tallplumphotography

<p>I believe all Canon DLSRs have the evaluative metering mode which will basically do what you're looking for.</p>

<p>This article will show you a graphic of the different metering modes - you can see that the 'main' metering segments around the active focus point and then 'falling off' for segments on the other side of the viewfinder.<br>

http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2011/qt_photograph_snow_article.shtml</p>

<p> </p>

Chris - Cocktail is a paid app. I think you're thinking of Onyx.

<p>From the Canon site, seems like AF will work with the non-STM lenses.<br>

<br />With all the improvements in this generation of Rebel....I wonder if we'll see more people just upgrading from Rebel to Rebel rather than to the XXD or 5/7Ds....</p>

<p>It's not entirely clear from the press release - does the video AF only work with the STM lenses, or is it that the STM lenses are specifically designed to be used with the autofocus?<br>

<br />It sounds like the purpose of the STM was that the AF motors in the "normal" lenses were generating too much noise when using the built-in mic, which would suggest that regular EF and EF-S lenses should be OK to use.<br>

Except maybe the 50 1.8 which sounds like a coffee grinder....</p>

<p>Ergonomics was an important factor for me.</p>

<p>The 2.8 is pretty heavy and only gets heavier as the day goes on. After 4 hours of shooting I think the only thing that kept me from losing shots was the IS (which I know isn't the version you're looking at...).<br>

<br />The 4 IS is vastly lighter and more maneuverable after a long day. <br>

If you are going to shoot slower than the ol' standby of focal length * crop factor = shutter speed, then you might want to consider the IS version more heavily.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Yeah, but it's the _first_....</p>

<p>^ Somehow missed the first response....what he said. </p>

<p>^ Prozac calms people down, why wouldn't it calm my malfunctioning camera/lens connection down?</p>

<p>I had a similar problem when I switched over to a glossy screen - something about 'wide gamut' (IIRC, might be misremembering).<br>

<br />If your version of the software allows it, make sure you check the 'iterative grey balance' checkbox and then recalibrate - that should solve your problem with the yellow. If you have the version of the Spyder that doesn't have that option...open a support ticket and walk through your issue with them. Perhaps they'll be able to help.</p>

<p>That Sanyo charger only charges in pairs. So, you lose the ability to charge each battery individually. The charger will charge until the first of the two batteries in the pair is fully charged, so the second one gets to where it gets....</p>

<p>I'm guessing it's an alignment guide so the QC people can make sure that everything closed properly at a glance and that the assembly is tight. </p>

<p>I'm pretty sure there would still be prosumer model. However, it would be such a minor upgrade over the consumer model that it's only purpose would be to drive undecided people to the pro model. <br>

And if the consumer model were good enough to start draining pro sales, they'd cripple features on the base model for the next upgrade cycle....</p>

<p>Just for idle speculation and wondering....<br>

If the shutter on the 1Ds Mk III is good for 300K Actuations...they would have gone through almost 19 cameras taking all those shots.<br>

Assuming 25Mb/shot that equals something like 140K Gb.... <br>

If they had a 16Gb Cf card, they would have filled it 8750 times (assuming that most cards will fail after 10,000 read/writes, I guess they went through only one and a half cards!)<br>

Not bad.</p>

 

<p>I don't think PSE6 has layers (I tried it on my Mac only for the healing brush tool which was infinitely better than GIMP's but PSE6 was so clunky as to be useless) but you may wish to look at GIMP.<br>

<br />Try saving two versions of your images, convert both to B&W in DPP, set contrast normally for one, then use "linear" for the other - this will effectively give you more detail in the highlights. Export them both to GIMP (or PSE 6 if it does layers), set layers, you should be able to come up with a pretty good B&W image using that process.</p>

 

<p>Wouldn't the full-frame make any focus inconsistencies more obvious rather than less obvious than Canon's APS-C?<br>

Perhaps repeating your test with a chart to test front-and back-focusing would make comparison easier? I've used this one to diagnose lenses in the past: http://focustestchart.com/chart.html</p>

<p>I had someone turn to me at a moderately noisy event and tell my my XSi "had a nice sound to it."</p>

 

<div></div>

<p>^ They refused to help me when they saw I had installed 3rd party RAM.... The guy told me that he wasn't going to mark down that I had voided the warranty by doing so, as if he was doing me a favor. That's where my misconception about the RAM voiding the warranty came from.<br>

Maybe I didn't smile enough?</p>

 

<p>Keep in mind that putting in 3rd party RAM may void your warranty.<br>

If you can afford it, SSD drives, while small, can give you a huge performance boost, especially compared to the 5200rpm drives that normally get sold with the computers.</p>

<p>^ how else are you supposed to test the autofocus? :)</p>

<p>I've run into similar problems and caught a difference in the menu structure between Mac and Windows versions of VLC. Are you using the same OS as Atkins?</p>

<p>A very simple (and perhaps overly simplified) explanation:<br>

<br /> As you know, your lens focuses light onto the sensor - in effect it makes a cone of light that hits the sensor. When the spot that hits the sensor is a 'point' it is in focus. A circle of confusion tells you how big a circle can be and still be indistinguishable from a point (the CoC is usually derived from sensor size in digital cameras). The lens will render things within a certain distance from the sensor plane into circles and everything that gets rendered as being smaller than the CoC is in acceptable focus and that's your depth of field.<br>

<br /> See this image: http://images.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/tut_DOF_lensdiagram.png from this article: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm</p>

<p>Now, why smaller apertures have greater depth of field: http://images.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/tut_dof_aperturediagram.png image from the same page.<br>

The light from the larger aperture is potentially coming in and being more "angled" which allows for larger circles of confusion. The smaller aperture allows light to come in from fewer angles which allows for smaller circles of confusion from a longer part of the scene - hence greater DOF.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I had a similar experience once, years ago, when a friend's daughter asked to take a couple shots with my then-new Minolta A200. She snapped off about two or three shots and when I went through the cards later (this was at the end of a long day of event photography), I realized she probably would have been a better choice of photographer for the even than me....<br>

As much fun as that camera was, I never could get an acceptably sharp photo with it, but this 8 year old shooting automatic managed to get tack-sharp shots..</p>

<p>In addition to the above, consider these two sites required reading<br>

On-camera bounce: http://neilvn.com/tangents/<br>

Off camera: strobist.blogspot.com</p>

<p>For more info:<br>

Flash + umbrella + reflector = rembrandt lighting which is all that some people use. Ed Verosky has a couple ebooks out that have have a very simple two-light system he seems to use for the majority of this portraits and they look great.<br>

Jimmy DiGiorgio just released Guerrilla Headshots that covers basic lighting in addition to other things as well.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>If you're going to be setting it up and tearing it down a number of times, a more expensive material might provide a better measure of durability. It's also theoretically possible that a not-entirely-white material would introduce a color cast into the image.</p>

<p>Then again, many off-brand products seem to be made on the same assembly line and of surplus materials as the name-brand components....</p>