5D3 Multiple exposure seemed so simple, main subject too transparent

[hotwilzz]

Title pretty much sets the stage. I was so excited to try this feature. I have tried it in "additive" as well as "average" mode, changed iso, shutter speed, aperture and in every test the primary subject (in my case the subject that moved with each frame) comes out quite ghostly or transparent in the final composite.

While I might want this effect some times, in this case I do not. I have read and re-read the manual and I am stumped. Sorry if the obvious answer is eluding me

Cheers,

David

 

[J.R.]

The manual is woefully inadequate ... You could check these out -

http://learn.usa.canon.com/app/pdfs/quickguides/CDLC_MultiExposure_Feature_QuickGuide.pdf
http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/videos/tutorials/eos_5d_markiii_tutorials/mark_iii_multi_exposure_shooting_detail.shtml

... Hope this helps

 

[Marsu42]

The manual is woefully inadequate ... You could check these out

Thanks for the link - the pdf also shows how Canon crippled these options beyond "jpeg only" on the 6d, I hadn't realized until now: next to some missing blending options it's not possible to save the source files on the 6d, it's just the result!

Thanks again, Canon :-< but fortunately I cannot see any advantage of the in-camera processing over Photomatrix, save for the raw option on the 5d3.

 

[J.R.]

The manual is woefully inadequate ... You could check these out

Thanks for the link - the pdf also shows how Canon crippled these options beyond "jpeg only" on the 6d, I hadn't realized until now: next to some missing blending options it's not possible to save the source files on the 6d, it's just the result!

Thanks again, Canon :-< but fortunately I cannot see any advantage of the in-camera processing over Photomatrix, save for the raw option on the 5d3.

+1 ... they've also knocked off the multiple exposures in continuous shooting on the 6D ... Can't fathom why ...

BTW, what was your impression of the focus points on the 6D other that the centre point? ... (I guess this may have been discussed elsewhere but couldn't resist ... I got the 6D yesterday)

 

[Marsu42]

+1 ... they've also knocked off the multiple exposures in continuous shooting on the 6D ... Can't fathom why ...

After Canon has learned from 5d3/d800 that obviously few people are willing to switch to the competition, their only thought seems to be to upsell to the 5d3, and that's why they removed a lot of firmware features that could be implemented for zero cost....

BTW, what was your impression of the focus points on the 6D other that the centre point? ... (I guess this may have been discussed elsewhere but couldn't resist ... I got the 6D yesterday)

I just tried it in a shop 2x for 1/2 + 1 hour next to the 5d3, so I cannot comment on the outer focus points - the upcoming dpreview.com review should have a conclusive answer on that.

But I'll wait some more for the 6d (and probably 24-70ii) to drop in price as they surely will - the 6d might be an ok to good camera, but feels a lot cheaper than the 5d3 and that should reflect in the price.

 

[Zlatko]

After Canon has learned from 5d3/d800 that obviously few people are willing to switch to the competition, their only thought seems to be to upsell to the 5d3, and that's why they removed a lot of firmware features that could be implemented for zero cost....

Well, it is a business, not a photographers' aid society. Photographers upsell too, as do countless other businesses, not just Canon. I doubt that anything can be implemented in a camera for truly "zero" cost. Any feature has to be be designed, built (or coded), tested and evaluated, refined, tested and evaluated again, added to the production process, added to the product manual, added to the product marketing, supported for the life of the product, etc. Add up the worker-hours needed to do that, the opportunity cost of having them diverted from other work, the cost of the facilities where everything gets done, and the wages and benefits of all of the people who do it, and there is nothing in a camera that truly has zero cost.

 

[Marsu42]

there is nothing in a camera that truly has zero cost.

Sure, and I don't confuse Canon with a charity organization - but in the case 5d3->6d with the same digic5 it'd say that they had to consciously remove some features, just like afma on 50d->60d, leaving them in place probably would have generated less development cost than removing them.

However, another reason might be that I know from the Magic Lantern forum that the 6d has less memory than the 5d3, so that might be another reason for some firmware feature cuts, even though some memory can hardly cost a lot. Or maybe they are using defective digic5 units on the 6d, just like a dual-core processor is a quad-core with two broken cores?

 

[hotwilzz]

Thank you JR, I had found the video but not the other info. I have experimented a big more and found that people show less transparent in the "Dark" setting with a bit more light.

Thanks to all for your feedback