ilia_isakov

<p>as the title says, I currently photograph but plan to eventually get professional video dslr's. I am not a fan of canon eos line but may eventually invest in a red or sony camera. Most of my lenses now have aperture rings and are made for the ef mount. I am planning to buy a zeiss 35mm lens but I dont know if should invest in one with an aperture ring or not, the two are many hundreds of dollars difference. The thing is that I can buy the zeiss for the M or PL? mount with an aperture ring and sleep soundly that I did not just buy a 2 grand lens that I will have to resell one day because it has no A ring or electrical connectivity with a professional video camera like red. so does anyone know if the adapters they sell read data from canon lenses, enough to change settings like Aperture without having manual controls on the actual lens?<br> Thanks for your replies everyone</p>

<p>Thank you. Yes, i've tested these in Raw and saw plenty of difference in both improved noise and brighter and cleaner image with my full fram over the micro four thirds one.</p>

<p>sorry, about that. Here is the link. 1st photo is sony. 2nd photo is micro four thirds.<br> <img src="http://www.eli.camera/photo.html" alt="" /><br> http://www.eli.camera/photo.html.<br> can you send me an article where it says that a full frame eats 2 stops to achieve the same DOF as a four thirds camera?</p>

<p>Hi, I've owned a panasonic GH3 for the past year. as you may know that camera has a micro four thirds sensor. about a month ago i purchased a sony a7rII from Korea on ebay. new and packaged. But I soon realized that this camera does not handle itself better in low light. It handles noise much better. But people say that a full frame camera has about 2 stops more of light cause of the area of the sensor, which is about twice that of the four thirds one. I took two images to compare, at jpeg, both imported into lightroom and exported out and uploaded here. I admit the WB is a bit umatched, but its still not a sufficient reason for why this camera shows such slight improvement in low light performance under the same settings as a four thirds sensor. Both were shot with 50mm lenses (my 25mm on the gh4) and were set to multi metering mode<br> the settings on both are:<br> ISO 2000<br> f2.0<br> 1/30<br> this is my Sony full frame <br> <img src=" alt="" /><br> this is my Panasonic micro 4/3<br> <img src=" alt="" /></p> <p>DID I GET A FAULTY COPY OR IS THIS NORMAL (yes i do see about 1/3-1/2 stop difference)</p>

<p>Hi, this is the listing<br> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-1D-C-EOS-1DC-Digital-Camera-Body-18-1-Megapixel-4K-1DC-/351508521080?hash=item51d78a6078</p> <p>I was wondering if those of you who own this camera or have casually made intelligent decisions when buying in the sort of grey market community of ebay for their camera or supplies, can help me make a smart choice here. Does this listing look legit and what are the things i should inquire of the seller.<br> I have asked the seller who has owned this camera and he replies:that it was owned by a company for about a year.<br> the price seems ballpark fair, a little on the low side for a used 1d-c with such a low shutter count<br> the seller has really good ratings and promises a 30 day warranty.</p> <p>overall, am i making a good decision in buying such a complicated beast of a camera with no manufacturing warranty on ebay, no less. what are your thoughts? thanks</p>

<p>thanks Gerry, I am not sure what it is. Maybe I am doing something wrong with the firmware upgrade, since the "lens upgrade" menu does not show in the first place when I turn my camera. I will try wiping it clean and check again.</p>

<p>Hi, so I have a panasonic gh3 and I just bought the olympus 35-100 f2.0 lens, its a great investment. only problem is that the camera fails to recognize it.<br> I bought the panasonic dmw ma1 adapter.<br> The body firmware is 1.2 (i think thats the latest)<br> I downloaded the firmware update for this particular lens http://www.olympus.co.jp/en/support/imsg/digicamera/download/software/pana/dl/35100_dl.cfm<br> I followed the step pretty carefully. download, extract in desktop, formate my memory card, made permissions for to read and write of the file to be allowed to everyone. and copied the extracted file into the camera.<br> and upon starting my camera, there is no firmware upgrade box that comes up. what am i doing wrong?</p> <p>HAS ANYONE DONE THIS BEFORE WHO CAN GIVE ME AN IDEA OF STEPS THAT I'M MISSING OR VARIOUS COMPATIBILITY ISSUES AND TIPS.</p>

Hi, thanks for the responses. I am a bit of a dodo when it comes to visualizing the final set up. I am trying to get ahold of a brochure of lighting equipemnt and how they each alter a studio set uo. I Know theres nothing concrete on this, given the limitless options of lighting set up, but at least a general overview of light equipment and set uPs. Strangely, i cant find much beyond the conventional explanation of the three light set ups. I need a good glossary on these equipment and add ons. Any recommendations

Hi. I May have overlooked some forums dealing with this. But I can also that that I have found many vague discussions on the subject. The questions being: I have a GH3 olympus fl-600R flash what does an owner of a four thirds camera settel for when he needs to fet his flash off his camera and start shooting more professional flash photography? I realize there is no real TTL system for micro four thirds yet...... Choice A)I have bought the cactus v6 system at B&H cactus lets you manually adjust all surrounding flashes exposure bracket from the transceiver on camera. the tech told me a firmware upgrade would be sufficient However, coming home, it did not work. looking through the website my flash is unsupported. Choice B) I saw a vide that Quantum has a copilot that supports TTL.......turned out to be bogus, as far as I know. Choice c) i tried a vello freewave wireless system at B&H. It works, and of course it is manual. So should i settle for that. Are there any options. photographers who own the same cameras and the same problems, id appreciate some advice. please include links if possible.

<p>here is a link to this entire event which i put on dropbox.<br /> Here is my problem, and please keep from criticizing my technique.<br /> I shot most of these without flash,<br /> At iso's ranging from 3200 - 6400<br /> My highest aperture is a 2.8, combine that with a lowest escapable shutter speed, and that was the ISO I had to use.</p> <p>when I came home I worked extensively on noise removal using such tools as lightrooom's Luminance tool and Clarity tool pushed to rather mild extremes sometimes to polish and take the color noise out………and if you flick through the album you will see how I combined it to make aesthetically pleasing photos of old age and noisy 1800's photos with a metal plate look on them.<br /> Upon export, some photos really "refused" to be sharpened, I checked and exported the same photo at +10 sharpness and +150 sharpness……….it simply hardly budged……hardly<br /> So I resorted to photoshop, and professional noise removal, surface blurring, and sharpening. But that too was very hard to produce a plausible photograph, thats up to normal sharpened and smooth standards.</p> <p>So it is I spent hours in editing sessions………...<br /> If You have the time, skim through the album, please keep the link and images discrete, and I'd like to hear feedback. thank you to all who have answered.<br> https://www.dropbox.com/lightbox/photos</p>

<p>High ISO meaning<br> 3200-6400 (on a four thirds sensor - which is probably worse)<br> and yes jpeg.<br> is that the problem, jpegs don't have enough "information depth" to be sharpened? Because I see that photoshop cs doesn't do the job and lightroom "selectively" sharpens…..and I don't know. I think its a contributing factor, but I also heard that many people reported such problems with lightroom5, and that there is a plug in available for that…….</p>

Hi Ed, thanks for the reply. Yeah those were pics were shot at very high iso, granted that was bad, but i was shooting without flash and had to. The images were noisy and lacked comsiderable sharpness. I tried to view the image on both macs viewer and windows photo viewer, and yes they look hardly touched by the sharpness adjustment i made. I rane a test and saw that at 150 sharpness it might very well look hardly adjusted to be so. I have a gh3 (panasonic). I shot them in jpeg format SRGB in camera color space Shutters at 1/30 And aperture at 2.8 Alot of the photos i shot afe at very high ISO's (and it being a four thirds sensor it is both a necessity even with the lens at f2.8 and an added Focus abberation. But be that as it may Lightroom fixes that on screen, while showing the photo in its photoRGB workspace, but upon export ( at any of the 3 choices for color export) the image is denoised, but left hardly sharpened. And NO i do not resize my photos upon export. Thank you all for replying....

<p>the sharpening settings are as follows.<br> sharpened +70<br> noise reduction<br> luminance +45.</p> <p>But I don't quite follow how my settings matter. what matters is lightroom shows a finished product one way and the same image upon export looks unsharpened.<br> and yes I am using lighroom 5, perhaps that is the issue. and I cannot really upgrade for several reasons. (its not a retail purchase)</p>

<p>Hi, so here is my problem. Lightoom continuously exports photos that are less sharp, (the colors seem to match) but the sharpness is just consistently lower, and raising it to exaggeration in editing and exporting --- still doesn't do the trick. how this happens I don't know. at first i thought it was the interface of layout, that with its rectangular layout, what i was seeing on lightroom always looked sharper than the exported image. But i finally caught up that this was more than an illusion. so here is a photo to demonstrate how an exported image looks more degraded than the "edit".<br> Why does this happen???? On the left you see lightroom finished edit. on the right is the image opened with macs photo viewer.= If you were to look closer you would see the eyes and mouth area are unsharpened in the right image (the exported). and the screenshot itself is of poor quality to show the telling difference. In case you are wondering. I am using lighroom 5 my image is previewed in lightroom using full quality in the settings. And upon export I do not choose the resize button.<br> <br> note: my concern is on the sharpness, not the color space. (does one affect the other, being that my monitor has never been calibrated.)<br> Also, please stick to "easy fixes", if there are any, maybe a secondary plug in or a software to automatically calibrate this.<br> </p>

<p>Hi, I have this fear of dropping cameras, and it finally caught up with me<br> my dog knocked my camera off a couch, and I saw it hit the ground. I checked the camera and it seems to be fine, however, I want to set my fears straight... so please tell me about how high a normal dslr (not cheaply made) - what height of fall can it "survive". Describe similar incidences if you had them.</p> <p>more specifically my question is: what happens when a camera falls down. Lets say there is no visible physical damage.......buyt I am assumingthat there are still moving parts inside the lens and the camera. How does this affect them down the line........will it malfunction someday?</p> <p>(I own a panasonic, gh3, and a 12-35 mm panasonic lens. Both are apparently sturdy, the camera is magnesium alloy).</p> <p> </p>