dSLR thread

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,315
Location
Monterey, CA
I always thought that the smaller cameras were for those that couldn't swallow the larger bodies of real DSLRs. You are clearly not one of those people. What are you doing with an A7r anyway? Keeping up with both Canon and Nikon glass was too easy?
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,268
Location
USA
I always thought that the smaller cameras were for those that couldn't swallow the larger bodies of real DSLRs. You are clearly not one of those people. What are you doing with an A7r anyway? Keeping up with both Canon and Nikon glass was too easy?
I have some decent glass, but Canon c. 2007 sensors are getting old.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,268
Location
USA
The L bracket has to be on the Metabones IV adapter or it vibrates even more than usual. The damned shutter shakes the camera somehow, so the low shutter speeds are useless even on a solid tripod.
There is also a noticeable shutter delay as well since the sensor does not have the global shutter. :crap:
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,315
Location
Monterey, CA
Since we're ranting vaguely, the autofocus for videos on the 7DII makes a noticeable noise even on external mics connected via the flash shoe. Not sure how to decouple that. Plan B is to switch to the lavalier hidden just off camera somewhere, but that is considerably less portable/mobile/convenient.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,268
Location
USA
Since we're ranting vaguely, the autofocus for videos on the 7DII makes a noticeable noise even on external mics connected via the flash shoe. Not sure how to decouple that. Plan B is to switch to the lavalier hidden just off camera somewhere, but that is considerably less portable/mobile/convenient.
The 7D II is not so good for video production. AF is not normally used in quality productions, but in ENG video cameras.
Which lenses are you using now?
If you have to use AF with an onboard mic like a camcorder, try one of the Canon video lenses indicated by "STM" in the name.

Also take a look at the EVF cameras, like Sony, Fuji, Olympus, etc. They are better for the videos for that EVF if nothing else.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,315
Location
Monterey, CA
I'm just using my regular lenses, I have a new Rode directional mic with vibration isolation arriving Monday that should solve the issue.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,268
Location
USA
Does anyone have the 5DsR yet? I cancelled the wrong order, so the one of the two that arrived ended up in storage 1800 miles away and not easy to access. :(

Meanwhile the A7rII is available for pre-order as of this week. The sensor looks amazing, but it is still crippled with the battery life (reduced to 290 per CIPA), single SD slot, apparently the same EVF, and other limitations. I can't see spending $3200 for the toy-like body.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,315
Location
Monterey, CA
Thanks. Honestly I don't think my gear is a limiting factor at the moment, so maybe I should just be smart and not spend more money on photog stuff for a while.
 

snowhiker

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
1,668
Thanks. Honestly I don't think my gear is a limiting factor at the moment, so maybe I should just be smart and not spend more money on photog stuff for a while.
This. A 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000x this!

I think there are probably twelve people on the planet who are limited by their gear and not themselves. Lunar is one of those twelve ;)

Of course when it's pushing 115F outside it's hard to get any motivation to leave the house.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,268
Location
USA
This. A 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000x this!

I think there are probably twelve people on the planet who are limited by their gear and not themselves. Lunar is one of those twelve ;)
It depends on the definition of limited. I'd say that everyone is limited by the equipment. Whether people understand the limitations and how to work around them for their needs is another issue.
 

Tea

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,724
Location
27a No Fixed Address, Oz.
Website
www.redhill.net.au
46 degrees Snowhiker! Hoolie Doolie that's hot! And only the start of summer too. Nasty! I've gone through a couple of 46 degree days, one of them at home the other in outback Western Australia, and a single shocker of a 47 degree day (all without AC) and they are seriously difficult to take. Just about the only time I have ever regretted my fur, in fact.

(On the 47 degree day, which came at the end of a very dry summer and immediately subsequent to a full week of 40+ days and had a howling northerly wind as well, 173 people died in fires. As chance decreed, none of the fires happened to be close to us that day. I vividly remember talking at length to a firefighter some time afterwards. He and his mates were assigned to protect a street. an ordinary suburban street, in outer Bendigo. We are not talking big trees or bush, just houses and suburban lawns. They had eight or ten blokes, all properly equipped, and two modern tankers. They fought the fire and flat-out failed. They had the know-how, they had all the gear, they just couldn't stop it. The street burned to the ground. No-one was hurt, everyone was evacuated in time, but the wind and the insane heat of it was too much for human agency to deal with.)

Anyway, good luck for your summer guys. I hope it's a mild one and you get a little rain.
 

Tannin

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
4,432
Location
Huon Valley, Tasmania
Website
www.redhill.net.au
I don't believe in it, Bartender. Heating, yes, though not too much of it. I never heat the whole house, or even a whole room, just one small part of it, which all one needs to be comfortable in winter. As for air-conditioning, no. Just no. It is a crime against nature.

(I have AC at the shop where members of the public visit, but I hardly ever use it. It's a naturally cold building, and last summer I think I turned it on only twice. In winter, the shop is miserably cold and no amount of heating ever seems to warm it up much , so I generally don't bother anymore, just wear warm clothes. This mania for having everything heated to 25 degrees in winter and cooled to 17 degrees in summer is not just horribly irresponsible, it's unhealthy. Humans are perfectly capable of living comfortably in a wide range of temperatures and have done so for thousands, probably millions of years. My advice to most people is HTFU Princess.)
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,268
Location
USA
Damn. I need to find another option for the 5DsR RAW file conversions. Maybe DXO or C1?
 

snowhiker

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
1,668
Damn. I need to find another option for the 5DsR RAW file conversions. Maybe DXO or C1?
There's not some plugin for 5DSR RAW's?

This looks interesting. I wonder how it compares to the Nikon version. I wonder if a new Nikon 24-70 with PF element will be out anytime soon? The 300mm f/4 PF lens is very good.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,268
Location
USA
There's not some plugin for 5DSR RAW's?

This looks interesting. I wonder how it compares to the Nikon version. I wonder if a new Nikon 24-70 with PF element will be out anytime soon? The 300mm f/4 PF lens is very good.
I refuse the CC and even the new LR full retail spies on every image clicked, though I disdain LR for the catalog function as well. I'm done with Adobe except for an older version of PS that has the perpetual license.
I just need to convert RAW to 16-bit TIFF. The new Canon DPP 4.x is slower than half the speed of 3.x. It appears that 3.x is no longer being updated though Canon promised 12 months last year. DPP 4.x conversion with the 50MP files is just ridiculously slow on the desktop and would take forever on a laptop.

I have no idea why Nikon would make a 24-70 with diffractive elements other than to prevent someone else from doing so. It's not needed to save weight in the smaller lenses.
If you need VR in a 24-70/2.8, the Tamron is a decent lens. Tokina has been making 28-70 and 24-70 lenses for years, and they have never been up to par compared to Nikon/Canon.
Buy a used Nikkor if money is tight.
 

snowhiker

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
1,668
I have no idea why Nikon would make a 24-70 with diffractive elements other than to prevent someone else from doing so. It's not needed to save weight in the smaller lenses.
If you need VR in a 24-70/2.8, the Tamron is a decent lens. Tokina has been making 28-70 and 24-70 lenses for years, and they have never been up to par compared to Nikon/Canon.
Buy a used Nikkor if money is tight.
Just wondering if the "pro" Tokina will be any better than their older one. $2k is a lot for a new Nikon, especially if a newer version is in the works. I won't need anything soon as its still too hot to do anything outside. I'll start thinking seriously about it three months from now.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,315
Location
Monterey, CA
"Done with Adobe" is a very bold statement for a photographer. LR is a POS, but you're now a bunch of versions behind on PS and buying new cameras? Pirating PS might be the best road ahead, as I don't know any workflow that doesn't include LR or Bridge handling RAWs.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,268
Location
USA
I don't like the Bridge at all. I'm not a photographer, but most of them that used Phase One got into the Capture One early on and use it for miniature and subminiature formats as well.
I screwed up the demo though.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,315
Location
Monterey, CA
I'm just a working stiff, not a photographer.
I'd agree that there are lines between someone who makes their living taking pictures and someone who takes their photography hobby as seriously as you do, but there aren't many lines and they are awfully thin.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,268
Location
USA
I don't believe in it, Bartender. Heating, yes, though not too much of it. I never heat the whole house, or even a whole room, just one small part of it, which all one needs to be comfortable in winter. As for air-conditioning, no. Just no. It is a crime against nature.

(I have AC at the shop where members of the public visit, but I hardly ever use it. It's a naturally cold building, and last summer I think I turned it on only twice. In winter, the shop is miserably cold and no amount of heating ever seems to warm it up much , so I generally don't bother anymore, just wear warm clothes. This mania for having everything heated to 25 degrees in winter and cooled to 17 degrees in summer is not just horribly irresponsible, it's unhealthy. Humans are perfectly capable of living comfortably in a wide range of temperatures and have done so for thousands, probably millions of years. My advice to most people is HTFU Princess.)
Well of course A/C is not natural, but neither is the 5DsR. The resolution is super-natural. :D
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,268
Location
USA
I'd agree that there are lines between someone who makes their living taking pictures and someone who takes their photography hobby as seriously as you do, but there aren't many lines and they are awfully thin.
Apparently I'm not quite normal.
 

snowhiker

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
1,668
I could see myself being a birder and shooting birds. Two problems:

1) Finding birds to shoot.
2) I'd have to shoot a w/300mm lens only. Could never afford more lens.

HUGE Nikon lens "price-gap" from 300mm to 400mm. The new 300mm F/4E PF is $2000 while the cheapest 400mm prime is $9500 (old) $12000 (new), f/2.8 only NO f/4 or f/5.6. Well I guess the 200-400mm is only $7000, and the 80-400mm is only $2700 but it's CRAP compared to the primes.

WISH Nikon had a cheap 400mm f/5.6 like <cough> Canon <cough>.

The 300mm f/4E PF with 1.4x extender is probably better than the 80-400mm and a bit cheaper too. Probably how I'd go in the future, aka next year, maybe.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,268
Location
USA
I could see myself being a birder and shooting birds. Two problems:

1) Finding birds to shoot.
2) I'd have to shoot a w/300mm lens only. Could never afford more lens.

HUGE Nikon lens "price-gap" from 300mm to 400mm. The new 300mm F/4E PF is $2000 while the cheapest 400mm prime is $9500 (old) $12000 (new), f/2.8 only NO f/4 or f/5.6. Well I guess the 200-400mm is only $7000, and the 80-400mm is only $2700 but it's CRAP compared to the primes.

WISH Nikon had a cheap 400mm f/5.6 like <cough> Canon <cough>.

The 300mm f/4E PF with 1.4x extender is probably better than the 80-400mm and a bit cheaper too. Probably how I'd go in the future, aka next year, maybe.
A long lens only does so much due to atmospheric limitations. The most important part is to get closer. That may take blinds or wading through rivers, mud etc. and planning for days, weeks, etc.

The 80-400G on a D7100 (now D7200) does quite well for the cost. I don't know why the 300/4 with a TC would be any better.
You can find a used 500/4 P or perhaps an older Sigma 500/4.5 at reasonable prices. The new 500/600 Nikkors are probably better than anything else, but over $10K like the 2012+ Canon lenses.
To be practical, you can buy a 150-600 Tamron or Sigma C for not much more than a grand or the Sigma S for about twice that. IQ is rather decent, but not prime quality.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,315
Location
Monterey, CA
Before the 100-400II I had a 170-500 Sigma that was complete crap. I'd get better shots using my 180 Macro and cropping. 300mm is not particularly bad for birding, as Lunar said there is no substitute for getting closer.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
15,268
Location
USA
Before the 100-400II I had a 170-500 Sigma that was complete crap. I'd get better shots using my 180 Macro and cropping. 300mm is not particularly bad for birding, as Lunar said there is no substitute for getting closer.
You had one of the worst of the worst. The old 50-500 (not OS) was halfway decent and the newer 150-600 lenses are somewhat usable up to 500.
 
Top