Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
Cyprus tour
|
Re: Cyprus tour
Posted: 15 Jul 2008 at 7:53 GMT
|
go to thread
|
|
All looks good to me, didn't check every link but it all seemed to be working OK.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
A VERY untechnical question
|
Re: A VERY untechnical question
Posted: 14 Jul 2008 at 22:18 GMT
|
go to thread
|
calumet do two good value laptop bags with fold out screen shades:
www.calumetphoto.co.uk/ctl?ac.ui.pn=search.Search&query=laptop%20cases
I use their own brand one for my ibook when shooting teathered with my mast.Think tank also do one, though it's probably much more expensive.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Bracketing exposure when shooting in RAW?
|
Re: Bracketing exposure when shooting in RAW?
Posted: 12 Jul 2008 at 15:12 GMT
|
go to thread
|
jimmyd said: Clearly I cannot expend 4gb to do one property.
Why not, a 4.7gb dvd is what ? 20c?
Back-up then delete everything except the finished files.
I hear what you're saying, and I don't shoot [vr's] professionally, but If I did, memory expenditure isn't abig deal.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Lens for Still Shots
|
Re: Lens for Still Shots
Posted: 11 Jul 2008 at 9:58 GMT
|
go to thread
|
ok, I really don't want to perpetuate this 10.5 vs rectilinear superwide, but...
For 'most' RE shots, you could probably get away with just using the 10.5, defishing, then croping to suit.
The main drawbacks being that it's a lot easier to frame when WYSIWYG when looking through the viewfinder and the quality suffers at the edges.
OK for the web, but most of my clients print brochures and get 'editorial' coverage in glossy property mags, I would worry about the quality of a defished image used full page, especially on a cover.
It's also way way too wide for most external shots.
Anyhow, I've posted a comparison between the de-fished 10.5 and the sigma @10mm <a href="www.flickr.com/photos/56677800@N00/sets/72157603962467232/">here</a>
Micheal, how are you de-fishing as part of your LR workflow? or are you putting them through NX first [if so you're cooking the RAW before going to lightroom right?]
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Lens for Still Shots
|
Re: Lens for Still Shots
Posted: 9 Jul 2008 at 21:53 GMT
|
go to thread
|
As you are asking about 20-24mm I'm guessing you're shooting FF canon?
If so the 10-22 is ef-s so no use to you.
Even on FF 20-24 is not really wide enough for most RE work.
Many are happy with the 17-40, there's also the 16-35 [eitherway you'll need PTLens or DxO]
If you want wider I think there's a good 14mm canon prime, and sigma do a 12-24 super wide for FF [tokina as well I think]
I shoot nikonDX with the sigma 10-20, mostly at 10-12mm
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Tips for my first residential job?
|
Re: Tips for my first residential job?
Posted: 9 Jul 2008 at 21:40 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Some people just can't be bothered to do a little preparation, not even when they are trying to shift their overpriced pile!
Maybe you should have considered re-scheduling when it became apparent that they were not ready [and weren't prepared to co-operate either?], you certainly shouldn't have to wash dishes, and they should have moved the cars.
Here's the back of a flyer I'm having printed, maybe you need something similar for future jobs:
www.flickr.com/photos/56677800@N00/2652437198/sizes/o/
That said, you did a good job, wb is good [always difficult with yellow walls]
I've not managed to come up with a satifactory workflow for hdr panos.
Could you explain your workflow a bit more?, did you adjust each image for wb etc then put the whole bunch into PTGui, or did you stitch each bracket sequence separately, adjust then blend the three 180x360 images?
Stills look good too. The stills gallery seems to open and leave the vr playing in the background, I'd have thought it should open over a plain dark background.
And I get no content [just a blank white screen] on ibook with osx 10.3, safari 1.3.2, works fine on firefox though.
Marcus
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Upgrading everything, would appreciate your advice.
|
Re: Upgrading everything, would appreciate your advice.
Posted: 3 Jul 2008 at 21:22 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Don't want to confuse the issues but as you are wary of investing the [not insignificant] money in tourweaver it might be worth checking out what immervision has to offer:
www.immervision.com/en/multimedia/index.php?cat=m...
You may need to get assistance with the coding though, as its' more DIY than tourweaver.
Not sure about it's floorplan integration either.
Any experienced immervision users care to chime in ?
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Try Before You Buy!
|
Re: Try Before You Buy!
Posted: 27 Jun 2008 at 22:05 GMT
updated: 27 Jun 2008 at 22:07 GMT
|
go to thread
|
tallmanirl said: Come to think of it, a Trial Period isn't all that unreasonable, if you return the camera in perfect condition. After all, you wouldn't buy a car without a test drive, and you can be spending a similar amount.
Fergal.
Maybe not.
But if you decide to buy a product from an internet site because their price is better, then it's buyer be[a]ware, as far as I'm concerned.
If you want to try before you buy either hire, or go to a real shop that has the associated overheads, check out the goods, and, if you like the product, play fair and buy from them.
The distance selling protection is meant to protect consumers from pressure selling, not as some "I'll just send it back if I change my mind" right.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Tips for my first residential job?
|
Re: Tips for my first residential job?
Posted: 25 Jun 2008 at 21:45 GMT
updated: 25 Jun 2008 at 21:54 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Good advice to think about camera height, though I wouldn't go too low for a VR compared to a straight RE shot.
Here's some discussion on the topic:
www.flickr.com/search/groups/?w=44315269%40N00&q=%22camera+height%22&m=discuss
Also try to find interesting viewpoints that have some separate points of interest as you rotate. The center of the room isn't necesarily the best place to set up.
I don't shoot VR's commercially at the moment but here's a recent test shot.
www.threesixtyvr.co.uk/tours/percival/percival.ht...
Same set up as you. Three shots at +/-1.3ev, blended with Enfuse for lightroom and stitched with PTGui. [doh, I forgot the nadir, had to use a mirror ball]
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Difference Between Pano Head and Panning Head?
|
Re: vignetting
Posted: 23 Jun 2008 at 21:25 GMT
|
go to thread
|
tallmanirl said: Is vignetting a particular prob with FF, or is it widespread in DSLRs?
Most lenses have some light fall-off towards the edges, especially the corners.
Because you are only using the center 2/3 of the frame with a crop body you will get less vignetting and CA then you would using the same lens on a FF body. So the problem is common to all DSLR's but it's more acute on the FF sensors.
These issues are more pronounced on digital cameras as opposed to film cameras of a similar sensor size. I'll try my best at an explanation:
Imagine the light sensitive grains of chemical held in the film emulsion as a thin layer of random size bits of gravel held in clear a gel.
Now imagine the sensor of a dslr as a tightly packed sheet of buckets, and at the bottom of each bucket is the light sensitve part.
Light coming through the lens and hitting the center of the film/sensor will have a similar intensity,
Now at the edges the light is falling at an angle. For film this isn't a problem as the light travels through the gell and hits the grains.
But on a sensor some of that light is hitting the edges of the buckets and not being registered by the sensor. Hence more vignetting and other abberations on digital than on film.
The manufacturers go to all sorts of lengths to reduce this problem, using micro lenses on top of each bucket, designing new lenses which are more 'telecentric' [the light comes out more parallel], or in the case of the 4K Leica admitting defeat and advising you put a center grad filter on the front of your [also super expensive] lens. To be fair the rangefinder design is at a disadvantage here in having a shorter distance from the rear element to the film/sensor plane.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Difference Between Pano Head and Panning Head?
|
Re: Difference Between Pano Head and Panning Head?
Posted: 20 Jun 2008 at 7:24 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Doug Aurand said:
The "word" is there is a replacement coming for the 5D shortly, so there's a good chance it will accomodate the EF-S lenses giving you the biggest choice.
Doug, I'm pretty sure that's never going to happen, the e-fs lenses have a rear element that protrudes into the camera body, on a full frame camera the [larger]mirror would hit this rear element. So FF canon's are never goung to accept e-fs lenses.
Fergal, if you can get a new 5D for 890 euros, that's a good way to go, giving you excelent image quality, and leaving some cash for a few decent lenses and accessories [like a NN5 or a 360p adjuste].
You may need to be careful about vignetting which will cause stitching issues, much less of a problem on the crop bodies.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Popularity of Canon 1Ds Mark2 For Landscapes
|
Re: Popularity of Canon 1Ds Mark2 For Landscapes
Posted: 18 Jun 2008 at 21:07 GMT
|
go to thread
|
If you can find a new MkII for £2k then that's great, I was estimating £4k.
One thing to understand is that whilst [modern] full frame sensors do have the capability of capturing first class images, they do tax their lenses much more than the APS / DX etc crop bodies.
The crop bodies, when used with 'full frame' lenses are capturing an image from ~ the center 2/3rds of the image circle. This means that distortion, edge softness, vignetting, and CA issues are much better delt with in the crop bodies.
Full frame, pro quality, lenses that were great on film bodies, are often great on crop bodies, but the full frame digital bodies can show up weaknesses that detract from the quality of the image.
My point is, if you invest in a full frame body [because you want the best image quality] you will need to invest in very good glass to use with it, otherwise you'd probably be much better off with a good crop body [which would also free up funds for good glass]
So you'll need to research which lenses actually do have a good reputation on FF.
I shoot nikon DX so I can't really say what you should look for in the canon line up, but if I was to buy a FF nikon and lenses to match the list would look something like this:
10.5mm shaved for 360's [£375] and / or 16mm fisheye [£475]
14-24 f2.8 [£1075]
24-70 f2.8 [£999]
24mm P-CE tilt shift [£1300]
30mm f2 [£199] wide[ish] prime
50mm f1.4 [£190] std prime
70-200 f2.8 afs vr [£1125]
70-300 f4.5-6.6 afs vr [£320] for when I couldn't be bothered to lug the 70-200 around]
85mm f1.4 [£750] short tele prime
105mm f2.8 macro vr [£490]
Then there's the super expensive tele's, maybe the
300mm f2.8 [£2789]
add a remote, a couple of strobes, a 1.4x tele convertor some bags/cases
to keep and carry it all, cf cards, a fast computer to handle the files and I'd struggle to keep it under 10k.
Now, you don't neccessarily need all this, but they are all arguably more important that the body in getting the final result, depending on what and how you intend to shoot.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
Popularity of Canon 1Ds Mark2 For Landscapes
|
Re: Popularity of Canon 1Ds Mark2 For Landscapes
Posted: 17 Jun 2008 at 20:59 GMT
updated: 17 Jun 2008 at 21:04 GMT
|
go to thread
|
Tallman,
Many landscape photographers use medium and large format film cameras. A scan from a 4"x5" negative provides far more information than any 8, 10 or 12 million pixel dslr can ever provide [in a single frame]
But, a digital slr does have many practical advantages over a medium or large format camera, they are therefore tempting, even for 'traditional' landscape photographers.
Whilst others are catching up fast [ eg. sony and nikon are each expected to release a 24m pixel 'full frame' body before the end of the year] for a few years only Canon had a fullframe dslr with a very high resolution in the 16mp 1Ds mII
For wealthy hobbiest and professional photographers the high price of both the body and the quality lenses needed to make full use of that body are perhaps justified.
However, as a first time dslr purchase, it is slightly crazy, especially if you are happy to use stitching techniques, which mostly negate the high mp advantage of the 1Ds body. Unless you've you've already got a brace of canon af 35mm film bodies and a cupboard full of exotic glass.
I understand you're interest in the camera, but a 5d [especially a 5d sucessor] a nikon d300 etc etc will also give great results and leave lot's of change to spend on arguably the most important items- the lenses.
Untill you've used a dslr for a while you won't actually know whether you want to shoot with a classic 50mm 1.4 prime, or a 17-50ish 2,8 zoom or 200 f2 vr telephoto or a 14mm super wide rectilinear prime etc etc. Once you've got a good understanding of the lens choices you might like to make then you can better assess what manufacturer and body suits you best.
And given that you're even considering a 1Ds as a first dslr purchase I'm guessing your pockets are quite deep. It might actually be a medium or large format camera possably with a digital back is what you're looking for.
I'd read this:
www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/1ds-mk...
read around anything in the article you're not sure about [there's loads more info for the landscape shooter on that site]. I'd certainly want to know exactly what I wanted before laying out £10k or more on a camera system.
In the meantime, get a d60 or a 1000d or 20d or a650 or whatever and some basic lenses and you'll already be very close to the 'perfection' of shooting with a 1ds. And you'll quickly, and reletively cheaply, learn what you actually neeed for your own shooting requirements.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Q & A
Thread:
New Lenses Not Fitting Old Cameras?
|
Re: New Lenses Not Fitting Old Cameras?
Posted: 8 Jun 2008 at 20:39 GMT
|
go to thread
|
If you're getting a 1ds why would do you care about the older generation of canon bodies ?
All canon ef lenses will fit, no canon efs lenses will fit [ the sf-s lenses are meant for smaller sensor and mirror box cameras such as the 20/30/40D series, these cameras will also take the ef lenses though]
No canon EF or EF-s will mount on early non AF film bodies AFAIK
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Forum:
Galleries
Thread:
My first aerial (mast) pano
|
Re: My first aerial (mast) pano
Posted: 4 Jun 2008 at 11:44 GMT
|
go to thread
|
So what is the black box doing that the bescor doesn't do?
Ah, is it the reciever for the wireless connections to the bescor and camera?
If you screw down each locking ring in turn as the mast extends then leave the last one loose [the one at the head of the main mast body] then you can easily turn the mast by hand [I use the qt10 so it's easy to reach, you may need to stand on a ladder to reach]
Of course if you guy the top then this won't work!
I've only done this once and also had a large nadir patch, so I put a mirror ball in:
www.threesixtyvr.co.uk/tours/manorstables/
There is a manual rotating head using a pully cord that the military use for aligning antennas, perhaps this might be better than using the bescor?
I timed the full rotation of the head and divided by 7 then used a remote release and a stopwatch to shoot [rather than teathering]
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Prev
