assaf_niv

<p>Hi,<br>

Steven / Marc - thank you for your advice.<br>

I think I made some progress - I've tried performing a bulk copy (~200 files) by directly connecting my 60D to the laptop (different cable) - 0% errors.<br>

With this in mind, may I declare this to be a defected reader?<br />Is there a way to determine this assumption to be the exact cause of this, with absolute certainty (assuming the cable is insignificant in this equation, in a sense that it's most likely valid)?<br /><br />Thanks again!<br>

BTW - in any case I will make sure to use FastCopy for these kind of operations in future attempts.</p>

<p>Alan / Frode - thank you for your advice.<br>

Alan - to be as specific as possible:<br>

a. I can tell with a high degree of certainty that the errors are random - this is by examining different corrupted images (some are almost completely unintelligible, others are only stroked on certain parts (you may see the 2 image links supplied at the top of the thread for comparison, Though I do agree that for absolute verification an actual bit-2-bit comparison is needed on several different corruption occasion).<br>

b. I use CrystalDiskInfo to attest to the health of my drive - it indicates it's healthy, so I tend to rule this option out.<br>

c. I have multiple SD cards - all Kingston / Sandisk, and all present this problem upon bulk transfer - so I also tend to rule this option out.<br>

d. I'm not sure about the card reader itself - I should try to perform back-2-back tests (i.e - different reader on my system and different system with this reader).<br>

e. I have yet to fully perform memory benchmark tests (so far I've only run various Prime95 benchmarks successfully).<br>

All in all, I'm somewhat limited in the means available at my disposal (what can I do - I'm not an actual lab)<br />So I do understand that it might not be possible to pinpoint the problem with absolute certainty, considering the current circumstances. Though by posting here I did hope that some solution which is beyond my reasoning is available.</p>

<p>Ellis, Paul - Thank you for your kind informative responses.<br>

With the above in mind, a couple of questions/assertions if you may:<br>

a. Paul - I have recently executed Prime95 with various benchmarks: No - errors / crashes / blue-screen<br>

May you recommend a suitable memory benchmark test s/w ?<br />(freeware is preferable of course) <br>

b. Ellis - Your workflow and backup is super-rigid, I do not get to that levels.<br /> After considering your advice, I have decided that I probably should also perform bulk transfers on a resource-free Windows session. Nonetheless, I think it's more time efficient for me to first perform the bulk transfer as is (taking some corruptions into account), and straight away let Lightroom build the smart previews (as this is the most time consuming task in my system). Afterwards I shall look for the corrupted images and replace them manually.<br>

BTW - I think it's worth mentioning that I (still) use my beloved Lenovo T500 with 4 GB of RAM (which might account for Paul's plausible theory for the source of the problem).<br>

Assaf</p>

<p>Hi Ellis,<br>

Thank you for your suggestion - thing is I only know what are the corrupted photos after finishing the entire transfer,<br>

so ejecting and inserting again doesn't really do the trick.<br>

Basically, I just can't understand the root cause of the problem - especially considering that the used interfaces are all genuine top quality.</p>

<p>Clues? anyone?</p>

<p>Hi,<br /><br />For quite some time by now, I've been experiencing a very weird and annoying problem, which I hope someone at this wonderful community will be able to help me resolve:<br /><br />I have a Canon 60D with a few Kingston SD Cards.<br />I use a Sandisk imagemate SDDR-199 in order to transfer the images to the HDD.<br />Now, on about ~1% of the image files on any bulk transfer, the below happens:<br /><a href="https://goo.gl/photos/WGtcT6hUm2boDGDp9" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://goo.gl/photos/WGtcT6hUm2boDGDp9</a><br />[exported for web]<br /><br />It happens on the local CR2 copy only (on the HDD; not on the SD, which is inserted in the SDDR-199 interface).<br>

Below is a summary of a complete test exemplification scenario:<br />a. An original corrupted CR2 image file on the HDD: <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3KKDxpU3w7reTdJZWhyeWJRbmc/view?usp=sharing" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">IMG_4881.CR2</a><br />b. 7-zip (latest build - 15.14) checksums results:<br />SD CRC32: size 21957648 bytes CRC32: 6950EDEF<br /><a href="https://goo.gl/photos/91ihTiPedp3HjgZQ8" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">7-zip PrtSc</a><br />HDD CRC32: size 21957648 bytes CRC32: 2786C016<br /><a href="https://goo.gl/photos/91ihTiPedp3HjgZQ8" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">7-zip PrtSc</a><br /><br />As you may see - the checksums differ - which leads me to believe that somehow some errors during the transfer occur.<br />Important information:<br />1. If I copy-paste the single image file again, it's copied from the SD card in order, without any corruptions. <br />2. This seems to happen only when I transfer a bulk-load of images, and only on a minute number of files from that stash (though statistically this has not been proven, since I did not copy-paste a single image file numerous times, in order to account as a verifiable statistical measurement)<br>

<br />For your convenience - summary of interfaces used:<br />A. Kingston XC 120 GB<br />B. Sandisk imagemate SDDR-199<br />C. Seagate FreeAgent GO 500 GB (in good health) / HITACHI 150 GB HTS722016K9SA00 (in good health, seldom used in bulk transfers due to available space limitation).<br /><br />Honestly, I'm quite bewildered by this quirk <img title=":??:" src="http://m.bestofmedia.com/sfp/images/design/usr/smilies/confused.gif" alt=":??:" data-src="http://m.bestofmedia.com/sfp/images/design/usr/smilies/confused.gif" /> <br />Any ideas / advice / suggestion etc. will be of great service <img title=":D" src="http://m.bestofmedia.com/sfp/images/design/usr/smilies/biggrin.gif" alt=":D" data-src="http://m.bestofmedia.com/sfp/images/design/usr/smilies/biggrin.gif" /> <br>

Thank you!<br /><br />Assaf</p>

<p>Thanks Chuck,</p>

<p>I contacted Robert White - they do not hold these items - only Lee, and these are backordered :(</p>

<p>since I do not live in the UK and am trying to sort all of this, which is getting quite tedious,<br>

any other recommended dealers which stock the Cokin Z system (or Lee) ?</p>

<p>I apologize for all the questions, please understand my troubles - such delicate optics and costs, while considering the fact that I am not in the UK.</p>

<p>Thanks in advance<br>

Assaf</p>

<p>Thanks all for the respones,<br>

Chuck - in your last response I reckon you ment the Push-On holder...<br>

anyway, now that I know what are the 2 bundled options I need (Lee / Cokin+Singh-ray),<br>

I'm now looking for a creditable dealer on the net to purchase them.<br>

The problem is that it seems to be quite a difficult task due to demands overceeding supplies in both Cokin and Lee !!!<br>

Unfortunaltey, the Lee representative I've talked with said that he doesn't think that any dealer will have them currently in stock!<br>

(He also told me to go for the foundation kit which I now understand to disregrad per your generous explanations)<br>

It seems, that Cokin has a similar problem (I went through half of the dealers list mentioned at their site)<br>

so... anyone knows of a creditable dealer (US/EU) that has one of the bundles in stock (Lee / Cokin + Singh-ray)?<br>

Thanks for all the help :-)</p>

<p>Chuk / D.B - thanks for your responses.<br>

so, to summarize and make sure I got it right.<br>

If I have the new Canon 60d and 2 lenses - the Ultra Wide 10-22mm (77mm diameter) and the<br>

EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (72 diameter), what I need that will fit for both is (in order):<br>

<strong>a) 77m Wide angle angle Adapter Ring</strong> - for the wide angle lense<br>

<strong>b) Normal Adapter ring</strong> - I have a step-up 72-77 for the zoom lense, and I plan to keep it on to avoid the hassle, so - is a normal <strong>77 adapter </strong>ring is suitable to be fitted on it, or is it better to use a <strong>72mm adapter</strong> and remove the step-up?<br>

<strong>c) foundation kit filter holder - </strong>I see that it's adaptable (4x4, 4x6) so is it suitable for both lenses, <strong>or </strong><strong>the Push On Filter Holder </strong>will do the job for both?<br>

d) <strong>Filter - 4x6'' </strong>singh-ray or lee. - does the 4x6 fits either the foundation kit or the push on (I'm guessing it's just the inch/MM conversion is confusing me here)?<br>

Also I cannot find the push on in B&H, there's only a 100 Foundation kit and a normal foundation kit - what's the difference?... <br>

Thanks for all the help :)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hello, I would like to acquire a <strong>rectangular ND grad 3 stops soft</strong>, <strong>for my ultra wide 10-22mm 77m diameter lense which will ALSO FIT my regular 72 mm zoom lense</strong> (with 72-77 step-up adapter).<br>

I read quite a bit about it, and came to the conclusion to go either with LL or Singh-ray.</p>

<p>The problem w/ Singh-ray is that in order to fit it on a wide angle w/o Vignetting one have to use either a second adapter on a cokin P series or switch to the Z series - <strong>UNFORTUNATELY these are backorderd </strong>on B&H and adorama.<br>

as a consequence, I inquired about the Lee filters and systems, and I'm a bit stuck -<br>

<strong>I could not figure out what is the proper configuration </strong>I should acquire which will enable me to use both lenses (the ultra wide and regular zoom length). I.E. - <strong>Adapter ring + Filter holder + Fil</strong>ter.<br>

Since I'm going to have to order them via the net, I'm quite hesitated about making any mistakes while purchasing a such delicate equipmenet in a considerable amount of $$$...<br>

Any suggestions / thoughts / comments will be much appreciated :)<br>

Thanks In Advance,</p>

<p>Assaf</p>

<p> </p>

Hello,

First, Thanks for the great advices and the suggested reading links...

I think that now I have a bit better understanding of the different terms and their effects, I have also played a bit with the DOF calc.

And so it seems, as Albert has pointed out, that it is quite hard with my camera to produce selectve focus.

In light of that, as a general question regarding my camera model - Is there really a use for the different camera modes (i.e landscape, flowers etc...)?

and further more, does it mean that using the extreme f stops my camera offers are almost of no use (f/2.8 f/7.1 f/8.0 ...)? is there a situation where I will be able to significally tell the difference when shooting with different f stops?

It seems to me that I should stick to A mode and S mode only, and play around with the f-stop / shutter speed. And in case of A mode - keep it in between f/ 4 to f/5.6 - as the optimal f stops...

Hello,

I have a canon A640, I`ve read a few books and articles about focal length and

aperture size. The general principle which I see as one of the basics is:

When I want to shoot a wide area I should use a a large f/stop (small focal

length).

And when I want to shoot at a close-up I should use a small f/stop (large

focal length).

Though I think I'm missing something - I know that there`s a difference

between my digital camera and a classic camera because of the digital sensor

and how it behaves (I do not know the specific tech explanation).

My camera has an f-stop range of about 2.8-8 and basically it seems to me

(judging by what I see, with my eyes) that there`s no difference when I`m

shooting (whether it be a flower or a wide landscape) with different f-stops.

I`ve also noticed that if I choose stitch-assist mode for example, and let the

camera control things for a panoramic shot, it automatically chooses f 4.0 for

the aperture and NOT the biggest f-stop possible, why is that? shouldn`t it

adhere to the principle stated above?

Am I missing something? or is this correct and it is due to the tranformation

between classic cameras and going digital?

Should I stick to the principle of small f-stop for close-ups and large f-

stops for wide views? or in any case, maybe it doesn`t make a difference?

I will be grateful if someone will be able to explain to me this issue in

general and thoroughly, and if possible, relate to my specific camera and it`s

qualities...

Thanks!

Thanks for all the suggestions!

A few notes: I guess I wasn`t clear enough with "steady and straight" - I use a (cheap) tripod every time...

and about Albert Smith suggestions (thanks for detailed answer):

I`m not so sure what you meant by "The Canon also has the option to allow not only panning, but laterally moving to get the multiple segments". do you mean one of the pre-configured factory presets in the camera (like landscape, people, fireworks etc...)?

Also, Paulo Bizarro, how do you "gauge the difference in luminosity between the different parts of the scene that I want to photograph" ? I`m not familiar with this technique...

and I was rather surprised to hear that some of you wouldn`t recommend using CS3 for this task, since I`m always using it, and I also try to keep it manual and not auto...

I shall try the other softwares recommened...

thanks!

Hello,

I have a Canon A640, and I'm having great difficulties trying to shoot

panoramic photographs.

Basically I almost always find color and focus differences between the various

parts of the photo.

I read a little about the correct technique and I`ve tried all sorts of

arrangments with my camera, (non worked):

1. Using the basic stitch assit mode, the manual states that this mode locks

the Exposure and WB. For some reason I still found color differences!

In addition, in this mode the display on the LCD is MUCH SMALLER and it makes

it a lot harder to correctly compose the photograph (keeping it steady and

straight)

2. There`s a possibillity to lock the focus manually for continuous images,

I`ve tried that coupled with cloudy WB, it didn`t work. Also, I couldn`t find a

way to also lock the exposure at the same time (for continuous shooting...)

I thought of a bunch of arrangements that might work, like using the landscape

mode or maybe just putting it on auto etc... but these contradict the basic

techinque of panoramic shooting (and of course there`s the problem of so many

different arrangements...)

So now, I`m a bit lost, how can I shoot decent panoramic photos with my camera?

Please help...

Thank you!

Assaf