|
The pancake just came in. Even on a small camera it looks tiny.   Test shot of cats not cooperating and hanging out in the badly lit hallway  
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:20 |
|
|
I'm gonna get a UV filter for my 24-105 but that's only because I'm taking it to Burning Man and gently caress having the front element sand-blasted. I'm gonna rig up some sort of zip-loc bag housing and tape the poo poo out of it to at least try and keep some of the dust out. That and not change lenses, open any of the compartments or anything until I get out of the desert. What can go wrong!?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
You should take a 100-400 and pump it a bunch of times like a Super Soaker.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 21:45
|
|
|
Make sure you put a uv filter on top of that to protect your uv filter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:Make sure you put a uv filter on top of that to protect your uv filter. Well you certainly don't want to ruin your 250$ multicoated uv filter so it only stands to reason you should stick a 15$ Chinese one on top of it
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:Well you certainly don't want to ruin your 250$ multicoated uv filter so it only stands to reason you should stick a 15$ Chinese one on top of it But the quality of a $15 filter is poor so it would be better to put another $250 uv on top, then protect that with the $15 one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:But the quality of a $15 filter is poor so it would be better to put another $250 uv on top, then protect that with the $15 one. ultraviolet inception? I'm thinking the best solution here is dipping the ends of lenses in five minute epoxy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:ultraviolet inception? I'm thinking the best solution here is dipping the ends of lenses in five minute epoxy. It's called 'optical resin', scrublord.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
IceLicker posted:I'm gonna get a UV filter for my 24-105 but that's only because I'm taking it to Burning Man and gently caress having the front element sand-blasted. I'm gonna rig up some sort of zip-loc bag housing and tape the poo poo out of it to at least try and keep some of the dust out. That and not change lenses, open any of the compartments or anything until I get out of the desert. What can go wrong!? "Going to Burning Man" could go wrong. I feel like that should join the list of places a camera should never go along with those Color Runs (go find the Lens Rentals blog entry on CRs murdering lenses, it's worth a read).
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
IceLicker posted:I'm gonna get a UV filter for my 24-105 but that's only because I'm taking it to Burning Man and gently caress having the front element sand-blasted. I'm gonna rig up some sort of zip-loc bag housing and tape the poo poo out of it to at least try and keep some of the dust out. That and not change lenses, open any of the compartments or anything until I get out of the desert. What can go wrong!? Also a note to anyone attaching a UV filter to the Canon 24-105, it will not weather seal that lens, as it zooms externally. But do use sunscreen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 13:03
|
|
|
IceLicker posted:I'm gonna get a UV filter for my 24-105 but that's only because I'm taking it to Burning Man and gently caress having the front element sand-blasted. I'm gonna rig up some sort of zip-loc bag housing and tape the poo poo out of it to at least try and keep some of the dust out. That and not change lenses, open any of the compartments or anything until I get out of the desert. What can go wrong!? I think the best advice for that is to buy the best point and shoot you are comfortable with being one time use and throw it in a waterproof enclosure. It'll still get hosed up but you won't be out an expensive lens and camera.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 16:24
|
|
|
So I'm starting to sort photos from my trip and I noticed something with some of the shots from my T2i: 100% crop. Shot with the 50 1.8 ISO 100, 1/250, F8. It has this horizontal noise, I'm looking at my other photos and it seems that anything shot less than F8 doesn't seem to have this effect. Anyone have some insight as to what is going on?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
Just noise reduce in Lightroom? I mean it's uggo FPN, but it looks like the camera was metering for the bright background and the shaded areas are just underexposed. Edit: do you have highlight priority turned on?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Just noise reduce in Lightroom? Oh yeah I'm not overly concerned about it and was planning on just doing noise reduction but I was just curious. EDIT: HTP is disabled. iSheep fucked around with this message at 19:40 on Aug 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 19:36
|
|
|
That's just the T2i being the T2i. I remember I always got noise even when at 100 iso and perfectly exposed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 08:34
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:If thats crossed the plastic thread on the end of the lens, that's not great. If you can some how gently get it off and then screw it on straight and off again a few times, the little plastic ridges in the thread might get pushed back to where they should be.. but if it's on there real tight then you've probably done some damage. I'll give that a shot but no I didn't, it's on really god drat tight as well and the angle is tiny but I never used to tighten it much when I first put it on so who knows what the hell happened. Will trip report later. Then cry.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
I'm going on a bouldering trip to Fontainbleu in October with some mates and we're wanting to get some cool video footage of us all climbing. Would the 40mm Pancake be a good choice to buy for the trip? I have a 650D and have literally never touched the video mode on my camera. I'd rather not have to buy a GoPro or anything as I'm pretty broke as it is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 12:26
|
|
|
The thing about the GoPro or whatever similar sports video camera is it's ruggedness and it's size, so you can mount it on your helmet or whatever and forget about it. Your DSLR will take better shots/video (dunno about the video but the glass on the front of it even with the kit lens has gotta smash the tiny lens on a GoPro.. let alone the sensor size) but it's more the thing of swinging around a heavy and cumbersome DLSR while doing poo poo worthy of shooting. You're more relegated to the role of cameraman while someone else does something cool.. which is how you'll always get the best footage anyway (the amount of lovely, non-centered, boring footage you'll edit out of any GoPro shoot even when you're doing something amazingly exciting is crazy).. but as for POV shooting I don't think you can really emulate a GoPro with something else. But as someone with gigs and gigs of 720p GoPro footage of me skiing the Alps in Italy and strapping sports cars through France and riding downhill mountain bikes in Switzerland and 4WDing in Australia.. having properly shot footage (someone behind a camera with some skills concentrating on being a cameraman) trumps it almost every time. There are exclusions to this rule like this truly amazing footage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x76VEPXYaI0 But the fisheye and just POV makes everything look smaller and that big backfilp is literally one of the most insane things done ever on a bike.. your footage will be much more boring than that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:34
|
|
|
If you're going bouldering a GoPro might not be the best choice. If you have it mounted to yourself you just end up with a bunch of footage looking directly at a rock face and it can get in the way. Since it's bouldering you don't have to worry about the amount of gear you have and you can probably get around/on top of the feature you're climbing with ease so using a DSLR shouldn't be an issue. You can get the Canon 10-18 with IS for about the price of a GoPro if you want wide angle shots to show off the feature and get a sense of scale. If you already have a kit lens you can get tighter shots of climbers to show off technical moves or whatever. It should give you better results than a GoPro too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
I was at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway over the weekend, and one thing that's getting oddly common is people walking around with a GoPro on the end of a pole. It appears to have become the primary camera for a noticeable number of people, they jam that pole where something interesting is happening and hope for the best I guess. I can't imagine the results are any good, but at least it's not smartphone video recorded in portrait orientation I guess.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
Headhunter posted:I'm going on a bouldering trip to Fontainbleu in October with some mates and we're wanting to get some cool video footage of us all climbing. Would the 40mm Pancake be a good choice to buy for the trip? I have a 650D and have literally never touched the video mode on my camera. I'd rather not have to buy a GoPro or anything as I'm pretty broke as it is. The 40mm pancake is an all around good lens and worth every penny. For what you are doing, the upside would be that it is light an compact. A downside to what you want it for though is that you may not be able to "zoom with your feet" while climbing. And a downside to using it for video is that, unlike all the other STM lenses I've used, the 40mm is not completely silent focusing. If you have the money, I second the 10-18mm if you are going to be taking video while climbing with your friends. It is light weight, silent focusing, and wide enough to get your friends and all the scenery in the shot even if you are only a few feet away from them. If you intend to be some distance from your friends, like on the ground looking up at your friends as they climb, then it might not be so useful because anything in the distance will get very tiny very quick.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
For my backpacking trip last week I finally decided to leave my 50d at home and instead brought my old Nikon p&s and my gopro hero 3. I sacrificed not really being able to take great stills but to lose the weight of my 50d + 17-50 2.8 was incredible. Having a tiny camera in my pocket was more convenient than a heavy SLR around my neck. My p&s takes reasonable stills but lovely video and the gopro takes great video albeit super wide angle and a little distorted. You just have to pick whats important to you. If photos/video is important go with a better quality camera knowing you're going to have to carry a clunky camera around. If you want to enjoy the trip a little more and focus on the experience versus being a camera man, go with a gopro for the sake of getting very decent video and it being wearable. Mount it in different positions. You can wear it up high on your helmet to get a better downward perspective of your whole body from above. I just need to suck it up and go with a Sony RX100. incredible stills and video while still being very pocketable. And yes with bouldering you might end up with a lot of footage of rock with a chest mounted gopro. Mounting it to your head could get you more control of the views but the video might be twitchy as you move. My scrambling video was great when I looked down or away from the mountain side, but when I was trying to shuffle along a narrow ledge and hang on for dear life it was all rock.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
When bouldering just hand the camera to a buddy, then have them film from the side or top.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
I'm not really a video guy but the go pro seems like it's perfect for a b-roll camera. I see TV shows use it all the time. Like for example, during vehicle chase scenes in Sons of Anarchy you'll see the bikes moving from a few different angles then you'll see what's obviously a go pro (you can tell because the resolution drops a little bit) mounted near the rider's foot recording the front tire spinning. I think it looks cool and adds to the story. So with sports you could have over-view A roll camera that pans with the motion then edit in some frames from the first person go pro to make it a little more interesting. As for just straight photography I don't think go pros are that cool unless it's for timelapse (which is really video anyway). Having only a fixed wide angle lens makes it harder to capture individual moments the way you visualize them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
A GH2 or Blackmagic Pocket Cinema camera are good for ultra portable large sensor video cameras (well not APS-C, but a good compromise on sensor size and body size), the latter especially since you can shoot in a log mode with a compressed I-frame codec or even in raw if you want to be anal about IQ and grading. On the other hand, money.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
Fedora Brandisher posted:If you're going bouldering a GoPro might not be the best choice. If you have it mounted to yourself you just end up with a bunch of footage looking directly at a rock face and it can get in the way. Microsoft is working on a fix for that: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/projects/hyperlapse/
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
1st AD posted:A GH2 or Blackmagic Pocket Cinema camera are good for ultra portable large sensor video cameras (well not APS-C, but a good compromise on sensor size and body size), the latter especially since you can shoot in a log mode with a compressed I-frame codec or even in raw if you want to be anal about IQ and grading. Whirlwind Jones fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Aug 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Yeah, they've a new one coming out soon, the URSA.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:I thought the BMPC was bad (relatively) and that's why they were dumping them for cheap a few weeks ago. I thought it was pretty ok so long as you know it's mostly manual focus and is garbage for stills.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:I thought it was pretty ok so long as you know it's mostly manual focus and is garbage for stills. Wasn't one of its selling points supposed to be that it wasn't garbage for stills? I mean I'm not saying it's not, but I remember hearing that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:I thought the BMPC was bad (relatively) and that's why they were dumping them for cheap a few weeks ago. The Blackmagic Pocket (an S16 1080p camera)is a different thing than the Blackmagic Production (an S35 4k camera), and the Ursa is kind of an upgrade to the Production Camera. I just bought the Pocket Camera and it's pretty good, assuming you're familiar with the quirks of Blackmagic's cameras. Gotta shoot at ISO 800 to preserve maximum DR, gotta be proficient in Resolve to get the best IQ. Edit: SoundMonkey posted:Wasn't one of its selling points supposed to be that it wasn't garbage for stills? The Pocket Camera shoots raw at 1952x1112. I don't think raw stills were ever a selling point for this camera. 1st AD fucked around with this message at 00:44 on Aug 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
xzzy posted:I was at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway over the weekend, and one thing that's getting oddly common is people walking around with a GoPro on the end of a pole. It appears to have become the primary camera for a noticeable number of people, they jam that pole where something interesting is happening and hope for the best I guess. I got chased off the turn one inside wall by a marshall after someone shoved one of those through the fence. It was uncomfortably close to the riders leaving the pit. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
Looking for opinions on the Canon 100-400 F/4.5-5.6L IS USM lens. I've been into airplane spotting at airports for a while now, and my 70-200 just doesn't have the reach at some of the observation spots at bigger airports. I've looked at both the 300 and 400 mm primes as well, but would rather have the zoom. My only other thought was to get a 2x teleconverter for the 70-200 I have. Current equipment: Canon 60D w/ grip Tamron 70-200 F/2.8 Tamron 17-50 F/2.8
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
DJCobol posted:Looking for opinions on the Canon 100-400 F/4.5-5.6L IS USM lens. I've been into airplane spotting at airports for a while now, and my 70-200 just doesn't have the reach at some of the observation spots at bigger airports. I've looked at both the 300 and 400 mm primes as well, but would rather have the zoom. My only other thought was to get a 2x teleconverter for the 70-200 I have. Current equipment: I used one at aforementioned races last weekend with great success, and I've been very happy with mine shooting sports and wildlife. The abberation goes up noticeably once you pass 350mm towards 400mm and the push-pull zoom seems to a have a reputation for sucking in dust, but I haven't noticed that. NeuralSpark fucked around with this message at 16:03 on Aug 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
There's been some talk that the replacement for that lens will be announced in early September (along with the 7D2). Unless you need one right away, might be worth waiting, if only for the glut of old lenses that people will unleash on the market when that one starts shipping. Of course they could announce and not ship until next year... Also, if you were considering 300mm maybe look at the 70-300L.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
DJCobol posted:Looking for opinions on the Canon 100-400 F/4.5-5.6L IS USM lens. I've been into airplane spotting at airports for a while now, and my 70-200 just doesn't have the reach at some of the observation spots at bigger airports. I've looked at both the 300 and 400 mm primes as well, but would rather have the zoom. My only other thought was to get a 2x teleconverter for the 70-200 I have. Current equipment: If you don't mind waiting on a list a while (and the extra lb of weight) , the tamron 150-600 is supposed to be just as sharp as a good 100-400 in the overlapping range, plus it has the extra reach on it. Also cheaper Edit: more modern IS also timrenzi574 fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Aug 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
The Tamron 70-300 and 150-600 are both awesome and everyone should own them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:If you don't mind waiting on a list a while (and the extra lb of weight) , the tamron 150-600 is supposed to be just as sharp as a good 100-400 in the overlapping range, plus it has the extra reach on it. Also cheaper Claw Massage posted:The Tamron 70-300 and 150-600 are both awesome and everyone should own them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
I am very pleased with my 70-300L.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:20 |
|
|
A buddy of mine recently sent his 50D into Adorama to see how much they would give him for it, and they weren't gonna give him much at all so he decided not to sell and they sent it back to him. But when he got it back from them, it had a Tamron 70-300 on it, a lens that he never owned and didn't send in with the camera originally 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 08:07
|
|
