Knuckledragger Posted February 1, 2012 Author Report Posted February 1, 2012 I'd send it to an official Canon service center. I_D is right, the guts of a digicam are small, delicate and carefully aligned.
VPI Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 One with the Sigma 150 macro. I am going to have to study up on this as it is very different than any lens I have. I did not realize the Aperture would change depending upon distance from subject.
Jon L Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 I'd send it to an official Canon service center. I_D is right, the guts of a digicam are small, delicate and carefully aligned. Wow, it sure looked like fungus, but it was apparently a bunch of condensation. This camera had just flown in from Asia (in the cabin though), and I guess it was too cold. I don't really get it since it's been pretty dry here in SoCal, but it picked up condensation anyway. A day inside with heater on happened to cure the problem!
Edwood Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 Well, now I've done it. Preordered the Fuji X-Pro 1 and 35mm f/1.4 lens. Been quite pissed at Sony's utter lack of decent E-Mount lens choices. So bye bye to Sony NEX system for me.
Salt Peanuts Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 ^ Nice. I just looked for it in Amazon and I see the price for body-only stayed at $1699 - was hoping it would be lower. I'll be impatiently waiting to see how the AF speed/accuracy fares on the production units. I don't need a blazing AF speed (the one on my current camera isn't that fast anyways) but wouldn't want it to be so slow/inaccurate that it hinders using the camera, especially since it's been reported manually focusing with it will be as painful as it is on X100.
VPI Posted February 3, 2012 Report Posted February 3, 2012 Any of you guys have portfolios set up at 500px? Nice little site and some really talented photogs on there.
Iron_Dreamer Posted February 3, 2012 Report Posted February 3, 2012 One with the Sigma 150 macro. I am going to have to study up on this as it is very different than any lens I have. I did not realize the Aperture would change depending upon distance from subject. I have this lens as well. The behavior you mention is endemic to any internal-focusing macro lens. As the lens focuses closer, the effective aperture size is reduced, hence the smaller f-number displayed in the viewfinder. Some older copies of this lens (like mine) still show the chosen aperture, rather than the working aperture, as yours does. It is a killer lens though, I've used it for everything from macro, to portraits, and night landscapes. Did you get the new stabilized version, or the older, non-stabilized version?
Cankin Posted February 3, 2012 Report Posted February 3, 2012 Does anyone have Yongnuo or Nissin flash? how are their quality in general??
VPI Posted February 3, 2012 Report Posted February 3, 2012 I have this lens as well. The behavior you mention is endemic to any internal-focusing macro lens. As the lens focuses closer, the effective aperture size is reduced, hence the smaller f-number displayed in the viewfinder. Some older copies of this lens (like mine) still show the chosen aperture, rather than the working aperture, as yours does. It is a killer lens though, I've used it for everything from macro, to portraits, and night landscapes. Did you get the new stabilized version, or the older, non-stabilized version? It is the new version. I really wanted a small zoom with good quality so this will work well plus give me macro capabilities.
crappyjones123 Posted February 3, 2012 Report Posted February 3, 2012 I received the d7000 last night and for some photos it is giving me a yellow tint on the bottom or top half of the screen. Some pictures are just entirely yellow. Any thoughts?
bhjazz Posted February 3, 2012 Report Posted February 3, 2012 Well, now I've done it. Preordered the Fuji X-Pro 1 and 35mm f/1.4 lens. Been quite pissed at Sony's utter lack of decent E-Mount lens choices. So bye bye to Sony NEX system for me. Wow, and just a few weeks before I pull the trigger for the NEX-5N. hmm. Moar research needed for me, then...
RudeWolf Posted February 3, 2012 Report Posted February 3, 2012 Looks like auto White Balance may be acting up. That is, if you haven't changed anything between the two shots.
crappyjones123 Posted February 3, 2012 Report Posted February 3, 2012 2 shots were taken back to back in continuous shooting mode.
laxx Posted February 3, 2012 Report Posted February 3, 2012 (edited) I thought continuous shooting under fluorescent lighting causes different white balance due to the frequency of the light's refresh rate (probably wrong term). Edit Fluorescent lights can flicker at twice the frequency of the current feeding them, which implies an entire cycle of the flicker will take between 1/100 and 1/120 second. During each cycle the light's intensity and its color temperature can change. Thus, if you're using a shutter speed of 1/100 second or faster, you might observe exactly these phenomena: your photos make an interesting document of them, especially the bottom photo. Details appear deep within a good Wikipedia article on fluorescent lamps under the heading "Flicker Problems". The article references "The Feral Photographer" blog which gives a brief (simplified) explanation from a digital photographer's perspective. For sports photography indoors you need a short exposure time to freeze the action. Consider flash options if they are possible. Very short exposures (down to 1/4000 second typically) can be achieved with HSS flashes. To an extent you can adjust the color balance, especially when you're shooting RAW images, but that's going to be tricky during the color transition. Edited February 3, 2012 by laxx
crappyjones123 Posted February 3, 2012 Report Posted February 3, 2012 http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/4115/do-fluorescent-lighting-and-shutter-speed-create-a-problem-with-color-cast Problem solved.
falkon Posted February 4, 2012 Report Posted February 4, 2012 Anyone interested in the OM-D? It seems nice but M43 has its limitations. Mostly DOF and low light capability. Although since it's olympus, I'm sure AF will be extremely quick. Much quicker than the X-pro1
Iron_Dreamer Posted February 4, 2012 Report Posted February 4, 2012 It's hard for me to take anything much smaller than APS-C very seriously, and even an APS-C cam needs to be damn well done. I find it quite annoying that many m43 lenses are nearly as expensive as their full-frame equivalents (like the Panasonic Leica 25 1.4 vs. Nikon/Canon/Sigma 50 1.4), which cover four times the sensor area. I'm interested to see how the X-Pro1 sensor tests out. ISO performance certainly looked good on the LCD when I tried the cam at CES, but still not up to D3/D700 levels (though some diehard Fujiheads would try to convince you otherwise). The sensor size and lens speed of the Fuji system make it the most promising on the market right now, for image quality.
Jon L Posted February 4, 2012 Report Posted February 4, 2012 Does anyone have Yongnuo or Nissin flash? how are their quality in general?? I have Yongnuo YN-467 (E-TTL) and YN-460 II (manual). I also have Canon 580EX II and 430EX II. Frankly, both Yongnuo's are every bit as good functionally as 430EX II, and since I'm not all that impressed by 430EX build quality anyway, Yongnuo build quality seems fine to me, at 1/4 to 1/5th the price. Yongnuos also have optical slave, which Canons don't (why not?). 580EX II is far better built than all of the above but way overpriced IMO. While I can vouch for my own YN-467 and 460 II, there are certain Yongnuo models, including the latest YN-565 that have quite a few user complaints regarding early death, etc, so YMMV.
aerius Posted February 5, 2012 Report Posted February 5, 2012 Anyone interested in the OM-D? It seems nice but M43 has its limitations. Mostly DOF and low light capability. Although since it's olympus, I'm sure AF will be extremely quick. Much quicker than the X-pro1 Nope, I'll stick with my OM-1. I hate EVFs, give me an actual optical viewfinder and at least an APS-C sensor. Given that it's an OM, I can't understand why it doesn't have a full-frame sensor. I just don't get this camera. Mind you I have the entire X-Pro-1 system on order so they'd literally have to come out with a digital OM-2SP for me to buy into the system.
jpelg Posted February 5, 2012 Report Posted February 5, 2012 (edited) I don't get it either. I think the Olympus designers missed the point. Those of us who used to shoot film are hankering for a digital camera that handles like our old film bodies & has resolution & dynamic range that approaches our old film medium. I want a shutter speed dial. I want a real aperture ring. I want an ISO dial. I want the brightest, clearest viewfinder to make it easier to manually focus. I want lenses with markings to allow for easy zone prefocusing. Fuck LCD's with buttons, & menus, & submenus. Making the same digital camera, controls and all (or lack thereof), in the shape of a classic OM camera does not cut it, imo. But what do I know...*shrug* Edited February 5, 2012 by jpelg
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now