tron said:

surapon said:

I just set my Canon 4D MK II at 1 center Spot Focus

Click to expand...

This must be an interesting camera ;D

Click to expand...

Ha, Ha, Ha---Dear Tron.
Sorry , That is my mistake , I should type 5D MK II-----And At that Time , My brain thinking about 45 MP Future 3D, I say NO--I do not need 45 MP DSLR yet, and I just type 4D MK II ----Ha, Ha, Ha
Surapon

One thing I noticed after downloading the RAW files is that the samples in the review video appear to be post-noise-reduction (either from-camera JPEG or noise-reduced in Lightroom). There's a healthy dose of chroma noise in the 1600 ISO sample.

That being said, on the sample RAW image in question, it does clean up quite nicely in Lightroom without too much loss of detail. I can still read the smallest numbers on the tire just fine ("For DOT test and normal highway use in North America and Australia" on the upper left side).

The sample image is a fairly close-up view of a mostly smooth object, though, so it might just be that this particular images cleans up well because there's not as much detail to lose. Still, this is WAY better than what I'm getting right now from my camera, so this still looks like a solid upgrade to me...

You Will be just fine. Enjoy your new camera and stop worrying.

J.R. said:

Did you try to remap the hot / stuck pixels?

Click to expand...

Yes I did. What really stinks is the first one I had that was stolen only had maybe ten now I have 50+ and that's at iso 400 and 10 sec.

85LII > 100L

The images in the link you posted have very shallow depth of field, so as you have said you want to take images like those I would recommend a used 5D, as others have stated. Fast primes do not have to be expensive, and as you are controlling the distance to subject you do not need a zoom anyway.

Can't go wrong with a 50 f1.4 ( well actually you can because used half of them seem to be broken ), 40mm 2.8 is stellar, and if you like the distortion effect coupled with shallow depth of field get a 28 f1.8

Tips on shooting the 5D; use RAW and 100 ISO. Contrast can be abrupt.

Marsu42 said:

Aglet said:

70D has a bit better sensor performance than the 60D, it's pattern noise is negligible compared to both 60D

Click to expand...

Are there any reviews on this yet? Of course the 70d is the better camera as it should be, but the 60d pattern noise was already lower than 7d and probably even 5d2 - and the one "lens cap" shot from 70d still showed the pattern, so I wonder if there's really any noticeable improvement.

Click to expand...

don't know if there's any big site review yet, there's evaluation of it and I put up the samples in another thread here days ago.
started in the rumors section, unfortunately OOPS/

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=16713.0

70D's not perfect, but it's the best crop sensor from Canon since the 40D from what I can tell. It's way less bandy than my 60D at lower ISOs. It did seem to throw up a lot of extra noise with the main display ON tho.

Thought I'd give an update on my problem. The shop concerned was very difficult to deal with, wouldn't return messages etc so as I needed a working lens for my work I bought another copy which worked perfectly - such a nice lens. However it took up until today to get a refund, I sent metadata to them first which showed the fault then the lens once they asked for it. But surprise surprise when they got it they said there was nothing wrong with it and it was my cameras that were faulty. Basically it was weeks and weeks of hassles until today, at least I got a new lens (from another shop) that works a treat and I got my money back, except for postage as they still deny the lens is faulty.

http://nikoninspirations.com/

Canon camera is welcome!!!
Good luck 8)

You are welcome, it sure takes away the need to always use the ST-E£ screen if it is at an akward angle.

I had a question for 60d/7D/5DMK2 users: In many situations, when shooting on M one doesn't have time to adjust shutter, aperture, ISO etc. for e.g. events with moving subjects and areas of varying exposure. I would prefer to shoot Aperture Priority with AUTO ISO (since noise levels are perfectly acceptable to me upto maybe ISO 3200). However, this is out of the question since the camera often selects shutter speeds which are ridiculously low and there is no minimum shutter speed setting like the new Canons or older Nikons. If I choose Shutter priority, the camera will select whatever aperture it wants, which I may or may not need. It seems like AUTO ISO is only helpful in M mode.

I was just wondering, for those of you who shoot in these types of situations, how do you shoot? What are your settings? Do you always shoot on Manual and adjust shutter, ISO, aperture? How does one use AUTO ISO without the min shutter speed functionality.

Thoughts appreciated. Thanks.

1.)

PJF_8705.jpg by petereoin1, on Flickr


2.)

PJF_8705.jpg by petereoin1, on Flickr


3.)

PJF_8705.jpg by petereoin1, on Flickr


4.)

PJF_8705.jpg by petereoin1, on Flickr

5.)

PJF_8705.jpg by petereoin1, on Flickr


Thanks for looking

Make sure you have up to date memory cards, when I upgraded to a 60mbps flash card it made a big difference in buffer time.

Also, USB3 empties my 8GB card pretty fast (again, a good modern card), when I bought my 5D2 I made sure to have something that doesn't take 15 minutes to empty the card. USB3 will do it in 2 (or less with better cards).

I did a few simple experiments with mRAW and it looks like downsampling full RAW on my computer gave better results than shooting mRAW, which is unfortunate because if they could do better downsampling on-camera I would use it.

Thanks guys this helps alot

paul13walnut5 said:

No experience of the Metz.

The Canon will absolutely:

2nd curtain synch
High speed synch
be controllable through the camera menu
will crop the zoom according to sensor size and lens
work seamlessly with E-TTL II
work on your next EOS, or the back up body you buy
give you flash modelling preview
work with your AF for assist (there are different modes to select parts of the AF pattern, not sure how it will play with your 5D3)

http://www.canon.co.uk/Support/Consumer_Products/products/cameras/Speedlites/SPEEDLITE_430EX_II.aspx?type=download&page=1

From P23

Under low-light or low-contrast conditions when autofocus cannot be achieved, the built-in AF-assist beam will be emitted automatically to make it easier to autofocus. The 430EX II’s AF-assist beam is compatible with the AF points of almost all EOS cameras. The AF-assist beam is compatible with 28mm and longer lenses. The effective range is shown below.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I had a Metz 58 AF-1 and it did do the following.

2nd curtain synch
High speed synch
be controllable through the camera menu
will crop the zoom according to sensor size and lens
work seamlessly with E-TTL II

work on your next EOS, or the back up body you buy. For this one the Metz comes with a port for FW updates

give you flash modelling preview. Not sure about this one

work with your AF for assist (there are different modes to select parts of the AF pattern, not sure how it will play with your 5D3) AF assist worked but not sure if there were 3 patterns

Marsu42 said:

privatebydesign said:

I don't see the triggers being anything like the bargain priced accessories we currently see.

Click to expand...

Looking at the price of the current YN proprietary triggers, there shouldn't be much of a price difference for the rt version - it's rally just some cents of electronics in a plastic casing, they don't even have the lcd display of the st-e3.

Click to expand...

That would be a fair comment if cost per unit had nothing to do with perceived value per unit. Do you really think a YN-622 costs anywhere near four times as much to make as an RF-603? An RT YN-642 trigger would cost appreciably more than the 622, even if i was only £20 more that still takes it to £100 for wireless control of one flash, hardly the budget option that the RF-602 got us into at $25 a set.

If they didn't do the LCD it would be considerably less attractive, the ST-E2 doesn't have one so the 622 doesn't need one, but the RT system has much more functionality and digging through the camera flash menu becomes a chore with all the enhancements.

The way I see it whilst some people will always be excited at saving a few hundred dollars (or a hundred quid or so) once people start using the stuff and limitations start showing up then people see less value in third party, no new RT system option will be cheap and whereas with the current third party radio ETTL control that offers something Canon never did, going against direct competition with less functionality, as opposed to no competition with enhanced functionality, seems to make little sense to me.

But as I said, I have been wrong many times before.

ETTR makea sense mostly at ISO 100. With Canon however, it makes sense at ISO 200-800 as well. The idea is to let as much light possible but still keeping the highlights you want to keep. This is not easy since the histogram may show clipping but the RAW may not be clipped. Also, with certain colors like red, that color channel may be clipped even if the histogram looks OK.

I keep my 5D2 at EV=+1/3. This is a lazy way to expose a bit to the right, and to compensate for the conservative metering of my camera. When the SS is not a problem, I would overexpose a bit further until I see a brighter shot on the back screen - how bright - it is based on experience, not on the histogram really. This is very important (to me, anyway) for shots with a high DR or for ones which I expect to pp heavily. Sometimes I blow the highlights, unfortunately. My most viewed shot on Flickr has severely blown highlights.

The benefits of ETTR is not only lower shadow noise but lower shot noise. With strong pp, WB tweaks, vignetting corrections, etc., that noise may become visible even at ISO 100. With crop cameras, it takes very little to reveal it.

At higher but moderate ISO, it is better, for example, to shoot at ISO 800 to the right, if you can keep the highlights, than at ISO 400. The reason for it is - well, it is a Canon sensor. The read noise at ISO 800 is roughly speaking 1/2 of that at ISO 400 but you get no benefits form lower shot noise, of course (same exposure). This is counter-intuitive since you would expect that you should stick to the lower ISO if you can. You take more risk, as well, since metering in low light may not be so accurate, DR might be higher, and you can easily blow the highlights.

Justin clamps, and super clamps. Instead of trying to find smaller stands, just use these to make anything into stands. Chairs, table edges, door frames, whatever.

don't go too far,

check this out

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studiocomparefullscreen.asp#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=true&headerTitle=Canon%20EOS%2070D&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=canon_eos70d&masterSample=img_9682.acr&masterDisableCameraSelection=true&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=canon_eos70d&slot0Sample=img_9682.acr&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=nikon_d7100&slot1Sample=dsc_0176.acr&slot2Camera=canon_eos60d&slot2Sample=img_0243.acr&slot3Camera=fujifilm_xpro1&slot3Sample=dscf2016new.acr&x=0.027246414099183026&y=-1.045788818021597&extraCameraCount=1&extraCamera0Name=Canon%20EOS%2070D&extraCamera0DprCode=canon_eos70d

i'd say the quality is comparable, however this fuji sensor is playing in a different league, something i'd love to see in canon/nikon.

9VIII said:

LewisShermer said:

tnargs said:

Bennymiata said:

Canon always need to move forward and get people to spend ever larger amounts of money with them, so after FF, where else is there to go except to MF?

Click to expand...

So, you're saying there is a huge block of Canon users who have upgraded their way to 1DX and want more camera?

Click to expand...

Yep.

MF isn't about wondering the streets taking snaps of pigeons or taking photo's of your kids pricking about in the garden, it's a serious camera for serious people. It's a commercial camera for commercial projects, product, architecture & fashion. Imagine cropping an image and it still being big enough to print on a billboard or the side of a building. That's it's practical use. The photographers who do this aren't going out to do weddings at £100 a pop.

Don't get disgruntled because this camera isn't aimed at you. It's great that they're having a go at this market and I can't wait to own one

Click to expand...

I guarantee there will be a segment of the market using these to put funny captions on pictures of cats.

I know that's why I want one, getting action shots indoors is a real struggle (thus, I've never posted any funny cat pictures).
And the Bokeh! crowd will go bonkers.

Click to expand...

I am the Bokeh! crowd... why have everything in focus when you can have almost nothing in focus??

http://youtu.be/UFH6N0omGuE

As broadcast on STV (music edit for copyright reasons)

Jens_T said:

Hello,

today I bought the EF70-300L lense to replace my old Tamron 70-300VC. When playing around I noticed that the 300mm on the Canon seem to be a good bit wider than on my Tamron.

Is there a website that actually checks the "nominal" focal length? I remember Lensrentals sometimes comments on the the real focal length but they don't list the details.

Or is there a simple way to calculate it without too much hassle?

Thanks in advance
jens

Click to expand...

The 70-300L has a TON of focus breathing and the Tamron has VERY little. At MFD the 70-300L turns 300mm into only 200mm! At 25' it is still only about 282mm. Even at 50' is still doesn't seem to yet reach 300mm. Maybe on the moon it does ;D. Or maybe never. Even shooting across the length of a soccer field, the long way, the old simga 120-300mm seemed to deliver about 280mm if what you call the 300 2.8 IS delivering at 300mm at that distance. (the sigma also seemed to be about f/3.0 if you call the 300 2.8 IS f/2.8) and the difference seemed to be about the same shooting much closer in too so I think the old sigma 120-300mm was simply really a 120-280mm f/3.0 lens ;D.


At 25' I had to set it to read EXIF 72mm to get same FOV of the 70-200 f/4 IS at 70mm.

neuroanatomist said:

paul13walnut5 said:

Grab a kit by a flash and your flash will be destroyed...

Click to expand...

Depends on the kit. I grab and carry by the 600EX-RT...when I have one of my flashes mounted on the EOS M + 22mm f/2.

Click to expand...

I think the 600EX also qualifies as the heavier or more expensive component. Glad to see I'm not the only one who does this with the M+22 combo. I mean really - what else is there to hold it by.

Mikael, you are hereby banned for life. Don't make a new account, don't come back. You will be noticed, and we're not going to give you another chance.

You are knowledgeable and and can bring a much needed voice of dissent at times, and because of that we regret doing this, but you bring out the worst in everyone here, and your behavior can no longer be tolerated.

EVERYONE ELSE....

Your behavior in this thread has been no better. You should be ashamed of yourselves. Act like adults, and have civil discussions.

Whoops! I also just realized that I replied to a fairly old thread. That's what I get for perusing the message boards themselves instead of just the "hot topic" threads on the home page. D'oh!

More apologies...