed to make them look like crap

BTW, am I the only one who finds the new design like Viagra, but the fluo-yellow engravings like bromide?

Click to expand...

What´s Viagra?? :

If hold bound and you'll have a car/rough handling potential a pelicase is good. I've took big glass and entrusted it to the delights of the aviation industry without a problem. Nowadays you can get glass carrier rucksacks too and if you want to get best of both worlds get the rucksack and stick THAT inside the pelicase so you have hold transport and then "portable transport" on location.


Pelicases also make good step ladders and chairs at small airports

Northstar said:

DaveMiko said:

Northstar said:

DaveMiko said:

TrabimanUK said:

What about a 1D IV? 1.3x crop, better IQ than a 7D, 10fps.

OK, not as good as the mighty 1Dx, but you'll save a lot of pennies and do you really need a super-pro level camera, or could you get away with a good-pro camera if you're not a full-on pro?

Click to expand...

I don't really need any camera, since I only shoot for the fun of it. I guess, many others are in my predicament. 8) ... That being said, if I decide to get a piece of machinery as complex and sophisticated as a DSLR I only want the best I can get and that is the mighty Canon 1DX.
The 1D Mark IV is not up-to-date and, as you mentioned, not as good as the mighty 1DX, that's the problem with it.

Click to expand...

As I said before, the 1dx is brilliant at capturing fast moving action and it's great in low light...if that's what you'll use it for then go for it, if not, then stick with the 5d3 and buy more glass with $6500... The newest 300 2.8 is the same price. :

Click to expand...

That's a good idea. I like that. 8)

Click to expand...

Of course you would, it's only the best glass made by canon ever. Decisions decisions....

Click to expand...

??? :

abcde12345 said:

there's no more ice cream in the fridge!

Click to expand...

That's really not on, really.

But, on the 6D etc, it's been out since November 2012 ?? Expect a revamped 6D in about 2 + years.

Any revamp of the 5DMK III (5DMK IV ??) will not effect prices of the 6D, they fill different Price Entry Points & End User Markets.

I sympathise with your position, being in Australia, and being Gouged Down Under, that didn't sound quite right, try again.

I'm an Aussie also, but have lived overseas (Singapore & Jakarta) for 35 years, Singapore you will generally get US $$ Prices similar to prices available in the US, and as a Tourist leaving you get the 7% GST returned, not a bad deal, you just need to either be going through Singapore, or be friendly enough with someone that is.

Spent a few minutes playing with back-button focus a couple years ago and never went back -- or front, so to speak. I find back-button focus to be quite natural and love disconnecting the focus from the shutter button.

While I don't have a good picture of the market in Canada for used lenses, I think your choice of the 17-55mm is sound. I have used this lens on two different crop bodies for several years and think it a solid choice.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

Pro's often put black tape over the logo if they don't want to advertise the camera they are using.

Click to expand...

Yep, black tape works better than damaging expensive gear.

mackguyver said:

Mt Spokane Photography said:

As I recall, you can use FoCal Pro on a manual lens to check some of the problem areas such as sharpness at different apertures. Its one way to find out if there is a issue with a lens, if the curve is irregular, there is a problem.

You can take photos of the target manually focusing at each aperture and upload them into Focal for analysis. I'd have to reread the manual on this, its just from memory.

Click to expand...

That sounds right - I think you manually focus with LiveView and then it runs the aperture sharpness test. I suppose "Turbo" mode might work for the purpose takesome1 suggested. Really. I have no plans to use this lens for anything other than very slow, deliberate shooting with LiveView, but I guess it's possible to calibrate the confirmation light. I don't think I'll waste the time trying.

Click to expand...

It might be one way to detect suspected decentering issues.

I've had a number of the 100mm USM Macro lenses, and was disappointed in the images I took with all of them. They were fine lenses, but just too difficult to use handheld and slow AF did not help.

When the 100L came out, I was very skeptical and waited for over a year to see what early adapters thought. There were so many positive reviews to its operating ease and effectiveness of the IS that I finally went for a new one. It was even better than I expected. The lens is not exceptionally sharp, its very good. Instead, its strong point is the faster autofocus and the IS. I can walk around, and get close focus shots that are sharp. I almost never use a tripod with it, I may brace my arms for a extreme close shot, and for that type of use, it pays.

I was very pessimistic about the IS, and would have never expected to get handheld images like these. Obviously, I'm now totally sold on the lens.




Aphids



Baby Robins just holding the camera over my head and taking a blind shot into the nest. Getting this with a tripod would be totally impractical. I did, however, use a camera mounted flash.



Or this bug that was on my front screen door one morning, just grabbed the camera and snapped him. I used my flash, and braced my elbows on the door.

As a one band man who uses multiple C100s for documentary work, especially for interviews, 70D style autofocus will make my work much easer.

Been doing manual focus pulling for a relatively short 15 years now with different high end video camera and I don't mind this fancy new AF technology being an additional tool to my kit but I'll definitely would not want to abuse it. Tried the 70D autofocus and found its focus either still not as precise or if it does hits its focus - a bit too artificial in feel, very unlike a good human focus puller. However I can imagine in the future technology will make it possible for AF cinema cameras to make focus pulling better and more human like in its behaviour.

This development kinds of reminds me of 80s when still film cameras were starting to get reliable autofocus. It really polarised people.

Hi All,

I was looking at the at the Sony HVL 20DW2 light previously but didn't get it due to budget and need at the time. Now I need it, but it doesn't seem to be selling anymore.

I will use this as a off camera light for stills. Portraitures, weddings, etc.

I was also thinking of getting another LED light that's bigger. Like this:
Litepanels Litepanels Micro - On-camera light - LED - 3 W - DC.

My budget is $400 for both. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!!