Posts

Menace · May 4, 2013

Snook said:
I am contemplating this lens, what do you guys think is a fair price for a used, but in perfect condition 17-40 f/4L?

Rough estimate would be around 70-80% of new value.

mackguyver · May 4, 2013

Dylan777 said:
Just don't ask this same question when you ready for 24-70 f2.8 II. I'm sure you know what to do with your 24-105 ;D

Funny you should say that - I actually have the original 24-70 f/2.8, and the 16-35 f/2.8 II. So far I'm hanging on to the old 24-70. The improvements from f/8-f/11 don't impress me enough to pay the price to upgrade - at least while it's that much. Besides, I have the 24 f/1.4 II, 50 f/1.2, and 85 f/1.2 II if I want to shoot anything wide open or anywhere near 2.8.

Point taken, though!

tpatana · May 4, 2013

Quick try, spent couple minutes after snatching few of my wife's jewelries.

No focus stacking, quick LR editing.

I guess I need more practice, any comments what/how to improve?

May 3, 2013

Alrik89 said:
Thanks for wasting my time reading this nonsense.

Fleetie · May 3, 2013

EXIF is the name of metadata your camera saves about the image, in the JPG files it creates.

So as well as the image itself, your camera creates JPG files that have data about the camera model, lens, exposure time, lens focal length setting, exposure compensation offset, flash mode, white balance, etc. etc..

All of that lot is in the "EXIF data" in the image file.

On most/all computers, if you right-click one of your JPG files, and select "Properties" or similar, you can get to see
the EXIF data.

shutterwideshut · May 3, 2013

Congratulations! You will never regret with the 5D3.

Vossie · May 3, 2013

I've used the 28-135 on my Eos 3 film camera. When I went digital with the 10D, I did not like the range too much on the wide end and after some sold it in favor of the 17-85. I have no direct comparison vs the 24-105 that I own now. Besides IQ differences, 4 mm on the wide end it quite a lot. F/4 is already quite slow, so 5.6 would not be what I would be looking for. I'm actually considering to switch to the 24-70 2.8, sacrificing some reach to the benefit of IQ and an extra stop of light.

So for me a new 28-135 would thus not be appealing.

BEANC0UNTER · May 3, 2013

Sorry. You are correct, wrong forum. I appreciate all of the information.

Mt Spokane Photography · May 3, 2013

wearle said:
To all,

Thanks for all your suggestions. After going through extensive testing, I felt it had to be a problem with the lens itself so I sent it to Canon in late April. It was returned early last week, and the difference is phenomenal. I'm finally getting the results I should have gotten in the first place: very sharp images and a significant increase in the number of keepers.

According to Canon, "It was found that the adjustment of the circuit board was incorrect causing inaccurate auto focus."

Before the adjustment, I was getting about 10 percent keepers. Now, I'm getting about 70 percent. The 30 percent I end up deleting are mostly repeats and/or poor technique (excitement causing vibration) with probably 30 percent of those due to an actual miss in focus. This is probably more in line with how the lens should perform.

Wade

Interesting! As I reread thru the posts, it became apparent that the lens probably had a problem. I'm glad you have it working properly now. I think issues happen more than people realize, and I've seen others complain that a lens is poor, when they just need to have it serviced.

In your case, we know that the lens is supurb, so with your obvious use of proper techniques, the lens had to be at fault.

Mt Spokane Photography · May 3, 2013

omar said:
"Grace L Ferguson Storm door and Camera Repair Service"
what's that?

Old Bob Newhart Joke from the early 1960's referring to someone doing a service that they are not well qualified for.

I guess that dates me.

DJL329 · May 3, 2013

Drizzt321 said:
DJL329 said:

arioch82 said:

rporterfield said:

DJL329 said:

If I photograph a group of friends smiling and holding up their index and middle fingers, while sitting behind the cracked windshield of a blue, 1950's T-Bird that they've just washed, does that count for 9 or 10 of the photographs?!? :

Click to expand...

I'll give you 9. I don't think it would count for the cooking utinsel.

Click to expand...

the hood could be open with someone cooking an egg on the engine

Click to expand...

Actually, I was thinking the T-Bird would pass for "An interesting structure." If not, then I'll just shoot it front of Stonehenge! Oh, and I have to make sure the chrome bumper is polished. Then, I'll throw a potted plant next to the car, while one guy holds a spatula and another brushes his teeth, and I think I've got it all covered! ;D

Click to expand...

Wish that'd work, it's pretty creative, but according to the rules:

...and must contain 14 images as they relate to all 14 clues (images may be ordered in any way).

Click to expand...

Yeah, I noticed that. I'll just have to shoot it 14 times, each from a different POV! THAT might make it a winner!

Pieces Of E · May 3, 2013

I guess we want our cake and a lightweight cake too. Thanx for the tech response, as always, much appreciated. Who knows what we'll do, besides keep shooting with our current awesome equipment. Have a good weekend.

Quasimodo · May 3, 2013

I've been using my Benro Carbon monopod, but I guess that this solution is lighter, not to speak of slimmer

fredericsiffert · May 3, 2013

Stabilization Mövi

Do you want to stabilize your movie ? Watch here : http://fredericsiffert.blogspot.ch/2013/05/une-solution-pour-stabiliser-le-film.html

dswatson83 · May 3, 2013

Switched to the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC. Cheaper than the 240-70L V1 and I really wanted IS for the video. I was looking at the Canon 24-70 f/4 IS to get stabilization but I did not want to give up f/2.8 and the Tamron still looks better:
Canon 24-70 f/4L IS vs Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC - FIGHT!

Nishi Drew · May 3, 2013

The real joke is that we have a family friend called Bob, who is often called uncle Bob, and he's a photographer who covers events.

Case of the commercial I would instead refer to Uncle Bobs as "the guy with the big camera that wants us to think he's the photographer of the wedding when he isn't" or just a family member that wants to/agreed to take photos because he just has a nice camera.
But LOL, people fight over phones too much

Nishi Drew · May 3, 2013

I do like the G15, only used it briefly and with JPG but it was a great street cam, got some good candids, and that's F/1.8 ~ F/2.8. Though, that wasn't my camera and I'm sticking with my 5DII for everything, and I much prefer the X20 for it's form and function over the G15 too. if I get another strictly stills camera though then my eyes are set on the x100s, or the x100 because they can be had for a lot less now... OR, the next X-pro with improved AF like the S, and if it includes the digital split image focusing ability of the x100s then vintage lenses here we go~
While, if you want an X20, go get an X20, not like there are batteries or lenses that are compatible that need to be Canon anyways.

LetTheRightLensIn · May 3, 2013

Jason Montalvo said:
I have been unable to try it with an external recorder yet. Would you say there's a big jump in resolution/ overall quality?

would love to see some sample footage if you have any.

Cheers !!

On static stuff, for most things, I basically see absolutely zero jump in resolution compared to IPB internal.

If the entire frame is moving all over and especially when focus is nearly but not quite in focus on some detailed area of a frame and the whole frame is moving and focus changing the external has wayyyy less compression artifacts than IPB (however, that might not be the case compared to all-i, didn't test that yet). Frame by frame it's a huge difference for some frames. That said, in real time, at least on a 24" screen (even sitting really close), the differences all sort blur much more together to the eye and you have to really keep your eyes peeled like an eagle.

Sometimes if you have something like white text surrounded by solid block of color, the white text can be a touch crisper and sharper with the external recording (but there is, oddly, that MORE noticeable transition band on the left hand vertical sides of it though which is kinda....). Not sure if that is a Ninja thing, prores thing, PP CS6 thing, 5D3 thing or something I'm doing wrong.

I could swear that ALL output, internal or external, with 1.2.1 is a bit crisper and more detailed than before though, same shadow detail but things have a touch more contrast/detail/pop in general and areas of low contrast detail don't turn quite as waxy as before it seems. Still not like C300 or anything though or like some of those 'raw' DNG frames people are posting.

docholliday · May 3, 2013

There is the opposite extreme also...I'm sure that an "after hours" shoot of some rich and famous would reveal that they are slobs with bad, nasty habits. Look at some models before the makeup and lighting (or actors who spent too much time under an Arri Sun), some of them are down right hideous. Most of the "media" nowadays tailors the menu of what viewers see.

That's why some photographs are shocking - I have a friend who is from urban Florida and came for a meeting in the midwest. He got scared when he looked out his hotel room at 3am and saw lights moving around in the corn field behind the building. He thought it was some children-of-the-corn sh*t going on and didn't realize that it was probably kids playing (or a new meth lab going up).

docholliday · May 3, 2013

It was around in the 1D/Ds II and IIIs also...one of the reasons I could never shoot anything but the 1-Series (that and better viewfinder)!

bchernicoff · May 3, 2013

Please let us know what you find out. I have a 400mm f/2.8 Mk II that is no longer serviced by Canon and I worry about the day when I have AF problems with it.

RLPhoto · May 3, 2013

I would use a large butterfly key light as its generally pretty versatile with all sorts of different face shapes.

Add a hard kicker light with a wider spread to cover the shoulders and hair.

The background should be distanced to determine grey or black or even white if you add flash to it.

May 3, 2013

Graduated ND filters? Don't get the screw-in ones, you have no flexibility in where the line goes - it's always in the middle, and that's rarely where you want it for composition.

Get a Lee Foundation Kit and 82mm WA adapter ring (or a Cokin Z holder), and some Lee or Singh-Ray 4x6" grads.

May 3, 2013

If you don't mind normalizing a set of slightly different exposures in post, you can take a bracket exposure series by 1/3 EV increments. Use Live View and the 10s timer, and the series of bracketed exposures will be taken at max fps.

florian · May 3, 2013

But the C-Line is a total different quality. I have the 5D III and like it a lot and use it on my Tiffen Merlin 2 from time to time. But I got my 1D C this week and I can only say the quality of the movies is something I haven´t got before. I filmed parrots with 600mm II lens and 2x III in 4K and Super 35.
That gives me 1200mm *1,3 crop = 1560mm and I can crop the picture down to 1080P and get about 3120mm focal lenght or with the Super35 mode 1800mm because of 1,5 crop . It´s just perfect. Doesn´t really fit on my Merlin anymore but I don´t regred spending the extra Money. And I have to say the clean output is not really needed, the quality will only get better with RAW. But it´s nice to be able to connect a Ninja and get the Zebra and Focus peaking. and a backup of your recorded image in a good quality.

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics