What if I can only afford one 600 right now?
You could get the 600 now and a long ETTL cord to move it off camera.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I often use Av mode for flash stuff for candids, etc, because it does meter for the ambient. I'll typically set the meter to -1 and then adjust FEC accordingly. Set the ISO manually high enough so that the ambient is about 1/100-1/200. Enable HSS on the flash in case you walk into a brighter area and the shutter speed goes past the sync speed of the camera.
It might be worth checking out the manual to see if you can override the max iso of 400 constraint. Is it only with flash attached, etc? Perhaps there is a setting to remove it.
Will HSS be required if the shooter walks into brighter area? The "bright" ambient light will take care of the black bars when shutter speed goes past the sync speed of the camera - won't it?
And yes, adjusting the ISO manually is the best bet, instead of letting it stay on auto.
So in conclusion, if flash is mounted, there is no way to automatically get standard exposure in Av mode.
Also it is undesireable to use Av mode, simply because there is no way I can make my Min shutter speed to 1/90 or 1/125. Also Auto ISO is Clipped to 400.
My intention is, I want the camera to automatically get exposure of ambient light 1 stop below standard exposure exposure (given min shutter speed and auto ISO), in different lighting condition. And be able adjust FEC as necessary.
As conclusion There is No Way to do this.
I do have a question about its design, though. It's heavier and longer than the 16-35L II, so is this lens essentially a 16-35 FF UWA design with a speedbooster added?You need a 1.55x speedbooster (telecompressor) to go from f2.8 to f1.8. If a 16-35/2.8 was fitted with a 1.55x telecompressor, it would become an APS-C 10.3-22.5/1.8.
A better match is a 24-70/2.8 with a 1.55x telecompressor. The nearest rival is another third party premium product, the Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC (just £20 and 15g more) - and that would make a 15.4-45/1.8 VC lens with the same telecompressor built in. Wider, longer, and image stabilised.
I started another thread on this when the price dropped yesterday...
Engagdet (not a great SLR source of insight) expected this to be priced in the $2k+ range as it was an industry first. Cue giggling.
But even I am surprised with the $799 price including the hood.
I personally was expecting this to be coming in around $1,000-$1,200 even though it's APS-C only. A first is still a first, and I'm not convinced something is so easily 'priced out of APS-C user territory' with so many sports / wildlife guys plugging much more expensive glass on their 7Ds.
Any of you surprised by the $799 figure? The chatter I've seen on other announcement pages (photo rumors, Petapixel, etc.) has been very positive re: the price.
Sigma is on fire right now with that 35mm F/1.4, so people are taking them more seriously. I still am bent out of shape that they are using whatever witchcraft they have on crop when full frame people would give their left nut for this -- where is the EF 24-50 F/2.2 for full frame?
So this could possibly turn into an actual product within a year?
Hmmm tempting but I don't want to invest in APS-C anymore. The focal range is interesting as it overalaps Sigma's own 30mm f/1.4 DC HSM A. At this price it seems like the zoom would be the way to go?
Very true, particularly considering the 30mm isn't amazing optically.
I was refering to the new 30, not the old one. It hasn't had much press. Is that because it's not that great?
Unless you have a critical need for a second body now, I'd hold off and wait for this winter. Hopefully, prices will drop to that level again, or at least close to it. You could always get the 400 or 200-400 first. With those big lenses, no one will realize a second body dangling off the end of it!
For everydays shooting, I'm good with one body. For my daughter school events + others activities, I feel I missing alot of close-up shots for not having 2nd body.
For exp. my 4yrs daughter will graduate from pre-school next fri . All students will be singing and dancing etc....having 2nd body for these moments is very handy.
I don't want to pay another $3200 for a camera that don't use much - hate that
It's nice to have another 5D III though - this camera is just PERFECT for my needs. Will see
If the 100-400 is as good as Canon's recent new offerings, then it should be markedly better than the 70-200L II + 2x III. Hopefully, it'll take extenders well and give us good IQ at 560mm, which is about as far as we can get with a mobile hand-holdable system.
Hopefully, it'll take them at all. Lots of people are clamoring for a rotating zoom like the 70-300L. What if that plus a compact design means the lens loses extender compatibility?? Why would they do that? Consider...all along the 'barrier' was 400/420mm. If you wanted longer and still wanted AF, you shelled out the big bucks for a 1-series body or a supertele. So now that they've put f/8 AF in a 5-series, perhaps they'll take away a 'cheap' 560mm f/8 IS option with good IQ. Not really trying to be the voice of doom, here, but we all know that Canon giveth and Canon taketh away (AFMA on the 60D, anyone?).
Another 5D3 will just add to the muscle memory your probably built already. To me it's seemless to work with them as a pair.
All I need is BigValueInc sale, 5D III for $2500
With a FF kit, this would be a tempting upgrade path from the 70-300L to get a bit more reach...
I'd say that will depend on the physical specs of the new 100-400L. While I'd appreciate a step up in IQ and IS, I find that the current 100-400L delivers excellent images. But I'm still considering (and will likely purchase soon) the 70-300L as a travel lens.
Regarding 70-300 I will be interested in your opinion when/if you get it. I already have two 70-200 lenses (70-200 2.8L IS II and 70-200 4L IS) I intend to keep. A third one in the same more or less focal range would be too much.The f/4 is an excellent travel lens. Light and sharp. In addition I do not like the reverse use of zooming and focusing rings in 70-300 ...
On the positive side I would not have to bring my 300 4L and there are bags that you can put the 70-300 lens vertically - but not the 70-200 f4 - and save a lot of space!!!
I would like to be able to save my raw files to cf and small jpg images to sd... and I haven't gotten that deep into the manual to see if it can do that... though I guess no.
It can do it.
Thanks. I played around with the settings and figured it out pretty quickly. I'm still curious if it slows down the write speed.