July 29, 2014, 07:29:15 PM

Show Posts

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.


Messages - josephandrews222

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: July 28, 2014, 10:06:01 PM »
...mo' of the same.

2
EOS-M / Re: Difficulty attaching lenses to my new EOS-M
« on: July 26, 2014, 12:47:05 PM »
The 22mm, on my M, seems particularly tight...

3
I haven't read, carefully, this entire thread...but here is what I will say.

The EOS M/11-22mm combo sounds perfect for this sort of thing.

We are preparing to travel to FL/Disney/beaches and the light weight/small size of the M/11-22 means that it fits in my cargo shorts pocket...and is light enough to be placed safely on a tiny tripod that I would NEVER trust to hold a DSLR.

I've written this before on this board--the 11-22mm is the 'killer app' for the EOS M.


4
Just yesterday had the same problem. Instead of tweezers I used a tiny screwdriver to lift the flexible rubber from the plastic beneath it. And instead of glue, I then applied a bit of rubbing alcohol to the general (small) area between the rubber and plastic and turned the plastic 360 degrees to enable the rubbing alcohol to 'clean' the entire plastic wheel/rubber area. Somehow I think the rubber now is better able to 'grip' the plastic beneath it.

12 hours later, my main dial (top dial) is still working properly. I will report back.

30 hours later, the 'rubbing alcohol fix' for the Main Dial slippage is still working.

I did read elsewhere that the 40D is also subject to a problem with a balky shutter button...and that it can be fixed by literally pouring a bit of rubbing alcohol from underneath...through the (presumably empty!?) battery compartment. Ring a bell with anyone?

As a poster above noted, the 40D is not a young pup any more...but it remains one of our favorites at home.

5
Just yesterday had the same problem. Instead of tweezers I used a tiny screwdriver to lift the flexible rubber from the plastic beneath it. And instead of glue, I then applied a bit of rubbing alcohol to the general (small) area between the rubber and plastic and turned the plastic 360 degrees to enable the rubbing alcohol to 'clean' the entire plastic wheel/rubber area. Somehow I think the rubber now is better able to 'grip' the plastic beneath it.

12 hours later, my main dial (top dial) is still working properly. I will report back.

6
Reviews / Re: Please help me love ef 35mm f2 IS vs 40mm pancake
« on: July 21, 2014, 12:30:41 AM »
I am in exactly the same boat...well, sort of. Traveling to FL/Disney/beach in a couple of weeks, and would just love to provide family with pix from inside some of the Disney rides/exhibits/etc. I do not yet own the 35mm 2.0IS and am considering it (instead of the 40mm pancake, which works quite well on the 5DMkIII but I haven't really tested it indoors at Disney when mated to the 5DMkIII). Just how much better would the 35mm 2.0 IS be for this sort of thing? Not live-action sports, but kids are involved, and some movement on rides etc.

I've had some luck with the EOS M/22mm 2.0 as well as the 11-22 something-or-other for outdoor walkaround at Disney and the beaches...and in past years I've used a 40D/17-55 2.8IS for indoor (and outdoor) shots. Recall that the 40D only goes to ISO 3200. Now that I have full-frame capabilities, I'm looking to better my chances.

I get the sense that, for a non-L lens, that the 35mm 2.0IS is a nice one for this sort of thing...

Help/advice is welcome.

7
Lenses / Re: Tamron lenses --> annoying zoom ring
« on: July 18, 2014, 09:00:00 PM »
...restating what I posted in a different thread: I own the now-outdated Tamron 200-500. Its focus ring is right next to the body of the camera. When using a tripod (or even a monopod), I rather enjoyed the close proximity of the focus ring. I think my pictures did, too.

8
EOS-M / Re: How Much Would You Pay...
« on: July 15, 2014, 11:03:09 AM »
I should add the following--I purchased M's for both of my children--they both LOVE using them, and never seemed that interested in a standard Rebel DSLR...

...so, in my book, if Canon wants to grow the business...mirrorless may be where it is at.

9
EOS-M / How Much Would You Pay...
« on: July 14, 2014, 08:45:41 PM »
...for an (shooting for the moon now) EOS M-style body...with

*focusing abilities of, say, a 70D

and a sensor with...

*high ISO abilities of, say, a 5DMkIII

For those of you that haven't bought an 'M', it is a blast to use...really really fun.

But it DOES focus slower than even a low-level Rebel DSLR...and, at least in my hands, its sensor isn't so great as far as high ISO is concerned.

But I've thought about this a long time.

I would pay 1.5K for a 'tricked out' M, that worked as well as a modern DSLR works (as described above).

It should be obvious that I love my 'M', warts and all.

Fire away!

10
Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II [CR1]
« on: July 12, 2014, 08:10:25 PM »
If the focus ring was at the other end of the push/pull barrel so it didn't get turned accidentally, and if the IS was worth anything, it would be a far more pleasant lens to use.

Have you used the 70-300L?  The design places the focus ring next to the body, the zoom ring further out. That's reversed from other L lenses, and means your hand (well, mine at any rate) reflexively grabs the focus ring when intending to zoom.  A real PITA, and if the new 100-400 has a similar design, it would be unfortunate.

I own the older Tamron super zoom (200-500mm). Its focus ring is placed where it is next to the camera's body...and I kind of like it that way! When used on a monopod or tripod, it seems a lot better that way...but certainly different from my Canon lenses.

11
EOS-M / Why I Like My 'M'
« on: June 21, 2014, 01:07:43 PM »
...and the lens that is on it most of the time (the 11-22mm). Good things come in small packages!

My first try at attaching photos here...


12
Lenses / Re: Family Holiday To Florida
« on: June 13, 2014, 08:18:14 PM »
Hi,

First post for me so be gentle!
I am off on a family holiday to Florida soon. I want to get some good photos when over there but dont want o carry around too much gear. I have a 7d and a number of lenses:

Canon 15-85mm
Canon 100mmL IS
Canon 70-200mm F4 IS
Sigma 18-35mm F1.8

It was clear to me that i should just take the 15-85mm with me until i purchased a new Canon 24-105mm off of ebay for £360 (white box). It was just too much of abargain to not buy!
 I may go full frame in the future but have no current plans.

I am now thinking of taking the Sigma and the 24-105mm and maybe just sell the 15-85mm. I'm guessing i wont miss the 15-17mm end of the 15-85mm lens in a Florida theme park type trip. Any views? Would you ditch the 15-85mm?

thanks

Your post is a good one.

I estimate that I have taken 10K pictures at WDW/Universal and various beaches on both coasts...over the years that my family and I have travelled to FL.

My two cents:

For Disney pix...which if you're like me, will often include family members, you need to satisfy the following (in descending order of importance, in my opinion)--

*you want to travel as light as possible [the theme park rides are fun for all, including the photographer]
*you want your camera/lens combination(s) to shoot as wide as wide as possible [close quarters at many WDW attractions]
*you want your lens to let in as much light as possible and you want your camera to work well at high ISOs [some of the indoor Disney attractions are memorable and you'll want images from within some of them]
*(for Canon) you want your lens to be image-stabilized [helps everywhere but particularly in low-light situations so common at WDW]
*you want your camera to have fill-flash capabilities...for OUTDOOR mid-afternnoon people pix
*you want your camera/lens combination(s) to include telephoto capabilities [actually I am not certain how important this is...because of the weight involved]

Here is my FL kit:

1. Canon S95: fill-flash works well and fits in the tiniest of pockets--takes great people pix that easily enlarge to 8x10
2. Canon EOS M with 11-22mm f4 (at 11mm) IS lens (purchased online from CA) and 22mm f2 lens: 80% of the time the 11-22 lens is attached and this combo serves as one of two walkaround systems
3. Canon 5D Mark III with 24-105mm f4 IS lens and 40mm 2.8 pancake lens: 80% of the time the 24-105 lens is attached and this combo serves as the second of two walkaround lenses

The combination of 1. and 2. above is very small and light and works well. I use this duo a majority of the time

But the 5D Mark III with the 40mm pancake is an underrated option size-wise; it too is small and in addition to having superior low-light ability ISO-wise, what is often not thought about (by me at least) is how quickly the full-size Canons focus (compared to 1. and 2. above).

When I am using the 5D Mark III with the 24-105mm, I often leave 1. and 2. back in the room.

I kind of do street photography of my family while strolling around WDW and the beaches, and I've lost more than a few pix because of lousy focus using 1. and 2. above. That's when the Mark III/40mm pancake sort of comes in...I hope to utilize it more during our next trip.

I have probably gone on too long...have more but hope this helps.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: EF-M 22-46mm f/3.5-5.6
« on: April 13, 2014, 05:44:15 PM »
Given that there's already an EF-M 18-55/3.5-5.6, I expect this patent won't see the light of day as a product.
I would imagine that there is something else special about this lens such as being collapsible.

Perhaps, but I doubt it.  Canon is awarded well over 2000 patents per year, but they launch far, far fewer products per year. Many patents are submitted in the course of development, to test different design ideas.  King at the block diagram in this patent, it appears (at least at the low resolution of my phone) that there are six elements in five groups.  That's less than half the number in the M 18-55, and even fewer than the 22/2 pancake.  Canon may be testing how little glass (or plastic) they can get away with in a lens design.

What is the lens...about 2.5 inches in length? The 22mm is about 1.5 inches in length? Is the M 17-55mm about 2.5 inches in length? Am I on the right track?

14
Lenses / Re: Tamron 150-600mm AF servo issues?
« on: March 27, 2014, 10:06:23 AM »
I remember reading a thread or two like this. My recollection is that the 'defect' does not affect all Canon bodies...with some models unaffected. True?

15
EOS-M / Re: EOS M Lens survey - your favorites, and your most wanted?
« on: March 25, 2014, 10:43:03 AM »
The 'sexiest' M-system lens is the 22mm pancake...due to its tiny size and high image quality.

But for me, the lens that is on my 'M' the most (especially during family time while traveling) is the 11-22mm (purchased online from a Canadian reseller).

The 11-22mm lens is THE reason to go 'M'...I get people-and-places pictures with this set-up that are very close in quality to what comes out of my 5D/17-40 combo...and is much less obtrusive in typical vacation and street settings.

Pages: [1] 2 3