Posts

rpt · Nov 29, 2012

wickidwombat said:
cayenne said:

pwp said:

There's plenty of advice on how to select your focus points already, so I'll pass on info as to why Focus & Recompose Sucks...
http://www.visual-vacations.com/Photography/focus-recompose_sucks.htm
http://digital-photography-school.com/the-problem-with-the-focus-recompose-method

-PW

Click to expand...

WOW!!!

Thank you, that really illustrates things!! This may be why I've had so many soft shots starting off with my camera....I was thinking I sucked, or that maybe my lenses and camera were faulty...but this may explain a LOT.

Thank you,

cayenne

Click to expand...

those descriptions are not correct, they are overexagerating the effect unless they are refocusing on the other part. if you keep your technique good when you recompose the distance does not change THAT much

Applying some trigonometry, varying the angle, keeping distance to focus point the same, one gets the following:
Distance=8', angle=5 deg, the error is 0.3667"
Distance=8', angle=10 deg, the error is 1.481"
Distance=8', angle=15 deg, the error is 3.386"

So depending on DOF you may or may not notice too much of focus error...

PeterJ · Nov 29, 2012

I guess the CCD will probably only have 480 lines or so vertical resolution? If so sounds like you're on the right track using a relatively crappy lens with a longer focal length because you won't have much room for digital cropping.

I borrowed a similar lens from a friend a while back (can't remember brand, but similar class to those) to have a play with and at 650mm versus a 70-200L f/2.8 and cropping to 1920 x 1200 the 650mm had a fraction more detail but the Canon had better contrast and colour so was better for general photography. But if your CCD is reasonably low-res in comparison would expect you'd get much better results with the longer focal length.

I gather this will be some sort of automated target identification system and the still shots just for later confirmation / testing so you won't want the usual aspects of a 'nice' photo anyway?

tron · Nov 28, 2012

Re: EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS

By the way, thanks for the reference to high speed SS in conjunction with IS. I remembered I had read it in the past but to tell the truth I had forgotten...

wickidwombat · Nov 28, 2012

I think the only lens that ight have a chance of being better than the Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS II is the new sigma 120-300 f2.8 OS. I very much doubt the Tamron will come remotely close to the canon L

infared · Nov 28, 2012

Dylan777 said:
bycostello said:

none... leave your lens hood on to protect your lens, the more glass you add the more you reduce the quality of your lens

Click to expand...

-1.....not when you use high quality filter. With B&W Clear, I don't see the effect in my photos.

I agree with you...to all the goys that are saying no filter..when I get my lens I will shoot two raw files off a tripod..one with a B&W MRC filter and one without...and you have to tell me which is which...doubtful that anyone could. truly...

brant · Nov 28, 2012

When is this thing supposed to come out? Should I put a pre-order in right now? Who do you think will be the first place to receive the camera?

pwp · Nov 28, 2012

PeterJ said:
Thanks everyone, based on the feedback I'll sell my 24-70 and get the 24-105. Looking at used prices locally it looks like I should be able to get a new 24-105 for about $0 - $100 more so think I'll go that way.

This is a great time to shift a MkI 24-70 f/2.8. I got $1400 for my last one, sold not long after the 24-70MkII was released, sold on Gumtree in under 3 hours. From the number of enquiries I could have asked for more. The stratospheric price of the MkII has had the effect of ramping up the price of good, pre-owned 24-70 MkI lenses. There are great deals around on 24-105's right now. You'll come out with spare change.

-PW

East Wind Photography · Nov 28, 2012

That's true and of course if you are going underwater you will need to use an underwater housing that includes a filter in front.

For all other uses, forget the filter.

neuroanatomist said:
East Wind Photography said:

Dont use a filter on any L glass unless you need to use a polarizer. Filters generally degrade IQ even if ever so slightly. I would not buy an L lens if you prefer to have a filter in front of it. YOu're not taking advantage of everything the lens has to offer.

Click to expand...

I'll just point out that in some cases (16-35L II, 17-40L, 50L), Canon specifically states that a filter is required to complete the dust/weather sealing for the lens. Also, all of the uber expensive supertelephoto lenses (300/2.8 and up) have a drop in filter slot, and Canon states that a filter is part of the optical design so the glass insert should be left in the holder.

Botts · Nov 28, 2012

Hello everyone,

I am going to pre-order a 6D. However, I don't know whether to order it locally or through B&H, Amazon, or other US dealer.

Speed in arrival is my key concern. Do Canadian stores usually receive cameras the same day as a company like B&H?

I understand Canon's no shipping to Canada policy, but I have a USA forwarding address I'm thinking of using. I have Amazon Prime shipping to this address as well.

In your previous experience, would I get it faster if I ordered from a USA store, or a Canadian store?

sagittariansrock · Nov 28, 2012

I think one of the benefits of FF is the shallow DoF you can get for an equivalent FoV (compared to smaller sensors). So f/2.8 is better than f/4.
However, it really depends on usage. I think I shall have to make a decision between keeping the 70-200 f/2.8 IS (or getting the MkII) vs getting a 70-200 f/4 IS AND the 135 f/2 when I go full frame. Note that either way the cost will be similar, so it boils down to whether I want the convenience of a fast zoom compared to the versatility offered by the combination of a slower but more portable (and more likely to be carried) zoom and a faster prime for shallow DoF and larger aperture when needed.

TommyLee · Nov 28, 2012

that is an amazing buy ...is this hollow?...or is there glass in it?.. just kidding....
the price is so low...

this lens is a real gem.... as everyone knows

it solves so many issues... except weight....
when you are going to be @ f2.8...or above....

that -again - is so way below what I paid... and I accept my price for the performance I get....
well done

enjoy it

TOM

sandymandy · Nov 28, 2012

Jont said:
Not sure why people would go with 6D rather than 5Dii if it doesn't have the extra gadgets if it's indeed 2100$.

Probably cuz the 6D will replace the 5d mk2 and people just prefer to buy the "new stuff" cuz its supposed to be better. IQ should be a tad better with 6D than 5dmk2 aswell, so why not? I dont need a hardcore enduring camera case nor Wifi, GPS or great video functions since im not strolling around in jungles or beaches or such. 99,9% of my time im around in cities taking single shots and never video. Anyway price will drop in the future. Always nonsense to buy anything (electronic stuff mostly) on the release day except u REALLY depend on it (e.g. u only have 1 week before ur eyesight disappears)
But if i ever have the money to buy a FF camera there will probably the 6D mk2 or mk3 available already :-\

Nov 28, 2012

I totally agree with the foreground - IMHO it adds a great deal to an ocean/wave image. I think the context added from that plus the tripod you mentioned will help your already nice images. I started using a full tripod, cable release and filter landscape setup about a year ago, and found that while it does take a bit to set up shots, the extra time and effort has made me think through the composition and settings of my shots much more and has resulted in images I am much happier with than before. These two were from a trip to Big Sur last week, and I think start to show a little of the context that foreground can add

Rick Massie said:
They look good! If you want to improve them, I think your best bet is to wait for better light. It looks duskish, or very cloudy in these photos, but if you get a low sun shining through, it'll add contrast and clarity to the waves and splashes, and possibly nice colours as well. Keep trying the location in different light to get a feel for what works best.

Also, it may help to add something to the foreground (ie, a person in the frame - don't let them get too close to the waves though!) to give a sense of scale. Waves and rocks can greatly vary in size, and without something in your frame for size reference, it's sometimes hard to tell whether the wave is big or small.

Just some thoughts from my years shooting beaches and ocean in Newfoundland.

GuyF · Nov 28, 2012

Croubie, you mad fool, you'll start an internet sensation with that sort of anarchy!

I used to use Agfachrome 200 all the time for motorsport but the thought of going back to waiting for the results would drive me nuts. I want to be disappointed by my results straight away!

hawaiisunsetphoto · Nov 28, 2012

l loved my 1Ds Mark III but if you're concerned about low light/high iso shooting I'd recommend the 5D Mark III hands down.

GMCPhotographics · Nov 28, 2012

The 24-105L has a longer range, but it's not so good at 24mm. In fact at 24mm it's not very good at all.
The MFD charts for the 24-70L look much better.
The 24-70L is a lot smaller and maybe a better choice for travelling. It also combos with a 70-200 f4 L IS very well too.

ems1 · Nov 28, 2012

Anyone tried this remote on a 7D shooting at 8fps, does it work ok?

AshtonNekolah · Nov 28, 2012

indeed my best 50mm to be shot in 1.2, great article. This kind of blur is indeed one of a kind.

adhocphotographer · Nov 28, 2012

Not going to buy on release, but am interested in a review... bring it!

verysimplejason · Nov 28, 2012

No AF for video for 6D. It will be more expensive if it has.

kubelik · Nov 27, 2012

texasbadger, thanks for sharing! I'm really surprised and impressed you shot those with a G12; I've been to a Grace Potter show and they keep things pretty dark (and really really loud. I have no idea how she's not hoarse at the end of every show, those are some serious pipes)

Axilrod · Nov 27, 2012

NewFilmmaker said:
Thanks I'm learning a lot here!

When to use 3200K and when 5600?

3200K is Tungsten balanced light and generally where you want the white balance if you are shooting indoors with normal household lighting. 5600K is daylight balanced, which is where you want it set if you are shooting outdoors (or with daylight balanced light).

You're essentially just telling the camera what the correct color temperature is.

Try this, take your camera, set the white balance to 5500k and then walk around the house and see what it looks like. Should look way, way too yellow (warm) because the light in your house is closer to 3200K than 5500K. Switch your white balance to 3200K and walk around and everything should look great. But leave it on 3200K and go outside and everything will look really blue (cool), since the color temperature outdoors is 5500K.

But since you will be shooting indoors with daylight balanced light, 5000-5500K should be fine.

SJTstudios · Nov 27, 2012

The 5d mark iii is great, but the 1dx does most things better, as long as you won't miss the 12 fps, get the 5d3 and the lenses, both will really improve your photography, and with all that amazing glass, you can carry two lenses of great caliber. I also know that if you take photography seriously, it is wise to invest in two of the same bodies, you can share equipment, use 1 in case 1 breaks, and, you put a lens on for a particular view, keeping that is vital, so 2 5d3's would be really nice.
Or, as I would do if I had your gear, id by a 300 2.8 is.

kubelik · Nov 27, 2012

great shots, ahsanford! looks like you had both an enjoyable experience and an educational one as well, that's always the best.

Nov 27, 2012

skitron said:
CR recently ran a tip about Canon EOS 5D Mark III Body $2499. Go to the eBay link and the ad clearly states at the top for all to see "Canon USA Warranty" which is in fact a blatant lie.

I called Canon and asked them specifically about their warranty policy after reading their written legal warranty description. Despite the legal language not including a single mention of "authorized dealer", their stated policy is that they do not honor warranty on any item not purchased from an "authorized dealer", reasoning that non-authorized dealers are considered the "first purchaser", not the "reseller". According to Canon, that makes the buyer from BigValueInc the second buyer of a used camera. Yet the BigValueInc ad prominently lists it as "New" with "Canon USA Warranty".

BigValueInc is not on Canon's list of authoized dealers. In fact BigValueInc even states in their "about us" section that they are not an authorized dealer.

Yet there it is right at the top for all to see "Canon USA Warranty" and "New". Both of which are in fact a blatant lies.

It's also interesting that eBay is looking the other way on this matter.

I almost bit on one of these for $2886 after missing out on the $2499 deal...glad I looked into it closer...and felt this info was worth sharing.

Actually no, "original end user" is not in the origional post. But it is just symantics I udnerstand what you mean.

But I still have to disagree, if the camera comes in the origional packing as the seller claims then I see nothing in Canon's warranty that would void it. You can also go to Canon's website and read the link that explains the benifits of buying from a authorized dealer, it does not mention that if you do not buy from an authorized dealer it voids the warranty.

But, I wouldn't buy it from them anyway because as I said in the past post they have to have an angle to be able to sell it this cheap. Most of the time they are selling a broken kit, which would void the warranty.

Posts

Posts

Attachments

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics