patflynn

General question here that I didn't find elsewhere on a search of this forum.

 

The EOS 5DS and 5DSR each offer 50MP sensors, with the difference being that the R version introduces a separate filter to cancel the

effects of the S version's low pass filter, for the ultimate in detail capture.

 

Mine is a basic question: doesn't ADDING one filter to cancel the effects of another, deteriorate image quality? Placing MORE media

between the original light and the image capturing sensor seems like putting another filter on the front of the lens - you wouldn't do it

unless your vision required it (like a ND filter or polarizer, etc).

 

I assume Canon chose this route for the 5DSR for mass manufacturing reasons. But my question is, does this inevitably degrade image

quality? In much the way that it is supposed to enhance it?

 

If it isn't obvious, my understanding of the low pass filter is minimal. But shouldn't basic physics prevail? Since Canon itself thinks no, I

am looking for a plain English explanation to educate me. Thanks for any feedback.

<p>I gave a friend a Canon EOS 5D camera that I hadn't used in awhile, and heard back that its mirror fell off during use. He wants to repair it.<br>

<br /> Are there any decent repair shops you'd recommend - or better yet, any instructions for fixing this (known by Canon) problem?<br>

<br /> Thanks for any advice or redirects.</p>

All, thank you very much for the feedback. I'm on my phone now and not at a computer to attempt anything, but will work

with your advice ASAP.

 

To further clarify my intent, what I want is for the word "link" in my "Attempting a link" HTML string, to point to Google. The

word "link" would appear blue and mouse over would change the cursor to a pointer. Clicking the word link would launch

the Google website.

 

I'll work with the above advice as time allows today. Thanks again to everyone for the helpful discussion.

Thanks Lex - I did no copying or pasting, no bouncing between websites or softwares, just straight typing into the comment window. No idea why that worked for you multiple times flawlessly, yet failed for me multiple times in a variety of different ways. But I appreciate the feedback.

 

Jeff - what does your comment mean? I'll happily try your suggestion if you will kindly parse it!

<p>I am trying to post a comment with an active hyperlink embedded within my text. Here is a sample of my html syntax:</p>

<p>Attempting a <a href="http://www.google.com">link</a>.</p>

<p>My first several attempts to use that syntax returned an error message; that error message is discussed at length in several previous forum posts. But the error message itself is not pertinent to my syntax and the previous forum posts addressing it also are not helpful.<br>

<br /> Now, inexplicably, I am not getting that error anymore - I am simply unable to create the desired hyperlink. Instead, I am getting straight text exactly as shown above. So my comment looks like gibberish and no link exists.<br>

<br /> Any feedback about this would be appreciated.</p>

<p>I posted a photo for rating and critique today, and then went to verify the posting by looking in the "Photo Gallery Main." In the center of that Photo Gallery Main page is a section called "Browse Photo Categories" which lists MOST, but NOT ALL, of the photo categories that PN provides.</p>

<p>Among the missing is Travel. So these are my questions:</p>

<p>1) Why is Travel not included (or better yet, why aren't 100% of the PN photo categories included) in the main gallery of the website?</p>

<p>2) Is there any way that I can CHANGE my photo category from Travel to something deemed more worthy of visibility?</p>

<p>3) How can I, or anyone else, find my photo now that it has been sent to the hinterlands of the Travel category? How does anyone go to the Travel category to browse it, ever?</p>

<p>Thanks for any tips.</p>

I get that all the time, glad to know it's not just me!

Anyone have a feel for how long it will likely take the usual suspects to churn out underwater housings for the 5D Mark III? With all this

new and improved AF responsiveness and high ISO performance in the 5D3, I'm a bit relieved that I didn't buy a housing for the 5D2. But

what's the wait likely to be for this important 5D3 aftermarket?

@Mark, I recommend keeping the 5D3 as your primary and the 5D2 as your backup. Sell the 7D - that's exactly what I'm

doing. I've concluded after countless shoots that the performance of the 7D is only superior to the 5D2 in a few ways that

the 5D3 directly redresses. I've found that the 7D's 1.6x of extra reach with longer lenses results in IQ (via L glass and

primes) that just barely exceeds that of a blunt digital zoom and crop with the same glass on a 5D2. So for IQ with

telephotos, the 7D will actually be at a disadvantage against the 5D3. The 7D does share a look and feel with the 5D3

moreso than the 5D2, but so what? The mental transition required of that is far less significant than hopping out of a

standard car and into an automatic - and everyone can do that with nary a thought. So in summary, the 5D2 is a better

camera than the 7D, in all except for a few ways - and the 5D3 is better than both cameras in all those specific ways, plus

all the many others. So why keep the 7D? Just food for thought, sir.

<p>All: thank you for the replies. I have witnessed and photographed a total solar eclipse before, so am aware of the tremendous and singular experience it is - truly incredible indeed. I do understand the safety requirements of this rare situation and also do know the differences in size of sun/corona on film/sensors as that varies by lens choice. I'm only curious about the light sensitivity differences between the two EOS bodies mentioned. Specifically I wish to know if anybody has an opinion on whether light bleeding between the packed pixels of a 7D is a serious disadvantage to crisp and faithful imagery of light itself.<br /><br />If not, then I am inclined to try using the 7D with the 1.4 x/800mm rig to get close detail of the arcing edge of the sun itself. Solar prominences and probably Bailey's beads would be available there if the day isn't cloudy. Totality would approach almost 5 minutes, providing plenty of time to experiment. But as several of you have suggested - why not just kick back and enjoy the phenomenon organically, if the photographic experiment isn't worthwhile due to limitations of the 7D? So that is my question put more precisely - and I apologize for not specifying earlier.</p>

<p>

<p>If you were going to shoot a total solar eclipse with an EF 800mm 5.6 L lens, would you prefer to use the 5D Mark II or the 7D? The latter gives more reach but I've heard there can be light contamination between pixels due to the smaller pixels/greater pixel density on the 18MB APS-C sensor vice the 21MP full frame 5D2. Light itself (solar prominences, sun's corona, etc) is the subject, so theoretically this is an important detail. Haven't seen this permutation discussed anywhere and would probably buy/borrow/rent the 7D if the case were clear cut in favor of it. Also at play is a 1.4x extender. Facts and all opinions are welcome.</p>

</p>

<p>Dr. DeCandido, thanks so much for your persistent interest in helping me out here! I contacted Nik via e-mail and await their response about this. I also followed the link you provided and will try that when I'm next at my workstation. It does appear that Nik has addressed the compatability issue, so that's good news.</p>

<p>Keith, I did verify the files in the Plugins directory and even opened some of them up. Everything looks normal and fine, except there is absolutely no trace of Silver Efex Pro within CS4 anywhere - either the 64-bit or 32-bit version! I have done the Windows Uninstall half a dozen times so far but am thinking maybe a Control Panel "Remove Software" routine may be more effective. I hadn't heard of Revo before but thanks for that steer - maybe I will have to go that route next.</p>

<p>Good point Sheldon - I thought of that just after posting. I tried to pick up the filters by manually opening the 32-bit version of CS4, as you suggested. But still no trace of them...any other thoughts?</p>

<p>I have Windows 7 and PS CS4 on my PC and purchased Nik Silver Efex Pro via download. Read and ran the Setup instructions to the letter, but see no trace of the software within CS4. There is a Silver Efex Pro entry under my Windows Programs list at the Start button, and from there I have uninstalled several times hoping to fix the issue. Plus I verified the appearance of Nik files in the Plugins folder where I directed installation to occur. But no trace of access to this software appears in PS, either under the Filters menu or File > Automate (both locations are pointed to in the User Guide).</p>

<p>Though I just downloaded this software today, the instructions that came with it were clearly written before there was a CS4, much less Windows 7. But that's just about the only clue I have. Any suggestions for this predicament? Thanks in advance for any help.</p>

<p>Hi All,<br>

I've been shooting with the 5D Mark II and for some time now have used Digital Photo Pro to edit and print my images. Yesterday I installed PS CS4 (uninstalled CS3 first) so that my RAWs would be recognized by Bridge and editable in PS. I contacted Adobe via phone to purchase the CS4 installation CD, and it's now coming in the mail; meanwhile upon their advice I downloaded the 30-day trial version off their website to get started.</p>

<p>My trouble is, I can't get Bridge to thumbnail my RAWs nor PS to open them - an error arrives saying "it is the wrong type of file." If I use a DPP-to-CS4 workflow I can get my 5D2 images into PS, but otherwise can not. And I'm baffled because I downloaded this "latest & greatest" version (11.0.1) from Adobe itself just yesterday - and I had thought that CS4 supported 5D2 RAWs right from its initial launch last year. Why should this be a shortcoming now?</p>

<p>I certainly assume that a driver is missing - does anyone know if this is purposely withheld from the trial version? Or otherwise know what I can do to fix this? The CS4 installation CDs should arrive next week which I assume will solve this, and I do have an adequate workaround meanwhile. But the problem is vexing enough for me to ask advice nonetheless. Anyone have any insight?...</p>

M.L. - all the articles I've read (I haven't personally used the 5D2 at all) specify the lower noise at high ISO, plus the expanded range (much more than half a stop), as major upgrades over ANY other EOS. Also, the sensor in the 5D2 is the very same one in the 1Ds3, plus the Digic processing is newer on the 5D2. So I can't imagine how color rendition or detail retention is somehow inferior on the 5D2 vs. the 1Ds3. What exactly did you see there?

 

Also, I can understand the current opinion of the video feature being a dubious enhancement, especially as it currently is reported to work. But if it is fixed in the areas of no autofocus and no aperture control, then that feature becomes a true and major enhancement. And as someone who both needs and will buy Canon's full-frame flagship model at its next incarnation, I'm hoping that enhancement occurs. Why wouldn't I? Why would someone want a Ferrari but not want the Pirellis?

 

In any case, video capture inevitably WILL appear in the flagship lines, sooner or later. My theory is that this feature will eventually (years from now, mind you) become so advanced that it allows full, real-time autofocus during full, real-time exposure adjustment, at a high-enough capture resolution, that single-frame photography will be outmoded. Still photographers will just review video bursts frame by frame, select the individual frame that best represents the image they envisioned, and go from there. Success rates for capture will skyrocket and photography will become the multimedia experience that it is destined to become - for better or for worse.

The only enhancements that I expect to see soon to what has been called about above, is the restoration of autofocus and of the manual ability to control aperture.

 

As I understand it, the problem with autofocus is that all EOS cameras to date use the mirror as an intrinsic part of that function. So Canon would have to either develop a whole new autofocus system (which could be possible, considering the AF motor is internal to EF lenses already), or perhaps start using a pellicle or pellicle hybrid of some sort in its future cameras. Either way, this does seem like a problem that will be overcome.

 

I'm guessing that the problem with manual control of aperture is related to the major change in lighting that's caused by moving a full stop up or down. That would make for some herky-jerky video which I'm sure was tested and deemed inadequate. Canon is constantly adding new interim f-stops between the classic original settings, and I'd guess that at some point there will be an array of several dozen aperture settings which are separated so slightly as to allow manual control of the aperture during video shoots, without the dramatic lighting shifts. So this too seems like a problem that can be overcome.

 

All of which only serves to heighten my interest in the next 1Ds model, which we have to assume will include this video mode in an upgraded form. The rollout of the 5D2 hasn't so much tempted me with its superiority over the 1Ds3, as much as it has caused anticipation of the 1Ds4. And that has to be a key aim of Canon's in taking the major risk of producing a prosumer model that exceeds its reigning professional model. It's a major gamble they've embraced, so I'm expecting a major play to follow it on the pro side.

One angle that I wonder about here is how Canon thinks its 1Ds Mark3 users are going to feel about their now-inferior product, that cost them over three times more than the 5D2? I'm sure Canon expects those people to feel compelled to buy the 1Ds Mark 4 next year. The 5D2 is every bit as much a marketing ploy as it is an innovation of photography, and as someone who did not purchase the flagship model at Mark 3, I have to confess that I am much less tempted by the 5D2 than I am by what this gambit implies about the features that will inhabit the next 1Ds.

 

But as far as creating a demand for features where none existed, I don't see the HD video capacity that way. Instead I see it as Canon's first step toward revolutionizing digital capture. Imagine simply filming what you would otherwise photograph, and then breaking that film into its component frames and simply selecting the one that the captures the definitive image. Consider how much higher your success rate would be if the skill involved in squeezing the shutter at just the right moment is no longer a discriminator. That's where DSLR HD video capture is going to take photography. That's your bleeding edge feature here and that's what makes the introduction of the EOS 5D2 and the Nikon D90 such momentous events.

THANKS for the advice to pull out the CMOS battery - I did not discover this advice in my other research and I can't wait to try it. Unfortunately I won't be able to try until tomorrow but I certainly hope this works. I'm very encouraged that it has worked for others.

 

In case it doesn't work - can anyone recommend a POC for Canon? Bob Atkins and others recommended contacting them…got a phone number or e-mail address, by any chance?

 

Mendel, et al, I always turn off my camera for lens changes because the system holds a circuit charge while turned on. This will inevitably attract dust, much of which could end up on the sensor. The curtains are visible behind the mirror when the lens is off, and if dust landed there then it is easy to imagine this dust getting tossed onto the hi-pass filter (effectively, the image sensor) during the high-speed shutter action of an exposure. So I always turn my cameras off for lens changes, even though a) I guess it may wear out the on/off switch a bit more (hadn't thought of that before) and b) I have to admit that I get a lot of dust on my sensors anyway!

 

Thanks again to all for the help and for any suggestions you may have for a POC at Canon.

My Canon EOS 5D suddenly died and I'm trying to figure out why/what to do. Here are the details:

 

I was shooting in Nova Scotia last weekend and had been using the 5D for a solid week there with no issues of any

kind - full normal functionality, same as ever. I was using it on a clear sunny day of high pressure when it died. It was

tripod mounted at the time. I had just shot a scene with one lens and decided to switch lenses, so turned the

camera off for the lens switch. Changed lenses, turned the camera back on, and nothing. No lights, no readout, no

functionality of any kind - nothing. The camera was just dead.

 

I put in new batteries, and got the same null results. Switched back to the original lens in case somehow it was a

lens problem - but still null results from that. I then verified battery capacity on a 20D and further verified lens

functionality on a 1Ds - all these extraneous elements were proven to be fine through these tests.

 

I use the BG-E4 battery grip on the 5D and figured that may be the problem, but pulled it off and replaced the original

mechanism/single battery and still got no results. So the problem appears to be with the 5D only. I originally bought

this camera in January 2007 and have never had any problems. There was once a slight bit of impact damage to the

outer plastic cover on the display screen on back, resulting in a noticeable 1cm scratch there, but that was half a

year ago and the damage is totally superficial with no functional consequences ever noted. I believe this detail is

insignificant but don't want to leave it out here.

 

I'm at a loss. There were no environmental stresses on this camera body, no recent impact or moisture, no unusual

shooting circumstances, and perhaps most importantly, a great deal of normal functionality which includes months of

extensive use AND several successful shots about thirty seconds before this sudden death.

 

I am hoping for hypotheses on what happened and suggestions on how to deal with it. Recommendations of a good

diagnostic and/or repair center would be great. Thanks for any insights.

Any advice on this? I'm using various Epson papers and will soon be in

possession of a Seal 210 press. I'm worried mainly about colors shifting or

prints curling, plus any other perils I haven't anticipated. I'm wondering

especially about temperature settings and press durations - what's ideal? I'll

be mounting to foam board with dry mount tissue. Process suggestions for any

stage more than welcome, all experiences helpful. Many thanks!

I've never heard of Sagemax before - it is a fairly extensive and fairly

expensive 5-year warranty offered on peripherals at B&H and (I'm sure) other

online vendors. Has anyone purchased this plan before and/or had any experience

with them? The fact that B&H is willing to offer the product bodes well, but I

saw no reviews on their site. I am considering buying the plan with a new Epson

printer but the investment of over $300 represents 25% of the base price for

the model I would buy. Not bad for a 5-year plan but not a small outlay at this

time of year. Thanks for any insights.

(Initially posted in the wrong forum - my apologies)...

 

I need to convert a dozen or more old Kodak Photo CDs into a format that

Photoshop will support (ideally TIFF). I am running PS CS3 on a high-end PC.

This software will not recognize the PCD format. I'm aware of the need for an

8bi plug-in, but can't find one for purchase or even for download, not even on

peer-to-peer networks (which I probably wouldn't trust anyway). I have

installed and worked a little bit with Irfanview, and this freeware does

convert PCDs into TIFFs. However, Kodak Photo CDs offer each image in an array

of sizes; I am only interested in converting the highest-quality (largest) PCD

files, yet Irfanview will only convert the lowest quality (smallest) PCDs. This

outcome is utterly worthless to me due to horribly blown highlights in the

smaller PCD files. So my request is this: can anyone a)suggest where I can find

the 8bi plug-in for CS3, or b)tell me how I can interface with Irfanview to

isolate the highest-quality PCDs, or better yet c)suggest an alternative to

these approaches which will actually work? Please note I would like to find a

free solution but am willing to pay if that's what it takes. Many thanks for

any assistance.

I have some old Kodak CDs which I want to import into Photoshop for editing. I

am using Photoshop CS3, but I cannot get this software to read the PCD files or

open them in any way for conversion to TIFF or another usable format. Can

anyone point me to a plugin for CS3, or else some alternate software

altogether, for conversion of these PCD files to TIFF or (if no alternative)

JPEG format? A Google search offered as its top hit a plugin for PS4 from ten

years ago! Anything more recent out there?

Robin, thank you for your opinion, you are probably right about that. Robert, I appreciate your insight as well, and the link you provided. I did know about the size difference of the ink cartridges between these two printers, and was weighing that factor in my considerations. But I never thought about the cost in ink of swapping out the two black cartridges. I can see where this could cause both cartridges to run out of ink pretty quickly - that's a great point.

 

Can anyone offer a comparison of image quality from these two printers? I understand that the 3800 uses the same print "engine" as the large-scale 4800, but don't know exactly what that means or how (if at all) this enhances image quality - or whether image quality is better on the 3800 for any other reason.