-=5D CLASSIC admirers, assemble! (6)

^^Thats a good question. I'd think the DOF would be a lot thinner than that @ 1.6 . Looks great

srika wrote in post #15497319
ok I should not say "precisely". I was shooting at around ISO 640-1250 or so, but underexposing, and then lifting in post. This is because, I didn't really know what I was doing.

srika wrote in post #15497258
This is precisely what I was doing, when I started shooting nightlife in 2006. Although, I wasn't doing it intentionally lol.

I'll show you some before/afters soon.

mzondeki wrote in post #15496639
At the same time, considering 5Dc has very good DR, you can set ISO-3200 and under-expose by 2 stops, and pull it up by 2 stops (to simulate ISO-12800 behavior) during RAW processing.

I don't see much difference in ISO-3200 shots between my Nex5N Vs 5Dc. I believe T4i sensor is similar (or less) to Nex5N sensor.

I think this is how they might have been able to do it.

What do you guys do when you are working with very thin DOF with a lens like a 135L and you back way up and want to focus on something that you want composed far from the center of the frame? I think focus/recompose would not mess up the focus too much right? Is it only an issue in low light situations when possibly the only usable focus point is the center dot? Are the other ones fine in normal light? or perhaps in low low light but with the focus assist beam of a speedlight?

with the 135 F2L @ ISO 1600 no N/R software was used handheld shot wide open...

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

^ nice Can you comment about how to focus with just the center dot on a lens like the 135? The outer points work decently in lower light?

hyogen wrote in post #15539457
I think this is how they might have been able to do it.

What do you guys do when you are working with very thin DOF with a lens like a 135L and you back way up and want to focus on something that you want composed far from the center of the frame? I think focus/recompose would not mess up the focus too much right? Is it only an issue in low light situations when possibly the only usable focus point is the center dot? Are the other ones fine in normal light? or perhaps in low low light but with the focus assist beam of a speedlight?

my opinion, that is tricky to do with ANY camera, not only the 5Dc.

A couple from a afternoon out around London Bridge; first play with the Sigmalux, worried I had a soft copy in 'bedroom' tests, real world shows something completely different!

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/ukmitch86/84184​29856/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/ukmitch86/84184​30768/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/ukmitch86/84184​32050/

I have a questions maybe that has been answered before or not...

Is there any way to have a magnifier on the Eye port of the 5Dc? so you can get the fine focus???

just curious I rather keep the 5Dc it makes me work more with out all the bells and whistles... and i dont need more megapix

saaFOTO wrote in post #15540447
I have a questions maybe that has been answered before or not...

Is there any way to have a magnifier on the Eye port of the 5Dc? so you can get the fine focus???

just curious I rather keep the 5Dc it makes me work more with out all the bells and whistles... and i dont need more megapix

Hi, you have a few options - a Canon angle finder, or a focusing screen like the EE-S. IMO, it's still pretty hard to get manual focus right with it - I'm looking into a split prism for improved accuracy.

I imagine that's how the 'f/8 and be there' crowd came into being - shallow depth of field is completely reliant on accurate focus.

Took a walk with the dog at our local park, thought this looked nice.

i hope to join the club soon. I think I'll try the 5dc just to be in the fullframe game.

From when I went to NYC last fall. Forget how fantastic this camera is sometimes.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/nwmr12/84223672​79/

tonylong wrote in post #15527319
If you want the highest quality prints, "conventional wisdom" is to have 300ppi, meaning an image of 3,000x6000 pixels, larger than what a 5DC puts out.

But understand that this is for closely viewing an image. Larger images are typically viewed from a bit of a distance. Also, you can get a very good quality "close-up" print from a lesser resolution. I have 12x18 prints from an 8MP camera, less than 200ppi, that you can get excellent detail with a magnifying glass.

For "normal" viewing, you should get fine results with a 20x30 print.

True, actually if you are going to print a canvas they suggest 150ppi to get optimal results.