paul_c7

<p>Hi everyone, I have a question about my tripod head and I feel rather silly having to ask it, but since Manfrotto's customer support was of no great help, I'm hoping someone here may be able to help me.<br /><br />I have a Manfrotto XPRO Geared 3-Way Pan/Tilt Head (MHXPRO-3WG) and it has been one of the best tripod heads I've owned, until this odd situation that I've found myself in. I recently purchased a new super telephoto lens (Sigma 150-600mm) with the intention of using it to photograph the moon in the night sky (among other things, but this was one of the primary reasons why I bought it). I've got quite a heavy setup, consisting of a Canon 5D Mark IV with BG-E20 battery grip attached, plus the telephoto lens, plus a Sigma 1.4x teleconverter. It weighs in just shy of the tripod head's maximum load capacity. Everything mounts on the lens' tripod collar mount just fine. But this particular tripod head has a front tilt range of -20° to +90°, meaning you can tilt it 20° backwards (aiming up at the sky) or 90° forwards (aiming down at the ground). So what I realized is that due to the much shorter "up" angle, I'm not actually able to aim my camera/lens up far enough to be able to capture the moon in the sky as it is usually much higher than 20°.<br /><br />The way I see it, there are two things I could do in order to be able to get the upward angle that I want, but I'm not sure if they are safe for my equipment (I don't want to damage my tripod head, and I REALLY don't want to damage my camera or lens).<br /><br />#1) The first option is to rotate the quick release plate (Manfrotto 200PL) that attaches to my tripod collar mount 180° so that the camera/lens is sitting backwards on the tripod - this would allow me to point the camera up to a 90° angle, rather than being limited by the 20° tilt when it is front-facing. However, my concern with doing this is that the quick release plate has arrows on its underside that show which direction the lens should point, and by doing this, the lens would be pointing in the opposite direction of where the arrow points. I'm not sure if that is safe to do. Does anyone have any experience doing this? Is it safe? The arrows point a specific direction for a reason, so I really don't know if this is safe to do.<br /><br />#2) The second option, which I think is likely even more unsafe, is to keep the quick release plate facing the correct direction, but to insert it into the tripod head backwards so that the camera/lens is facing backwards which would allow me to point the camera up to a 90° angle. But since I believe the quick release plate is specifically designed to be inserted one way, I'm assuming this is NOT something I should do.<br /><br />I did reach out to Manfrotto's customer support with the same question, but all they said was that the equipment should not be used in any way other than how it was designed. Fair enough, but they didn't exactly answer the specific questions that I asked. They specifically said not to insert the quick release plate backwards into the tripod head, so I can safely rule that option (#2) out, but they didn't mention anything about attaching the quick release plate to the collar backwards in order to use the tripod head in a reverse position. Based on that response I imagine that this is not recommended either, but I'm interested to hear other feedback/advice about this.<br /><br />I did come across this topic (http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1367086) which is a very similar issue to mine, but the proposed solutions are for a slightly different problem in that he was already attaching his quick release plate backwards but that it would wiggle around on him.<br /><br />Does anyone have any experience with this or a similar problem? Is it safe to attach the quick release plate to the tripod collar backwards so that the lens can sit backwards on the tripod and aim more upwards? Since my equipment is quite heavy, I really don't want to risk damaging anything.<br /><br />And if the best/only solution is to invest in a different tripod head, is there any that you would recommend for this specific purpose that will also safely support a large weight capacity? Thanks in advance for any help or insight you can provide!</p>

<p>Hi everyone, I recently purchased a printer so I could print my own photos (Canon Pixma Pro 100). I bought a package of 13x19" Canon Luster paper to use for testing, since I figured I would start with the best/recommended paper type and work down from there, if necessary.</p> <p>I have been a photographer for a number of years but have always gotten my prints done at print shops and labs, so I have absolutely no experience with the printing process. Most people online say that trying to get your photographs to print the way they look on your screen can be quite a painful process. After reading a few blogs and watching a few videos, a lot of sources had the same suggestion - calibrate your monitor before printing.</p> <p>So I purchased the Spyder5Pro and calibrated my main display tonight (I have two displays - my primary, which I use for editing photos, is a BenQ GW2765, a 27" WQHD LCD monitor, and the other is an Acer 22" LCD monitor) however, after going through the calibration process twice I have to admit I'm a bit confused about what's going on.</p> <p>I performed my first calibration with the overhead light in my office ON. It recommended 120cd/m2, which I adjusted, which resulted in a very dim, very yellowish calibration profile - I had to lower my screen brightness from 100 to 11.</p> <p>I performed a second calibration several minutes later, not fully understanding. This time, I turned the overhead light in my office OFF. It recommended 90cd/m2, which I adjusted, changing the brightness from 100 to 5 in order to match the recommended value.</p> <p>When I get to the screen where it lets me toggle between my uncalibrated and calibrated views, the differences are staggering...the calibrated view looks terrible - dull and almost yellowish (I'm assuming this is the colour temperature). It's so dull that I can't really imagine using it like this.</p> <p>Can anyone tell me if I'm doing this incorrectly, or if what I'm experiencing is normal when calibrating a monitor? Does this mean I have to leave my monitor at 5 brightness when editing photos? I'm also concerned about editing photos with this profile, since it seems to make the colours look very flat and off. I'm just very confused at how having such a dull monitor is supposed to help me...but I know I must be doing or interpreting something wrong! Any help would be greatly appreciated!</p>

<p>Hello, I am looking to get any feedback from the community regarding potential alternatives to sites like 500px and Flickr. While I'm familiar with both, I dislike both for their own reasons (500px is far too popularity-based now, and Flickr, well...Flickr just outright sucks) and am struggling to find a comparable alternative. I am willing to pay an annual or subscription fee to use such a service, I do not expect good things to always be free. I did have a PRO account with 500px for about a year or so, and to be honest, I really, REALLY like how clean the 500px interface is...but I just absolutely cannot stand how the 500px community has shifted from being a place that showcases truly talented photographers and spectacular photographs to place where photo quality means next to nothing and instead hinges almost entirely upon groups of friends upvoting those same groups of friends' photos. I am not saying it's a nice feature - I think that to be able to vote/favourite photos is very neat. But what I don't like is how those numbers, whether high or low, are essentially forced down your throat at every available opportunity. In my experience, I have seen countless users who post photographs that are, in my opinion, mediocre at best - now, I realize that photographs are interpretive and subjective and that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but that being said, I think we can all agree that there are a lot of photos that are best described as being "meh" but that somehow manage to get to the top of the charts or popular pages simply because they have a lot of friends or connections on the site who will vote for anything, regardless of whether it's actually a good photo or not. I am not a professional photographer and I certainly don't take photos that are in the 500px Prime calibre, but I have to admit that I think a lot of my photos are better than many of the photos that find their way to the top of the popular pages, simply because so many of those photos have not achieved that ranking based on anything to do with the merit or quality of the photo...simply put, 500px has turned into a giant popularity contest by the nature that you cannot disable or hide these "ratings" - I talked to one of their support representatives yesterday and asked if it was possible to somehow at least just hide the thing that gets attached to your profile that shows how many friends/likes/affection points you have...but was told that no, there is no way to hide this. From my perspective, it feels as though I am being punished because I am not willing to vote/favourite hundreds of mediocre photos in the hope that those users will return the favour. That seems totally ridiculous to me, but it is what it is. Phew, sorry about that anti-500px rant, haha.</p> <p>My question is, does anyone know of any sites or services out there that offer something similar to what 500px offers (especially in terms of layout and design, particularly how clean/fluid/intuitive it is) but that doesn't have these silly popularity points? Attaching likes to a photo is one thing, and I'm not against that. But those numbers shouldn't be what's being in-your-face, it should be the photos that do that. I guess maybe I'm looking more for strictly a portfolio/gallery service, rather than a community. The community certainly provides a nice atmosphere, but this trend of doing whatever you can to amass likes, favourites, retweets, votes - whatever it may be - is getting way too out of hand for my liking. Call me old fashioned, but I just want something that looks clean where I can display my photos and be proud of them - not because thousands of people have clicked a button, but because it just looks good. Any helps or suggestions would be greatly appreciated! :)</p>

Thanks for the feedback - Larry, I will try what you said when I have access to my camera next. I know that several people have mentioned that this decreases battery life, but I have grips for both cameras and enough batteries to last a ridiculously long time...so for me, this is a non-issue. I would much prefer to waste battery life but be able to see my settings without having to press a button each time just to see them. Everyone is different in how they shoot. Thanks again for your replies!

<p>Hi everyone, this will probably seem like a pretty silly question to a lot of you, but I've searched online and haven't been able to find anything and short of looking through the manual again I'm not sure what else to do.</p> <p>I recently purchased a 7D but for the life of me I cannot find the setting where you can set the screen behaviour - currently I have to press the "Q" button every single time I want to see or change any of the settings using the back display (I prefer using the back display to the top display because of my eyesight). My 5DMkII does not have this problem - it always shows the back screen, except that it goes to sleep/standby after about 1 minute. Also, the screen goes black when I put my eye up to the viewfinder, and when I take the camera away from my face the screen activates again. Is it possible to set the screen on my 7D to behave the same way? I am getting really frustrated having to press Q every time just to see or change settings. Thanks very much for any help!</p>

<p>Thanks very much for the suggestion Ellis - I've never heard of this before but it does look very interesting. The only thing I don't like about it is that it looks like it's not designed to hold the cameras with lenses already attached...yes, it looks like it would fit both DSLRs with grips attached, but I'd still have the problem of needing to attach lenses to them before I could shoot anything (to be honest, the entire reason I got the 7D as a secondary DSLR was so that I didn't have to switch lenses so often, so having a bag that doesn't allow for lenses to be already connected to the cameras kind of defeats the purpose I need it for).</p> <p>Edward, the Airport model looks like a great bag, but I'll be honest in that I do almost no international travelling (I wish, but I have a 9-5 job that means I never get to go anywhere)...but as I was looking at that, I saw their StreetWalker Pro backpack and I think this is more along the lines of what I need. It doesn't look like I'd be able to bring a plethora of lenses with me, but it looks like it would at least let me carry both DSLRs with the grips attached (as well as lenses, it looks like) at the same time. I've sent an email off to them to ask before I order anything.</p>

<p>I've spent some time looking into top- vs bottom-mounted straps and to be honest it seems like there's a fairly equal number of people who advocate for either method. I did come across a few blog articles where people had posted photos of the entire bottom piece of their camera detaching because of a tripod-mounted strap system, but I also feel like they must have been pretty hard on their gear (i.e. as if they dropped it from shooting position to letting it dangle on the strap) to be able to do that much damage to it...I take really, REALLY good care of my equipment (I literally baby it, maybe this is why I will never be a "pro" photographer but I always take time to use and put my equipment away properly and in the most careful way possible). There were also some people who had had problems with the actual tripod mount itself bulging outwards, as if hanging upside-down from the tripod-mounted strap actually pulled the mount away from the rest of the body.</p> <p>That being said, I also saw a lot of positive comments about the tripod-mount being designed to support the weight of the camera/lens because it is a mounting position just like the rings on the top that hold the regular camera strap. To be honest, this argument makes much more sense to me and I think that as long as you're careful with your gear and that you don't use a tripod-mounted strap to support the full weight of dropping a camera at your side, you'd be fine. It's also easy for me to say that at this point because I've never used any sort of tripod-mounted strap/sling system, but based on what I know about cameras AND straps I can't see how this would pose a huge problem unless you're pretty rough with your equipment.</p> <p>Still, can anyone tell me if there's any advantages/disadvantages to having one camera on a strap/sling and the other on a belt/clip mount vs having both cameras on a strap system or both belt-mounted? Thanks!</p>

<p>Hi everyone, thanks very much for your input! It's always nice to get some ideas and perspectives from other photogs out there doing similar things but in different ways.</p> <p>Craig, I don't think your method would be very effective for me for two reasons: 1) I do a LOT of moving around while I'm shooting at the racetrack and I think trying to wear both around my neck would be pretty limiting in terms of mobility, not to mention I can't imagine how they wouldn't inevitably get tangled with each other, and 2) as Ellis pointed out, I don't think this would be very comfortable...I might be able to suck it up for a couple of hours once or twice, but since this is something I do fairly regularly I'm looking for more of a long-term solution.</p> <p>Ellis, I definitely appreciate your point of concern regarding the tripod-mount-based harnesses. It makes total sense to me, but I have also never heard of this being an issue (but I am also only now starting to look into these harness systems, so it's not like I've done a ton of research or anything). Both my cameras typically have battery grips attached - do you think this would present more of a danger or less?</p> <p>Phil, thanks very much for your suggestion - I had never heard of the Spider Holster before and I have to admit that it looks very intriguing to me. One question I have for you is why you suggest using this in conjunction with a BlackRapid strap, since I see that they also make a version of the Spider Holster that holds 2 cameras (one on each side of your hips)? I have to admit that my primary concern with straps/harnesses (this is why the Spider Holster looks so appealing to me) is I want to avoid having my cameras swing as much as possible. Sometimes when I'm shooting at the track I have to make a lot of quick, fast movements whether it's to get a shot from a certain angle or to get out of someone's way...but my concern with having one on a strap is that if I had it slung over my shoulder or around my back and I turned around quickly, it might swing out and hit something. Is there a particular reason you didn't recommend the Dual Spider Holster system? I'm really just seeking advice here, not trying to question how/why you do what you do. Obviously you've found that combination to be successful so I'm just looking for a little bit more info about what you like about that kind of a configuration, or what potential drawbacks there might be for something like the Dual Spider Holster.</p> <p>Edward, yeah, this was definitely my concern in terms of camera straps as well (the swinging and the tangling). I've never heard of the Sun Sniper straps so that was interesting to see - the single "PRO II" strap looks like it would be great for a single camera, and I looked at the "double plus harness" version as well...it looks great with respect to camera accessibility, but I feel like the swinging would still present a major problem (moreso with the double version than the single). Is that why it's advantageous to have one camera on a strap and another on a waist/belt-mount rather than having both waist-mounted or both on shoulder straps of some sort?</p> <p>Thanks again for all the help and feedback guys, I really appreciate it.</p>

<p>Hi everyone, I have a 5D Mark II and a 7D, both with battery grips. The 7D is a relatively new addition to my arsenal of equipment, and I feel like I need a new bag that will let me carry them both simultaneously. I bought the Lowepro Pro Trekker 450AW last weekend because when I was looking at it in the store it seemed like it would be big enough and also has the compartment configuration to allow for dual DSLRs, however I found out when I got home that the DSLRs will only fit in the bag if I remove the battery grips from each of them. My older camera bag (Lowpro Flipside 400AW) didn't have this problem as the spot where you put the DSLR has room for the grip, but unfortunately this bag is not big enough to carry both cameras. Does anyone know of a good camera bag out there that would have room to fit 2 DSLRs with battery grips? I would definitely prefer to invest in another Lowepro bag if possible as I've never had a single problem with any of their bags and I've owned quite a few of them. Or does anyone have any other suggestions? I don't really want to have to detach the grips from the cameras just to store them in the bag...it's too much of a pain later to connect/disconnect them since it can waste valuable shooting time. Or, is there a better way to do this? I'd like to be able to just bring a single backpack with me with the gear that I need rather than needing multiple items/cases/bags. I also have the Tamrac Expedition 8X backpack which if you've seen it, you'll know that it's really more of a tripping-style backpack and isn't exactly the most convenient thing to carry around (the thing is massive...I'm about 5'11 and with the chest straps pulled as tight as I can make them while still being comfortable the bottom of the thing still goes down well past my bum...yes it holds a lot but it's certainly not a bag you want to have to bring with you anywhere, and it's certainly not one you can be very active/mobile in while wearing it).</p> <p>I don't expect to be wearing this backpack 100% of the time when shooting, but I'd like to get one that is at least reasonably comfortable/easy to shoot with while wearing (unlike the Expedition 8X like I just explained above).</p> <p>Also, before anyone suggests it, yes, I need to have both grips on both cameras at the same time. I typically end up shooting for entire days at a time and I'm constantly switching back and forth between landscape/portrait, so having the grips makes a world of difference for me (which is why I want a bag that can fit 2 cameras with the grips attached)</p>

<p>Hi everyone, I am looking at buying a camera strap / harness system of some sort as I recently purchased a 2nd DSLR body (a 7D as a backup to my 5D2) and need some way of managing them. A friend of mine who shoots weddings told me about the blackrapid double which I looked into and that looks great, but many reviewers seem to say the same thing about it - that it is comfortable for all-day use and is great for standing/walking, but that it is very limiting in terms of mobility as it makes leaning/squatting/bending/twisting difficult since the cameras tend to swing around like a clock pendulum. While I definitely like the sound of the blackrapid double for shooting while standing or walking and may still invest in one for those types of situations, right now I'm doing a lot of race and automobile photography at a dragstrip near where I live so I end up doing a lot of squatting and bending over to get low-angle shots. I've also read about belt/clip-based camera holding systems but my concern with something like that would be that the end of my lens would be pretty close to the ground if I were squatting down with it attached to my belt...scratching the glass on the track surface is the last thing I need, hahah! Does anyone have any suggestions for what might work for me? I typically mount a 70-200 on my 7D for the individual closeups of the cars and I usually put my 15mm fisheye on the 5D2 since it always makes for some really mind-bending photos.</p>

<p>Hi everyone, I have a 5D Mark II and a 7D but I've never really used them for video very much other than testing, but recently a friend of mine asked if I could film him playing guitar and singing a song he wrote to send to his parents. I know my way around the cameras well enough to create a good visual setup (i.e. lit/focused properly, etc.) but what I really seem to be struggling with is audio. I know the built-in microphone is pretty much garbage, but I tried it anyways and it sounded as if he was singing inside a tin can. So I bought the Rode Videomic which records a significantly higher quality audio, but my problem is that because all the sound is coming from relatively the same direction, the audio in the video doesn't do his song justice because there's portions where the guitar will sound much louder than his singing and vice versa...as if it's not balanced, or, I don't really know how to describe it.</p> <p>I realize there probably isn't a specific solution to this issue, but I'm really just looking for some ideas or advice from anyone who has perhaps filmed something similar or who is more experienced with filming/audio in general. Is there a certain kind of setup that would work better for recording this? I know that the ideal thing would likely be to have two separate microphones (one for the guitar and one for vocals) but to be honest like I said I don't know a whole lot about video/audio and I really don't know anything about combining audio tracks or whatever. But is there anything I can do with the equipment that I have to improve the result? I've only tried mounting the Videomic on the hotshoe because I don't have an extension cable, but would there be a better place I could put the mic so that the vocals aren't constantly being overpowered by the guitar? I certainly don't have a problem getting an extension cable, I just don't know what I'd need to do with it to make it better. I tried searching for tips about this on google but all I really found was people talking about the 5D2's video capabilities/pros/cons/etc.</p> <p>Also, just in case there's anyone out there with experience with the Rode Videomic specifically, can you explain what the high-pass filter is? I've read the manual and I've looked it up online but I still can't seem to notice any difference between when it is engaged and when it is not. Thanks very much for any help that anyone can provide!</p>

<p>Thanks everyone for your help, I managed to fix it. I tried the Clear All Camera Settings a few more times but that still didn't work...I had to go into the Custom Functions menu and there's an option to clear all of those - that did the trick!</p> <p>I'm intrigued by the idea of having separate buttons to control exposure vs focus, but I'll admit that I don't fully understand what the benefits of doing this would be...can you explain how that would work? Sorry, I'm certainly no expert.</p>

<p>Hi everyone, I recently purchased a used 7D and the previous owner had created a number of custom button mappings that I would like to revert back to their original state...for example, pressing the shutter halfway does not engage the autofocus, instead I have to press a button on the back to focus the camera. I watched a video on youtube that explains how to do the "clear all camera settings" option and I tried this but it didn't seem to do anything because the shutter still won't focus...is there a way I can revert all the button settings to the way they would have been when the camera was brand new? Thanks for any help!</p>