Posts for: Notorious T.O.D.
Jun 17, 2020 06:28:07 #
Yes, this is a feature on the 1Dx2 also and can be quite confusing if you accidentally activate it. I guess it has migrated to at least the camera body the OP has too now.
CHG_CANON wrote:
Check page 565 of the EOS 90D manual and Custom Function II - 10 for linking the AF point based on the camera orientation.
Jun 16, 2020 00:18:39 #
Yes, 1.6 million ISO would be much more impressive...
boberic wrote:
At first glance 1600 ISO sounds high but it's only 2 f-stops above 400
Jun 15, 2020 22:02:28 #
Especially on Facebook...
boberic wrote:
If we are talking about a "News" photo in very poor lighting, with no time to set up a flash, a bad photo is a whole lot better than no photo. Many bad photos get published.
Jun 15, 2020 16:22:42 #
Ok, I got my Profoto gear from B&H. That holder comes with 4 mounts, 2 for Speedlites and 2 for triggers. My Canon 600s have the triggers built in so I have used the 2 trigger holders to hold 2 more speedlites for a total of 4. It is a very versatile piece in my view.The outer ring also rotates so you can easily angle you boxes if you need to. You can fit 2 speedlights inside the ring, maybe 3 but it would get pretty tight. I have a 7’ parabolic umbrella I use with 3-4 speedlites sometimes. Let me know if you have any questions...
Sdubois wrote:
No this is great.. I needed an option for my speedlights as I get faster sync rates than my pro strobes which is needed for dark action shots like jumping with colored powder for example.
I need to invest in a ring light soon and thankfully they don't seem to cost as much as my strobes.
I need to invest in a ring light soon and thankfully they don't seem to cost as much as my strobes.
Jun 14, 2020 10:12:02 #
This is the Profoto Speedring that I was referring to. It holds speedlights and Profoto softboxes. Profoto quality and price...
At you talking about this or a ring light?
At you talking about this or a ring light?
Sdubois wrote:
Sure! I need to look into getting a speed ring I like the look in the eyes of the models
Jun 13, 2020 16:47:52 #
It doesn’t slow down my 1Dx2 with a CFast card. You can basically hold the shutter button down until the card fills, the buffer will not hold you back in reality. The MkIII is even faster with newer processors...
imagemeister wrote:
IMO, shooting any form of raw can slow your camera down - including AF ..... but especially BOTH ! - again, just my experienced, studied and logical OPINION.
.
.
Jun 13, 2020 16:44:01 #
You current body doesn’t weigh zero...so it is only the difference...
Sark17 wrote:
I was leaning that way, but dang that thing is heavy! I do a lot of walking and I imagine I’d feel an additional 3lbs, but if it’s that much better (and I imagine it is!), I’ll just have to lift more weights!
Jun 13, 2020 09:58:24 #
It’s a shame more people don’t get The chance to experience a 1D Series body. I prefer the built in vertical grip and the size and weight help balance longer lenses especially when hand holding.
Perhaps your friend should rent a couple bodies to try out. Or buy from a place like B&Ag where you can return easily if not happy...
Perhaps your friend should rent a couple bodies to try out. Or buy from a place like B&Ag where you can return easily if not happy...
Sark17 wrote:
I feel like I’ve invested in really solid glass. I... (show quote)
Jun 13, 2020 07:01:15 #
For a full frame DSLR body I would say a 1Dx3. The 1 Series can shoot anything well. Watch some of the videos regarding its focus tracking features. If not shooting as many quickly moving subjects you can save some money with the 5D4.
Gonna need some good glass too.
Gonna need some good glass too.
Jun 11, 2020 21:42:02 #
Well if that is your point I can understand that part of it but it is not as simple as that alone.
davesit wrote:
My point is not that fast lenses are obsolete, but rather if F1.8 today is the new F1.4 because of improvements in sensor technology, signal processing etc...
Jun 11, 2020 12:39:18 #
Yes, fast lenses still have their value and the market continues to provide them...
davesit wrote:
The fact that you can still get a identifiable photo at an ISO of a million is a pretty good achievement. And ISO sensitivity is improving all the time. Does one still need a F1.4 lens anymore?
The fact that you can still get a identifiable photo at an ISO of a million is a pretty good achievement. And ISO sensitivity is improving all the time. Does one still need a F1.4 lens anymore?
Jun 11, 2020 12:36:46 #
Depends on the lens and if you have image stabilization or not. Also if what you are shooting has movement then you need enough shutter speed to stop or mostly stop the motion. A blurry image will be even less useful than a high iso one.
crooner wrote:
Most of the example photos in the link from the indoor concert have shutter speeds of 1/500 or faster. The answer may be obvious but why wouldn't slowing the shutter speed help? Wouldn't that be a reasonable way to shoot at lower ISO? even handheld?
Jun 11, 2020 10:14:11 #
Agree, and as processors, sensors and electronics get better the high iso performance will continue to improve.
jerryc41 wrote:
Well, it's a case of getting a picture or getting nothing. Sometimes, anything is better than nothing. Over time, high ISO shooting will get better and better.
Jun 11, 2020 06:56:06 #
Likely equally horrible. My 1Dx mkII is decent up to 25,000 or so. After that it starts getting noisy rather quickly. But 10 years before that noise was getting bad at 3,600 with my 1D MkIII...
Howard5252 wrote:
That brings up the question of what an image would look like at ISO 819,200 ? That number is for the Canon EOS-1D Mark iii
Jun 10, 2020 12:59:27 #
If I can beg, borrow or maybe rent a 1.4 Extender III I will try this on my 1Dx MkII. It would be an interesting experiment... I will have to see if I have some shots with my daughters T3i and the 2x with my 70-200.