Messages

1

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Does Canon really have a Flagship Stills Camera?

« on: April 01, 2013, 07:03:25 AM »

By Decree, the 7DMkII is GOING to be Canon's Flagship wildlife/sports camera (DISREGARDING the 1DX which is unaffordable to plebs (sorry shouldn't use THAT word) like me, With it's improved frame rate, improved sensor, next-generation processor together with the resulting low-light capability and low noise, plus an integral grip, it will become THE camera for wildlife and sports enthusiasts. So it is written. I am waiting. I am hoping.

2

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D vs 5D3 noise @ ISO400

« on: April 01, 2013, 06:43:02 AM »

My 7D replaced a 1D MKIIn, an 8MP camera, (cost well over £2000 when new), - the 7D was a revelation yet the 1D was very much a professional camera at the top of the pecking order when I first got it.
And all this talk of high ISO and noise! When I used film, (not SO long ago - all my travel and wildlife images are still with Latitude stock library), I shot on Fuji Velvia, 50 ISO, rated at 40 ISO, or Provia, rated at 80. Latitude's current submission requirements state "ensure ISO does not exceed 200 unless absolutely necessary." So I shoot at 100, sometimes 200, and infrequently, if necessary, at 400 ISO. How easy photographers have it these days with the availability and functional use of high ISO's, - yet expectations are SO high, - I wonder how they'd cope if they suddenly found themselves with Velvia loaded in their film camera? I reckon we'd see a load of blurry images!

3

EOS Bodies / Re: Here I go, the Full Frame way!!

« on: March 28, 2013, 07:11:45 PM »

I bought the 70-300L a while back and after using it alongside my 100-400L, finally sold the longer zoom and replaced it with a 400mm f5.6 prime for those "longer shots". The 70-300L is considerably sharper than the 100-400 zoom in my opinion. So much easier to carry around. I also have a 70-200 f4 and it almost makes that redundant too! I can definately say that if you get one, you won't regret it.

4

EOS Bodies / Re: Buy, Wait, or Switch? If Canon's next crop body releases don't improve sensor.

« on: March 26, 2013, 05:20:48 AM »

New 7D? Main priorities are improved sensor (low-light performance), & focussing performance. Not so bothered about improving frame rate, 8 frames p.s. is plenty sufficient, but if it came with 10 f.p.s. I'd be delighted. How I'd love an integral grip like the 1 Series. Not in the slightest bit interested in wi-fi, GPS, or fold-away revolving screens, nor improved video. Will keep my current 7D until a preplacement is brought out, it's far too costly to consider changing brands when you've a compliment of lenses. 

5

Lenses / Re: Cheap Canon 300mm or 400mm do I Choose?

« on: March 01, 2013, 01:53:08 PM »

I've been through the whole lot! Started off with a Sgma 400mm f5.6 the build quality of which was dubious to say the least, (this was a good few years ago I hasten to add). Replacing it with a Canon 400mm f5.6 was the best decision I ever made. But the views of the professionals and advice from those in the know, eventually persuaded me that my wildlife photography would benefit from an f2.8 lens. It didn't! SO large, SO heavy, very impracticable, - shooting at f2.8 I found that the depth of field was so limited it was necessary to stop down to.... f5.6! Two years of huffing and puffing with the thing I traded it in for the new 400mm f4 DO lens. At last here was a lens I could use wide-open and still retain a resaonable d.of f. Unfortunately even the muscles I'd developed using the f2.8 hadn't the resiliance to keep going with it for long though, (and the hood was like a giant waste-paper bin)! - so I traded it in for a 100-400 f5.6 zoom. I soon got used to the push/pull mechanism, (never had any trouble with dust in it although I used in in both India and Kenya over a period of a good few years), it was smaller and lighter than my last two lenses, nor did I notice any difference in the IQ. A year ago, (getting fussier over IQ now), I traded it in for another f5.6, - there is definately an improvement in IQ but I do perhaps, miss IS. So over a period of some 20 years, a complete circle (shows how old the f5.6 is)! On a practical basis, I used it on my last photographic safari in Kenya with a bean-bag propped over the base of the open window of my jeep, so IS wasn't a necessity, but for most of my general shots I used a Canon 70-300 f4-5.6L IS which I love to bits. If you're using a crop body (7D or similar), I'd advocate the 70-300 IS zoom as a first choice. If you have F/F, the 100-400 zoom is fine, the 400 f5.6 is sharper but no IS, - take your pick!   

6

Portrait / Re: Post your best portraits(street, studio, candid etc...).

« on: February 27, 2013, 02:10:52 PM »

Mystery model

7

Software & Accessories / Re: Latest version of DPP

« on: February 11, 2013, 04:58:38 AM »

Thanks, that one worked!

8

Software & Accessories / Re: Latest version of DPP

« on: February 10, 2013, 05:50:47 PM »

Unfortunately the link provided doesn't assist, - it takes you to a list of updates but when you select DPP for Windows it doesn't work and a box appears which states "It is possible that the page you were looking for may have been moved, updated or deleted".

9

Software & Accessories / Latest version of DPP

« on: February 10, 2013, 03:00:22 PM »

I understand the latest version of DPP is v3.11 released for the EOS 5 MKIII. Is it possible to update the 2010 version currently installed when I bought a 7D? I can't find such a facility on Canon's UK or Europe site. Thanks for any info!   

10

EOS Bodies / Re: Comparing 6D with 5D3

« on: October 02, 2012, 02:56:44 PM »

Can anyone state with any certainty just WHICH camera actually replaces the 5D MKII? Initially I thought it was the 5D MKIII, but now people are saying, no, it's the 6D. I won't be replacing my 5D MKII for reasons of cost at present, (never had any focusing problems with it whatsoever by the way, although I admit I use it only for portrait/landscape work), - but for someone wanting their first F/F camera, the fact that the MKII is likely to be discontinued shortly doesn't make it any less a camera, and is it not cheaper in real terms than either of the other two, now that the price has dramatically dropped?

11

Lenses / Re: 100-400mm vs. 70-300L for basically the same exact price used? Which one?

« on: May 26, 2012, 04:24:49 PM »

I should know! Had a 400mm f5.6L prime which I traded in for a 2.8L and which I regretted instantly. Far too big and heavy and wide open depth of field was too minimal so I found myself stopping down to about f4 all the time. Traded it in and bought a 400mm f4 DO. Still too big and heavy with a lens hood like a waste-paper bin. Traded it in and bought a 100-400mm zoom which I had for about 5 years. Still heavy, didn't mind push-pull zoom though, only 2 stops IS. THEN Canon bought out the 70-300mm L. Smaller/lighter/conventional zoom, over 400mm in 35mm terms on my 7D, - very very sharp, - 4 stops IS, NO CONTEST! 100-400mm zoom goes - swapped it for another (back to square one) 400mm f5.6L prime, for when and IF I need longer reach. I'm not bothered about lack of IS as it's use will be safari photography from a vehicle using support. 

12

Lenses / Re: Canon 400mm f4 DO lens - any users on this forum with feedback etc

« on: March 16, 2012, 09:30:37 AM »

I can answer with direct experience. I started my wildlife photography with a Sigma 400mm f5.6 lens back in 1989. I exchanged it for a Canon 400mm f5.6L. Being what I can only now describe as "indoctrinated by the views of other photographers" I felt I just HAD to get an f2.8L - when I exhanged the f5.6L for the f2.8L I found the impractibility of travelling with such a large heavy lens completely cancelled out any perceived advantages. When I used it wide open at f2.8 I found that the depth of field was so limited I had to shut down to f4 or f5.6  to get an acceptable d. of f. Eventually after a couple of trips to Kenya and India with the 400mm f2.8L I exchanged it for a 400mm f4 DO lens at a cost of several thousands of £££'s. My hopes that I'd found my dream lens were dashed however when I discovered after buying it that it was still extremely heavy, (light? - don't make me laugh)! unacceptably bulky, and the lens hood, (as was the f2.8's), resembled a waste-paper bin. I then exchanged it for a 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L zoom lens, this was smaller. lighter, and more versatile. I have no issues as to the quality of the images any of these lenses provide, other than my original Sigma which wasn't so good, - I will be keeping my 100-400 with a view to exchanging it for a new improved version as soon as one appears. I'd also be interested in a new 400mm f5.6L with IS if they ever brought one out. I've also bought the recent 70-300mm f4-5.6L which is a cracking lens and in my view a new 100-400mm should simply be a slightly larger version. In the days when I was using the Sigma, 400mm f5.6L and f2.8L lenses, I was using a film camera at 100ISO. Now with a 400mm focal length on a 7D body I'm getting the equivalent of 640mm on auto ISO which at say, 400 ISO, is indistinguishable in image quality, taking into account IS which the other lenses didn't have. To anyone thinking of the 400mm DO lens I'd say, wait and see what Canon does this year before spending so much on an f4 lens, which, however attractive it might sound, I'd suggest most people don't really need. They think they do!

13

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: [POLL] I'm a 5D Mark II owner and...

« on: March 01, 2012, 01:35:10 PM »

None of these and I'd wager I speak for many, - would love to but simply can't afford it. The only reason - period.

14

Lenses / Re: 70-300L anyone?

« on: February 17, 2012, 02:21:00 PM »

Canon 5D MkII with Canon 70-300 f.4.5-5.6L lens at 300mm, second image a drastic crop, I'd say! 

15

Canon General / Never delete images 'in camera'

« on: January 22, 2012, 01:54:03 PM »

Got a shocked telling off from a friend of mine when I deleted an image I'd taken on his brand new 7D.  He told me it was possible to damage the processor by deleting images from the memory card 'in camera'. ONLY delete the images off the card when the card is being read on a computer, he told me. Never heard THAT before, and can't quite believe it. Is this true? If so, why? - and surely Canon wouldn't provide a 'delete' button!