Just be careful with Loc-tite or similar solution as some contain acetone that can react (badly) to certain plastics including polycabonate.

Another tip for you, get around by taxi and use Vinasun and preferably Mai Linh. Stay away from the other companies. Most o them will rip you off.

big failing on canon the 2nd curtain issues

neuroanatomist said:

EchoLocation said:

incredible if this is true.
what are we going to talk about now?

Click to expand...

The 100-400. Again.

Click to expand...

Lol....how about the 12-24? 35 f1.4 II? 135 f2 II? Or even the 7DII?
Lots of fat to chew with that lot

I'm not too fussed with a pair of new longer TS-e lenses. The original TS-e lenses were better, the longer they were. The worse one was the TS-e 24mm L, which optically was the weakest of the bunch. The TS-e 45 and 90 were / are optically very good. When Canon realeased the new TS-e 17L and TS-e 24IIL, they created two stellar lenses and turned the tide of Canon weak wide lenses. Sure, there were a lot of new improvements too, like newer coating and a far better movement system (which allows tilt and shift in every possible combination at a flick of a switch). But the longer lenses don't need the same optical improvement, they are already very good. Sure, they could do with an improvement in their movement mechanism and newer coatings but I question the diffenence that a double in retail price will do to the final images. Sure a newer lens will be better, but probably not observable in the final photographic output. I have a TS-e 45mm and it's a very low use lens for me and not one I use THAT often...in fact I don't know anyone who makes a lot of use for this niche lens.
I just get a feeling that Canon look at their lens portfolio and someone noticed that these two old lenses stick out a bit as old and legacy.

I would get this lens to just have the ability to move within the 200-400 range without having to change lenses or switch between camera bodies. It's just something less to carry (or more) around at the football games. Just a thought but I'm probably going to stick with the 400mm 2.8 II since I've been saving up towards that goal. I'll try to rent the 200-400 when it becomes available before I make my purchase just to be sure. Or I'll see if I can borrow one from CPS for a test drive.

dont the Rx units have build in recievers to work with skyports?
so not sure why you are using seperate recievers

the elinchrom have 4 channels (selectable on the dip switches on the transmitter)
you need to make sure all recievers are on the same channel as the transmitter
might search youtube for a tutorial on how to change the channel for the built in recievers

to enable optical slaves make sure the button with the picture of the eye is on

Mt Spokane Photography said:

J.R. said:

The OP has titled the thread "SL1 sensor a step back?" ... clearly he is comparing the sensors here.

Click to expand...

He is only comparing them in the title

Click to expand...

Not really, the OP even goes on to say that -

vtechproductions said:

What the heck? I hope this is not the 70D sensor.

Click to expand...

I have had regrets about not having my camera with me, but not normally with wildlife. If I am going to be going anywhere outside the city the camera is always packed.

jcollett said:

Don Haines said:

One night, while walking home from the local bar, I saw bigfoot and Elvis, but with no camera to take a picture, nobody believes me....

Seriously though..... the site where I work is secure.... fences all around.... 3 kilometers by 8 kilometers in size, and contains a firing range.... It is the perfect spot for wildlife.... the firing range is crawling with wildlife. (It is a career ending move to shoot anything other than targets). Problem is, no cameras allowed. I have seen deer by the thousands, bear, moose, wolves, coyotes, fox, a cougar, there are several Osprey nests, an eagle nest, scads of Red Tailed hawks..... I keep having to chase wild turkeys away....AND I CAN'T TAKE PICTURES WITH MY CAMERA!!!!!

Click to expand...

What a country! Shoot bullets ... great. Shoot pictures ... no way! Guess you'll need to rig up a camera to look something like this to get in.

http://www.royarden.com/blog/pictures/115940.jpg

Click to expand...

Jcollette, it might seem amusing but I have actually rigged up an old rifle stock to hold my DSLR. I did it simply because I had the parts to do it. It isn't that convenient for changing settings (I am looking into wiring up an extra set of controls on the stock for that) but I couldn't believe how much easier it is to track moving animals with it. It is also great if you are laying in the scrub waiting for a shot as it is a lot quicker and easier to keep it steady when shooting handheld. Te downside is the strange looks that you get when unloading the car at the national park carpark. I have been stopped and questioned by the rangers a few times already, but once they get a proper look at the rig they are fine with it.

AZRAE1 said:

i have just bought myself a new 24-105mm lens and was thinking of buying the Lens Extension Tube EF 12 II and was wondering how much difference this will make etc; how close i can expect to get before the picture goes blurry im sorry if this is a stupid question im new to photography :-[

Click to expand...

Extension tubes work just fine with that lens. I would recommend getting a set rather than just one so you have more choice. There are many cheap sets out there. As long as they work with AF they should be fine. But you will MF or live view focus much of the time anyway.

I seem to remember the max focus distance will be the focal length over the ET length.

On face recognition - I had the 6D sitting on a bench as I played with the Wifi and there is absolutely no doubt it recognizes and refocuses on a face. I was moving my head all around and watching the camera's behavior on my computer monitor.

These camera discussions always represent opinions that are personal and I wouldn't push a 6D over a 5D3 unless money was an issue. However, I really wanted WiFi for remote shooting and the 5D3 didn't have it, so that finally made the difference for me. I was very apprehensive about the AF and decided that I was OK with recomposing at least until the next "has it all" crop camera hits the shelves. Getting the 24-70 F4, and the 300 F2.8 with both extenders was a killer on the pocket book! Also I didn't like the extra size and weight of the 5D3.

Todays shot 6D 300 2.8 II 2X III 1000th F5.6 ISO 1600 late evening

Jack

paul13walnut5 said:

...have the actor walk right into the lens at the end of your indoor sequence and right away from the lens at the start of the outdoor sequence...

Click to expand...

this is what we are calling creative mind... i do not know how to do video and rarely join on video topic. this is the first time since i spot a really great comment.

i love it...

Martin said:

I had exactly the same problem and it was real. After three service visits they exchanged the mirror box. Atfer that repair the AF points' misplacement was corrected however since then I struggle with AF system. Since almost a year from purchase the camera is being serviced all the time without any good solution. My guaranty is almost over and the camera is like piece of crap. I can only suggest you to push the store to exchange it as probably any service will not fix that. I checked 3 canon services and every time if one thing was corrected the other one was not working properly. Right now center and left points are backfocusing and right points are focusing in opposite direction. One year of frustration without taking photos. Unfortunately IMHO if you think your AF points are misplaced-you are probably right. In my camera when I focused on the edge of any target it focused far away. And it was obvious that it happened only in one edge of focus point. It is normal that the real focus point has more area than its layout in viewfinder however not only in one direction. As I said-they fix this but camera probably lost all factory tolerances and now AF is just useless.

Click to expand...

Sounds scary. I guess I'll have to discuss the issue once again with the service. They suggested that they'd move the viewfinder inside the body so that the points get aligned. To me this sounds like fixing a problem with another one and most likely doing more damage than anything else. If they mess up the AF, a serious problem is created to replace the possibly cosmetic one.

Now that I checked the issue again, I can also see (with the grid on) that the grid lines are longer on the right than on the left side of the frame. This tells me that the viewfinder might actually be in place but the indicated points are off center. ... Well, I don't know. I use cameras to take photos. Someone else can repair these things, but I hope that the someone also knows what he/she is doing while at it.

Thanks!

The ML folks are making all my wishes come true!

Now my 300 mm f/4 performs like a 900mm f/4 in video mode, that is like a 3X zoom without any loss of light!

Here is how: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5441.msg35624#msg35624

As someone else noted, it depends on what the OP wants to do.
The 24-70 is, inarguably, a superb lens. However, they may want a faster lens for the DOF aspect although I feel the Canon 50's are poor value in terms of optical quality (for the 1.4) and cost (for the 1.2).
The 100 is a tack sharp optic that offers a FL the zoom does not.

But.... for me the zoom offers the unassailable advantage of being at the FL I need instantly. I shoot events and lifestyle. I do not want to be fussing with a lens change when I need to shoot NOW. It was bad enough in the film days but with digital sensors and their sensitivity to dust, I will do anything to not change lenses. All the putative advantages of primes go out the window when I don't have a shot.

J.R. said:

Drizzt321 said:

Ok, got my scans done and a few bits of editing, mostly just removing dust and specks from the scan. Here ya go whoever wants to see them https://plus.google.com/photos/102378497314145496618/albums/5876055902888292097

Click to expand...

Nice images ... I would guess the slides would be even more impressive.

Click to expand...

Definitely. I tried to match the slides pretty closely, but I think I'd need to spend a lot more time tweaking the scan process to get closer, and even then I probably won't quite match it.

I like the bkg. But find the head room excessive.

Love the photo though.

A camera is only a tool. Better tools make life easier, but are no substitute for workmanship

For me, the histogram is the most important quality check in the field, mostly to correct for exposure. I shoot raw to correct white balance and fine-tune exposure in post.

Second image is my favorite. B&W can be tough but I think you picked the right images and did the right PP to make it work.

paul13walnut5 said:

I have energiser batteries. Calumet batteries. Sigma lenses. A tokina lens.

I have a canon flash.

Whenever the question comes up in forums I always say 'buy a canon flash'.

This is why.

Not very helpful, but true.

The money spent on cheapies is wasted as the third party guns have no resale value, and you'll end up buying the canons anyway. There is such a thing as a false economy. Tripods. Flashguns. Don't scrimp.

Click to expand...

True dat. I had a Sigma Flash, their top of the line. Always loved Sigma lenses and never had a problem with the. Hated that flash, sold it on eBay after 2 months and bought a 580II. 5 years problem free....

xps said:

Disappointed by the "artifically" looking (to much contrast, noise,...) IQ of the testes 100D, I check the Olympus OM-D and Sony NEX-7 in the next two weeks...

Click to expand...

I don't think that 100D IQ is noticeably different from 60D or any other camera that shares the same/similar sensor. I don't know what tests are you talking about, but I strongly advise against judging cameras by their default JPEG settings, which are mostly represented by the early samples floating around. IMHO, every "IQ-hungry" person should be shooting RAW and getting the desired result in post. From my experience, no camera can produce an image which mirrors reality. Human vision has much much wider dynamic range than any DSLR or Mirrorless. Did you try the HDR mode?

Always full raw with 5D III

Hydrogen said:

Hello Everyone,

Just wanted to pose a question to those with sufficient experience AFMA testing and adjusting several lenses and bodies. Specifically, I want to discuss Accuracy (how 'spot-on' focus is relative to a target) and Precision (the repeat-ability of focus).

Ref: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/AF-Microadjustment-Tips.aspx

I have found that more often than not, zero AFMA adjustment on a body for a given lens yields more precision (repeatable results) even if the depth of focus is "off" (front or back) rather than once you adjust the AFMA in either direction, even by +/- 1. This is why I am starting to believe factory calibration of body to lens is better than AFMA tweaks.

Sometimes, but less frequently, higher precision (repeat-ability) is found on an AFMA setting other than zero, but it isn't always the "best" AFMA offset in terms of image accuracy/sharpness.

I believe this is why the FoCal AFMA testing application has a AF Consistency test, which allows you to test various AFMA values in a repeatable fashion, to seek-out the best AFMA setting with the most repeatable results.

Have any of you found the same to be true? That sometimes you may want to trade accuracy for better precision (repeat-ability).

Thanks

Click to expand...

Good discussion. I have not yet tried to AFMA my cameras but I agree I want the best setting to get the maximally sharp pictures all the time.

I use a 14-24 Nikon on a 5d iii body, since autofocus is not an issue this is IMO the perfect lens