2.8 is OK I guess provided a red L follows
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 was thinking as you but OP had said:family / children: better with prime lenses
landscapes: better with a 24-70
Interesting. I have the opposite viewpoint, mostly. My kids move fast - a zoom offers the flexibility I need to capture them from arm's length to across the yard. For landscapes, I have the camera on a tripod and time at my disposal. TS-E 24mm and mucking about with gran ND filters? No problem.
get a video camera or ... learn how to paint
... Have a video camera and I know how to paint ... what else?
Now that the Nikon 80-400mm upgrade lens in now in the hands of customers and reviewers, perhaps Canon will think it is now safe to announce their new 100-400 lens (I'm hoping for 200-500 F4 non-push pull - probably would be too heavy) version.200-500 would be monstrous in size, price and weight.
I was expecting a bit more believable prank.Simple, choose between:
and all L-Lensens now have to be re-releases as R-Lenses...
Since this was the very beginning of a long night of shooting I decided to get a little rough with the lens and managed to jam it back into alignment. It snapped in and seems to be working fine now. I need to AFMA all of my lenses now, but so far problems in site. Any thoughts on sending the 24-70 into CPS for alignment if I don't see any problems with it? Kind of worried about getting the lens back worse than when I sent it in.I cannot imagine how you fixed it but if it seems OK (left part = right part = very good) and focusing is 100% OK
After a lot of mails to Canon I am now sure that Canon hear at the customers and realease a ...-400 lens this year.Hmmm it's April 1st today