vernon98034

<p>Yesterday when I was in a garden, I noticed that the auto-focus of my old Sigma 105 micro lenses was not working. I thought I need to contact Sigma service department to find out whether they could fix the problem or not (they couldn't fix the same problem on my old 17-35mm lenses). Today, I check the lenses again and find the auto-focus problem only occurs in a close distance inside of their close focus distance specfication. The auto-focus works sometimes, but have a difficulty of performance consistently in a close distance. And my another old 70-200mm Sigma lesnes exhibits the same behaviour while their latest 24-35mm and 20mm lesnes don't have this behaviour. I am wondering other people also experience the problem or not. My 6D has the latest firmware on. </p>

<p>I need to reset my 6D Wi-Fi setting at least for the password. After selection "Enable" for the Wi-Fi and click the set button for Wi-Fi function on the camera menu, I get a menu list with Exit and Confirm set. I can't see how I can reset my Wi-Fi setting in the "Confirm Set". Do I miss something in the regard? </p>

<p>Thanks Ian for your input. A very good analysis. A delay of the second flash can be a reason. The meter only has three modes: ambi, cord and non-cord, but multiple flash. So, I only can meter the first flash triggered. The wall colour is light blue. I put a close to grey colour shirt on top of a black reflector and place them in front of the wall. The histogram looks about right this time. The shirt is close to properly exposed with a litter bit overexposure. I used to set the aperture based on the main screen. 4.09 (set 4.0) in this case, but not where the aperture needle point to 5.6 in this case. That would cause the overexposure too. </p>

<p>The light meter is Konica Minolta Auto Meter V F. Monolat sold the light meter business a few years ago. The current version of this meter is <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/514614-REG/Kenko_KFM_1100_KFM_1100_Auto_Digi_Meter.html">this one</a>.</p>

<p>I don't know how to attach a photo image to a post. So, I upload related photos to my profile. The light set up are shown in <a href="/photo/18190599">this photo</a> and <a href="/photo/18190600">this one</a>. And<a href="/photo/18190618"> this one (ISO400 1/125 F8)</a> and<a href="/photo/18190619"> this one (ISO80 1/125 F8.0</a>) show the whole light source. <a href="/photo/18190601">This photo</a> shows the meter reading. When my camera setting is the same as what the meter reading says, that is ISO400 1/125 F5.6, the histogram of the photo goes straight to the right edge. Again, the meter is pointed to the light source, but not to the wall.<br /> <br /> The purpose of this test is to ensure that I can set up my camera based on my light meter reading.</p>

<p>My light meter show was in the non-cord mode, which is for flash metering without a connection between the meter and a flash. And the meter show 100 percent of light from a flash, or zero percent from ambient light. To my knowledge, all photo light meters in the market can meter both ambient light and flash light.</p>

<p>I have two hostshoe flash lights pointing to a reflective umbrella type of a light modifier. One of the flashes is connected with a light trigger slave and the other is either in a slave mood or connected with the first flash through a shoe connector. The light modifier points to a white wall. I place a light meter against the wall and in the center of the light coverage. The metering dome faces to the light modifier. If I set my camera aperture as the light meter reading, a phone is way too hot and I need to step down two stops to get a proper exposure. Why the light meter reading is so low? BTW, the two flashes are old ones and they don't go pre-flash.</p>

<p>It is tested on hand-held at 1/60 second on the long end of lenses. </p>

<p>I bought this lenses along with other Canon gears last year. Someone finds the photo sharpness with IS (IS on) of this lenses is worst than those without IS (IS off). Is this a known problem? If I return it to Canon, are they going to fix this lenses or send me another one? </p>

<p>Thanks all for your inputs. I find it is better to place a camera on top of the ballhead instead of in a drop slot when a lenses is heavy. A L-bracket will help if the lenses doesn't come with a detachable tripod mount. In a portrait mode, a camera with a relative heavy lenses such as Sigma 85mm 1.4F can't be hold statically after I tight the locking knob by hand. After some practice today, I think I can live with the ballhead. I just have more practice of using the drop slot in both side. </p>

<p>Using a L-bracket is one way to solve the problem. I didn't think of it. I, however, don't want to go down the path though for two reasons. It adds an extra cost and a L-bracket is designed for special cameras. Neither the brands of camera and the ballhead shall be matter in this discussion. Both my Canon G series and my Canon DSLR have the same problem on the ballhead. </p>

<p>I acquired a new ball head last month. While I am happy about its quality, I have a problem of placing a camera vertically on the ballhead. To place my camera vertically, I rotate my camera to the left from the horizontal position. I have a better control of my camera in this way than rotting my camera to the right. The locking knob is on the other side of the drop slot (this ballhead has only one drop slot). So, my right hand which is holding the camera is on the left side of my tripod while my left hand needs to be on the right side of my tripod to lock or unlock the ball. It is quite awkward for me. Is the ballhead only for placing a camera on the right side of tripod? </p>

<p>All my Canon film cameras have the eye control feature for a focus point selection. So, I expected the same feature from a Canon DSLR body. To my surprised, I don't get the feature from a Canon DSLR camera. I get quite frustrating the auto focus point selection on 6D. And that lets me wonder why Canon DSLR camera doesn't come with the eye control anymore. </p>

<p>Thanks both for your info. So, the current digital camera technology isn't smart enough to emulate how a film renders colours.</p>

<p>I like the old Fujichrome Velvia 50 very much and would like to have the same highly saturated effect with my Canon DSLR. After some online searching, I find a version of Velvia picture style (<a href="http://members.shaw.ca/kinematic/picturestyle/Velvia_pf2.zip" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">members.shaw.ca/kinematic/picturestyle/Velvia_pf2.zip</a>). I test the PS and find all shadow areas turn into blue. That isn't how Velvia would represent grey. I am wondering there maybe other versions of Velvia picture styles. Anyone know where to download any other Velvia picture styles? </p>

<p>I bought my Phottix remote flash trigger for my G11 a few years ago. Phottix web site lists two flash trigger models for Canon DSLR cameras. 60D is the latest camera for the model I have. Sorry for being unclear on this subject. Thanks Jeff for your information. I was not aware the difference of the two models is about remotely triggering camera but not flash. Not, I won't do any remove shutter release for portrait works. So, I guess I can rent other cameras such as 7D and 5D Mark III depended on what my clients are willing to pay for their sessions.</p>

<p>Thanks everyone for your information. BTW, a few sample of <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/26423920@N00/sets/72157611908701616/">my works</a>.</p>

<p>Thanks both for your information.<br>

I will shoot RAW for my portrait sections. I have the Digital Photo Professional 3.7 (a part of the Canon utilities) for RAW format files from my G11. I will download the latest 3.12 version so that I use it to edit/process RAW from. Due to my flash trigger Phottix Strato version restriction, I only can use 60D with the trigger. </p>

 

<p>I need to rent an EOS DSLR body for upcoming works. I am wondering how I can retrieve image files from the camera to my computer. Does any camera rental store also let me have the camera software CD for image file transfer? I have a G-11. Does its software also work for Canon DSLR?<br>

Thanks for your information in advance.</p>

I would like to know how others set up your photo package price right now. The

three-time principle doesn't seem to work these days. The print price can be

very different from various photo labs.

 

Thanks for your inputs.

Your softbox seems to have a hot spot based on the first sample.

Thanks all for your inputs.

 

My procedure of each set of portraits was the following:

- posing

- adjusting the main light accordingly

- adjusting the reflectors on the other side of the main light

It needed some time to walk over the above steps.

 

The reflectors served two purposes in the narrow space. Other than adding a fill light and a kick light, they also blocked the bouncing light from the wall to prevent colour casting. One reflector should be good enough. But I like to add some kick light to separate the subject from the background. I will use a bigger reflector for the kick light this time so that I don?t need to adjust it for each shot.

 

Giving more background space is a good ideal. I would like to have the widest aperture if possible in theory. But again, due to the time constraint, I couldn?t adjust the main light output each time to achieve the widest aperture without losing the DOF coverage. I think my camera aperture was set to somewhere around F/11. And the lens was 70-200 mm F2.8. I will see whether I can set the aperture not more than F/8 this time or not.

You're right, Nadine. The main light had been moved between various shots. Due to the tme constraint, I didn't meter the light for every single shot. That was the cause of the expose difference.

In regarding of the colour, I agree that it is not good at lease from those scans. It was due to the expose difference and the scanner responsed the colour differently. The prints looked fine.

<p>Thanks Colin for your detailed feedback.</p>

<p>I agree that some of them are over exposed as I already mentioned. I used print film so that a half or one stop over expose doesn't show up in the final prints.</p>

<p>The light modifier should not make any significant difference in regarding of the light itself other then light split. I used a reflective umbrella. So, light split was an issue in the relative small space. In fact, I had two reflectors on the other side of the main light to take care of light reflection. Split light shouldn't contribute any light on the subjects. </p>

<p>I might use Gary Fong's equipments for illuminating in a situation such as a wedding or a social event. I definitely won't use them in portrait works. </p>

<quoteblock>

... your exposures appeared to be all over the place.

</quoteblock>

<p>I am not sure that I understand about statement.</p>

<p>I thought that the lighting setting can be identified easily by experienced eyes. Anyway, one light was on the left hand side of my camera, and three various shape and size reflector boards were presented. They were taken in a relative small space. There might be some light bouncing around. Have I mentioned about light measuring? Yes, my camera was set to manual. I always do so for portrait works.</p>

<p>BTW, I wouldn't put a Gary Fong's toy on my flash to do a portrait work and charge for a service fee.</P>

It takes me 6 seconds to load the page, but 16 seconds to load your page at photo.net.