Messages

1606

EOS Bodies / Re: Test

« on: July 07, 2011, 12:28:38 PM »

No problem... Just wasn't sure what you were testing and if you wanted responses or not.  If you like food photography, creativelive.com has a PPV interview with a food photog who shot for national geo among others and also had an exclusive interview with a food magazine photo editor in which he critiques peoples photos on what would he consider "magazine" quality and not... very interesting stuff if you like that kinda thing.  Anyways welcome to canon rumors and it looks like your test "worked"

1607

EOS Bodies / Re: Test

« on: July 06, 2011, 11:28:49 PM »

Am I missing something?  Nice shot I suppose... what specifically are you testing so we can best respond?  Or are you testing our reactions?  DOF very nice overall... B and W very smooth and rich and velvety... As far as food photography, very nice overall however some picky editors (magazine editors) may frown on the grungy floor being seen but for other purposes it may be very appropriate depending on what you are trying to convey...?

1608

Lenses / Re: New lens or body?

« on: July 06, 2011, 06:25:48 PM »

You do realize the pandora's box you just opened asking internet strangers what gear they would have you buy.  =)  Waiting on bodies can be a very tiresome task.  5D people are waiting on a prayer that the replacement will be any time within the next 6-9 months and and 7D people, well, that camera, in all reality, likely wont be replaced until probably 3rd qtr 2012 to complete it's 3 year cycle, however that could be thrown up in the air depending on how stock levels remain (5D mark II being backordered in most stores) and other cameras like 7D being in short supply. 

Lenses are always your best bet because unlike bodies that have a life cycle of every few years, lenses outlive bodies sometimes 2-3 bodies (if not longer if you have a really nice lens and treat it well).  While the allure and options of a bigger and better camera are always more lucrative, you might as well (if funding is readily available), go ahead and buy a lens or two that will let you do what you want to do.  I would recommend getting a good "walk around" lens (17-55mm, 24-105L, 24-70L, 15-85 (at least), even the 18-135mm has ok MTF (sharpness) charts...)  Then get your specialty lens depending on what you love to do (telephoto for close ups of wildlife or wides or ultrawides for landscapes)... Have your bases covered and then once you get better, you can splurge on a new body and even better glass.   

1609

EOS Bodies / Re: August Nikon D4, D400... how and when will Canon respond?

« on: July 02, 2011, 06:31:43 PM »

At the end of the day, you've got to do what you got to do.  And to be honest, the D300 to D300s upgrade was practically nothing (other than video).  So if you look at it like that, Nokins D300(s) camera is getting pretty long in the tooth, and even at that, when the 7D came out, many reviewers sites basically said the 7d matched or was better in many regards... That I say yawn with this proposed upgrade.  Now what I want to hear is rumors of the D800 because that could force canon's hand with the 5D upgrade.  Hopefully the D4 could help with that as well.

1610

Software & Accessories / Re: corrupt file name provided by my 7D

« on: July 01, 2011, 09:45:22 AM »

when mine, it just created a bad file... camera couldn't read it, computer couldn't open it... With my situation it was the card screwing up.  Incorrect or odd file prefixes i would concur with neuro

1611

Software & Accessories / Re: corrupt file name provided by my 7D

« on: July 01, 2011, 07:43:58 AM »

I had that happen a few times on my 7d.... i was able to trace it to a specific memory card i got from best buy.  I dont use that card no more and knock on wood I haven't encountered that since. 

1612

Lenses / Re: new lens and camerabody

« on: June 29, 2011, 03:01:53 PM »

That way he's not being forced into buying additional lenses JUST BECAUSE he is upgrading bodies, unless he wants to.

That assumes s/he will sell the 7D upon going FF.  I didn't...and I still have (and use) my EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS.

True enough...

1613

Lenses / Re: new lens and camerabody

« on: June 29, 2011, 02:27:57 PM »

"First of all, i love lanscape wide angle pictures," and a 24mm lens on a 7D is not wide angle.

Well 24mm is wide angle if you walk back enough to make it wide angle,  haha.  Joking aside I think unless he needs the 2.8, some options he could go is the 24-105 IS is a great all around lens, he could get that, and then as neuro mentioned in a prior post, pick up a 10-22mm EF-S lens... or you can get a 10-20 sigma, or equivelent tokina or whatever... those are good for crop bodies such as the EF-S and if and when you even move on from the crop body (7D, 60D, Rebels, etc)... and move to full frame like the 5D and 1Ds, then you only have to sell 1 lens, still have a good all around lens, and can use the money from the sell of the ef-s lens to buy whatever gear you deem appropriate at that time.  That way he's not being forced into buying additional lenses JUST BECAUSE he is upgrading bodies, unless he wants to. 

1614

Lenses / Re: new lens and camerabody

« on: June 29, 2011, 10:39:13 AM »

In that mindset, having the 24-105 and 24-70 makes no sense.  Personally I would go with the 24-105 instead of the 24-70, unless perhaps the 24-70 IS comes out, however unless that happened, I wouldn't bother. 

I can see some sense to it - the 24-70mm provides an extra stop of light, which in some situations is critical.  Personally, I've recently done some shooting in the evening, when I wanted the flexibility of a zoom, had moving subjects which negated the benefit of IS, and ISO 3200 with the f/4 of the 24-105mm wasn't doing the trick - one more stop would have been enough to stop the subject motion and bump the keeper rate to something acceptable.  I've considered the 24-70mm, but would really like an IS version of that lens.  If I had both current lenses, the 24-105mm would get more use, I'd bet.

Well shoot assuming money is no issue, then yeah, get as many lenses as you can, however as he is starting out his gear, I wouldn't recommend jumping out and getting both lenses within his first few lens purchases until he comes into the situation (and have enough training to know the difference) where he would want and need a faster lens.  Even at that, 2.8 is only 1 stop faster and at that point, he may even want to consider a fast prime or two to combat that situation (my original recommendation for his 4th purchase).  Its fun spending other peoples money, haha.  =)

1615

Lenses / Re: new lens and camerabody

« on: June 28, 2011, 11:21:18 PM »

Ii would skip the 24-105 and go for the 24-70 and if you like, go later for an 70-200 or 70-300.
I think it makes no sense, to have two lens in the same range. But depends on you needs.

I believe I may have mis-spoken/mistyped because I reread the thread and he mentioned he was getting the 24-105 and then going to later buy the 24-70 and you said having 2 lenses in the same range made no sense and I replyed nonsense... I guess i misread and thought I read his third purchase was a 70-200... (saw 70 and went in that direction in my mind)... In that mindset, having the 24-105 and 24-70 makes no sense.  Personally I would go with the 24-105 instead of the 24-70, unless perhaps the 24-70 IS comes out, however unless that happened, I wouldn't bother.  I would recommend he got the 70-200 F(whatever his budget can afford(2.8-4)  on his third purchase instead of the 24-70.  That way he has a mid, wide and tele.  Then maybe adding a 50mm 1.4 or 85 1.8 or some large aperture lens down the road for the misc shooting conditions when f2.8/4 aren't wide enough.  With those 4 lenses he should be good in my guestimation.  Also avoiding EF-S lenses may work well if he's hoping to upgrade to FF in the future. 

1616

Lenses / Re: new lens and camerabody

« on: June 28, 2011, 06:20:40 PM »

... it's a good think i'm patient and my money gets to compound interest until it's announced/released.

Where do you get interest on your money these days?

Inflation and rising prices seem to overwhelm the paltry interest rates.

I've got my options... =)  hopefully this camera will arrive when i'm young enough to do stuff with it, haha. 

1617

Lenses / Re: new lens and camerabody

« on: June 28, 2011, 05:49:31 PM »

Ii would skip the 24-105 and go for the 24-70 and if you like, go later for an 70-200 or 70-300.
I think it makes no sense, to have two lens in the same range. But depends on you needs.

Nonsense... The only reason to go for the 24-70 is if you want the extra speed, no stabilization, and a bad back carrying the beast.  It's a good lens but the 24-105 is a very good all around lens with ok wide end (36-170mm roughly) and decent long end... Then he can throw on the 16-35 and 70-200 for situational photography.  That's the route I am in motion for going with Full Frame, i just need the friggen 5D mark III to come out... it's a good think i'm patient and my money gets to compound interest until it's announced/released. 

1618

Lenses / Re: Sigma 24-70 2.8 hsm vs Canon L

« on: June 28, 2011, 01:23:20 PM »

I'm going to guess that Flake means using a 77mm filter on the 82mm-threaded lens (whether you call that a step up or a step down is semantic, in that different manufacturers would name it differently). 

Looking at the front of the lens, it does seem that there's a bit of room to spare.  That's true in many cases, for example, mounting a macro flash on the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS or the EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro lenses requires a Macrolite adapter, which is essentially a 67→58mm or 72→58mm step-down ring, respectively. 

The Sigma lens already suffers from a fair bit of optical vignetting, but a loss of 5mm might not add any mechanical vignetting to that.

Sums it up I guess!  although the 5mm is a diameter loss so it means a loss of 2.5mm on each side

It varies from lens to lens I suppose... for instance there are some lenses which i've heard can give vignetting just putting on a regular filter, hence why they sell low profile filters... I dont have much experience with this lens in question... while adding a step down ring may not add much to mechanical vignetting, adding a filter, or two or three (depending on what you are adding) may become a problem... Regarding the macro rings... since there is a sense of telephoto in those zooms, I think they may either add a fraction more glass so it's more consistent edge to edge but you can also easily utilize such attachments.  I think (going off assumption) it may be more of a marketing and engineering factor with "macro lenses" or else they would have to utilize another style of adapter.  Perhaps someone who has this sigma lens can try it out for the benefit of this forum and we will be eternally grateful.   

1619

Lenses / Re: Sigma 24-70 2.8 hsm vs Canon L

« on: June 28, 2011, 12:53:32 PM »

Just buy a step down ring 82 - 77mm isn't a massive difference and £2 finding out if 24mm vignettes (which it does anyway - lots!)

Don't you first have to buy the 82mm filters to use a step down ring, unless you mean a step up ring?

I believe that's what he meant... I would be nervous on vignetting on the wide end but if it work, then great.. 

1620

Lenses / Re: Sigma 24-70 2.8 hsm vs Canon L

« on: June 28, 2011, 10:26:32 AM »

For the best comparison of these two lenses, go to the the-digital-picture.com  You can in the 12233 chart put the two lenses side by side and look at sharpness and such... the 24-70L outpreforms it, especially in the corners, on all focal lengths... center sharpness tends to be a wash/maybe even a slight edge at times with the sigma, but the corners fall apart.  Lastly, on their summary of the lenses, they said if sigma was the same price as canon, NOBODY would buy the sigma, however since it's half the price, it's something to consider.  It also mentioned if you get flare, even a little flare, you lose a ton of contrast in your entire image.