|
So my 6D is making some slow shutter sounds. The exposure seems right regardless, but it sounds like it's going off at 1/10 a second regardless of what i have it set to. I've tried different lenses and batteries and whatever i could think of. If i set it to continuous mode it seems to get its speed back. Is this a common problem? Time to ship it in for service?
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:30 |
|
|
Erostratus posted:So my 6D is making some slow shutter sounds. The exposure seems right regardless, but it sounds like it's going off at 1/10 a second regardless of what i have it set to. I've tried different lenses and batteries and whatever i could think of. If i set it to continuous mode it seems to get its speed back. Is this a common problem? Time to ship it in for service? stupid question but do you have it set on silent shutter for the drive mode, rather than regular single shot?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:stupid question but do you have it set on silent shutter for the drive mode, rather than regular single shot? Not a stupid question, i'm an idiot and that's exactly what it was. Thanks. Never even noticed that feature, literally.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
Had to use silent shutter for the first time the other day at a newborn shoot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
I honesty don't even know if the silent shutter mode on my 6D is actually quieter than the regular shutter mode. It just sounds longer really!
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
Newbie mistakes I have made no 47. That time I thought my camera was broken because I accidentally set it up in the mode that delays the shutter for 10 seconds.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
NaDy posted:I honesty don't even know if the silent shutter mode on my 6D is actually quieter than the regular shutter mode. It just sounds longer really! That's exactly what it does - it adds shutter lag at the front end after the mirror flips, then delays the mirror return so the sound is spread out over a longer period of time. It gets perceived as quieter because it's not all happening at once, so it's less disruptive. It also gives you a little extra handholding ability because of delaying the shutter after the mirror flips up (which settles down some vibration in the body)
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:Newbie mistakes I have made no 47. That time I thought my camera was broken because I accidentally set it up in the mode that delays the shutter for 10 seconds. I left my camera in mirror up when buying a lens off someone and forgot. I was there looking stupid while saying 'I'm sure this is my fault so I'll buy it, but I have no idea what it's doing'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 16:43
|
|
|
NaDy posted:I honesty don't even know if the silent shutter mode on my 6D is actually quieter than the regular shutter mode. It just sounds longer really! The 6D has a fairly quiet normal shutter so you don't notice much difference between normal and silent. The difference between normal shots and silenced ones on e.g. the 5D3 is huge. The first time i shot with my 5D3 the loud shutter sound startled me so much i almost dropped the camera. I thought something was broken because the sound was so brutal. I definitely can see the use for the silent mode on the 5D3 when shooting wildlife, babies, in a church or when shooting near someone recording a video. My wife recorded our daugher playing on the piano and i photographed her and all you can hear on the video is CLACKA CLACKA CLACKA from the camera, not my daugher playing. Ineptitude fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Apr 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
What is the opinion on 500PX these days? I used to upload photos to 500PX and Flickr but nowadays it's more like Flickr/Instagram.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
500px is what flickr used to be now. Everyone's uploads get shown in a big searchable stream, an algorithm happens taking into account favourites, views, and comments which gives you a moving score (which degrades over time), and then if you get enough it goes to the upcoming stream and then onwards to popular. There are groups but people can't use them to manipulate scores in the same way so the most popular pictures are actually the best rather than the ones with the most sparkle kitty gif comments.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
"actually the best" is pretty debatable, 500px definitely has an aesthetic that tends to be popular and maybe less prone to maxgor style gaming the system
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Too much Ricoh theta 360 shots to be any good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2016 22:37
|
|
|
What's the 500px film photo scene like? I've only scraped the surface and it mostly looks like typically garish digital stuff but if there's a thriving film photo subculture like FlickR I'd be interested in exploring it more deeply.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 03:27
|
|
|
I'm editing some city shots and I'm trying to figure out which line should actually be vertical. Any suggestions for this? My guess is that the strongest/closest vertical line to the viewer in the image should actually be truly vertical while the other vertical lines are slightly slanted.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
huhu posted:I'm editing some city shots and I'm trying to figure out which line should actually be vertical. Any suggestions for this? My guess is that the strongest/closest vertical line to the viewer in the image should actually be truly vertical while the other vertical lines are slightly slanted. I use the line that isn't on the axis hosed with by the pitch of my camera. If that makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
Does anyone have experience with mounting medium-large size prints (20x30) to foam board? Spray glue seems like the standard, but for my purposes it doesn't have to be permanent or 100% precise at the edges. Is there any reason to not use double sticky tape if I just need to display a bunch of prints for a few days?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
double sided scotch tape would be better as it won't take any of the foam off when you remove the print.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 02:35
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:I use the line that isn't on the axis hosed with by the pitch of my camera. If that makes sense. Ah that does make much more sense.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 02:46
|
|
|
Even if it's just for a few days please do not use tape that isn't acid-free.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
huhu posted:I'm editing some city shots and I'm trying to figure out which line should actually be vertical. Any suggestions for this? My guess is that the strongest/closest vertical line to the viewer in the image should actually be truly vertical while the other vertical lines are slightly slanted. Is there a horizontal line - like the horizon, or the street, or a body of water - that would be easier to line up?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
Nah I was shooting up while wandering through the city.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 06:27
|
|
|
huhu posted:Nah I was shooting up while wandering through the city. Seek professional help.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 08:09
|
|
|
huhu posted:Nah I was shooting up while wandering through the city. If there are lots of strong verticals, align it to whatever known vertical reference you can find right down the centre of the image as a good starting point; that's the only line that will be invariant with pitch (other than if you have a true horizon, but if you're looking up I doubt that). If that doesn't work, one trick is to play with the manual "lens correction" options in Lightroom. Once you've corrected for perspective, rotation should be easy to figure out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 11:01
|
|
|
elgarbo posted:Seek professional help. Isn't that why we're all here?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
huhu posted:Isn't that why we're all here? I'm here because I heard there were snacks
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
Tried sticking a 20x30 print onto a foam board. It's surprisingly tricky to get the edge to line up, and double sided tape is really hard to peel back off. I think I'll go for the ugly but safe method of binder clips at the corners.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
The way I've done it is by checking for square first, lining up adn clamping 2 opposite corners, then glue+kicker the 2 *other* corners. Then unclamp and glue from the inside going out to chase air bubbles.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 09:26
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:The way I've done it is by checking for square first, lining up adn clamping 2 opposite corners, then glue+kicker the 2 *other* corners. Then unclamp and glue from the inside going out to chase air bubbles. I would not have thought of that, but very good idea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
I know nothing about cameras, and have this lens, and would like to know what type of camera body its compatible with (and if it's just for film, or dslr's) 
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
ChocNitty posted:I know nothing about cameras, and have this lens, and would like to know what type of camera body its compatible with (and if it's just for film, or dslr's) Canon FD. Old film. This is the mount that predates EOS/EF Mount
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
Little googling shows it's a decent lens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:Canon FD. Old film. This is the mount that predates EOS/EF Mount Ok ty. I just asked someone else in a pawn shop and they said it's for a Pentax body. Is that incorrect?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
It's definitely not pentax k-mount. Looks like FD to me too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
Completely incorrect - Pentax K-mount (still in use on today's Pentax DSLR in autofocus form) is utterly incompatible with Canon FD-mount. Technically, Pentax uses a bayonet-mount (align, put together, rotate, click) and Canon-FD is a breach-mount (align, put together, rotate ring on lens until tight). Pawn shops are notoriously bad at camera lenses. In my experience, they price flea-market level junk like old-gem pro-grade glass, and will just make whatever poo poo up they think will separate you from your money regarding lens-body compatibility or accessories you should totally buy right now. EDIT because I can't stop talking about old lenses Anything that says "KIRON" on it is probably pretty good. They were the actual lens manufacturer (based in Japan) of a pretty wide variety of 3rd-party brand glass in the 80's. Notably, they had a contract with the American company Vivitar, such that Kiron made some of the well-regarded Vivitar Series 1 lenses. Canon FD is an "orphan" mount because no modern (digital) camera can wear those lenses without an adaptor. This keeps prices lower than something like Nikon or Pentax mount from the same time that still fits on modern DSLRS fairly easily. People still shoot film on old SLRs (e.g. me) so it's not like that lens is worthless. Look for similar lenses on eBay and sell it there if you are so inclined. Key search terms are the focal length range (28-105mm) and the aperture range (f/3.2-4.5). ExecuDork fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Apr 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
ChocNitty posted:Ok ty. I just asked someone else in a pawn shop and they said it's for a Pentax body. Is that incorrect? Definitely incorrect. It's an FD mount lens. You can put it on an F1's , A series (AE, AE-P , A-1, etc) , T## (T70, T90) cameras. If you want something cheap to put it on, an AE-1 is probably your best bet but make sure they put new foam on it and oiled the mirror return so it doesn't sound like it has whooping cough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
Anybody got a suggestion for a gallery/photo management software that's not too complicated and as cheap as possible? My boss wants a way to manage her phone photos on her computer, with things like flagging for rejection and rating systems from Lightroom, but she doesn't want the post processing features at all. The Photos app bundled with her Mac is apparently too lacking in features.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
Picasa? edit: lol google killed it, because of course they did
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
Geektox posted:Anybody got a suggestion for a gallery/photo management software that's not too complicated and as cheap as possible? I don't personally have an opinion, but what you want is "digital asset management." I've heard Photo Mechanic spoken highly of before.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:30 |
|
|
Geektox posted:Anybody got a suggestion for a gallery/photo management software that's not too complicated and as cheap as possible? Photo Mechanic? At $150 might not come under the definition of 'cheap' though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2016 02:38
|
|