john_seymour
-
Posts
69 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by john_seymour
-
-
I have a few paid for shoots in the next few months. I'm currently using a 20D
and the shoots are in low light (corporate 'party', with band, etc). I
typically shoot with 2.8L lenses at 800 or 1600 ISO, occassionally 3200. I'm
seriously considering the 5D replacement as an upgrade whenever it arrives.
Meantime I feel 'exposed' on a paid shoot, as the only photog covering the
event, not having a backup body. I could:
- Buy a 5D now even though its replacement is likely to excel in low light/at
high iso, a key use of mine. Maybe take a big hit/loss on the 5D if I sell it
to get it's replacement soon.
- Buy something like a 400D and, other than testing it works, keep it in the
box unless my 20D fails. Then sell it in "as new condition/barely used" when I
get a 5D replacement. How much am I likely to lose doing this (% of purchase
price)? Presumably a 400D @1600 ISO is 'OK' (or even better?) compared to 20D
@1600?
- Rent something like a 40D or even 5D for these events only. But the cost is
not really justified, and I'll possibly lose less buying/selling a 400D? A 5D
rental is about 25% of a new 400D per day!
The problem is it's only to cover a few events (I'm only very semi-pro), and I
can't load my price so much as to cover the hire of a spare body.
Any thoughts/advice? Is the risk of the 20D failing really rather low/should I
worry?
-
Pixel counters apart, we now have 10MP in the new 400D and as I recall there's a trade off in poorer noise performance as the pixel sizes are physically smaller. 5D goes the other way as pixel sizes are actually bigger, despite the 12MP, and noise performance is better than 20/30D.
So, with today's technologies, there's a trade off to consider...
-
24-70. I have one & find the weight no problem. There's no substitute for for a fast lens if you think you'll need to stop action or shoot in low light. A tripod/monopod could be a substitute for IS at a push. But if you can't get the shutter speed fast enough to freeze subject movement you're out of luck as a blur is something you can't correct in Photoshop very well! You can even at a push crop a bit to compensate for the longer reach of the 105!
IS is great, all other things being equal. I have a 70-200 2.8 IS for example and love it. But my second choice was the non-IS 2.8 if I could get it, rather than the slower lens...
-
... ah. Just found it on EBay ;-0
-
"The Canon UK auction outlet ..."
Is there a URL for this?
W
-
Bottom line, I think, is that the average number of shots you'll get with a lens without any underlying manufacturing fault, before it fails, will be so high that you'll consider it good value. Ie if it fails 'early' you'll have had many many 1000's of shots using it - if you don't use it 'like a pro', you should find it will last 'forever'.
-
-
I think the issue with the glass over the sensor compared with your lens glass is that very little (damage) on the sensor glass will be seen on the photos. Yet you can do a lot to a lens with little apparent effect. All to do with the focus planes I think. And nobody really knows how hard/what coatings are on the sensor glass, do they?
J
-
I don't like getting ripped off any more than the next guy, but I'd want to be confident the stuff I was getting cheap really was the same. And in the overall scheme of things in DSLR photography these days, sensor cleaning kits are not that expensive over the time you'll be using them (ie one kit lasts a LONG time for most people).
J
-
In Feb I will we taking pictures at a charity ball, of guests.
They'll be paying for a print on the spot from a small Canon 6x4
dyesub printer. That part worked fine last time I did it. It was
even quick enough. The setting will be a pre-frabricated 'booth' at
the event.
I'll have a Canon 20D with a 420EX flash on it, bounced, and
supplimenting some fluorescent lighting already there. This did work
ok last time too with a LEE 244 PLUS GREEN filter over the flash and
the camera set-up to fluorescent white balance. I took a couple of
test shots and used fixed shutter speed, auto exposure with a little
exposure compensation. I seemed to get away with this with a booth
colour that was predominantly white, and a the mix of
black/white/coloured clothes. Perhaps at 6x4 on the night it didn't
matter too much!
This time I want to do better if I can...
From subject to subject, I will be moving towards/away, and the
sujects will be wearing different clothes, of course. Some white and
some black!
1. As the "booth" is a controlled environment, presumably taking and
using a custom white balance of a grey/white card will help? With
the filter on the flash it should be nearer than otherwise to the
flourecent lights. It will always be bounced off the same surface,
so my presumption is the overall colour balance shouldn't change too
much shot to shot. I'm presuming this should be better than the last
appoach of nailing it to fluorescent WB anyway.
2. Is it sensible/is ther eany point in setting up for manual
exposure in this situation? Can I expect changing subject distance
will mess this up (won't the subject get the same exposure given I'm
boucing the flash and there are other fixed lights)? How do I set up
the 420EX flash to be fully manual and dial in the power (do I need
to), or can I only set up flash comp with the flash insisting on
auto exposure? What does a 420EX do when the camera's set on M?
Should I just follow my previous appoach above?
-
For an amateur (like me) it's also the 'joy' of owning and using the expensive stuff. It's better built, handles better, etc. Does it make (small) pictures better, all other things being equal? Probably. A little. But you're into the law of dimishing returns for your money. Like buying expensive hi-fi (cheaper stuff sounds ALMOST as good to many people), or expensive cars (they look nicer and go faster/better engineered, but the cheep ones still get you from a to b).
So a lot depends on your budget - and character! A low cost lens will I think give you much better value, but not the ultimate in performance (however you measure it). And remember the best photos ever taken were not neccessarily shot using the most expensive equipment available today.
You might
- Buy cheap and be happy with the value and how much you didn't need to spend
- Buy cheap and never ben happy with the quality, and wind up with the expense of upgrading later
- Buy expensive and never feel you could do justice to what you'd spent, forever whishing you'd spend less
- Buy expensive and be upset it's still not perfect (just less imperfect than the cheap lenses!)
- Etc etc etc
J
J
-
FWIW there was a notice in Canon UK's service centre in Elstree, UK that says they will do one sensor clean (I think it was one) during the warranty period. After the one (or the warranty) its chargeable. I guess it depends on the local management if they want to do it...
J
-
A faster card should help when reviewing pictures on the camera, and maybe a quicker download speed in a card reader on your PC.
-
Legally I suspect not. But morally I think they some obligation to providing *some* compensation given the bag was new, used properly, and clearlyu not fit for its primary purpose. If everyone had their lenses fall out their bags this way, they wouldn't be in business, regardless of if they warranted the bag's content.
J
-
Those links are supposed to be
and
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=111031&page=2
-
I bought a CyberPack 9. It has a faulty zip (it *sometimes* leaves
an unzipped 'hole' halfway up the bag, even when
it's zipped up correctly). My Canon 70-200L IS (still under
warranty - or was) rolled out on my first outing with the
bag. Onto a road surface. Dented.
The bag is new, and will be replaced by the UK retailer who sold it
to me. I've tried to contact Tamrac HQ in the US
to see what, if any, compensation they can offer me for the len's
damage. I have mailed all the way up to the
President now. And they've not even done me the courtsey of
acknowleding they've received any mail from me at all.
I'm fairly convinced they have no legal obligation to compensate me
for this "consequential" damage to my lens, but is
their (lack of any) response at all reasonable form a company that's
supposed to be one the leaders in their field?
And is expecting some kind of compensation reasonable to expect too?
Pictures of the bag are here http://www.camera.fotpic.net
I raised this at POTN too http://photography-on-
the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=111031&page=2
Please don't waste your time replying here if you've seen this on
another forum, but for those who have not, I'd value
your opinions.
Why wouldn't Tamrac want to have such a discussion? Their silence is
conspicuous. This isn't about legal rights etc.
It's about the way Tamrac treat me, their customer. And that I'm
left with a damaged lens as a direct result of the
failure of this "professional" backpack's failure to deliver on it's
primary purpose - to protect it's contents. I'm
just staggered that this so-called reputable company has no interest
in doing anything, instead leaving this kind of
discussion to fester on. That *can't* be good for business, unless
they have something to hide, can it?
J
-
I have one too. Works well. But I've always wondered:
1. How do you know when to replace it?
2. What happens to all the crud it picks up from the lens? And if ever it picked up something hard, what's the risk of then grinding that 'particle' into another lens?
-
Do circular polarisers have less effect than linear ones? I'm suspicious the linear one I had on my G3 was far more effective than the circular one I now use with my 20D...
J
-
The camera isn't airtight. You can and will get dust in it even with the lens on, albeit perhaps not as much or as quickly as when changing lenses a lot.
This does, however, beg the question about P&S cameras which are also presumably not airtight. And there's no option for users to clean those sensors...
J
-
Don't forget other costs too )albeit not perhaps in the same scale:
- More powerful PC/more memory in your existing PC to cope with the larger file sizes from the larger sensor
- Bigger/faster CF cards to deal with the larger image sizes
:-)
J
-
Not that I have much choice, but anyone had bad experiences sending a camera/lenses back to Canon (Elstree, UK) for these kind of calibration issues?
J
-
Giampi, I agree with what you say. I didn't post pictures because I've not had time to do the screen captures showing active focus point. But I can tell you all you'll see is the same front/rear focus shots you've seen other people take 1000 times.
By "failure mode", what I meant was has anyone seen this effect where some focus points front focus and some back focus on the same camera, and the fron and back focusing of the focus points in question doesn't always happen, despite trying to rreproduce it in tests?
At the end of the day what's lead me to this isn't a desire to pixel peep, it's wondering if there's any equipment problem behind front or rear focused shots I get in conditions I'd not expected to get them.
In each case it *COULD* of course be my technique, and I can hypothesise as well as the next guy as to what might have caused it in each case. I'm looking for the confidence that it's my problem not the cameras - that way time I spend making good is worth all the effort. And the camera is going out of warranty shortly :-|
J
-
I have a Canon 20D and lenses all under a year old and I'm wondering
if I should be asking for them to be looked at as a warranty issue.
The lenses are a 24-70L and 70-200L IS (the 70-200 is much newer)
and I have never been completely satisfied with the camera's
consistency in being able to obtain crisp focus, even under what I
would consider favourable conditions. So I tried to do some tests in
an attempt to remove my technique as an issue.
On a tripod, in self timer/mirror lock up mode, I photographed 3
small boxes one a cm or so behind the other and focused with each
focus point in turn on the centre box. The lenses were wide open
(F2.8) and at max zoom.
My results are inconsistent, but in general it appears a couple of
the focus points *tend* to front focus and one appears to back
focus - sometimes!
I'm unclear as the technology used and thus don't know if this
problem is even likely or possible to be a failure or maladjustment
of the camera and/or lenses (combination of front and rear focusing
focus points, and apparent randomness of if they do focus more or
less correctly)
My question is, given the above scenario, would you advise
1. The symptoms I'm getting point very likely to a error in
technique on my part (even when doing the tests)?
2. I should send the body and/or lenses for under-warranty
investigation?
Is what I describe a 'failure mode' that anyone has ever seen and
ever seen repaired?
Regards
John
-
Just checked their web site
http://www.fixationuk.com/repairs.htm
They're a Canon Professional Service Centre and claim
- Our level of service is tailored to Professional photographers, but you don't have to be a professional to use us.
- We repair all professional and high-end amateur models for both Nikon and Canon.
- Our technicians have over 120 years combined experience in servicing to the highest possible standards.
- We can perform many Canon warranty repairs.
- We give rapid diagnosis of faults and free estimates.
- Our turnaround times for repairs are unsurpassed - 2-3 days is usual, often quicker if necessary.
- We have excellent transport access and parking facilities, or fully insured despatch services if you cannot visit us in person.
- Our technicians are available to discuss faults and servicing requirements with you, to advise you on technical problems, and to discuss special modifications (for example we can stack Canon extenders, modify Nikon AF Teleconverters to work on non-AFI/AFS lenses, extend remote release cables and TTL cables, etc).
Short term 20D backup?
in Canon EOS Mount
Posted