julianradowsky

Self timer mode has been activated (on purpose, or by accident), and set at 2 second lag.

If we take the problem and turn it on its side:

We want to keep the mirror and SLR features (real viewfinder, prism, autofocus, exposure metering etc).

 

Perhaps it would be possible to modify the viewfinder mechanism to offer a viefinder curtain that combines a CCD sensor that has the same resolution as the LCD at the back of the camera (MUCH lower than the actual resolution of the image sensor).

 

When activated (i.e. the curtain is down) the CCD in the viewfinder curtain can redirect the incoming image from the optical viewfinder directly to the LCD on the back of the camera, providing EVF without any of the issues associated with using the main CMOS image sensor as the source for the EVF (heat, power consumption etc.).

 

This arrangement would also allow all of the autofocus and exposure metering to function correctly, since the EVF input becomes the last device in the light path (essentially replacing your eye)

Henrik - I am NOT saying that, what I was providing was a counter to the 'logic' of the initial post.

 

Full frame pictures with the 5D SHOULD NOT be taken with the prime intention of then cropping down to equivalent 1D Mk II sizing - that's just dumb.

Crop the frame from the Canon 5D to 1.3x and you get EXACTLY THE SAME number of pixels that you get with a 1D Mark II (both cameras have exactly the same pixel size)

 

Therefore, if you take a picture with a 50mm lens on the 5D, focused on a subject 1.5m away, and then crop the resultant image to the same crop size as the ENTIRE image from take with a 1D Mk II focussed on the SAME subject from the SAME distance, with the same exposure settings (especially aperture), you will get EXACTLY THE SAME PICTURE, with the same FOV and DOF.

 

By the same methods, take a picture at 24mm with the 5D, and crop that picture to 1.3 (resulting in the same image as the 1D mk II would produce), guess what? THE VIGNETTING WILL VANISH

 

This entire discussion is pointless, and ONLY an issue with those who have never used full frame film cameras and shot chromes, where vignetting with wide angles is par for the course.

Check your input cables. Sounds like you are using RGB input (15 pin D-Sub VGA cable). The cable might be faulty.

Custom function for 2nd curtain sync affects only the built in flash.

 

550EX and 580EX flash set 2nd curtain sync with the mode on the flash itself.

The problem is that you are using Green (full auto) and P (program) modes with the flash and not creative (Av or Tv) modes.

 

Canon flash algorithms are different for the auto and creative modes. In Auto (Program or Full Auto), the algorithm is designed to treat the flash as primary light source and disregard ambient light IF exposing for ambient light (i.e. NOT fill flash) would lead to camera shake, in these situations, you will find the subject to be exposed correctly (if you DID NOT focus and recompose), and the background behind the subject would rapidly fade to black, since the exposure time was not long enough to correctly expose for the ambient background light.

 

In creative modes (Av or Tv), the flash algorithm differs in that flash is ALWAYS treated as a fill flash, and the camera exposure settings are calculated for ambient light levels as if there were no flash present.

With scans that size, you are a little short of RAM - your powerbook had 50% more memory than you currently have, you need at least 1GB of RAM (2x512MB sticks), 2GB would be even better.

 

Do you currently have 1 or 2 memory sticks making up your 512MB?

 

If only one then you are not getting the full performance that is possible, since the memory bus is not operating in DUAL mode.

 

Make sure that you have populated your memory slots with IDENTICAL SPEC (size, density AND timing) RAM sticks and you will see a vast improvement in performance since the memory bus will operate in Dual mode.

 

Also take note that if you are populating only 2 out of 4 slots than the population sequence is also important - see your user's manual.

Be gentle, if you think you might have overdone it, then you probably have.

You migh have 2nd curtain sync set to on in custom functions. The flash will then seem out of sync on slow Tv

You can't do a direct comparison, it is NOT all about differences in processor speed. The 1.7GHz Pentium M Centrino platforms ourperform P4 2.8GHz based notebooks AND use less power (5+ hours battery life for Centrino platforms, 2.5 to 3hrs MAX on P4 based notebook platforms with same rating battery)

 

And now for the kicker: the Pentium M processor in centrino platforms is not P4 based, it is actually hybrid PIII on steroids.

I think the image numbering algorithm is card AND camera based. A new image will always have a number that is one higher than the highest image number found in camera memory OR on the current card. If the card number is higher, then the in-camera number is updated appropriately, and if the in-camera number is higher than the current card number, then the card is updated appropriately.

Function over form. I'd rather have great tools inside a brown wrapper than shiny wrapper with no tools!

I have previously owned both the EOS 5 and the EOS 3, and the 3 is a superior camera by a large margin. Go for the 3.

Never mind the lens or AS/IS debate, what is really important is the quality of the sensor and the images is produces.<br><br>How does Minolta really compare in that department to the Canon (or even Nikon for that matter).

Check your D60 custom functions. Make sure that you have not set function for the flash to be used for AF only (emits, does not fire)

Perhaps when you send your camera in to Canon to check focusing and it comes back, but still seems to focus incorrectly, the problem is not actually a focusing problem (in terms of the autofocus mechanism of the camera)

 

It is possible that the focusing (in terms of the AF sensor and circle of confusion) is 100% accurate, perhaps the problem lies elsewhere, which is why Canon can't fix it by correcting focusing.

 

Perhaps the problem is more closely related to parts manufacturing specification and tolerance, specifically to the sensor housing/assembly. If this is not 100% to design specification, then even if the focusing is 100%, the image that is recorded will never be in focus at the correct place, unless the DOF is pretty deep, and the actual focus point is close to the focus point caused by the out of spec sensor assembly.

 

If this is the cause of the problem, then the only way to fix it is to replace the sensor assembly, or the entire camera.

This is not a photo.net issue, check with the service provider (DNS admin) that is hosting the C-Name entry that points to the photo.net site.

 

I can surf to http://www.photo.net/users/rps-atlantic.org , but not to your aliased site.

Byron, the EF 70-300 DO IS lens is not an L lens becuse it does not use the same materials that would make it an L lens i.e. Fluorite or UD glass.<br>The DO elements remove the need for these materials.<br>L does NOT mean 'Luxury' (as incorrectly assumed by many), it is just an indicator that the lens uses specific materials, which just happen to be more expensive.<br><br>

The following is from <a href="http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Image_Stabilization_Lenses/EF_70-300mm_f_f4.5-5.6_DO_IS_USM/index.asp?ComponentID=152993&SourcePageID=26369#1" target="_blank">Canon's own seb site:</a><br>

"The EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM is the world's only zoom lens to incorporate a DO element. Introduction of a new triple-layered DO element not only makes the lens more nimble, it delivers unrivalled imaging performance. The DO element is combined with normal refraction elements to compensate for colour aberration. This achieves levels of colour aberration correction that could previously only be achieved with the use of fluorite elements or Ultra-low Dispersion (UD) lenses. The result: superb image quality in an exceptionally small package."

If Ken's statement '<i>both images were shot off a tripod, MLU, remote release, speed @ 100, 400 5.6 L lens at f/8, shutter was 1/60, default camera settings on both cameras</i>' is correct, and this scene was outside with sunlight as the main light source, then it is possible that the light intensity for the 1D Mk II shot is differnet from that of the 10D shot, if this is the case, then either the 10D shot is underexposed, or the 1D shot is overexposed, or both.

<br><br>

The only way to do a qualitative comparison is to ensure that the only variable that changes is the camera body i.e. The comparison can only be made between shots taken in an identical, controlled studio environment.

The only update that I want for 10D firmware is E-TTL II, since the camera DOES already process distance info (it is available in the EXIF data), and E-TTL II is an exposure algorithm and not hardware, it should be possible for Canon to include it in 10D firmware, I suppose it really depends on their level of loyalty to their customers whether they add it or not!

For images destined for output on Fuji Frontier printers, use sRGB colourspace - this is what the printers use.

James, based on your second post, I would guess that your problem is that you are recomposing after focusing (a habit firmly entrenched due to the EOS1 having a single focus point).

 

The E-TTL exposure calculation is done on the subject area under the focus point used. The caveat is that the flash exposure calculation is performed only when you trip the shutter (pre-flash), if you have recomposed after focusing then the area used for the flash exposure calculation might have different EV from the actual subject (since the focusing point has been moved).

 

You have three options to resolve this problem:

 

1] Use a focusing point that is correct for the subject and avoid recomposing

 

2] Use FEL before recomposing

 

3] Use manual flash settings or manually adjust flash exposure (FE Comp)

Nobody has actually answered your question, so here it is:

The EOS3 stores calibration for both horizontal (landscape) and vertical (portrait) positions, so you need to calibrate it for both in the calibration step, however I do not believe that the calibration should be done for both portrait orientations (shutter button at top, AND shutter button at bottom), this would confuse the ECF system.

 

If you wish to calibrate for both options, rather use two ECF channels (e.g. channel 1 for protrait with shutter button on top, and channel 2 for portrait with shutter button on the bottom).

 

For what it's worth, I find that I have more control of camera shake when I use portrait orientation with the shutter button at the bottom, specifically bacause with a long lens, like the EF100-400L IS, I can use my elbow against my torso as additional support [sometimes I do not have a tripod at the ready], whereas in the shutter button at the top postion, there is no way to provide that kind of additional support.

Here is a possible solution to the problem:<p>

<ul>

<li>The unified forum should be automatically regenerated at a regular interval (perhaps every 10 minutes), or whenever there are a minimum number of new forum entries since last regeneration (whichever occurs first would reset the other trigger), the output of this regeneration should be an XML document, which could be cached in RAM.</li>

<li>The customisation for each user should do nothing more than create custom XSL and CSS stylesheets for the user for viewing the XML document representing the unified forum (XPATH queries to filter the XML appropriately and CSS styles for colours etc.)</li>

<li>Presenting the unified forum to each user is then simply a matter of parsing the cached document through the user's XSL to return the HTML page and with embedded CSS styles for colours of icons and fora etc.</li>

</ul>