david_amberson1

April 5, 2010

Got a Dell Inspiron Laptop the other day for work. Nice setup. Windows 7 dual core etc. Works well.

Noticed that my images upon down load after shoot doesnt look as snappy.

To catch up: I normally use my home PC. HP Pavillion, Top fuel Dragster. Quad Core, high end video card. along with this an HP 24" HD 1900x1200 monitor. I have it calibrated with a huey.

With both monitors side by side, the Dell Laptop images look very washed out, dull etc. I calibrated the Dell with the Huey and it GOT WORSE. It took on avery green tint.

I am willing to accept maybe the desktop isnt correct. Maye they are over satuarted. The images on the HP 24" are warmer, more saturated.

Is is normal for Laptop displays to be this far off. Its a small screen. No high end video card. If it were only slightly diff. Id say OK, but these images are WAAAAAY off from one another.

Anyone out there with experience like this, chime in. Give tips suggestions. I may be doing something very obvious. I shoot all day everyday and its been a long one.

Thanks

March 12, 2010

As Enrique said, she doesnt know anything. She knows they(maybe Best Buy) wont be ordering anymore.....because they arent selling any.

My local Wolf/Ritz Pro Shop isnt ordering anything more than Rebels anymore....not because Canons stopping everything.....but because they screwed Canon in Bancruptcy deal and Canon wont front them anything anymore. If its to be discontinued, they wont know before us, thats for certain.

March 12, 2010

This is so on the 1D3 too......only if Highlight Tone Priority is enabled. And it says this from canon too. Whatever it does to hold highlights better, it creates a little noise.....but its really a non issue. You need 100% to even see it. Dont know if thats how they tested it, it really doesnt matter. They just needed filler material to take up space in the review most likely.

Dont worry about what reviewers are saying.....its still the best Canon offers at the moment. Buy it. Need better, switch to Nikon for the D3s.....but its improvements wont be worth the money of a switch to most.

February 11, 2010

I wonder how many 1D4's will suddenly suck now after this review by RG.....after all the praise.

I've read nothing but possitive reports and great images from this camera for 2 months now.

As Yakim posted in another thread about a 1D4 review, many others are finding the exact same thing. I think RG has found a quirk no camera can handle and he's picking it apart. Why would he do these tests for us......theres something in it for him. I promise he isnt that concerned for our well-being to do this for us out of the kindness he holds deep in his Aorta.

This comes out and I just wonder how many, "Yeah mine sucks too" will fly.

Its obvious he's splitting hairs. The MarkIIn wasnt any better, so what more do you want. I dont run off 30 shots in a row anyway. I fire 5 -10 shots max in short bursts and even my 1D3 can do that most of the time.

The 1d4 from what I've seen is a rock star at it. Who cares, as said, the D3s isnt perfect, its pick your poison at the moment. If you want super clean ISO 6400 12800 images, D3s is the camera. If its important, but not open heart surgury critical, then the 1D4 will do a hell of a job too. AF in these two seem like one has its pros and cons, just like the other....but either will absolutely, beyond a shadow of a doubt give the best results money can buy.

That said, I have been reading on FM about the BIF guys with 1D4's having serious trouble with FW 1.0.6. But.......it was great with 1.0.4, soooooo this should be an easy fix for Canon. FW 1.0.7 AKA 1.0.4......cause we all know they wont go back.

NOTICE: For those of you that have a 1D4, and it now sucks and wont deliver usable results, I will be willing to trade a mint 1D3 and cash to take it off your hands. You shouldnt suffer, its inhumane.

January 20, 2010

What sharpening levelsmethods are you using.

I had an XTi years ago, and somehow it got bumped up to level 6(out of 7) in pic styles Standard and I didnt know it.

All of my RAW conversions were real grainy. It didnt show in prints, but they were extremely fuzzy on screen. It took some investigation, but as I kept digging in the settings, I found it. The camera jpegs looked great, but the RAWS were way oversharpened. I have found when shooting jpegs, the in camera sharpening needs to be 5 or 6 to match what the RAW file shows on screen in DPP with level 3 set.

I did extensive testing on this to find a jpeg in camera setting I could use to get me similar sharpness results as when I shoot RAW. When I shoot sports ie basketball, its not economical to shoot RAW(400-500 images) which need conversion before going to the office.

So I bump up jpeg sharpening to give me those crisp images I see when opening RAW files in DPP.

But if you leave the sharpening level set that high for RAW conversion, look out!

This is likely the issue. And yes, the in camera jpegs apply more NR than the RAW converter, just play with the settings and remember, sharpen with caution, a little goes a long way.

January 15, 2010

I ditto Ken

I could drive a nail with a brick, but the hammer would be easier. And the newer hammers have the anti shock grip technology, anti slip head and new neck technology that makes driving nails easier than 40 yrs ago.

For the techno/equipment nerds out there, they make nail guns that will shoot nails into wood as fast as you pull the trigger(1D4). Build your house with a hammer, I'll use the new fangled nail guns and mine will need new paint by the time you're done swinging that hammer......I'm just saying.

January 15, 2010

Martin, sorry you couldn't get more serious responses. You see, this site is full of people that cant stand it when someone asks these questions.

See, I understand that you are just cautious. You were asking from the people you thought would know in a ballpark area about when the 5DIII would be expected.

In other words:

1. Is it most likely in the next 6 months, or:

2. Are we talking June 2011 ballpark.

No one knows exactly. But most can be close.

If the later(#2), you would buy now, if its the first, you wanted to hold out and get the latest and greatest.

You asked this question here because you are among the many out there that doesnt know everything about Canons product launch history etc. So you thought many here would give pretty consistent answers of a guess. Maybe they all expected it around a 3 month period, then its a safe bet they are right. Many here are pretty good about knowing whats next and when....most of the time. But many here are also pretty good about being jerks and never giving answers.

People, I really wish if you get that annoyed by peoples post's, just dont answer....its not a MUST to answer everything. This is supposed to be a forum for help, not abuse.

Martin, some here have made very good suggestions.

1. New glass can be very inducing.

I was absolutley amazed when I bought an 85 f1.8. The IQ it provides over my very expensive L Zooms

wide open is nothing short of breath taking. New lenses can very much change stagnent photography.

Alot more than a new camera....in most situations.

2. The 5DII is a good upgrade from the 5D.

It offers enough upgrade to be worth it. It has great video.

Tons of resolution. Nice new LCD. Great ISO performance.

If you are happy with the 5D, the 5DII wont dissappoint you. If you are hoping for a better AF system, then maybe you should wait, because it isnt better. The old 5D will still make great images until you decide whats right for you.

I know you dont want to buy a new 5D if a new one is on the horizon.

That said, chances are the 5DII wont be upgraded for a while. BUT, the XXD cameras(20, 30D) were on about a 15-18 month cycle for years too, and my 40D was upgraded in 11 months after I bought it.

The 10D announced 2/03

20D 8/04

30D 2/06

1D3 announced 2/07, gonna upgrade, waited due to AF issues, bought 40D instead for temp. Wanted frame rate increase. So:

40D 8/07, I bought in 9/07

50D 8/08! What the hell.

I was pissed. I was gonna sell it to offset cost of a 1D3 purchase. Couldnt then, my 40D dropped value instantly way before I expected it to.

They are absolutley moving faster than before due to competition. A for sure bet is that the 5D3 will not be a 3 yr replacement as before. They CAN NOT wait that long due to Nikons hard push in FF market. Canon and Nikon knows exactly what each other is doing long before we do.

I used to work in a Mercedes Plant and rest assured, they knew exactly what BMW was doing at all times. Its a chess match we are caught right in the middle of.

Your 5D announced 8/05

5DII announced 9/08, selling in Dec. 3yrs later.

So its been rolling for 16months now. Sept. this year will mark 2yrs for the 5DII. Man time flys.

I suspect the replacement is around that time. They just cant wait much longer. The 3yr cycle is over. Nikon will step all over them.

Hope this helped with your questions. If you are too cautious right now, glass is always a better upgrade that can be used on all EOS models. They hold value better than cameras too. Dont be too cautious, you'll miss out. If you always wait on newer models, you'll always be waiting, because there will always be a newer, better camera around corner.....that is for sure.

Take care.

December 21, 2009

DxO is NOT a reliable source for choosing a camera. They have the 1dsIII listed way better in High ISO noise than the 1D3.....which is a big crock of s%&t!

I have used the D3 and my 1D3 side by side and their may be a 1/2 stop difference in Noise with the edge on the D3....but it was barely visible in 100% viewing.

There is no way the 1D3 is this far down the list......I give them no credibility at all.

But it does not surprise me about there opinion of the 7D....I have not been impressed at anything from the 7D.....the AF being the best thing about it. I have a good friend that returned 2 before giving up all together and going back to his 40D. The IQ was horrible.

That said, today was the 3rd time I've ever gone to DxO site....just because they are so far off base.

And I'm of the opinion also, if they cant get the printed specs right, what else have they gotten wrong. Hell, all they have to do is copy and paste Canons listed specs for most of that crap.

The best way to pick a camera, is to use it.

Does it have the features you need?

Does it feel like you can use it, control all the features without needing a manual all the time.

Do you get tired of holding it?

Then, does the IQ give the results you desire, consistently?

if the answer is yes, open wallet.

If answer is no, move on to the next camera.

Lather, rinse, repeat:-)

December 1, 2009

Yes. And I have it set to always apply upon image open. I'm attaching a screen shot of that.

If I open the same image in LR, it seems to be a little closer to DPP. In fact, I thought the only reason it didnt match perfect was that I processed the image in sRGB and Adobe is Pro Photo.....but I thought I could put a smaller color space file in a larger one and not effect color....I thought it was only when trying to put a larger Adobe color file into a smaller sRGB file you'd get color shifting?

So I went back to DPP and set color space to Adobe and it matched better.

But when I open the image in Noiseware, or even internet explorer, they look the same......way shifted from DPP.

I know IE isnt color managed, but its default is sRGB....and so why isnt the image displayed in IE or Noiseware as it is in DPP with the monitor profile selected. This is a scenario I'd expect when editing an Adobe RGB image, but this one was sRGB from capture all the way thru JPEG conversion....on a profiled monitor.

I wouldnt expect it to be 100% perfect....its a Huey....but it should be close enough not to matter at all.....at least I'd think.

Any clues anyone?<div></div>

December 1, 2009

Screen Shot from Noiseware. See, when I have my Monitor profile selected in DPP, look at the screen shot color and then look at how it looks when that same file is loaded into Noiseware.<div>

</div>

December 1, 2009

DPP Screen Shot with Monitor Profile set to sRGB, Huey still On<div>

</div>

December 1, 2009

DPP Screen Shot<div>

</div>

December 1, 2009

I had a question about DPP color managment.

I recently started using a program I'm sure you have all hard of "Noiseware". Love it BTW and noticed something odd. It has the option to read "Embedded" profiles....OK I have this selected.

Now Noiseware cant read RAW files, so it must either be TIFF or JPEG. I used DPP to make the JPEG for Noiseware with embedded icc selected on converson.

In DPP(which I used all the time) I have the preferences set up as shown in the screen shot I have attached.

I use a Huey monitor calibrator and have that selected in Monitor selection under color matching module...is this correct?

The color shown in DPP looks probably the most correct as shot when the Huey icc is selected in monitor color matching section, but when the converted file is loaded into Noiseware, the color is way off from what I intended in DPP. Its much more saturated and has a magenta cast compared to what it showed on screen in DPP during the conversion.

I have the workspace set to sRGB....I normally work in Adobe, but all of my assignments I shoot thats not for me, I am required to shoot sRGB...so this is why I am using a smaller space.

The image in the "DPP screen shot" was taken playing with my cat, and the image was used later to test Noiseware. That program does an awesome job with noise....best Ive used. Anyway, back to subject at hand. The image in screen shot is what I had in DPP, I also attached at screen shot to show what it looks like in Noiseware. You can get my point this way.

Could I be double color managing. Should I leave the color matching section set to my color space "sRGB and leave the Huey to make sure that the colors are correct. Because even when the Monitor section is left blank and I have sRGB selected, I can toggle the Huey off and on and see a huge difference in its corrected colors so even tho the Profile isnt selected, Huey is still correcting my monitor color. So my question is, Have I misunderstood the Color Matching section in DPP.

Because when I leave it set to sRGB, then DPP will display the exact color the JPEG shows when loaded into anything else.

I'm asking because I have my color like it should be in DPP, but when using Noiseware afterwords, the color is changed once the file is saved. I have no way of knowing what the fina will look like at this point.

Hope I didnt confuse anyone.

November 12, 2009

Image resource does have 7D images that look more like what youd expect.

Maybe the 7D will just need a little more sharpening in post.

November 12, 2009

Also on photo sharing forums a lot of photographers think the file quality of the Canon 7D is awesome. Maybe our expectations were too high? We thought the 7D should give us files better than a Rebel or G11. Maybe we are just too anal?

</blockquote>

Nothing surprising. I've said this many times. This is exactley what I've seen from every 7D photo out. At 100%, they just dont have the detail. These bird photographers out there that scream theirs is real sharp and perfect, I think they either dont know what sharp is, or they dont want to believe the results.

Canon should have chose AA filter more wisely. I think the only people who really worry about Moire' is Canon. I've never had it ruin prints.

Canon, recall.....remove this stinking filter so people can get the resolution they paid for.

November 4, 2009

David, can you shoot one of these games at f2.8 to see just how well the focus works. Or is this a 70-200 f4 lens?

Just curious, f4 on a crop sensor has enough DOF to mask some issues. If it tracks that well at f2.8, then you know you have a winner.

Overall though it looks good.

November 4, 2009

My grandfather drives a Porsche and rarely goes over 40MPH on his way to the grocery store or Blockbuster. It's a waste of automotive muscle and he should give the darn thing to me in exchange for my Accord. But damn the torpedoes he enjoys the thing and it's his money and that's all the reason in the world to spend the extra cash for something you don't need, won't get ya their any better but tickles yo' pickle. An expensive new toy always seems to give me a quick kick in the pants and I get excited and learn all sorts of new shit. And the 7D is one of the few cameras to come along in years dats so good it gits me outta mah chair and ah hollers alleluia!

</blockquote>

Thats priceless! and agree 100%. If you can afford it, buy it if it "Tickles yo' pickle":-)

As said above, and Honda Accord will carry you as fast as you want to go to the store, but for a good reason, you will have much more fun going in a Porsche. Why? Various reasons, but it is what it is.

November 4, 2009

I have a 85 f1.8 and its very sharp wide open. Its very surprising how sharp it is wide open when using zooms wide open. I use a 1D3 and 70-200 f2.8L IS almost everyday, then use a 24-70 f2.8L along with that and my 85 1.8 is sharper wide open than the 70-200.

My 85 f1.8 wide open is quite possibly sharper than the 70-200 stopped down to f4. Its very sharp wide open. I had never seen this kind of sharpness until I bought it sometime ago. You get used to L zooms and you think it doesnt get any better.....but it does.

I also should add that it was spot on focus right out of the box when all my other lenses needed adjustment. I try to use this lens whenever I can. Thing is, when trying to use it on a 5 year old at f1.8, its hard to get focus where you want it because they wont be still, or I cant be still. But when it comes together, this lens will make portraits look better than any lens Ive used. I second whats being said about the 1.2L. I'm sure it will be slightly better, maybe wide open, but the focus is so slow on that lens, for the money difference and focus speed and how close they are in IQ, I'd choose the 1.8 everytime. You could put the difference in another good lens.

Seriously, 85 f1.8 gets my vote....twice!

October 30, 2009

Wow!

You got all that from my little comment?

Impressive. No wonder you see Canon conspiracy theories where none exist.

</blockquote>

Yes, I got it from here:

If you think Nikon products are free of problems, think again.

</blockquote>

I never said anything about the 40D being bad. I feel its a good camera for the money.

There are no conspiracy theories. Just defective 7D's...as usual with Canon. Release anew body, then have to repair 25% of them immediately after.

And for childish remarks. My statement was because of your childish remark:

Don't tell them that, Yakim - they might not go.

</blockquote>

For no apparent reason. No one had said anything about Nikon. A couple had only complained about the defective 7D's. Then the complaint police had to chime in.

Despite what you think Keith, there are way too many defective 7D's floating around for the amount thats actually on the streets as of yet. YOU just dont seem to care.

October 29, 2009

And heres Keith. I knew he couldnt stand it. Any that have an issue with Canon are wrong, and they should stop complaining and switch.

I didnt see above where anyone said anything about Nikon, but since you want to bring Nikon in it, lets hear it. Tell us why Nikon isnt any better.

What are the issues that are comparable to Canon. Name some of them. The worst I have see from the Nikon camp that everyone seems to have problems with are the smoked LCD's.

So many 7D users that have to keep returning their new camera for various issues. Whether it be AF, some just are dead right out of the box. The camera had not been out 2 months good and they had to do a firmware update. This camera does not have the sample quantity out there yet to warrant the amount of issues already being reported and addressed for this model. Many still dont have their copy having preordered it.

Now this ghosted image thing. And I bet in 3 or 4 more months, there will be another FW update for another issue.

If you have a Canon camera that has failed you upon arrival, you should stop whining about it and just accept it. Blame yourself or switch. Keith Reeder either has a good copy or knows someone who does, so all cameras are good. If yours isnt performing well, check yourself, cause Canon wouldnt dare release an undertested model for the consumers.

October 29, 2009

Steve, the 430EX absolutely will NOT cover all 19 AF points of the 7D.

It is only designed to cover the 9 Point system on the XXD models.

I havent tested it on a 7D, but I know for a fact it doesnt cover the 19 Selectable points on my 1D3. I'm sure the beams will cover a few of them, but not all, so you will have some that are NOT covered if you use 430EX.

The beam pattern is significantly different when using the 580 on my 1D3 than the 430 was when switching to outer points.

October 29, 2009

Steve, I change lenses, flash and memory cards all the time with my camera on and its never given an ounce of trouble.

Maybe removing the battery while its on could be bad, but I've done that many times before as well and its never given any trouble as well.

October 28, 2009

Steve, none of th flashes other than the 580 will cover all the AF points of the 7D correctly. The 550 may, but I am not sure about that one, havent used it.

Try to get a used 580EX.

Ben, I started to, but I am sick of chimng in on stuff like that. The sales guys get all pissed off about it, then the customer starts drilling me for info...and I end up making a sale for the paid salesman.

I have chimed in many times before because they just spout the most rediculous statements that you almost cant just sit by and listen. I heard one lady complaining about how she was sick of her 8x10s getting the heads chopped off, and he said "If you buy a FF camera, the aspect ratio would be the same as 8x10"

I nearly screamed BS. He proceeded to tell her that the 8x10s were an old style size(correct) and that a sensor that was the same as "old" 35mm film was intended to bring that back.

WHAT! It should be illegal for salesman to sell cameras when its that obvious they arent capable of even selling a battery for one, let alone the system.

I said, "Mam, he is completely wrong in everything he just said, and if you buy this camera, I swear you will still get chopped off heads. If I'm wrong, I'll pay for the camera myself. The only way to stop this is the account for it when composing the shot. Leave some room for 8x10 cropping." And I left after saying "You should walk out of hear and buy somewhere else after the BS that man just told you"

He started shouting and we nearly fought in the store. But I just couldnt stand by and not say something after hearing something so completely wrong.

From this point on, I just get my prints and move on. I hate it that many people everyday buy stuff there and get the shaft because of poor saleman. But its not up to me to stop it. And I dont needto go to jail over beating the hell out of the sales guy in the camera store. Its just not worth it. And yes, I have called the district store to report the incompetance.....but the owner that owns the chain....hint hint, is just as incompetant, and it trickled down to that person, so whatcha gonna do.

Its a good place to get prints....and thats about it. Unfortunatly, its like this at just about all camera stores. Theres one large chain thats the worst I have ever been in. Big box store, yellow tag. I'll say no more.

Even one of the most respected stores I use, has a salesman that cant do anything but ring up the sale. I asked him if he knew the flash duration on a strobe head I was interested in, he said "Its 1/8000 flash duration, but if you need it slower, just turn down the ISO"

Yes, I know, it still makes me angry. I could have put that strobe in his......

Sorry, the thread got hijacked and off topic. But at least its still about poor salesman, which is kinda what the OP stated.

October 27, 2009

Oh....and the salesman at the camera store, the only thing they know, is how to sell you a camera. The more honest ones will tell you when they dont know.

Seems as though everytime I am at the store waiting on prints, I hear a salesman telling a new customer something that is completely wrong. In fact, they sold a 5D2 to a women there the other day, that solely bought another Canon body because she had 4 lenses....all that were EF-S lenses. She told him what she had because he wanted to evaluate whether or not the lenses were worth staying with a certain brand, she told him, he said, "Oh yeah, those are good lenses, I'd keep them and stay with Canon, the 5D2 is a great fit." She'll be pissed when she gets home.

October 27, 2009

I was using a 430EX on my 1D3 for a while and was suspect as to whether it would cover the 45 points on my camera, knowing it was designed for the 9 point layout in say a 40D.

I bought a 580 and its much different. The 580 series flashes are designed to work with the 1 Series 45 point AF system, and I read somewhere on canons site, it would cover the 7D as well. When using the 580, I noticed once you select an outer point, the AF beam projects a much broader pattern and I was able to get much better results in dark usage when I started using the 580. I am sure the 430EX would do fine for center point, but it was well worth the extra for me to insure al of my points were covered by a flash designed to work with the AF system.

I also noticed it was much easier for the 580 to expose images for the way I bounce. In many cases, at weddings, I would bounce into a distant wall/ceiling and if far enough away, the 430 struggled to give proper exposure. The 580EX is rarely in situations where it cant keep up, and this made it much easier for me to work and gave me more opportunity to be creative than before. I now can almost always dictate where my light comes from using on camera flash, just because that wall I want to use....is no longer out of reach, and so you can make it seem as though the 580 wasnt even used.

If you can swing a 580EX, its well worth it....especially when using it on a new camera that has an AF system that can benefit from it.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by david_amberson1