|
Losing the eyecups on my cameras seems to be a talent of mine. Brand new 5d3 from 2 months ago, and I already lost it somewhere. 
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 07:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 21:41 |
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:Losing the eyecups on my cameras seems to be a talent of mine. Brand new 5d3 from 2 months ago, and I already lost it somewhere. I found the eyecup to my d5000 2 weeks ago. I had lost it last year sometime, and sold the d5000 6 months after losing it, and it was sitting in the grass in my backyard the whole time :|
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 07:21
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:Losing the eyecups on my cameras seems to be a talent of mine. Brand new 5d3 from 2 months ago, and I already lost it somewhere. If its the same one as the 50D (which I doubt) I have a spare.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 07:45
|
|
|
I used to lose the one on my old rebel all the time. I finally got a replacement at B&H and just crazy glued the thing down. Haven't had the problem on my 50d yet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
I'm wondering if it has to do with having my camera on my black rapid during shoots. Maybe it rubs against my hip too hard and knocks it off? I'm pretty sure I lost it yesterday during a shoot 45 minutes away from town, in a giant tall grass field. So ordered another one today. I'm going to glue it down, I think. My only concern is if I ever need to pop it off to clean around there or something?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 17:31
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:I'm wondering if it has to do with having my camera on my black rapid during shoots. Maybe it rubs against my hip too hard and knocks it off? I'm pretty sure I lost it yesterday during a shoot 45 minutes away from town, in a giant tall grass field. So ordered another one today. I'm going to glue it down, I think. My only concern is if I ever need to pop it off to clean around there or something? Maybe you could just use a little strip of gaffer tape across the top to discourage it from popping off?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 18:02
|
|
|
Inf posted:Maybe you could just use a little strip of gaffer tape across the top to discourage it from popping off? Gents; This also works well if you suffer from PE.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 18:20
|
|
|
It nearly takes a crowbar to get the eyecup off my T4i, but it pops off very easily (too easily) on the 5d3. Haven't lost it yet fortunately 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
Did you guys break the releases on your 5D3 eyecup or something? You should have to pinch both sides to get it to slide off. Mine has little give and I have no fears about losing it accidentally.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 18:58
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Did you guys break the releases on your 5D3 eyecup or something? You should have to pinch both sides to get it to slide off. Mine has little give and I have no fears about losing it accidentally. Mine also takes some pressure to release, but not very much at all. I can certainly see it coming off by getting bumped at the right spot. Pretty much the last thing I worry about though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
I didn't think it was loose or anything, and I'm not really sure when exactly I lost it. I just picked it up this morning and noticed it was missing. When the replacement comes in, I'll see if it's loose from the get go. I'll probably end up taping it down a bit just to be sure. I wouldn't say I'm hard on my gear, but I do try to minimize the time I'm changing lenses, etc so maybe in my rush I just loosened it by accident and the hip bumping just knocked it off? Who knows. But it's annoying as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 20:56
|
|
|
FIGHT ME DO IT 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 21:51
|
|
|
Menorah on Fire posted:FIGHT ME Why would we fight you for putting glass that doesn't suck on your camera?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 22:03
|
|
|
Touché  I owe this thread thanks for convincing me to drop the petty cash on a fotodiox adapter -- I don't care if it sucks to take off, I'm finally using these amazing lenses I've had on hand for years.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 22:13
|
|
|
I would just get one adapter for each lens and Nikon back caps and then never take them off.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2013 22:34
|
|
|
I'm going on an alaskan cruise at the end of august, and im trying to decide what lens to purchase to go along with the 24mm TS-E and 135mm f2. My budget is in the 1200 range. The 70-300 IS, 100-400 IS, 400mm 5.6, or 300mm f4 IS are in the running. Thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 02:05
|
|
|
The problem with the Fotodiox adapter isn't removing it from the lens, it's that it can get stuck on your camera body (with the lens attached), then you're REALLY hosed. I posted about it a while back. Not sure if it was in this thread or the previous Canon thread. Basically, during normal use a little screw can work itself loose enough that the release lever sticks out too far and gets caught on the edge of the mirror box when you try to remove the lens. There wasn't any way to disassemble either the lens or the camera body to get the lever out of the way. Sending it off to Canon would have cost me hundreds of dollars, and the rep on the phone couldn't guarantee that they wouldn't just IMMEDIATELY box it up and send it back to me without touching it upon opening my package and seeing a Nikon lens (in fact, he said this was likely). After trying to get in touch with Fotodiox for almost two weeks (lovely customer service for sure), I finally got a rep to talk to me and he said I could send it to them and "our tech will look at it," but of course there's no guarantee they wouldn't gently caress my camera and/or lens up anyway, plus I would have to swallow the cost of shipping a $2000 camera body with insurance to Indiana and trust this 3rd rate generic parts company with it, blah blah blah... Long story short, the options were that I could force it off, or they could force it off. Me forcing it off was much cheaper, so I did it. At that point I was only operating on the hunch that it was the lever causing the obstruction, which is made of stamped sheet metal, and luckily that was the case. The lever finally bent when I applied enough pressure to it, and it scratched the poo poo out of the inside face of my camera body above the mirror box. It's not a good feeling to have to apply brute force to separate two expensive pieces of equipment. I still use my adapter out of necessity, but I dismantled it and removed the release lever. I can still remove it from the lens by manually actuating the pin with a dental pick. As a consolation to scratching my camera up they offered to send me a new one, so I said what the hell. The new unit they sent had a loose lever screw just like the first one, so I immediately removed the lever. Despite this major flaw, I think the ~$60 fotodiox adapter is still the best sub-100 N-EF adapter because it's the only one I've found that has the leaf springs in the flange like a real lens does to make sure it mounts with a minimum amount of play. Inf fucked around with this message at 02:16 on Jul 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 02:13
|
|
|
somnambulist posted:I'm going on an alaskan cruise at the end of august, and im trying to decide what lens to purchase to go along with the 24mm TS-E and 135mm f2. I'm assuming here that you're using a full frame body. Either way I'd actually still suggest the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS. On a Full Frame that, to me, is getting into useful focal range for birds and other decently distant subjects. I used to use a 70-300mm on my T4i and that was amazing range. If I didn't need a wide angle lens so badly I'd probably get this as my next lens as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 04:52
|
|
|
mclifford82 posted:I'm assuming here that you're using a full frame body. Do other people not find the push/pull zoom mechanism annoying on the 100-400?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 13:13
|
|
|
I just returned the 100D for a 700D, my fingers cramped during the weekend of testing it. The grip of the 600D was comfortable aswell, not to mention the 60D or 6D. 700D it is then.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 15:29
|
|
|
demonachizer posted:Do other people not find the push/pull zoom mechanism annoying on the 100-400? I haven't tried it. I imagine I'll rent it before purchase to try it out. Seems like it'd be easy enough to get used to.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 15:49
|
|
|
I really liked the push-pull once I got used to it. If you know you won't be adjusting the focal length you can crank down on the tension ring and the lens stays put. If you're changing distances constantly, you can freewheel it. If you want just a little tension, you can do that too!
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 15:54
|
|
|
My Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM has push/pull zoom.  I wish the design wizardry Canon uses for their L zoom lenses could be applied across the entire range. The zoom ring on my 70-200 f/4 L is perfectly smooth, has zero zoom creep, and require less force than my 17-55. (which requires more force, stutters when trying to zoom smoothly, and zoom creeps like a motherfucker)
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 17:01
|
|
|
somnambulist posted:I'm going on an alaskan cruise at the end of august, and im trying to decide what lens to purchase to go along with the 24mm TS-E and 135mm f2. Why on earth would you spend $1200 on lens for a week/two week/whatever-it-is long vacation? Either save $1000 and rent a lens better than all three of those choices or spend that money on a lens you'll want all year round. Or better yet, use that money to go on an excursion somewhere cool with cool poo poo to shoot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
Yeah, if you really want quality rent a sigma 120-300 Art instead. No reason to settle for that canon grade stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
Haggins posted:Why on earth would you spend $1200 on lens for a week/two week/whatever-it-is long vacation? Either save $1000 and rent a lens better than all three of those choices or spend that money on a lens you'll want all year round. Or better yet, use that money to go on an excursion somewhere cool with cool poo poo to shoot. Geeze. I'm not going to purchase anything without using it first, I was just curious what people think about the choices presented within my budget because I don't have a telephoto lens with a lot of reach and I wanted impressions based on experience. And I can't exactly rent a lens , try it out on a cruise ship , and decide to go with something else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
Sorry I was a little harsh, but my point is that I think you're thinking about it the wrong way around. Don't think about what $1200 lens is gonna be awesome for this week or two of my life. Think about what you want to shoot right now that you can't, and go from there. This purchase is obviously going to be something you'll be using for a long time. I'm guessing that what you're getting at, is that you want to shoot wildlife in Alaska. Is this something you sure you want to continue when you get back home, or are you just interested for this particular trip? If you're not sure then I'd just rent something and save the money for now. Haggins fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Jul 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
LiquidRain posted:My Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM has push/pull zoom. It also sucks in dust like a Dyson. Pretty kickass image quality though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 22:11
|
|
|
It's a bit more work but just but if you've got the time, just buy the lens you want to rent used and sell it when you're done  In the end it costs you nothing??? I've done it a few times.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2013 22:59
|
|
|
Haggins posted:Sorry I was a little harsh, but my point is that I think you're thinking about it the wrong way around. Don't think about what $1200 lens is gonna be awesome for this week or two of my life. I wish someone had been this harsh with me. Then I probably wouldn't have spent $1300 on a 150-500 that has had a total usage of...three weeks in Africa, then to the zoo one time. In three years.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 01:32
|
|
|
joelcamefalling posted:I wish someone had been this harsh with me. Then I probably wouldn't have spent $1300 on a 150-500 that has had a total usage of...three weeks in Africa, then to the zoo one time. Just sell it then, you'll probably get most of that back.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2013 02:57
|
|
|
erephus posted:I just returned the 100D for a 700D, my fingers cramped during the weekend of testing it. And I'm going to trade it in for a Pentax K-50. What's a swivel lcd screen with touch compared to better grip, lower ISO noise and weather seal. I'm going to have both and test them out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2013 11:19
|
|
|
So the latest builds of Magic Lantern have raw video enabled for a lot of devices. Currently I have it working on my T2i - with a 45mb/s card I can basically do continuous recording at 16:9 SD resolution. It took a lot of experimentation to figure out what settings worked or not. I'd like to say that this is a game-changer, but it's really not. Even if I had a faster card and could get a bump in resolution, I feel like raw recording requires a sensor that can actually make the most use out of it. Using my non-scientific tests, I can only get MAYBE one stop of highlight recovery, and there's like zero detail recovered in the shadows. It's nothing like shooting on a Blackmagic Camera where you get D800-like detail being recorded in the shadows and highlights. I'm only messing with this because I'm going to San Francisco to tech and edit a 3 day shoot where the director is using a Magic Lantern'd 5D3. I mean the 5D is unequivocally a better camera, but I wish we could be doing this whole thing on the BMC 
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2013 21:39
|
|
|
I just got in a 5D Mark III rental from Borrow Lenses. I don't know what I'm going to do when I have to return it. Also, holy crap a crop sensor chops off a bunch more than I thought it did.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 00:10
|
|
|
rcman50166 posted:I just got in a 5D Mark III rental from Borrow Lenses. I don't know what I'm going to do when I have to return it. Also, holy crap a crop sensor chops off a bunch more than I thought it did. If you're using a very wide lens (24mm or wider) it's awesome to see the barrel distortion in the viewfinder as you pan across a room / crowd.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 00:21
|
|
|
Great, now I'm spinning.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
Try a 14mm, it's pretty fun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 00:47
|
|
|
demonachizer posted:Do other people not find the push/pull zoom mechanism annoying on the 100-400? Buying the lens, using it for the trip, and then selling it used is probably the same cost as renting it for the trip. 100-400 is a pretty useful range if you don't already have glass to cover that distance. You might find yourself hanging on to it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 04:53
|
|
|
InternetJunky posted:It seems to be a love/hate thing with people. I'm in the love camp. It feels natural and intuitive. Also, the whole "dust pumper" reputation has got to be some rumour Nikon started. I've used mine for years now and if there's dust in there it certainly doesn't show in the image. I love my 100-400 and after like 3 hours of fooling around with the tensioner, I love the push-pull.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 06:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 21:41 |
|
|
Don't walk around while looking into the viewfinder with an ultra wide on your camera. I nearly fell into a ditch doing that what with the perspective so messed up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 09:42
|
|
