[K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on...

In article <VGWzf.160432$D47.106400@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
ian lincoln <dragonslayer DeleteThis @whocares.com> wrote:
>Sony's lens making abilities are impressive when it comes to their
>camcorders.

I don't know about low-end video cameras, but professional video
cameras tend to be used with Canon or Fujinon lenses.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

On 20 Jan 2006 08:39:12 -0800, Bill Tuthill <can.TakeThisOut@spam.co> wrote:

>
>Do you know who makes the Zeiss-branded lenses on many Sony digicams
>and videocamcorders? Cosina under license?

I don't know, because Sony and Cosina aren't telling, AFAICT. But it seems
likely they are made by Cosina, since Cosina makes the Zeiss Ikon lenses, and
Cosina is also making the recently announced ZF lenses with Nikon mounts, as
well as the upcoming ZS lenses with M42 mount.

>
>Somehow the DSC-R1's use of CMOS sensor had escaped my notice.

That was almost the first thing I noticed in the DSC-R1's specs, probably
because I was looking for it. After their success with the Nikon D2X sensor it
seemed to me likely that they would build a top-line camera of their own with a
CMOS sensor. I was surprised at how noisy the sensor is in the shadows at high
ISO, particularly since it has the same pixel pitch as the sensor in the D2X,
but I guess the higher noise is unavoidable given the live preview feature.
They'll probably do better with their upcoming KM based DSLRs, unless they can't
resist the temptation to be the first to provide usable live preview in a DSLR.
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

In article <Kn9Af.4$Hu5.2@bos-service2.ext.ray.com>, Kinon O'Cann
<somewhere.DeleteThis@over.the.rainbow> writes
>
>"Skip M" <shadowcatcher.DeleteThis@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:24Uzf.12036$sA3.2708@fed1read02...
>>>
>> Let me clarify that. Flash metering, is, indeed, not a strong point of
>> any Canon, and a continuing source of frustration for me. But it works
>> better than the 20D, that's for sure. That is the only weak point in the
>> armor of the 5D, as far as I'm concerned. It certainly is not lacking in
>> "certain areas of basic functionality," as is stated here...
>
>The only flash problem I see is that Canon's philosophy is different from
>others, like Nikon. Nikon, when using flash in "A" mode, will not drop the
>shutter below 1/60, while Canon will always try to balance flash with
>ambient, and drop the shutter as low as necessary. My solution is to shoot
>flash on manual, and choose the shutter and aperture myself. Works great,
>too. Honestly, I like the Nikon system better, but I can easily live with
>the Canon system.
>
>Agree that the 5D is a wonderful machine. I really enjoy mine.
>
Yes, it took me a while to get satisfactory results from the Canon flash
system, having switched to the 5D after three decades of Olympus OM
system, and this was one of the main problems that I had. After talking
to some guys with more experience of the Canon approach on here (thanks
David!) I figured out what the problem was and have had only a couple of
problems since, which are explainable.

The Canon defaults to a background exposure in auto modes, with the
flash filling the shadows. This was completely the opposite
nomenclature from what I was used to, where auto would determine the
flash level, but not the shutter for background level unless the flash
was deliberately limited. It is possible to have the 5D limit the
minimum shutter speed to the x-sync in Av mode using the custom
functions (C.Fn-03), but then that has to be disabled when you actually
want fill flash, making it a cumbersome option.

As Skip says, the best solution is to use the flash with the camera in
manual mode, counter-intuitive though that sounds. The flash is still
automatically controlled, but the shutter manually fixed. Switching to
fill mode is then a simple matter of turning the control to Av mode,
rather than a menu sequencing operation.

The only times I have had marginally off flash exposures since has been
whilst following a toddler while using bounce flash. I suspect that as
I turned round to keep the moving subject in frame there was an obvious
difference between the preflash reflection that was used to determine
the flash exposure just before the mirror lifted and the actual
reflection of the main flash used to make the exposure. The result was
quite a bit of overexposure (I would guess about 1 stop or more) due to
the flash catching a much closer surface to bounce off. I doubt that
the Nikon system would have done any better under the circumstances,
although the old Olympus system (and any of the OTF systems since then)
would have been OK. Unfortunately OTF flash doesn't work with digital
sensors.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

Kennedy McEwen wrote:
> In article <Kn9Af.4$Hu5.2@bos-service2.ext.ray.com>, Kinon O'Cann
> <somewhere.RemoveThis@over.the.rainbow> writes
>>
>> "Skip M" <shadowcatcher.RemoveThis@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:24Uzf.12036$sA3.2708@fed1read02...
>>>>
>>> Let me clarify that. Flash metering, is, indeed, not a strong
>>> point of any Canon, and a continuing source of frustration for me. But
>>> it works better than the 20D, that's for sure. That is the
>>> only weak point in the armor of the 5D, as far as I'm concerned. It
>>> certainly is not lacking in "certain areas of basic
>>> functionality," as is stated here...
>>
>> The only flash problem I see is that Canon's philosophy is different
>> from others, like Nikon. Nikon, when using flash in "A" mode, will
>> not drop the shutter below 1/60, while Canon will always try to
>> balance flash with ambient, and drop the shutter as low as
>> necessary. My solution is to shoot flash on manual, and choose the
>> shutter and aperture myself. Works great, too. Honestly, I like the
>> Nikon system better, but I can easily live with the Canon system.
>>
>> Agree that the 5D is a wonderful machine. I really enjoy mine.
>>
> Yes, it took me a while to get satisfactory results from the Canon
> flash system, having switched to the 5D after three decades of
> Olympus OM system, and this was one of the main problems that I had. After
> talking to some guys with more experience of the Canon approach
> on here (thanks David!) I figured out what the problem was and have
> had only a couple of problems since, which are explainable.
>
> The Canon defaults to a background exposure in auto modes, with the
> flash filling the shadows. This was completely the opposite
> nomenclature from what I was used to, where auto would determine the
> flash level, but not the shutter for background level unless the flash
> was deliberately limited. It is possible to have the 5D limit the
> minimum shutter speed to the x-sync in Av mode using the custom
> functions (C.Fn-03), but then that has to be disabled when you
> actually want fill flash, making it a cumbersome option.
>
> As Skip says, the best solution is to use the flash with the camera in
> manual mode, counter-intuitive though that sounds.

That is exactly how I use my 10D with flash...with the camera in manual.
It's really the only way to retain full control with flash.

>The flash is still
> automatically controlled, but the shutter manually fixed. Switching
> to fill mode is then a simple matter of turning the control to Av
> mode, rather than a menu sequencing operation.

I've not heard this described anywhere until reading this post...but that's
exactly what I do as well.
-Mark
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

"Philip Homburg" <philip RemoveThis @pch.home.cs.vu.nl> wrote in message
news:u97adogq51idh35u6dqq1c6it7@inews_id.stereo.hq.phicoh.net...
> In article <VGWzf.160432$D47.106400@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
> ian lincoln <dragonslayer RemoveThis @whocares.com> wrote:
>>Sony's lens making abilities are impressive when it comes to their
>>camcorders.
>
> I don't know about low-end video cameras, but professional video
> cameras tend to be used with Canon or Fujinon lenses.

What do they use on the Betamax video gear?
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

In article <tijAf.222778$V7.108639@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
Pete D <no.DeleteThis@email.com> wrote:
>
>"Philip Homburg" <philip.DeleteThis@pch.home.cs.vu.nl> wrote in message
>news:u97adogq51idh35u6dqq1c6it7@inews_id.stereo.hq.phicoh.net...
>> In article <VGWzf.160432$D47.106400@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
>> ian lincoln <dragonslayer.DeleteThis@whocares.com> wrote:
>>>Sony's lens making abilities are impressive when it comes to their
>>>camcorders.
>>
>> I don't know about low-end video cameras, but professional video
>> cameras tend to be used with Canon or Fujinon lenses.
>
>What do they use on the Betamax video gear?

No. But as far as I know, that is just consumer stuff. The cameras
used for Betacam SP probably had Canon or Fujinon lenses.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

"Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in message
news:7alAf.15030$V.829@fed1read04...

>
> I've not heard this described anywhere until reading this post...but
> that's exactly what I do as well.
> -Mark
>
We are all agreed then? The basic functionality of a Canon EOS DSLR has to
be ignored in order to obtain correct flash exposures. Wonderful. The world
of ETTL II flash exposures is all Canon bullshit. You have to take this
wonderful, highly computerised, state of the art camera and it's equally
sophisticated speedlite and use the camera in manual mode to make the flash
work like a Nikon or Olympus flash does.

After all the postulating and position manoeuvring, it is finally back to
what I said in the beginning. The 5D and all Canon DSLRs before it except
the 1D series are sadly lacking in basic functionality. Thank you gentlemen.
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

"Skip M" <shadowcatcher.RemoveThis@cox.net> wrote:

>First, you cannot exclude the 1 series, they suffer from the same ETTL II
>issue, and, second, you used the plural "areas" and "things like flash
>metering." Care to mention another area of lack so we can fill out that
>plural?


Skip,

Try to go easy on Doug.

It can't be easy posting messages from a market stall.


 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

In article <pLpAf.223140$V7.205310@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
Douglas <reply.DeleteThis@the.group> wrote:
>
>We are all agreed then? The basic functionality of a Canon EOS DSLR has to
>be ignored in order to obtain correct flash exposures. Wonderful. The world
>of ETTL II flash exposures is all Canon bullshit. You have to take this
>wonderful, highly computerised, state of the art camera and it's equally
>sophisticated speedlite and use the camera in manual mode to make the flash
>work like a Nikon or Olympus flash does.

I still don't get this. Since Tv and Av are autoexposure modes, ISTM that
using them when you want the flash to be the primary source of illumination
is never going to work. It wouldn't occur to me to try and use them for
(non-fill) flash - I'd always use M and let the flash autoexposure do its
job, which is seems to do just fine (Canon 5D + various speedlights). I
don't understand why anyone would expect to get good results trying to use
the flash for primary illumination while the camera is still trying to
expose the scene using ambient light (as it will in Av and Tv mode). What am
I missing here?

Puzzled of Cambridge
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 17:38:01 -0500, Alan Browne
<alan.browne.TakeThisOut@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>Bill Funk wrote:
>
>> Many *older( flash units use a high triger voltage. The new DSLRs
>> expect a lower voltage, and the higher voltage can fry the internals
>> of the DSLRs.
>
>This is part true and part myth. Some Canon's in particular (I believe
>the Elan 7) cannot take high sync voltages. But some DSLR's definitely can:
>
>For example, the 20D (Canon) 250V (+ or -)
> 7D (Minolta) 400V (+ or -)
>
>It always pays to read the manual of course

Thanks.

--
Bill Funk
Replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

<Jim> wrote in message news:2006011922345616807%@newsgroups.comcast.net...
>> Sony's lens making abilities are impressive when it comes to their
>> camcorders. Most of their compact cameras have impressive lenses and
>> their auto everything exposure systems aren't easily fooled. Their super
>> zooms for the hybrid dslr market are good, considering all the necessary
>> compromises in design they are good. Sony seem to have stuck with ccd
>> whereas canon have a proven track record with cmos. Sony have optical
>> stabilisaton for their camcorders and digicams as well as software IS for
>> their low end digicams. I think the K-M system would make a fine
>> addition. The superior handling of K-M designs may conflict with the
>> small and sleek company ethos rather than the big and chunky yet
>> functional mantra of K-M. All in all K-M could be in worse hands.
>
> To my knowledge, Sony buys lenses... not manufactures. They may indeed
> source fine lenses...

Sony manufacture carl zeiss to CZ designs and specs. CZ don't actually do
the manufacture for them.
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

"Philip Homburg" <philip.RemoveThis@pch.home.cs.vu.nl> wrote in message
news:u97adogq51idh35u6dqq1c6it7@inews_id.stereo.hq.phicoh.net...
> In article <VGWzf.160432$D47.106400@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
> ian lincoln <dragonslayer.RemoveThis@whocares.com> wrote:
>>Sony's lens making abilities are impressive when it comes to their
>>camcorders.
>
> I don't know about low-end video cameras, but professional video
> cameras tend to be used with Canon or Fujinon lenses.

When i refer to low and high end i refer to cheap versus £1000 not in tv
quality pro stuff. Its my retail background.
 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on... 

Sarah Brown <sarahlizzy.RemoveThis@ntlworld.no_uce_please.com> wrote:

>I still don't get this. Since Tv and Av are autoexposure modes, ISTM that
>using them when you want the flash to be the primary source of illumination
>is never going to work. It wouldn't occur to me to try and use them for
>(non-fill) flash - I'd always use M and let the flash autoexposure do its
>job, which is seems to do just fine (Canon 5D + various speedlights). I
>don't understand why anyone would expect to get good results trying to use
>the flash for primary illumination while the camera is still trying to
>expose the scene using ambient light (as it will in Av and Tv mode). What am
>I missing here?


What you may be missing is that Canon cannot provide functionality
that is routinely provided by, for example, Nikon. Nikon's matrix
balanced TTL fill flash is an object lesson in how to combine flash
and ambient light, and it has translated brilliantly from film to the
latest Nikon digital SLRs.

Canon still has some catching up to do. However, in the meantime,
using M mode works well enough.

Nikon has carefully protected its TTL flash technology with a plethora
of patents. I suspect the fact Canon is some way behind Nikon is not
because Canon cannot develop the technology, rather it is because
Canon is taking some time to work out how to implement that technology
while working around the patent protection Nikon already has in place.

For those who wish for more flash automation than the 5D can reliably
provide, Nikon may be a better choice just now, but I feel sure that
Canon will get there in the end. Better late than never. <g>

Maybe Canon will provide a firmware update for my 5D when the time
comes, but in the meantime I am happy using it with a Metz CL-4 in
non-TTL auto mode. For me, that works more consistently than my Metz
54 MZ-4 with the latest SCA 3102 adapter providing TTL auto flash in
the 5D's M mode. In theory, the latter should work better, but it
doesn't, even after I had the adapter flashed by Metz to the latest
version.

Whatever, I have two choices now, both of which work tolerably well,
and when Canon takes the next step, I may just have three.


 >> Stay informed about: [K-M - Sony] Damn! Now let's move on...