daft question; but @ 6inches wide surely you could achieve this level of depth of field @ f22?
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 bought a 7D three years ago, added a 5D mk III later. Since then I have not touched the 7D but kept it as backup camera. I shoot various subjects, also a lot of sports using the 70-200 2.8 II, Sigma 120-300 2.8 sports and 1.4III converter.
The 5D mk III is really awesome but every now and then I do miss the extra reach. Extra mm for full frame are really expensive and above budget.... Would it make sense to replace the 7D for the Mk II and start using the 7D mk II for sports only? Or would I be disappointed since detail and low light performance of the 5D mk III are better than then 7D mk II anyway?
300mm f2.8 would yield 480mm f2.8 on the 7D mk II
300mm f2.8 + 1.4 converter would yield 672mm f4 on the 7D mk II
Reasons to consider upgrading the 7D: better reach and maybe AF speed (how does it compare to the 5D III anyway??). fps, although dramatically improved in the Mk II is not my main concern. Any thoughts appreciated.
So your "Dilemma" is this;
Should you upgrade a camera you have not used in three years?
If you can't find the answer inside the question itself go ahead and buy it. Nothing we say can cure this type of madness.
I have 9 lenses all of which are calibrated perfectly (no afma require at all) across both bodies.
What method of AFMA do you use? Out of 3 pro bodies and 11 L lenses I have never had a lens and body combo that did not require AFMA adjustment. I have also only seen a couple of lenses from other photogs over the years that did not require any afma adjustment. You must be the luckiest camera and lens buyer in the world to get perfectly calibrated lenses and bodies...
no, no problems... and if the correction solved it i don´t know why the hell i would send it in...
sending in only the lens doesn´t help much.. it´s a camera + lens combination thing.