|
goattrails posted:(the aperture is slightly smaller however).
|
# ? May 14, 2013 01:02 |
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 18:57 |
|
I'm surprised no one posted this yet. It's pretty huge news. http://www.eoshd.com/content/10324/big-news-hands-on-with-continuous-raw-recording-on-canon-5d-mark-iii
|
# ? May 14, 2013 01:08 |
|
So for the last 18 months I have been shooting exclusively with a 1000D and 50mm f/1.8. I LOVE the 50mm for the image quality and I actually really like the tight FoV for photos I make for myself in fact I more often find myself wishing for a little more reach. It IS a little tight for documenting social occasions for Facebook though, and the AF is horrendous. I've recently upgraded my body to a 550D and now have some cash to spend to buy some lenses. The 24-105L seems like my perfect focal length range but unfortunately it's a fair way out of my price range. Are there any decent 3rd party lenses in that focal length region? If not I'm probably just going to get a 40mm f/2.8 and a 85mm f/1.8 as they both look like pretty sweet lenses.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 01:45 |
|
Waarg posted:unfortunately it's a fair way out of my price range. What is your price range?
|
# ? May 14, 2013 01:52 |
|
tarepanda posted:What is your price range?
|
# ? May 14, 2013 01:55 |
|
iSheep posted:Replaced my focusing screen on my T2i today. Pretty easy however very stressful at the same time. Did this on my T2i myself last year; felt like I was playing Operation. Changing the screen on my 6D was a breeze by comparison. No sweat (literally). My T2i had that problem with dust too after changing screens. It was a huge bitch because I apparently kept getting dust on the pentamirror side of the screen during installation, even if it looked clean going in.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 02:03 |
|
Waarg posted:£3-400 You could probably find a used Canon 100 mm 2.8 (non-L) around that range if you want more reach. Image quality is amazing, too. I forget if it was in the last thread or another thread, but there was a lot of love for, I think, the Rokinon/Samyang 14mm 2.8.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 02:05 |
|
Anyone got $11,799 burning a hole in their pocket? http://fstoppers.com/have-money-to-burn-canons-new-200-400-f4-l-usm-announced-for-11800 Finally.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 05:04 |
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:Anyone got $11,799 burning a hole in their pocket? drat, I was wondering when the price for this would come out. I figure street price will be $9k or so.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 05:06 |
|
Aww man I'm gonna need a bigger jar to throw all my change in to buy that.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 05:09 |
|
Waarg posted:So for the last 18 months I have been shooting exclusively with a 1000D and 50mm f/1.8. I LOVE the 50mm for the image quality and I actually really like the tight FoV for photos I make for myself in fact I more often find myself wishing for a little more reach. It IS a little tight for documenting social occasions for Facebook though, and the AF is horrendous. I've recently upgraded my body to a 550D and now have some cash to spend to buy some lenses. The 24-105L seems like my perfect focal length range but unfortunately it's a fair way out of my price range. Are there any decent 3rd party lenses in that focal length region? If not I'm probably just going to get a 40mm f/2.8 and a 85mm f/1.8 as they both look like pretty sweet lenses. The Canon EF-S 15-85mm IS? It's apparently decent and within your price range if you get it used. If you can live without having the extra reach, the Tamron 17-50mm.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 08:37 |
|
Being in Hong Kong is bad for my Mastercard.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 09:04 |
|
InternetJunky posted:At the risk of exposing myself to further ridicule for not knowing everything about my 1dx -- is there anything that anyone can think of that would cause the camera to severely underexpose each picture? I know that you reset the camera to default settings, which should have fixed this, but two things that could cause underexposure and haven’t been mentioned are highlight priority mode and the focus screen setting. The former is under the second shooting menu. The latter is under the fourth custom function menu.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 09:26 |
|
bolind posted:Being in Hong Kong is bad for my Mastercard. Ughgh sexy, post some pics, I'd be interested to see this on an APS-C
|
# ? May 14, 2013 10:47 |
|
Will do, but I'm without a proper laptop for the next week, and I'm also whatever the bachelor version of a momtographer is. Preliminary test shots, however, leaves me very pleased. Additionally, I think it's a beautiful big fat middle finger to Canon that it comes with a super nice case, center-pinch cover and lens hood standard. Altogether ten bucks worth of plastic but so thoughtful.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 11:27 |
|
About this Magic Lantern stuff, is it an alternative firmware? Is it worthwhile to be installed? --edit: Awww, no 6D branch yet.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 11:32 |
|
Combat Pretzel posted:About this Magic Lantern stuff, is it an alternative firmware? Is it worthwhile to be installed? Yes and yes.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 11:32 |
|
Waiting for a 5d II release with 24 fps raw video...
|
# ? May 14, 2013 11:38 |
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Ughgh sexy, post some pics, I'd be interested to see this on an APS-C https://secure.flickr.com/photos/fivre/8719138862/sizes/o/in/photostream/ Yeah, it's pretty sharp. No crop. Not as much wider but still quite sharp. Also dear god my laptop screen color is quite odd. Magic Lantern has always looked cool (focus peaking! a faint possibility of recording live drums without clipping all to hell!) but I figured it'd be a massive UI pain.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 12:05 |
|
fivre posted:Magic Lantern has always looked cool (focus peaking! a faint possibility of recording live drums without clipping all to hell!) but I figured it'd be a massive UI pain. All of its stuff is in its own menu—which is kind of crowded, but not too bad once you get used to it. It has the nifty feature that pressing the Info button will take you to the ML manual page for that function so you can learn what each option does. The only problem I have with it is that it makes my camera take longer to wake from sleep mode. The delay isn’t horrible, mind you, but it’s definitely noticeable. I’d compare a 5D2 with Magic Lantern to a 20D, in terms of wake‐up speed. Earlier versions of ML didn’t have this issue, so I remain hopeful that it will be rectified in the future.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 12:32 |
|
Is it worth installing even if I literally never touch the video option on my camera? 650D if that matters.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 12:38 |
|
Headhunter posted:Is it worth installing even if I literally never touch the video option on my camera? 650D if that matters. I rarely touch the video option on my camera, and I still use it for >30 s exposures, exposure/focus bracketing, an intervalometer features. I find a few of its UI tweaks handy as well. It runs off the card, so if you don’t use those features often, you can put it on only one card if you wish. I should really do that with mine to avoid the wake‐up delay when I don’t need those features.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 12:52 |
|
Cool, will give it a bash at the weekend.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 12:53 |
|
Platystemon posted:Yes and yes. It's not strictly an alternative firmware as it co-exists with the original firmware. The only modification it makes to the camera is to change a setting (the 'bootflag') that causes the camera to execute code stored in a file on the memory card (autoexec.bin). The ML software then hooks into the camera's boot process and launches its own code. It's still early days for these recent RAW hacks, so they're pretty rough around the edges and support for most cameras is limited (but it should work even with 50D). If you're into timelapse then the option to shoot a raw timelapse without shutter actuations is awesome. Combat Pretzel posted:About this Magic Lantern stuff, is it an alternative firmware? Is it worthwhile to be installed? --edit: Awww, no 6D branch yet. The 6D port is making good progress, but there's no official build yet.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 13:03 |
|
evilmonkeh posted:It's not strictly an alternative firmware as it co-exists with the original firmware. The only modification it makes to the camera is to change a setting (the 'bootflag') that causes the camera to execute code stored in a file on the memory card (autoexec.bin). The ML software then hooks into the camera's boot process and launches its own code. I know that, but the distinction is esoteric. It only really matters to the developers, and, I suppose, to people who know enough about firmware to worry about “bricking”, which in ML’s case is mostly unfounded.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 13:07 |
|
As a hybrid video/photo guy I also appreciate the addition of the waveform monitor. I realize that photography and film have totally different evolutions but it's a little head-scratchy to me how different the color correction tools are between the two much of the time. WFM is still totally useful for stills.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 15:06 |
|
Would swapping my 70-200 f4 for a 80-200 f2.8 (both Canon) be a bad idea? I hardly ever use the f4 but I'm very happy with it. Thought it might be fun to have a telephoto at f2.8.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 15:19 |
|
Depends on what you're doing with it. The 80/2.8 won't focus as fast as the 70/4, and it is (reportedly) noticeably soft when wide open. And it lacks full time MF. I wouldn't go for it unless you really need the extra stops for work purposes.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 15:31 |
|
Platystemon posted:I know that you reset the camera to default settings, which should have fixed this, but two things that could cause underexposure and haven’t been mentioned are highlight priority mode and the focus screen setting. The former is under the second shooting menu. The latter is under the fourth custom function menu. I think I'm going to send it in for a checkup anyway. TheAngryDrunk posted:Anyone got $11,799 burning a hole in their pocket?
|
# ? May 14, 2013 15:37 |
|
InternetJunky posted:I went out shooting two days ago and the problem was gone. I think it'll sell like crazy among the pro sports/nature crowd. This isn't something for the hobbyist or even the dentist enthusiast, but for someone who is hired to shoot high-profile games and waits out in a blind for days hoping to catch 30 seconds of some rare triple-horned duck or whatever. Being able to hit the Turbo Boost button and swing in a teleconverter in seconds without having to detach lenses has got to be a godsend for sports photographers. As for value, it saves them from having to carry a second body and/or lens.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 15:46 |
|
bisticles posted:or even the dentist enthusiast Ok, now I'm picturing a guy hiding behind a blind catching sweet shots of a root canal procedure.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 16:00 |
|
Erwin posted:Ok, now I'm picturing a guy hiding behind a blind catching sweet shots of a root canal procedure. Waiting for the 1/10000 patient that the hygienist says "You know what? I think you floss enough."
|
# ? May 14, 2013 16:18 |
|
I need some extra batteries for my 6D. I read that Wasabi Power and Sterlingtek both make decent 3rd party options. The Wasabi power seems like a better deal and has a better warranty. Any experience with them?
|
# ? May 14, 2013 16:56 |
|
ShotgunWillie posted:I need some extra batteries for my 6D. I read that Wasabi Power and Sterlingtek both make decent 3rd party options. The Wasabi power seems like a better deal and has a better warranty. Any experience with them? I just got some wasabis in my gopro but have always run sterlingtek in my cameras for about the past 5-7 years. Sterlingtek batteries have outperformed my Canon/Olympus batteries from day 1. They hold longer charges and are cheaper if you buy 2 batteries. I've never had a reason to complain about those batteries, they just work no questions asked and without fail in several types of camera. 2 of the Canon batteries in my gripped 50D makes me feel like I can shoot continuously for days on end. I havent used my gopro extensively yet to determine the quality of the wasabis but they seem to function about the same. Its going to take some time before Wasabis credibility is up there with Sterlingtek but they are probably worth their price.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 17:11 |
|
InternetJunky posted:I know people are going to throw money at this like it's the second coming of Christ, but this has to be the worst value for your money out of the entire Canon lens lineup. It's expensive, absolutely YES. But it's also a 300mm f4, 400mm f4, 500mm f5.6, prime-quality zoom lens, all in one neat and easy package, and with killer IS, to boot. I do think it's about twice as expensive as it needs to be, but Canon needs to make back that R&D money somehow!
|
# ? May 14, 2013 17:21 |
|
bobfather posted:I do think it's about twice as expensive as it needs to be, but Canon needs to make back that R&D money somehow! Canon spent all of their T5i development money on this.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 17:49 |
|
Electric Bugaloo posted:Canon spent all of their money on this. There we go.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 17:57 |
|
InternetJunky posted:I went out shooting two days ago and the problem was gone.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 19:10 |
|
Pablo Bluth posted:At least one person thinks it's worth it: http://andyrouse.co.uk/index.php?page_id=174 Keep in mind I'm not saying it's an amazing lens or that it doesn't serve any purpose. I'm just saying for that price it is horrible value for your money.
|
# ? May 14, 2013 19:37 |
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 18:57 |
|
InternetJunky posted:If I could get one for zero dollars I'd say it's worth it too! Did you read that article?
|
# ? May 14, 2013 19:55 |