ryanjoseph

<p>The 7D is not especially beginner friendly for video. I used to own one. Have you considered renting something like a Panasonic GH4 instead?</p>

<p>I have a major electricity company in Jamaica asking me to take some technical photos for them. I am strictly an amateur, but a professional friend of mine referred them to me because they needed someone with long glass to take detailed photos of wind turbines. I am looking at about 6 hours of travel time and 2 hours of work. Would 500-600 dollars be a reasonable charge? They offered me 200 but that seemed awfully lowball to me based off the distance I would be driving and I told them I would not do the job for that. They are waiting for my counter offer. <br>

My justifications are as follows:<br>

8 hours of my time <br>

Price of gas in Jamaica (8 dollars a gallon). Based off the distance I'd be driving I am guessing I would spend about 60-70 dollars on gas.<br>

High risk location (poor security)<br>

The fact no other local photographer has a Canon 600mm lens and a teleconverter.<br>

Thanks for any input!</p>

 

<p>I recently bought a Tamron 24-70 VC. The lens is wonderful and autofocus is very accurate through the viewfinder. However, in live view mode it fails to lock focus under any condition on my 5DS. Has anyone run into this issue? Sadly my lens is gray market so I do not think I can send it to Tamron for servicing.</p>

<p>I use 3rd party batteries, but the only brand I really trust is Wasabi.<br>

I've tried a few third party battery grips on various cameras (40D, 7D, 5Ds). I ended up returning them all and going first party.</p>

<p>I use <a href="http://www.ryanjosephphotography.com">500px</a> with a custom domain. </p>

<p>I used to shoot both, but over time I managed to get rid of film from my workflow. If you are willing to put up with the difficulties and cost of shooting film, my favorite film is Kodak Ektar 100.</p>

<p>I always travel with two lenses. A 24-105 and a 100-400. I find that between these two lenses I get 99 percent of my needs covered. If I could only take one, it would probably be the 24-105.</p>

<p>Sadly I sold my 7D so I no longer have a body to test the lens on other than my 5DS. I have a friend with a 60D I could try it on though. Using DOF preview shows the aperture works fine, with no signs of sticking as far as I can tell. I am getting perplexed by this underexposure problem.</p>

<p>Yes it happens in AV mode. Here is a link to an example photo being underexposed. </p>

<p>https://d199bk7kirt65b.cloudfront.net/files/p/E~forums/56327767/3d4d8ce7e9164d26ad8e619369f2b90a</p>

<p>Recently picked up a Canon 100mm (older non-USM) macro on the cheap and was testing it on some bees yesterday. I noticed as I got closer and closer to subjects that the camera would tend to underexpose, not accounting for light loss in macro range. Is this related to the age of the lens? I seem to lose about two stops at 1:1. I don't mind doing exposure compensation, but I just assumed the camera would compensate for macro range photos itself. Thanks for any input. </p>

<p>I think sensor size will always matter. Just like cars, there is no replacement for displacement. Larger sensors produce better images. Go to Imaging Resource's Comparometer and compare two cameras with different sensor sizes but the same resolution: the 7D MKII vs the 6D. At all ISOs the image quality from the 6D is noticeably better than the 7D. </p>

<p>Ended up buying the 100mm macro and love it, thanks for the input.</p>

<p>I never considered the lack of parts. Then again I am in that boat now with the Phoenix macro.</p>

<p>I am acquainted with somebody that is selling the Canon 100mm F2.8 Macro Non-USM. He wants 150 dollars for it. The lens is in mint condition and everything checks out on it. The price seems right but I am still on the fence about buying such an old lens. According to what I read on the internet it's image quality should be comparable with the USM model. When I work in macro I usually manual focus, so the lack of USM doesn't seem to be that big of a drawback to me.<br>

I would be upgrading from a Phoenix 100mm F3.5 Macro with a matched diopter, which I can sell for about 100 USD. If I sell the Phoenix I would basically only be out 50 bucks buying the Canon lens. Thanks for any thoughts.</p>

<p>The most important thing to do is have redundancy. I run a RAID array, and judiciously edit my work. Anything I really like goes into my "Keepers" folder, that is photos I would never want to lose. That folder is periodically synced with Dropbox using Microsoft Synctoy. Once a year I refresh my archival grade DVD backups based off that folder.<br>

The trick with digital is delete, delete, delete. It keeps storage costs down and makes backing up far easier to do. </p>

<p>Sadly I had to return the camera to Amazon. When it came in to the country I was informed that it classified as both a video camera and still camera, and that I would have to pay 60 percent tax on it. Gotta love government taxes.</p>

<p>I ordered a OMD with the 14-42 kit lens. I won't jump much in past that. I guess I will see if Micro 4/3rds is for me once I get.</p>

<p>Josh, how do you find telephoto AF performance on your OMD vs something like a 7D? I am particularly interested in burst mode AF performance on moving objects.</p>

<p>I am hoping to find some input from people that made the switch I am considering. My current gear setup is a Canon EOS 50D, 17-55 F2.8 IS, 100-400 L IS, and a Canon 100mm IS macro. I love this kit, and have been shooting Canon for nearly 10 years now. However I am becoming tired of Canon and their increasingly uninspired body updates. I also think SLRs are due to soon go the way of the TLR, but that is just my opinion.<br>

A friend of mine recently acquired an Olympus OMD EM5 with a kit lens and I was extremely smitten with the camera. I remember when 4/3rds cameras first came out years ago they generally far trailed Canon's APS-C cameras in image quality. I did not notice any such deficiency on the Olympus. <br>

Has anyone in my position made the switch? I love my Canon gear but I am growing tired of how heavy my camera bag is and Canon's body designs. My main concern with switching to Micro 4/3rds is telephoto zooms. Is there anything that can match or beat the Canon 100-400 in image quality and AF performance on the other side of the fence while offering the far smaller lens advantage? I've read online reviews about lenses such as the Panasonic 100-300, but I would like some feedback if anyone has had the Canon 100-400 beforehand. </p>

<p>I don't think it's about lack of thought, it is simple data inflation. As of circa 2012 more data is generated on the internet in one day than the entire span of human history up to 2003. Think about that, it is mind-blowing. The means of the photos have changed, but they still hold emotional value to those that view them. Just each photo means a little less because the general narrative of our life is so detailed now thanks to digital technology.<br>

Prints suffer from inflation too, my Mom laments how no one prints and displays photos anymore, never mind the fact she probably has somewhere around 10,000 4x6 photos sitting in boxes that will probably never see the light of day. </p>

<p>As far as I know OSX has no native USB 3 support. I am sure inevitably the day will come that Apple adds USB 3 support. In the meantime the best I can suggest is you load Windows 7 with Bootcamp and (if you have PCI-E slot available) to jam in a USB 3 PCI-E card. I have one in my ancient LGA 775 workstation from 2007 and it works great.</p>

<p>I don't "hate" film. I just don't see it as relevant technology, just like the buggy whip, FM radio, CDs, analog cable, and books. I am an avid reader, often reading about 40 or more books a year. My personal library is over 1200 books. I have not bought a single new book since 2009, when I got an Amazon Kindle. People now ask me if I hate books. Apparently people cannot differentiate between indifference or seeing a technology as obsolete and hatred.<br>

I've been on this forum nine years, and I have never seen them "film haters" that are getting referenced so often. I have however seen digital haters, and received a pretty nasty private message from one recently. </p>

 

<p>The 7D looks like the superior camera to me. The 5D is ancient tech, even if the sensor is bigger.</p>

<p>Curtis,<br>

I doubt it. There is still some profit in film as a specialty market, just not enough to support a company the size of Kodak. I bet someone will buy their film division and continue making equivalents to Porta and Tri-X, even if under a different name.</p>

<p>I toss my gear in airtight plastic containers with silica gel packets inside to absorb moisture. They're good as new when I take them out. Also, make sure the gear has no grease or anything gross on it before you store it.</p>