Messages

226

Lenses / Re: I wish I'd never sold my.....?

« on: November 30, 2011, 01:08:05 PM »

The 20D I fixed a couple months back.  I expected a little over $200, only got $155 on eBay for it (I think it has a lot to do with the auction ending on a Friday night).  If I'd known it was going to sell for so little, I would have just kept it for a second body.

On the topic of cars, my dad and my grandfather have three regretible sales:
1953 Corvette
1973 Porsche 914 2.0L silver (99% Concour quality)
1985 Porsche 911 Carerra Cab red (to fund 2000 Boxster S)

Often I miss my 1998 Volvo V70 wagon, despite my current V50 T5 being nicer, more powerful and newer.  I think sentimental reasons are why I miss it.

227

Lenses / Re: RIP Canon EF 15 f/2.8 Fisheye

« on: November 21, 2011, 11:25:33 PM »

I hear from lots of people that aren’t happy with the 8-15 f/4L fisheye. They wish Canon would update the full frame fisheye 2.8 prime.

Who are these people?  I have no experience with this lens, but every review I've read online is glowing. They all say it's sharp, contrasty, and has excellent build quality. Heck, even the Nikon users are extremely jealous about this lens.

228

EOS Bodies / Re: Announcements in January & February [CR2]

« on: November 18, 2011, 03:30:13 PM »

Meanwhile there is great discuss on NR about the vapourware D800... Personally, I think that a lower megapixel D4 is more likely given the Olympics.

I think a formal announcement has to be made in order to qualify as vaporware.  Has Nikon said anything about the D800 yet?

229

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

« on: November 18, 2011, 01:40:01 PM »

Love this shot.  Is it inside a storage tank with an open manway behind them?  Do you have a link to a larger version?

230

Portrait / Re: Canon s95 shot of daughter at Disney World

« on: November 18, 2011, 01:29:03 PM »

I'll echo neuro's thoughts (catch light and tons of CA/ghosting).  There is also a white-hot pixel on her left eyebrow.  Something looks very strange about this picture.  Can you upload an as-shot jpg conversion?  What settings were you using in LR, because everything in the background is ghosted (not just highlight/shadow transitions, but all the mid-tone transitions as well)?

When you say strange, are you referring to possible camera issue?

Yes, I was referring to a camera issue, not your composition or anything.  I agree with neuro that the CA is still present in the as-shot, but the contrast/saturation boost does exacerbate the problem.  I'd believe in the second picture the CA is not as bad since it is not backlit (like the first).

231

Portrait / Re: Canon s95 shot of daughter at Disney World

« on: November 18, 2011, 12:21:43 PM »

I'll echo neuro's thoughts (catch light and tons of CA/ghosting).  There is also a white-hot pixel on her left eyebrow.  Something looks very strange about this picture.  Can you upload an as-shot jpg conversion?  What settings were you using in LR, because everything in the background is ghosted (not just highlight/shadow transitions, but all the mid-tone transitions as well)?

232

EOS Bodies / Re: How often do you go through a body? Why do you upgrade?

« on: November 17, 2011, 06:33:54 PM »

Here's my timeline:

• Fall 2000 - Nikon FM (Art Photography I, II and III classes in HS) my dad's old film camera
• December 2002 - Sony P71 P&S
• May 2006 - Canon SD600 P&S
• February 2010 - Canon Rebel XT and kit lens (used)
• September 2011 - Canon Rebel XTi (purchased broken; fixed, and sold XT for more than purchase price)

Since Feb 2010, I have spent a total of just under $1000 for all my photo gear (see signature), most of it was really good used deals, and the rest broken and fixed.  I have also sold 2 lenses and 2 bodies that I fixed (thanks, Craigslist!).  I've profitted a couple hundred from my little projects, so I've spent about $800 net.

I would love to step up to a newer body (primarily for ISO >1600 and a better OVF), but have not done it yet.  The 60D would be perfect (love the size).  If Canon were to release an entry-level FF camera in a body the size of the 60D I would pull every string to convince my wife for the upgrade.  I would not be interested in a body the size of the 5D or 1D series.

Most likely I'll upgrade the next time I find a killer deal on CL, or a broken camera to fix.

233

Lenses / Re: Canon 28mm f1.8

« on: November 17, 2011, 11:46:07 AM »

Without opening the debate, I am one of those people who shoots without UV filters all the time.  I say protect your lens with a hood when shooting, a lens cap when not.

Ditto

For a bag, i am rally a fan of the Lowepro Sling bags.  I have a 200 and just moved up to a 300.  I bought the 300 used on eBay for $44, but can't tell it from new.  The 200s are great, i just needed a bigger bag.  Lowepros lifetime guarantee is awesome, and the hideaway rain cover can save your gear.  They have replaced 2 bags for me for free, no receipt required.

Same here.  I have a 202AW Sling and it houses all my gear (see signature).  A 300-series would definitely be needed to fit a 70-200mm (it was tricky to fit a 70-200 f4 in it when I borrowed it from a friend).  I have been pleased with the bag, but I definitely agree with neuro about outgrowing bags, I'm close to the limits of my bag's capacity.

234

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L IS "Soonish" [CR2]

« on: November 14, 2011, 12:32:15 AM »

A few folks want an EF 400 f/5.6L IS, I’d think this sort of product would fill the void. I’d expect it to be optically awesome.

At a rumored cost of nearly 3 times the amount, how exactly does this 'fill the void' of an IS 400mm f/5.6 replacement.  The whole point of the 400 5.6 is affordable super tele.  In most amateurs minds I would venture to say $2800 is not 'affordable'.

235

PowerShot Cameras / Re: PowerShot S100 reviewed and compared to the S95

« on: November 10, 2011, 09:13:13 AM »

I'll report back on other issues raised.

One little feature I forgot to mention, and haven't seen mentioned elsewhere. The S100 has a built-in 3-stop ND filter. Nothing in the manual confirms it's an optical filter, although the click when it's turned on and subsequent lag to correct the exposure do strongly suggest that it is, and the image circle is small enough that it's quite feasible. The only lingering skepticism is that Canon does manipulate sensor sensitivity on the sly, e.g. when ultrafast lenses are used on a dSLR, where they compensate for an angle of incidence too shallow for the sensor by 'secretly' increasing sensitivity (i.e. ISO).  But, I suspect in this case, it's a real ND filter. Handy for waterfalls and other desired motion-capture situations, and for overcoming the max 1/2000 s shutter speed when needed.

For what it's worth, even the SD700 (5 years old) had a built-in opitcal ND.  I disassembled one a couple years ago to remove sand from the lens barrel.  I would imagine Canon is still using optical ND.

236

Lenses / Re: New Lenses Imminent? [CR1]

« on: November 02, 2011, 11:16:37 PM »

KyleSTL... thanks for your very useful post with the list of non L primes and releases!  Much appreciated!

Paul

You're welcome.  Also, the amazing thing about that list is only two have been discontinued:

50mm f/1.8 I (replaced by II)
100mm f/2.8 Macro (replaced by USM)

237

Lenses / Re: New Lenses Imminent? [CR1]

« on: November 02, 2011, 05:59:56 PM »

In APS-C terms, that's 56mm(35), 80mm(50) and either 153mm(85) or 38mm (28)

You mean 136mm (85) and 45mm (28)

I can't remember the last time an affordable non-L prime came out?  I think it was the 60/2.8

Non-L Primes (excluding 400mm DO):

60mm f/2.8 Macro USM (2005)
100mm f/2.8 Macro USM (2000)
MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro (1999)
28mm f/1.8 USM (1995)
50mm f/1.4 USM (1993)
20mm f/2.8 USM (1992)
85mm f/1.8 USM (1992)
100mm f/2 USM (1991)
TS-E 45mm f/2.8 (1991)
TS-E 90mm f/2.8 (1991)
35mm f/2 (1990)
50mm f/1.8 II (1990)
100mm f/2.8 Macro (1990)
24mm f/2.8 (1988)
15mm f/2.8 Fisheye (1987)
28mm f/2.8 (1987)
50mm f/1.8 I (1987)
50mm f/2.5 Macro (1987)
135mm f/2.8 Soft Focus (1987)

238

Lenses / Re: New Lenses Imminent? [CR1]

« on: November 02, 2011, 05:19:18 PM »

I would preorder the updated 35mm f2 if it's in the same price range as the lens it replaces.  Same build quality and features as 28mm f1.8 USM, but simpler optical design, should make it more affordable (than 28mm, not cheaper than current 35mm). 

239

United States / Re: Canon's new "2.4mm" lens available at bestbuy

« on: October 24, 2011, 11:14:22 AM »

And these are the people selling most electronics to American consumers...

I knew the people working in the stores were pretty much clueless (no offense intended to anyone working at BB, but most people aren't well-informed about the items they are selling), but this is a new low.

240

Canon General / Re: 5D mark II versus 7D spot focus

« on: September 27, 2011, 03:59:35 PM »

awinphoto,

For a given aperture (regardless of focal length, since aperture is a ratio of focal length and iris diameter) the light PER UNIT AREA is identical regardless of format (1/1.7", APS-C, 35mm, medium format, etc).  Your statement of the 5D Mark II's AF sensor receiving more light is only true if (and only if) the individual focus points are larger than the 7D's focus points.  The overall amount of light reflected by the mirror (which is dependent on mirror size, and therefore sensor size) is completely irrelevent to the light used for any given AF point.

The relevent question is (all other things being equal):

How big are individual AF points of the 5D Mark II vs. the 7D?