July 30, 2014, 08:01:03 AM

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 - DJL329

Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 32
I eagerly await the 5D Mark III, however I'm more interested in a 50mm f/1.4 II that replaces the "micro" USM with "ring" and decreases the MFD.

For those wanting an EF 24-70mm f/2.8L with IS, just remember that Canon has yet to release an EF (not EF-S) lens with IS that does not reach at least 100mm.  I'm not saying I think they won't add it, just don't assume they will.   ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: New Processor for EOS line [CR3]
« on: September 23, 2011, 02:17:35 PM »
[CR3] ?????? :o

He must've forgotten the minus sign between the R and the 3.   ;)  Or that the CR ratings are for the site's moderators to rank the Rumors that they post, not for everyone else to use.

EOS Bodies / Re: Ball pitching speed / Shutter speed accuracy experiment
« on: September 22, 2011, 05:06:56 PM »
Have you tried doing a similar test using an automobile, traveling at a predetermined speed?  When you compare the results from the 2 bodies, the results should be identical (if they're both working properly), since the speed of the car is now a constant.

You could also do that to test your radar gun.  If it is off by a certain factor (the percentage difference is the same, even at different speeds), you could then factor it in when using it on the pitchers.  Or possibly (I don't know anything about radar guns) use it to calibrate the radar gun?

Sports / Re: New Member ;-)
« on: September 22, 2011, 01:23:30 PM »
The 24-70 f/2.8L might be a better choice for indoors, instead of the 24-105mm f/4L, as it's a stop faster, and you already have the 70-105 range covered with the 70-200mm.

An ultra-wide angle, such as the 16-35mm f/2.8L (the 17-40mm f/4L, is a cheaper, slower alternative) is another must:  group shots, interior shots of the church, etc.

The 15mm fisheye is also popular.  For instance, in posed shots of the bride (with the train laid out in front), it helps to exaggerate the train.

And don't forget a flash!   :D

Here's an article I just found on the subject:


In the end, do lots of research.  I'm sure there are plenty of books and articles on the subject.

EOS Bodies / Re: Big 5D Mark II Price Drops in Canada & USA
« on: September 22, 2011, 09:48:41 AM »
that mean something new coming?

Not necessarily.  Most of the folks here are hoping it does, because it's been 3 years since Canon last announced a new Full Frame dSLR (3 years since 5D Mark II; 4 since the 1Ds Mark III).  There is a "Pro" announcement scheduled for today (see link, below), however we don't know which products will be announced.  Just have to wait and see.


Lenses / Re: New L Series Lenses coming out with the 5D Mk3?
« on: September 21, 2011, 10:20:41 AM »
That's one of the advantages of investing in an EOS system. Every single EF lens ever made, for example, will work on any new Canon EOS DSLR you buy today.

Interesting that you bring that up as a positive to buying Canon when Nikon and Pentax have a backward compatibility that spans 50 years or more. While Canon's is only 20 or so.

However, I don't disagree with you. I find that 20 years is plenty.

I don't think I'd wave the canon flag when it comes to discussions of lens back-compatibility.  especially not to anyone who had to go through the FD-to-EF sea change.  I hope that canon's learnt that lesson and we won't see that happen again in our lifetimes.  a lot of the higher end glass canon produces is stuff that's meant to last a lifetime, so a 19-year life span for a lens mount is absolutely unacceptable.

At the time (mid 1980s), Canon was trying to keep up with Minolta and Nikon.  The FL mount was mechanical and needed to be replaced to outpace the competition.  Was it risky?  Yes, but if you want to be successful in business, you have to take risks.  Since they now have an electronic mount, it's highly unlikely that Canon will have to replace it anytime soon.

It's now 24 years later and Canon has sold more lenses (EF mount) than Nikon has in 50 years, so I would have to say yes, Canon has learnt their lesson.  ;)

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF50mm f/1.4 USM
« on: September 21, 2011, 09:29:27 AM »
Truly loving this lens!


+1  :D

All shot with the 5D Mark II.

(With extension tubes)


Canon General / Re: A Canon Hollywood Event on November 3, 2011
« on: September 15, 2011, 11:42:00 PM »
“Canon is making an historical global announcement”

Psst, moderator.  It's "historic" (something important), not "historical" (anything from the past, not necessarily important).   ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 'Rep' tells BBC that "fewer megapixels are better"
« on: September 12, 2011, 07:00:35 PM »
I'm awaiting the release of a 400 mp camera so I can sell off all my telephoto lenses.

400MP on a APS-C or even full frame 35mm would be so overkill it isn't even funny.

It would be so "noisy" that you'd need to wear earplugs!  ;)

EOS Bodies / Re: New body spotted at IAAF Daegu?
« on: September 12, 2011, 01:02:12 AM »
The highlights and shadows by the prism are playing tricks on us.  It's definitely the 5D Mark II.

Lenses / Re: TS-E 17 mm f.4,0L or ef 14mm 2,8 L mk II
« on: September 10, 2011, 04:33:46 PM »
If, as your post states, you're planning on shooting landscapes, then I would say neither of these lenses.

The TS-E is great for architecture, since you can use it to eliminate the "keystone" effect.  If you're not shooting buildings, then why pay more for the Tilt/Shift and manual focus?   And, as others have mentioned, you do need to use a tripod.

The 14mm is rectilinear (I have the original version), which makes it great for exaggerating/distorting perspective.  The best use for this lens is to get up close to something, not for landscapes.  The angle is so wide, things in the distance end up being very small.

Also, since both have a convex front lens, neither will take screw-on filters, which can come in very handy when shooting landscapes (especially ND and polarizers).

Therefore, IMO, the best choice for shooting landscapes would be the 16-35mm f/2.8L II.  Check out other sites (fredmiranda, flickr, etc.) to see examples by other photographers.  You could also rent (or at least try it out in the store) before buying.

Lenses / Re: Good yet affordable telephoto lens?
« on: September 08, 2011, 01:21:13 PM »
I have the 300mm f/4L IS & 1.4x TC II combo and like it very much.  The short minimum focusing distance (1.5m) is helpful, as is the sliding, built-in hood.  Being a prime, it's sharper than the 100-400mm, which I considered before getting the 300mm.  This site has a tool you can use to compare the output of lenses:


Here are some cropped samples with the 1.4x TC:

EOS Bodies / Re: Advice on purchasing a new APS-C body
« on: September 08, 2011, 01:13:25 AM »
The current 5D and 1Ds bodies are about 3 and 4 years old, respectively, so they are the most likely ones to get updated in the next year.  The 7D is "only" 2 years old, so if you're dead set on that body, I wouldn't bother waiting.

I also agree with AG:  if you both like the 60D, then getting a 2nd one is another good option.  Remember, good photography is less about the hardware and more about what you do with it!  :D

Canon General / Re: Canon 5dmii quirk or software issue?
« on: September 07, 2011, 03:35:12 PM »
Have you tried using Canon's EOS Utility to download the photos?  That would help to determine if it's a problem with the app or the camera.

Canon General / Re: Canon pricing
« on: September 05, 2011, 10:15:46 PM »
The 1Ds MK3 is listed as low as $6599 in Canada but no stock. If Canon is to come out with a new model typically whats the trend in terms of pricing. Would the new MK4 (if that's what it's called) generally be priced well over the past model and take several months to drop? Curious if anyone knows how the higher end digital cameras were priced with Canon.

When the 1Ds Mark III was originally released, it was $7,999 (US).  Here's a link to a press release from 2007.  The original price is listed about a page down, right above the section titled "History."


Judging by the increased cost of the new "L" lenses (70-200mm f/2.8L II, 300mm f/2.8L II and 400mm f/2.8L II), the replacement will be more than $8,000.

Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 32