[MaximusJ]

I received a bag this week, the lowepro's pro messenger 200. After trying 3 other bags (slingshot 302aw, event messenger 150 and flipside 400; all lowepro's), I think I may have found the perfect bag for me. I will still use my flipside for the long walking distances, but this one seems to be an excellent all-purpose bag.

Really love it; you can put a lot of stuff in there and the bag's extra padded strap makes it easy to carry around. Not made for long walks tho, but you can have everything handy and swap lens in seconds. I can store my D800 with lens attached, 3 more lenses (14-24, 24-70, 70-200 and 50mm), flash, teleconverter, Ipad and spare batteries and still have room left for an extra body and a lot of knick knacks.

The gf's starting to hate tho... 4 bags and I cant get rid of any; they all seem to have their respective usage.

[kamek]

6D great for photos, but not so much for video: http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/01/r...6d-by-gizmodo/

[ddk632]

I have seen that in several places. 5DIII hands down is better at video. I never shoot video except the odd family thing, so it's a bonus for me. I don't even know what moire is, or why it's bad

Actually a few months ago, when I was considering cameras and the 6D was in preorder stage, I looked heavily at a Mark III and decided against it because I felt most of the upgrades were in the video department, with the significant exception of the autofocus system.

So in short I agree with the article, if you are serious about video, 6D is a worse choice than the 5DIII. I just used the flip side of that argument in my decision-making; since I don't care about video, I didn't want a 5DIII as I'd be paying for features I'd never use, honestly, including the AF system.

The day I decide to blow a bunch of cash on a camera just to have it, it will be a 1D series camera

[danniexi]

Originally Posted by ddk632

I have seen that in several places. 5DIII hands down is better at video. I never shoot video except the odd family thing, so it's a bonus for me. I don't even know what moire is, or why it's bad

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glos...g/Moire_01.htm

^ definition of moire; the weird waves you see in fine repetitive details of subjects.

i don't think it's bad as people say it is. ive rarely seen it in any of the test videos that i have taken. then again, like you, i'll rarely be taking any videos anyways, so not a concern for me.

[The1]

Originally Posted by ddk632

I have seen that in several places. 5DIII hands down is better at video. I never shoot video except the odd family thing, so it's a bonus for me. I don't even know what moire is, or why it's bad

Actually a few months ago, when I was considering cameras and the 6D was in preorder stage, I looked heavily at a Mark III and decided against it because I felt most of the upgrades were in the video department, with the significant exception of the autofocus system.

So in short I agree with the article, if you are serious about video, 6D is a worse choice than the 5DIII. I just used the flip side of that argument in my decision-making; since I don't care about video, I didn't want a 5DIII as I'd be paying for features I'd never use, honestly, including the AF system.

The day I decide to blow a bunch of cash on a camera just to have it, it will be a 1D series camera

When I had my mark II and was looking at the mark III I had the same concerns you expressed with the small changes to photo and large changes in video. I now have the mark III and don't regret it at all. The autofocus is in a different league. Was one of my biggest gripes about the mkII. Now it's bang on almost instantly.

100% crop is now very sharp where with the mark 2 it was almost muted in comparison, soft even. So more of the image is usable now in a crop. I'm finding the couloirs and contrast a whole lot better too. Worth the money? Hard to say, but I'm glad I updated either way.

And I don't think I've taken a video on it yet and have almost had it a year.

[Chewy734]

Originally Posted by The1

...
And I don't think I've taken a video on it yet and have almost had it a year.

you need take good pics of your watch collection, you lazy bum.

[The1]

Lol, there's too many .

Il get around to it, just keep reminding me. Not this week though, I'm in Vancouver and only have 2 watches with me

[M_Six]

Someone on POTN was asking if the extra sensitive center focus point on the 6D would AF at or above f8, so I tried it out with my 70-300L at 300mm and my Kenko 2x TC (for 600mm and f11), and bigger than Stuttgart it worked! Check the EXIF on this (although it doesn't say AF anywhere, just take my word for it).

[M_Six]

Ok, test #2. I found that if you just zoom all the way out to 600mm and f11 (with the Kenko 2x) and try to AF, it won't. But if you focus first at 140mm f8 and then zoom out, it will fine tune the focus at 600mm f11. You sort of have to get the focus in the neighborhood at f8 first, I guess, and then zoom and refocus. Still could be useful for bird and such. More testing tomorrow in sunlight.

Focus point was the pull chain.

[M_Six]

Here's what I've found after more testing. Using just the center AF point and trying to AF with the lens set at 300mm f5.6 (so 600mm f11 with the Kenko 2x TC), it would lock AF *if* the subject had high contrast. The first four images below show what I mean. All have definite contrasting edges. Then I switched to using all AF points and let the camera decide. I was able to lock onto anything regardless of contrast, although not always my exact intended focus point. For instance, in the pic of the window dormer on the brown roof, I was trying to get the dormer itself and the camera chose the higher contrast brown and white stripes of the building, so again, contrast plays a role. But in short, it will AF at f11 given enough contrast.

Of note here, none of these images is tack sharp, which is a consequence of using a 2x TC in general. They also have not been massaged in ACR or PS. Basically SOOC.

[MaximusJ]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Are you a DJ?

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by MaximusJ

Are you a DJ?

Nah, Wifey's old college microwave. The thing is ancient, but still works great.

[MaximusJ]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Nah, Wifey's old college microwave. The thing is ancient, but still works great.

I know I just couldnt help it

[RelentlessRacing]

LOL this reminds me of the iPhone 5 vs s3 Drop test. Just... this one is more extreme

[M_Six]

I've been playing around with the 6D's Multi-Shot Noise Reduction (MSNR) setting. This was taken with the 70-300L at 300mm and f5.6 and is a hefty crop. The dolls are on top of a bookcase in a fairly dark corner of the living room. ISO 8000. Not too bad, I think. I can't wait to try this on a real nighttime scene. Of course moving objects will be a no-no in this mode.

[Weebl]

PP or not?

[M_Six]

A bit. Partial HP filter to sharpen up the doll's face a bit and some sat push. No PP NR, though.

[The1]

Originally Posted by M_Six

A bit. Partial HP filter to sharpen up the doll's face a bit and some sat push. No PP NR, though.

is the image cropped?

looks nice and clean.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Of course moving objects will be a no-no in this mode.

Actually, if I understand correctly, the second exposure is taken with the mirror down so that the second exposure only shows noise, if anything. The second exposure is subtracted from the first exposure to remove the noise from the first.

It works great for long, night exposures, except a 30-sec. exposures turns into a 60-second exposure.


Our first night, the stars were bright. by dcstep, on Flickr

There was a light breeze, so the trees aren't as sharp as I'd hoped.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by The1

is the image cropped?

looks nice and clean.

Yes, seriously cropped. Close to 40% I'd say.

Originally Posted by dcstep

Actually, if I understand correctly, the second exposure is taken with the mirror down so that the second exposure only shows noise, if anything. The second exposure is subtracted from the first exposure to remove the noise from the first.

It works great for long, night exposures, except a 30-sec. exposures turns into a 60-second exposure.


There was a light breeze, so the trees aren't as sharp as I'd hoped.

Nice shot, Dave. Although this MSNR does four shots, not two.

Here's another. Same lens settings, but at 25600 ISO. Again, a good crop. I'm going to have fun with this MSNR thing once the weather gets better.

[Weebl]

very nice, any high iso shots to compare not using MSNR?

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by Weebl

very nice, any high iso shots to compare not using MSNR?

That Tortie shot was 25600 without using MSNR. But what I need to do is to shoot an MSNR image and a RAW right after and see how they compare.