Forums: Skydiving Disciplines: Photography and Video:
Calling canon experts....

 

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Stumpy  (C 104288)

Jul 1, 2005, 4:12 AM
Post #1 of 36 (5167 views)
Shortcut
Calling canon experts.... Can't Post

Hi all, i have a Canon EOS RT (old 600 series but with the funky fixed mirror) which i love and have used heavily for the last 15 or so years, but i am very aware that the AF is WAAAY slower than some of the newer models out there. I think the motor for the AF may be in the lens so my question is, if i replace the lens will it breathe a new lease of life? I am not ready for jumping camera yet, and i want to put off joining the digital revolution until i am ready, largely due to funding issues and i would rather wait till there is a 35mm sensor at a reasonable price. I do love certain features of mine (5fps motordrive and the fixed mirror) and they are ideal for a lot of the photography i do (mainly sports) so i don't really want to get a new body, but am open to opinions. Thanks all!!!


mr2mk1g  (C 103449)

Jul 1, 2005, 4:15 AM
Post #2 of 36 (5086 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Stumpy] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

by "slower", do you mean the lens is slower to focus?


Stumpy  (C 104288)

Jul 1, 2005, 4:17 AM
Post #3 of 36 (5083 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mr2mk1g] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

yeah - it searches more than newer ones as well but i figure that is to do with the body itself and i can live with it.


dragon2  (D 101989)

Jul 1, 2005, 5:19 AM
Post #4 of 36 (5071 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Stumpy] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Get an USM lens, those have faster autofocus motors in them.


Premier PhreeZone  (D License)
Moderator
Jul 1, 2005, 8:22 AM
Post #5 of 36 (5035 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Stumpy] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Full sensor digital cameras will probally never reach the prosumer level. The cost driver just is not there like it is on the smaller chips. If you are waiting for a full sensor digital camera to become affordable you will probally never make the jump to digital. Last I was reading was Canon was going to only market the full size sensor to the professional series cameras like the 1D and similar. The original 1D does not have near the pixel count or speed that the new Rebel XT has. Marketing from Canon shows 2 very different product futures, one for the prosumer (20d, future x0d models, etc), High end consumer (Rebel, XT, etc) and the Professional series with the full 35 sensor.


billo  (D 24379)

Jul 1, 2005, 9:33 AM
Post #6 of 36 (5020 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Stumpy] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

The speed of AF is dependent on the body first and then the lens. (http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/autofocus3.htm) It's the processing in the body that first tells the lens to seek around, and the speed of this processing is based on what the camera body can do. If your current lens already has fast enough motors to keep up with commands from the camera body, then a newer lens would not improve your AF speed. However, if your current lens is 15 years old and has slow motors (the lens is always playing "catch-up"), then there is a good chance that a lens with a faster motor would help you out a little bit.

As you mentioned, I also found that the AF on the EOS RT is *very* slow (http://www.photozone.de/...nt/reviews/eosrt.htm). Based on that, i think a new body would give your AF a lot more *uumpfh* than a new lens. But if you do want to look into a lens upgrade, my suggestion would be to take your RT to a camera shop and ask them to try out some different lenses and do some experimenting there. If they don't let you do that, find a shop that rents lenses and do some experimenting at home.


Stumpy  (C 104288)

Jul 4, 2005, 12:19 AM
Post #7 of 36 (4968 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Thanks - i was just guessing that technology progression would naturally bring prices down but never mind!!

Start saving for that 20d then! (or whatever the next one is....)
just out of interest, where were you reading about the canon future product lines?

(And thanks Billo - that clarifies a lot of stuff)


(This post was edited by Stumpy on Jul 4, 2005, 12:21 AM)


AndyMan  (D 25698)

Jul 4, 2005, 5:32 PM
Post #8 of 36 (4929 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Stumpy] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Thanks - i was just guessing that technology progression would naturally bring prices down but never mind!!

I believe they will. I've been hanging around the IT business for too long, I've seen far too many people say "that will never happen", and things turn out to show they were flat wrong. To say "there will never be a full size consumer CCD" makes as much sense as Bill Gates saying "Nobody will ever need more than 640 KB of RAM".

Just a guess, but based on Moore's law, we should expect a CCD of roughly double today's size in 18 monthes.

We are SO lucky to have a highly competitive market for D-SLR's.

_Am




gowlerk  (C 3196)

Jun 10, 2013, 9:25 PM
Post #10 of 36 (4519 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AndyMan] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Full frame sensor Canon and Nikon bodies are now under $2000. I love my Nikon D600. But wear it on my head to skydive? No thanks. It weighs nearly 2.5 times as much as my DX sensor D5000 and full frame ultra wide lenses are huge. The image quality is great on DX, the camera is small and the smaller format makes it easier to have more in focus. Don't wait for the larger sensor for skydiving, but FX is fabulous for portraits with a long fast lens.


Zlew  (D 21616)

Jun 11, 2013, 7:12 AM
Post #11 of 36 (4413 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gowlerk] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Interesting to read this old thread and see how things have changed. I remember seeing my first DSLR in the late 90's. It was 6 megapixle, and cost 5 grand.

It is very cool how far the full frame sensors have come, but to me the more interesting thing is what is happening in the mirror-less world. The image quality and performance you can get out of a camera that weighs less than a pound (with lens and bat) and the size of a cell phone is pretty sweet. IMO, some are %90 to the performance of the consumer level DSLR's that are (and have) dominated skydiving still cameras for years and are smaller than just the lens on many of them. Who knows where skydiving will go, but I think there is a good chance we will see more of these as they continue to improve, and less of the larger consumer/pro-consumer/pro DSLR's for the non IMAX video guys.

For the type of pics I am taking now, I don't see a good argument for me to strap the canon DSLR back on, and take the mirrorless off.


BMFin

Jun 11, 2013, 6:00 PM
Post #12 of 36 (4326 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Zlew] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

In my opionon a Full frame is inferior in skydiving enviroment because it has slower FPS and shallower DOF.

Full frame is not for sports photography.


Zlew  (D 21616)

Jun 11, 2013, 6:42 PM
Post #13 of 36 (4322 views)
Shortcut
Re: [BMFin] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

FPS for video or stills? The 1DX will rock out 12fps if you are willing to strap that monster (size and price!) body to your head. In many ways a sports photogs dream (just not our sport! ha)

I think you will see full frame continue to get into smaller frame cameras at lower prices... but more importantly I think you will see mirrorless (or similar) cameras continue to become more capable. So, the lower end coming up may benefit us more than the high end coming down.

Can get an EPM1 for under 300 bucks now...crazy!


BMFin

Jun 11, 2013, 7:50 PM
Post #14 of 36 (4306 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Zlew] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Zlew wrote:
FPS for video or stills? The 1DX will rock out 12fps if you are willing to strap that monster (size and price!) body to your head. In many ways a sports photogs dream (just not our sport! ha)!

Well, yeah. The 1Dx seems to be the first Full frame that can compete with the frame rates of the smaller sensors.

However, it seems to be the only FF body that could really outperform a 7D in skydiving enviroment even though it makes a shallover DOF. So, yes. A 6000 dollar full frame can outperform a 1000 dollar APS-C. In a way it proves my point. Smile


RandySwallows  (D License)

Jun 12, 2013, 12:13 PM
Post #15 of 36 (4249 views)
Shortcut
Re: [BMFin] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

BMFin wrote:
In my opionon a Full frame is inferior in skydiving enviroment because it has slower FPS and shallower DOF.

*Unless ultra shallow depth of field is what you are seeking in your shot. You don't have to come down with more than 10-20 images for it to be a successful shoot. I've learned shooting less is much more :)


BMFin

Jun 12, 2013, 1:02 PM
Post #16 of 36 (4236 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RandySwallows] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

RandySwallows wrote:

*Unless ultra shallow depth of field is what you are seeking in your shot. You don't have to come down with more than 10-20 images for it to be a successful shoot. I've learned shooting less is much more :)

I think the opposite. More is more IMO.


Zlew  (D 21616)

Jun 12, 2013, 1:41 PM
Post #17 of 36 (4228 views)
Shortcut
Re: [BMFin] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

I also like high depth of field for freefall work. Esp when you are talking about clouds and other backdrops.

Even if you like narrow DOF, I don't think it will be difficult to get what you are looking for from FF, crop, or 4/3rds.

If you want high DOF- wide glass and stop it down a bit.
Narrow DOF- longer glass, and leave it wide open.

Most skydiving photography is from pretty wide angle glass, in strong light, so a big range of aperture settings are available. Same glass to same glass, I haven't noticed that big of a DOF difference (FOV...sure... but not much of the DOF front) between full frame and crop. Most of the examples I have seen that have big DOF difference with full frame vs crop are with "equivalent" glass, not the same glass- 50MM on crop vs 80mm on full frame for example. There is a difference, but IMO, it is really slight and easily compensated with glass/ and "f" settings

Anyway, for me DOF is low on the list of what camera to buy because it is something the photographer has a lot of control over. What we don't have control over...and are things that help me choose what to buy- weight, general quality, frame rate, shutter lag,cost etc. For me, this is why a crop is better than a full frame, and why something like a 4/3rds is better than a crop for skydiving.

The attached pics were taken with a 4/3rds camera with a 2.0X crop factor, and a 20mm lens. That works out to the equivalent of a 40mm lens on a full frame. The pics are not exactly low DOF or high bokeh. I will check the meta data if you would like, but I think these were shot around F9.

Off on a bit of a tangent there... but things have been slow in the photo/video forum! :)
Attachments: DOF.jpg (82.0 KB)
  dof2.jpg (72.4 KB)


Premier DSE  (D 29060)

Jun 12, 2013, 8:13 PM
Post #18 of 36 (4196 views)
Shortcut
Re: [BMFin] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

BMFin wrote:
RandySwallows wrote:

*Unless ultra shallow depth of field is what you are seeking in your shot. You don't have to come down with more than 10-20 images for it to be a successful shoot. I've learned shooting less is much more :)

I think the opposite. More is more IMO.

More is more overall, and in sports, that's the general attitude.
IMO, Super shallow DOF doesn't really work in skydiving, and supershallow DOF annoys the hell out of me in cinematic work.
Shallow DOF...great in anything. The over-the-top that is becoming popular with the f1.4 crowd...Crazy


BMFin

Jun 13, 2013, 4:52 AM
Post #19 of 36 (4184 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

DSE wrote:
BMFin wrote:
RandySwallows wrote:

*Unless ultra shallow depth of field is what you are seeking in your shot. You don't have to come down with more than 10-20 images for it to be a successful shoot. I've learned shooting less is much more :)

I think the opposite. More is more IMO.

More is more overall, and in sports, that's the general attitude.
IMO, Super shallow DOF doesn't really work in skydiving, and supershallow DOF annoys the hell out of me in cinematic work.
Shallow DOF...great in anything. The over-the-top that is becoming popular with the f1.4 crowd...Crazy

Yes, I agree. I also think shallow DOF isnt really going to work in skydiving. This is (among other things) why I prefer the smaller sensor over Full frame.


Premier DSE  (D 29060)

Jun 13, 2013, 5:08 AM
Post #20 of 36 (4176 views)
Shortcut
Re: [BMFin] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

BMFin wrote:
DSE wrote:
BMFin wrote:
RandySwallows wrote:

*Unless ultra shallow depth of field is what you are seeking in your shot. You don't have to come down with more than 10-20 images for it to be a successful shoot. I've learned shooting less is much more :)

I think the opposite. More is more IMO.

More is more overall, and in sports, that's the general attitude.
IMO, Super shallow DOF doesn't really work in skydiving, and supershallow DOF annoys the hell out of me in cinematic work.
Shallow DOF...great in anything. The over-the-top that is becoming popular with the f1.4 crowd...Crazy

Yes, I agree. I also think shallow DOF isnt really going to work in skydiving. This is (among other things) why I prefer the smaller sensor over Full frame.

Of course it works. It may be the flyer can't get themselves to the correct distance for the focal length to be appropriate, but blurring the ground, other skydivers, or clouds surely can work as a creative tool. My issue is with the super shallow, where someone is looking to get a nose in focus and the helmet out of focus. It doesn't add art to the shot, IMO. Not in our giant fishbowl, anyway.


RandySwallows  (D License)

Jun 13, 2013, 9:08 AM
Post #21 of 36 (4142 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DSE] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
DSE wrote:
BMFin wrote:
DSE wrote:
BMFin wrote:
RandySwallows wrote:

*Unless ultra shallow depth of field is what you are seeking in your shot. You don't have to come down with more than 10-20 images for it to be a successful shoot. I've learned shooting less is much more :)

DSE wrote:
More is more overall, and in sports, that's the general attitude.

I agree, but firing 8fps at whatever happens to come across one's lens never seemed deliberate to me. I find that waiting for the shot that was in my head before boarding the plane has served me better :)

DSE wrote:
Shallow DOF...great in anything. The over-the-top that is becoming popular with the f1.4 crowd...Crazy

I can be guilty of chasing things from 1.4 :)

DSE wrote:
Of course it works. It may be the flyer can't get themselves to the correct distance for the focal length to be appropriate, but blurring the ground, other skydivers, or clouds surely can work as a creative tool.

+1...2 for that matter

I agree with that, to an extent. I jump a 7d with my 5d II so I'm not taking a sides. I was never a fan of full auto or three round bursts either :) I don't shoot weddings like that and I have always enjoyed being deliberate about the shot I have in my head before getting on the airplane.


Laszloimage  (D 22468)

Jun 18, 2013, 1:44 PM
Post #22 of 36 (3836 views)
Shortcut
Re: [BMFin] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

The shallow DOF can really work IMO...Smile
Attachments: Aug_26th_09 063.JPG (61.1 KB)
  March_18_12 073.JPG (61.6 KB)
  March_10_12 094.jpg (80.5 KB)


hellodarrentan

Jun 19, 2013, 2:31 AM
Post #23 of 36 (3788 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Laszloimage] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

nice photos! what was the lens used?


Laszloimage  (D 22468)

Jun 19, 2013, 7:40 AM
Post #24 of 36 (3733 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hellodarrentan] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Thank you! 5D and 5D Mark-II bodies. The first shot with Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS lens, the other two with Canon 50mm f1.2 L lens.


gowlerk  (C 3196)

Jun 20, 2013, 5:23 AM
Post #25 of 36 (3667 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Laszloimage] Calling canon experts.... [In reply to] Can't Post

That is indeed a nice shot. But I don't think too many people are going to jump with a 70-200 2.8 and a full frame. Yes shallow DOF can make nice shots, but it's difficult to use and compose correctly without a viewfinder. Your skills are well beyond mine.

It would be easier with the fast 50mm. Was it wide open, or stopped down a little?

Ken


First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving Disciplines : Photography and Video

 


Search for (options)