Nobody's brought it up so I'll mention it. Isn't the timing on this interesting in that Canon just released a new version of DPP that isn't backwards compatible? Maybe the new RAW formula is already in the software?
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.
Yeah, everything I've tried so far isn't coming through. Haven't tried star ratings or looking at my curves but simple stuff like color that are in the picture style aren't coming over. Maybe I'm doing something wrong but the Canon site does say recipes don't transfer between the two so I'm guessing that's where Canon is storing all that stuff in the fileOne big bummer is nothing as far as settings seems to transfer between the two. Not even simple things like exposure or check marks.
Are you saying that doing an edit in DPP3 (e.g. curves & WB edit, and star-rating) doesn't show in DPP4?
My edits are coming over fine
For the DLO module, I wish they had the old 400mm f/2.8L IS USM in there too, like the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM.
http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-17-50mm-Vibration-Compensation-Digital/dp/B002LVUIXA/ref=pd_cp_p_0Keep in mind the VC is optically inferior to the non-vc version:
For some reason this costs a lot more at B&H.
f/2.8- you want as much light as possible for the smaller sensor.
17-50- this is a nice standard zoom range.
VC- you want vibration compensation when recording video.
Plus, it is a very nice and well-regarded lens all around.
There are so many counterfeit ones out there that its hard to identify a truly good deal.
I'd like to find a 82mm one, I have some 77mm ones, but 82mm seems to be the new standard.
I will stick to B&H, Adorama, or other reputable dealer and avoid anyone with "Wonderful" deals that seem too good to be true.
I expect to see some one day specials in the next 2 months, the problem is to spot them in time to jump on them. Perhaps signing up for sale notices at some of the major manufacturers outlets??
Let us know if you find a deal.
BTW, The price seems to be $150-$250 for good ones, but there is a $11.95 special on Amazon. Maybe this is one of those that ruins the front element on some lenses due to rubbing.
Here's another extreme example of lens damage and dust inside the lens, and how it affects image quality
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2008/10/front-element-scratchesGood of lensrentals to answer. I guess they didn't point you to Roger's blog?
It is up to you. But since you posted, I guess you want to return it.Not necessarily. I just wanted some reassurance this is normal and I shouldn't worry about it. Thanks for the input everyone. I'm shooting a wedding this weekend. If I don't notice anything in the pictures from that I won't worry about it.
So return it
I second that. The Sigma 85mm 1.4 is no match for the 85L, especially not for the bokeh (yes, there is more than sharpness, even if I think the Canon is sharper @f1.4).
@Radiating: I really like what Sigma is doing at the moment, but keep the feet at the ground!
You're living in the ancient past. Sigma's primary motivation now is image quality not price.
Sigma has been releasing lenses that blow their competitors out of the water in quality at around or slightly below their competitors prices:
If you have any doubts take a look at these real world samples:
Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 vs Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 @ f/2.8
There's no comparison, the Sigma is in an entirely different league of image quality. Their 35mm f/1.4 is likewise better:
And their 85mm f/1.4 is both sharper than Canon's 85mm f/1.2 II, and has much less purple fringing (the f/1.2 II has so much you can't even correct it automatically, which is why I use the Sigma)
Sigma makes a better lens that Canon does. Sometimes much better, this is the new Sigma.
I would be very surprised if the 24-105mm OS wasn't marginally better and I'd be very happy if it blew the Canon out of the water like they did with the f/1.8 zoom.
That is a great deal on the 35.
I took the rented 18-35 on a trip to Chicago and shot roughly 500 pictures, 300 of which were keepers. I haven't processed any of them yet, as I'm waiting for Lightroom to release a lens correction profile.
My copy seemed to hunt a little, especially in low light. Keep in mind I shoot on a 60d, so not the greatest autofocus to begin with. I did like the range a lot; I have a 17-40L so this was pretty close in terms of focal lengths.
I've been thinking a lot about switching to full frame, and thought maybe this lens would convince me to stay with crop. No conclusion so far. I wanted to love this lens, and I still could, but I won't know for sure until I get a chance to process all my shots.