Posts

Stewbyyy · Jul 16, 2013

JasonATL said:
Stewbyyy said:

However, I don't get the problem when I'm using sunlight through the kitchen window. It seems to only happen when the lights in the kitchen are on.

Click to expand...

Hmmm. What kind of lights?

This now makes me wonder about your shutter speed. If it is set to 1/60 or higher, try 1/50 or even 1/40.

Edit: Never mind. This doesn't really flicker that much. But, I still wonder about the lights. This is odd...

Shutterspeed is a 1/50th, shooting 1080p, 24fps.

No clue what kind of lights they are unfortunately, all I know is that they're fluorescent tubes. More disorientating than any other fluorescent lights I've seen though. They were recommended by the builder when we were getting the kitchen done up, we asked for powerful lights as our kitchen gets a lot of use for multiple things and we usually have dark days 95% of the time here in Ireland (doesn't help that the sun is on the front of the house and not the back where the kitchen is), so he said these were the most powerful he'd be able to put in.
I unfortunately can't remove the cover to check for a name/brand or anything.

dr croubie · Jul 16, 2013

I'm more interested that it can work at an incident angle of up to 60 degrees.
Finally, I might be able to use my 21mm Skopar (or the 12mm or 15mm Heliar) on a digital sensor without it going all purple on the edges...

Nishi Drew · Jul 16, 2013

Might as well use a zoom if you shoot 2.8 or slower often, I agree, that's why I shoot F2 or faster quite often, your zoom can't match my 1.4!

photonius · Jul 16, 2013

comsense said:
Jay Khaos said:

I'm aware that most of you will probably think that the idea of even attempting this is ridiculous, but

Click to expand...

No the idea is not ridiculous but need to me looked with right logic. Only conceivable reasons to do this:
1) Avoid theft: would not work - Any normal thief given an opportunity would not be repulsed stealing an unmarked big camera with big glass
2) Avoid attention: Would do the opposite - How many people look at photographer and scramble to read the model # on their camera. Most like the few who frequent forums like this. And even an unmarked rebel would raise the attention level of this group to moon.
3) Style and statement: There can be no arguments against this one. Except, be careful not to damage $3K camera!!!

So far nobody mentioned a real serious reason for "debranding a product":

LEGAL. Anywhere in certain "spaces", which can be TVs, movies, sports stadiums, there can be a legal restriction for professional photographers, vendors etc. to show their brand, if an exclusive right to use advertising space, branding etc. has been given to a specific company. I.e. of Canon sponsors an event, they may not wish to have Nikon shooters prominently displayed during TV broadcasts. So, perhaps Canon gives all the photographers free cameras, but professional XX wishes to keep using his/her Nikon, so it's best somehow to hide that he/she is using a Nikon, otherwise there may be consequences.
Probably quite a number of readers here are aware of the ridiculous limitations that were imposed on shops around the London Olympic venues based on sponsor pressure.
Or the ambush marketing of a Dutch brewery during the World Cup. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10321668
I have seen a number of debranded cameras in Tv shows, most likely because of branding/legal issues.
Then of course there are the funny instances where commercials for a MS product are made with Apple hardware, the Nokia PureView ad (http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/5/3295316/nokia-apology-lumia-pureview-ad), etc.
So, there are good reasons when you want to hide a product brand.

PS: I forgot the story of the athlete who had a contract with some sports company, but used running shoes from the competition, and added some stripes to hide the fact....

Hardproducer · Jul 16, 2013

Bring it to canon repair and let it dried and cleaned by canon. If you wait to long, later on you get corrosion and that will finaly damage your 7D unrepairable.

Good luck

adhocphotographer · Jul 16, 2013

I used my 17-55 almost 90% of the time..... that was unitl i got the 70-200 2.8 IS II... it is a tough choice, but i would say keep your 17-85 and get the 70-200!

Ellen Schmidtee · Jul 16, 2013

Sometimes corporations do silly things.

When the Apple IIgs was introduced, the Israeli distributor would not sell it, as Macs were more profitable per-unit.

A couple of local PC distributors joked they didn't send flowers with thank you notes because it would raise the suspicion they sent bribes as well.

Mt Spokane Photography · Jul 15, 2013

Although I love my 100mmL because I use it hand held, this is one area where third party lenses are less expensive and excellent. If you want to keep the cost down, consider one of the many fine third party macro's.

The advantage of a longer focal length macro is the working distance. A 50mm Macro on FF must be very close to get 1:1 magnification. 100mm, or more gives a reasonable working distance.

mkabi · Jul 15, 2013

Word of advice. And, I learned this during my last video shoot (that being my first official video shoot).

We all know that with High ISO = high noise (basic rule of thumb, right?).

Here is what they don't tell you.
Low ISO = noise during post production. It happens when there is not enough light and you are increasing exposure and brightness so you can see the subject(s).

So, the best thing you can do.... light the bitch out of your scene (invest in LED or other types of continuous lighting). Because apparently, you can darken it during post and nothing is lost and no noise is produced.

If you have nothing to work with but video with a lot of noise, look into "Neat Video"

preppyak · Jul 15, 2013

I guess my question is, do you really need the f/2.8 lens if you believe that using it without an ND filter would render it useless? I mean, if you are constantly shooting in that bright of light that 1/8000th and f/2.8 doesn't cut it, how often would you actually be using it at f/2.8? There's obviously AF advantages, etc, just curious really.

Traditionally gear is the most expensive in the late spring and mid-summer; they've already done their sales for summer buyers, and it's usually not until early fall that they bring back good deals. That said, Canon has rarely gone more than a month without new rebates the last year and a half or so, so, if you can wait, I would.

Ripley · Jul 15, 2013

jdramirez said:
Ripley said:

Well, what happened?

Click to expand...

I went out with my best gear... I shot from the fringes of the action because I didn't have anything that was even close to being consider period specific, and most of my photos were... ehhh... meh... ok... good... but not anything that I would really fight tooth and nail for.

Part of it was shooting from the fringes... the other part is that it is really difficult to recreate the sense that you might die during a reenactment. Heck... no blood, no guts, it just simply was a tough venue when you weren't embedded in the action.

There were some shots the other team members got that were WOW (as viewed on a 3inch lcd screen), but I didn't even see any compelling images that warranted being captured.

So there I was... having a GREAT time... getting paid a little, getting treated much better than the paying patrons, getting free water, free potato chips, free peanut butter crackers, primo shooting from the fringes, and chit chatting a great group of guys.

Honestly... I got a great experience out of it... and the publisher got about 1000 photos using pro levlel gear, but that were ok. It painted a picture of the battle, but not of the depth of emotion and feeling.

Oh... and I got primo parking and rides on a golf cart to/from wherever I wanted on the battlefield.

So I had fun and I'd do it again... but I'd make a stop at ye old goodwill and see if I could find something that was period specific so I could get up close to the action.

Awesome!!! Thanks for sharing.

Vossie · Jul 15, 2013

The 35 f2 IS is a good option then. Sharp, good IS for video and fast enough for indoor use.

CKP · Jul 15, 2013

I had the RX100 with the Ikelite for about 6 months now but have to add I don't dive, I use it for the intertidal zone (tidal pools, etc.) and some sport shots.
Macro ability of the RX100 is very good (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151530217723171&set=a.325832463170.153409.254152713170&type=1&theater) but you will definitely need a flash for "real" underwater photography and should also consider a wide angle converter. Overall it's a great combination... I am however selling mine if you're interested (I do a lot of over/under shots, for that the RX100 isn't that great and I am going to get a SLR housing).

Plaid Zebra Films · Jul 15, 2013

My new short film shot on the C100 with Zeiss glass. I really love the combination of the two. It looks really cinematic to me. Give it a look and tell me your thoughts!

https://vimeo.com/70319447

ecka · Jul 15, 2013

neuroanatomist said:
Northstar said:

neuroanatomist said:

Northstar said:

You will like the 40mm....I would add that with the STM focus motor, it will serve you well for indoor video too...

Click to expand...

How will the STM focus motor help with video, given that the OP has a 60D?

Click to expand...

by magic?....my mistake, i thought he wrote 6d

Click to expand...

Not even by magic lantern.

The 6D doesn't AF during video, either. Just the T4i/650D, T5i/700D, and the EOS M. The 70D will have it, too.

Well, 6D has no AF tracking mode for video, but it does AF just fine, using the same slow hunting LiveView CDAF. From what I've seen, only 70D actually does AF tracking during video. T4i/650D, T5i/700D, and the EOS M are just trying to

.

WillThompson · Jul 14, 2013

Re: Still only 1/3 stop difference! (When using 1.3 stop steps)

A EOS lens is only functioning to specification when powered up with a body.

The aperture setting is not a passive but an active device!

Is that metered manual or auto exposure?

In auto the camera can skew both settings by 1/6 or is that multiple 1/10's of stops with no indication of f-stop or shutter speed change. (Not sure of the sub step values that Canon uses 1/10 vs 1/6, It has been a long time since I went to Canon school)

So answer me this, how many stops difference is f1.2599 from f1.4142??????

jdramirez · Jul 14, 2013

Dylan777 said:
I hope I could sell my 5D III around $1500ish by the time 5D 4 coming out.

At this moment, I'm so dam happy with the results 5D III has to offer(my needs of course). The 5D III could be my last FF DSLR. I'm looking forward for FF mirrorless body like the Sony Rx-1, that allow shooter to swap lenses. Hope Canon, Nikon, Fuji or Sony will bring something to the market next 3-5yrs.

I would be tickle to death if future FF mirrorless AF speed x3 - x5 faster than current RX-1.

When I bought my XS... I figured I would eventually upgrade. When I did, I sold it for exactly what I paid. I lost zero dollars. When I bought my 60D... I figured I would use it till it died. I sold it for $316 less than what I originally paid which equates to about $126 per year (2.5 years) as a rental fee ($0.34 per day). But then extra money came along and I had a full complement of lenses so I upgraded to the 5D mkiii. I presume I will have that for 3 years... maybe 4 unless then new 5d mkiv is just AMAZING. But with the 5d mkii, it had problems - mediocre auto focus being the big issue. I don't have any complaints with the mkiii. So after 4 years, I suspect I'll lose $1000 (I got it at a really good price so I won't lose as much as others) so $250 per year and $0.68 per day.

I don't like the idea of renting my camera for around $5 a week... but considering lens rentals and borrow lenses charge $127 for 5 days... I think I'm getting a bargain.

scottkinfw · Jul 14, 2013

Also, if you are on a shoot and everyone has Canon gear, no confusion as to which belongs to whom.

Right about the 1965.....

sjschall said:
Love my label maker . . .
- label my lens caps so I can quickly see what's what when stored vertically in a bag
- label cards and batteries numerically, which is great for shooting and keeping track of them

castillophotodesign · Jul 14, 2013

I love my 70-200 IS II. I used it on the 5d III and i am very pleased with the results. Here is a sample photo

to see more photos from this shoot visit my page

https://www.facebook.com/CastilloPhotoDesign?hc_location=timeline

mrsfotografie · Jul 14, 2013

MrFotoFool said:
Considering what you already have, no reason to buy the 300. The 70-200 2.8ii with 1.4x extender will give virtually identical results with the advantage of a zoom.

I shoot zoos extensively and used to have the 300 f4 (non IS) and the very old (black) 80-200 f2.8, which does not take extenders. The 300 is great, I have stunning shots with it, but it was too much carrying both telephotos and I hated switching so I would keep the 300 on most of the time and some shots ended up cutting off the animal legs because the framing was too tight.

I sold both lenses and now use the 70-200 2.8 (non IS) and 1.4x extender and that is the perfect setup. Stick with what you have (and if anything dump the 100-400).

Getting rid of the 100-400 is not an option to me, as it is the ideal motorsports lens

The 300 mm would be primarily for zoo-work, without an extender though so I guess its between the 70-200 + 1.4 and the 300 mm.

However great for the track, the 100-400 is a little bit disappointing for zoo-work IMHO. Note I'm not considering a 2x TC here as I don't want to work with a straight f/5.6 lens.

RGF · Jul 14, 2013

neuroanatomist said:
insanitybeard said:

I try as far as possible to completely discharge the LP-E6 in camera (so it will no longer power the camera) before I recharge it, though I'm not sure if this really makes much difference to battery life/ recharge performance.

Click to expand...

If anything, that's worse. Li-ion batteries are better used frequently but lightly. Frequent full discharges will actually reduce overall longevity.

Interesting. The opposite of NiMH batteries which have memories

Halfrack · Jul 13, 2013

Something to keep in mind, the shape of your softbox dictates what you're trying to mimic in nature. Square/Rectangle boxes mirror a window with the sun coming in (I've even seen someone gaffers tape a grid onto the front of one). Octa's and beauty dishes are round and more sun like.

Strip boxes I don't have a relative light source off hand. Big softboxes are fun because with some foam core, you can turn a 4x6 into 2 1x4's with 4' between them.

LetTheRightLensIn · Jul 13, 2013

I agree with Fegari that the 2x TC III definitely gives it more true macro reach. I have no clue what those who claim the bare lens zoomed 2x shows more detail are seeing since the macro+2x TC clearly is bringing in more true and real fine detail.

Admin US West · Jul 13, 2013

They certainly appreciate all of you linking the website URL and clicking the link. That's how Google and others determine the ranking.

I've removed the URL and locked the topic to prevent more free advertising.

justsomedude · Jul 13, 2013

IceAgeDX said:
The 7Dmkii will likely be out of my price range.. But if the 70D has the same sensor as original 7D I assume it'll still be really good

I think the 70D will have a better sensor than the 7D, at least based on the specs:

7D

18MP
100-6400 ISO (standard)
12,800 ISO (expanded)
WiFi: NO
3" fixed screen
920,000 dot LCD
8 fps burst

70D

20.2MP
100-12800 ISO (standard)
25,600 ISO (expanded)
WiFi: BUILT IN
3" fixed screen
1,040,000 dot LCD
7 fps burst

Based on these specs, I think your 70D is a better by. And not wanting to start a holy war, I will say that I've never been impressed with the 7D (you can look back to some of my first posts here on this forum), and truly believe it is a lemon.

I'm one of the few (probably <5% of users) who never got a sharp photo from a 7D; and started hating photography because of it. Yes, I'm a pixel-peeper, and yes, I'm an OCD photographer. I want my images to be tacky sharp. So maybe I'm not a fair example of the average 7D shooter.

But in my limited experience with only three 7D bodies, each one failed me with its poor AF. Pretty much every shot I got from a 7D body resembled the infamous Darwin Wiggett "melted-hay" photos at 100% view. After months of swapping bodies with Canon Irvine, I finally parted ways with my 7D. Since that moment I felt as if the heavens opened, and I became a sane photographer once again!

However, I am excited about the prospects of a 7D MKII based on recent rumors posted here on CR, and anxiously await its announcement. I'm sure any AF issues have been resolved in the 4 years since the original 7D launched.

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics