All images © Bob Atkins

5.jpg

This website is hosted by:
Host Unlimited Domains on 1 Account

4.jpg

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
Web www.bobatkins.com
*
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 1 
 on: August 16, 2015, 12:59:15 AM 
Started by klindup - Last post by klindup
I do use AVG and have done so for several years.  I am still not sure if the problem lay with Windows or AVG but whichever it was, the problem has gone away with no action on my part.  I assume that a subsequent update issued by Microsoft or AVG corrected the fault.

Ken

 2 
 on: July 29, 2015, 03:55:19 PM 
Started by KeithB - Last post by KeithB
I figured it out by reading the manuals

 3 
 on: July 28, 2015, 01:14:02 PM 
Started by KeithB - Last post by Bob Atkins
Good point. I'll check that out and make the appropriate changes to the article!

 4 
 on: July 28, 2015, 01:13:23 PM 
Started by klindup - Last post by Bob Atkins
Sorry Ken, I can't help directly. I've resisted using Windows 8 myself and if I do have to move from Windows 7 I'll go straight to Windows 10.

All I know is that the EOS Utility is supposed to be compatible with Windows 8.1

Are you running the latest version of the EOS Utilty? Have you tried running an earlier version (e.g. the one on the CD that came with your camera?)

If you are using AVG there may be an issue - see https://support.avg.com/answers?id=906b00000004udqAAA

Good luck!

 5 
 on: July 26, 2015, 04:28:01 PM 
Started by klindup - Last post by klindup
I have a problem with EOS Utility.  I am using Windows 8.1 and apply Microsoft updates on a regular basis.  After one update EOS Utility would not load.  I tried reinstalling it and I tried resetting the compatibility flag and rebooting to no avail.  Has anyone else experienced the problem and more importantly found a solution?
Ken Lindup

 6 
 on: July 22, 2015, 10:38:01 AM 
Started by KeithB - Last post by KeithB
In your article comparing the two, you don't mention that the SL1 cannot be used as a wireless master with its internal flash. I know it is not that important to some, but it is a deal breaker for me.

 7 
 on: July 12, 2015, 08:24:57 PM 
Started by mjperini - Last post by Bob Atkins
I've just posted a "mini review" of the 5Ds (no "r"). I was impressed with it as a camera for landscape, portrait and commercial work where you can take time to optimize focus and you don't need the fastest possible frame rate. See http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/canon_eos_5Ds_review.html

However for nature and wildlife, I agree that the EOS 7D MkII is probably the best bang for the buck right now if you don't absolutely NEED full frame. As Frank points out, things like atmospheric turbulance and slight focus offsets can negate the higher resolution of the 5Ds over the 5D MkIII, assuming you can get the framing you want without cropping. If you have to crop, then the 5Ds is better then the 5D MkII, but probably not as good as the EOS 7D MkII.

 8 
 on: July 02, 2015, 01:20:33 PM 
Started by mjperini - Last post by Frank Kolwicz
I've shipped it back, no regrets.

Frank

 9 
 on: July 01, 2015, 04:26:15 PM 
Started by mjperini - Last post by Frank Kolwicz
The last day of the rental is over, it's in the box.

Today I shot RAW and maximum size JPEGs simultaneously and the JPEGs did not fare well for me. They are slightly soft and low contrast, meaning that they would need additional sharpening and contrast adjustments and be just that much less useable. The only gain would be in-camera and editing speed compared to shooting RAW, but there's no speed gain compared to the 7dii.

I'm not planning to shoot landscapes or still-lifes again and, if I was, I'd probably get out my Pentax 67 and test all those rolls of 220 Kodak Portra that are in my freezer. I'm just not inspired to do so. Birds are a lot more entertaining and don't require more than the minimum travel around my part of the county.

Like my previous trial of the Sony A7r last year, I keep hoping for an ideal system with better resolution than I've got, only to be stymied because of the limits of my work habits, subjects and lenses.

 10 
 on: June 30, 2015, 06:32:43 PM 
Started by mjperini - Last post by Frank Kolwicz
Today I tried the JPEG setting instead of RAW, which was my normal file format with all of my Canon digital cameras up to 7dii. I don't see any loss on my screen or for my purpose - modest sized prints.

Shooting only maximum size JPEGs helps a lot in the field and in editing by the huge increase in speed they give as well as the number of images on a memory card. RAW file in-camera time simply means an active subject can't be well covered, the lags often eclipsing a bird's sudden movements and brief postures.

Maybe tomorrow I'll do side-by-side images in both RAW and JPEG for a more definitive comparison.

I'm still not sure I want to spend the money, mostly because I'm seeing too much image degradation due to the atmospheric distortion from excessive heat that we're having to get the most out of the camera. Only under the most ideal conditions - close, breezy and in the cool of early morning can I be reasonably sure of getting high image quality and those conditions haven't coincided with having a cooperative bird in front of me, yet.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10