I am an keen amateur,and I own the 135 (and It happens to be my favorite lens). I borrowed the 85 1,2 for more than a week, and I did not like it. I find the AF to be very nervous and slow. After being out shooting for a whole day with that lens, I had to throw 80% of the images, a problem I don't have with my 135. I have considered the 85 1.8 given all the good things I read about it, but have not yet had the opportunity to try it.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5D MKII, 17mm TS, 50mm 1.4, 16-35mm F2.8L II, 70-200mm F2.8L IS II, 135mm F2.0L, 24-105mm F4.0L, 100mm F2.8L Macro, Tokina 17mm

In my experience, the Canon speedlites are far superior to the YN flashes, I bought one (can't remember model, but was abt size of 430ex) some time ago when I only had the 430ex(Au$120 2nd hand) tried to use it off camera with ST-E2, the YN is far inferior at picking up the IR( it takes forever to find a place/angle that it will work off-camera) than the Canons and just gives a cheap and nasty impression, I wasn't happy with it at all so I gave it away, and bought a 2nd hand 550ex(abt Au$70, and 2x 580exii in as new condition for abt $350 each) and I still have my original 430ex. 550ex is a bit bulky but otherwise I have no complaints regarding my Canon speedlites and would recommend them

The YN didn't have an LCD like the Canon's do either and less functions.

elflord said:

daniemare said:

Am I really alone in thinking, as a Hobbyist, that a $2k FF body will be awesome and the current Price trend seems ridiculous? Can Canon make money with such a lower priced FF body with parts from the wheely bin, bearing in mind future L lens sales? Will this cannibalize sales of other bodies? Or does every single FF user out there crave for the 36MP 61 AF pt monster at $3,5k body only as rumoured?

Click to expand...

Sony tried a 2k full frame body and it wasn't very successful. The good news is that your sub $2k full frame is already here -- it's the used 5D mark II (or a new one if you can get it on sale).

You're not going to see what's very close to a flagship product at a discount price. There's nothing entry level about a full frame body with a flagship sensor and a top of the line AF system.

While it might not seem like Canon make money from used 5D Mark II sales, the buyers of the latest and fanciest technology need to sell their used gear to someone to fund their purchase. So a thriving secondary market where there is reasonably strong demand does help maintain demand for their flagship. If the market is flooded with cheap full frame bodies that are loaded with the same tech as the expensive full frame bodies, it could potentially undercut their high end products. Basically, the guys who would have bought used 5D mark IIs would buy the 6D instead, so those who are selling the 5D Mk II have to offload it for peanuts, and therefore have less to spend on the upgrade.

Click to expand...

That last paragraph is a very good point. Price points of these things and their longevity help not only the creators of the product, but, the consumers too. checking now, when it's time to make my upgrade, my 7D will account for about 1/3rd of the cost of the 5dmkiii (What I may actually do is get the 5dmkiii, sell my 7d, and grab a 7d mkii, assuming they come out with one. I like the extra range a 1.6 crop gives you, and I don't want to have spend a ton on a 200-400 mm lens when my 70-200mm covers a lot of ranges on both a FF and 1.6 crop crop bodies!

http://chuckalaimo.com/

IF you're doing landscapes, spend the money on solid tripod and a cable/ir cable release....

IF you're looking for glass to reach out, save up an extra $100 and get a used 70-200f4L - about $500 and should include a lens hood. It'll be a lens that you'll use for years, give you solid results every time. Yes, there is no IS - but if you're dealing with daylight, it'll love you very much. Best part is that you'll be able to sell it later on for the same amount.

well_dunno said:

If 7D mk2, 5D x (or mk3), 3D, 70D and 650D as well as a whole bunch of lenses get released this year, what are we going to speculate about in 2013??? ;D

Click to expand...

"Will there be a 1D5 release in 2013?"

thepancakeman said:

briansquibb said:

I would wait until I need to change not because I would like to change.

Click to expand...

Gotcha this time! Unless you're putting bread on the table and a roof over your head with your photography, you don't need to take pictures. We do it because it's fun, rewarding, self-expressive, etc, but us non-pros don't need a camera at all. :

So whether it's a want for better AF, more MP, or simply something that doesn't have scuff marks on it, there are plenty of consumers looking for a new camera right now. As RuneL points out, there is always something theoretically better just on the horizon, so waiting for the next great thing can be a never ending process.

If it just weren't for the investment in the dang glass, it'd be easy to be more brand agnostic and go with whatever seems good when I want a new camera.

Click to expand...

'If it just weren't for the investment in the dang glass, it'd be easy to be more brand agnostic '

If the finance is not a deal breaker then switching brands is not an issue.

As we are talking about top of the range then there is a strong likelyhood that there is a significant invesment in glass and other brand specific extras which increase the probability of financial influence on changing brands.

Each individual has their own perceived wants and needs.

I am just suggesting that before jumping to stop and consider the needs (as defined by themselves - even a scuff becomes a need for some).

However a brand new technology D800 will always look sweet against a four year 5DII. To wait until the D800 has been reviewed might well be a prudent minimum wait time.

We are talking top of range here so there are other tactical options available if the need to upgrade is needed (like a 7D/5DII?) from a consumer body

thanks!

Jedifarce said:

Minnesota Nice said:

Alright, to start things off, I shoot snowboarding videos and I will be doing longboarding/other stuff like this as the year goes on. My question to you is what are must have lenses/bodies/accessories/other equipment for shooting video?

In an ideal world my setup would be:

7D (I like the burst rate as well because I shoot a lot of sports photography)
16-35mm F/2.8L
8-15mm L fisheye
70-200mm F/2.8 L
Glidecam HD 2000/4000 either one I've used both and they are basically the same.
A Camera Slider
A good Gitzo/Manfrotto/Slik Tripod with a smooth panning head.
Any sort of Shotgun microphone
A few different ND filters

Now, here's what I've got
60D (The articulate screen is actually nicer than I thought it would be)
8mm Rokinon fisheye (Optically excellent and build quality is second to none)
18-55mm kit
55-250mm EF-S
Crappy tripod

I'd like a waterproof housing but I'm going to wait until I upgrade bodies before I make that purchase.

Click to expand...

I would include a GoPro and Canon HF G10 in the mix.

Click to expand...

Oh I've got two GoPros, one HD Hero 1080p and the New HD Hero2. I win them every once in awhile at competitions.

Yes it's getting harder and harder to address this question considering all the circumstances around.
1. If you don't change your lens you will have to walk more to cover the lack of 400mm-640mm focal range. Cause - you shake because you're tired.
2. With the full frame camera you're afraid that it could fall - it's more expensive so you're more careful. You hold it strongly and after a while you're tired. Cause - you also shake more.
3. With this experience you take a tripod with, which makes you tired again. So without a tripod you can't shoot without shaking all...

Sorry, but there are really so many things to consider... I choose a camera on base of lighting conditions, purpose, target, weather etc. Sometimes it is crop, sometimes FF. Sometimes one is better, sometimes the other...

What a great idea. Now I can go out and buy my first non L lens!

Entertainment, and little more. I do enjoy them though.

First post on here, I think I refresh this site a good 10 times a day though! I thought I'd just sign up to chime in, I'm a little shocked at how often I see people asking about if the 1DX is delayed and that more people don't do a bit of research.

I'm guessing we can take Chucks' word that it won't in our hands until April.....

@3:10

Canon 1D X with Chuck Westfall


-SFDTM.com

Last month, the expected announcement date was (for some still is) february. If it doesn't come this month, the expected announcement date will be march. Or april. If it still isn't around then, it'll probably be may. Etcetera. Until eventually some concrete rumors emerge, or an actual announcement is made.

I've being using a Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 & a Samyang 8mm f/3.5 (diagonal fisheye made for APS-C bodies) for a while.

Photos of bands, both on stage and in the street, and using it as an ultrawide lens got me great results and positive feedback. I can get a whole scene, say the band playing + people dancing + crowd watching, and people like it. I didn't have to correct it, and nobody commented it's distorted or gimmicky.

I've used the EF 15mm f/2.8 to take photos of nature lanscape. Here I have to very carefully compose and correct the distortion, but the results are panoramic and impressive.


I've recently bought a Sigma 8mm f/3.5 circular fisheye for use on my 5Dmk2, and would appreciate advice as well.

Gothmoth said:

i mean there has to be a reason for the bigger front element... but im not that firm in lens design to answer that question.

Click to expand...

Generally, the relatively larger front element is to help reduce aberrations when shooting wide open. Telescopes are usually in the f/5-f/10 range, not f/2.8 and faster like many lenses.

neuroanatomist said:

Viggo said:

1m (where my LensCal is)

Click to expand...

wickidwombat said:

I micro adjust all my lenses at MFD

Click to expand...

This is really not a good idea, unless you'll always be shooting at the MFD. Canon recommends setting the AFMA at 50x the focal length, LensAlign at 25x the focal length (e.g., 5m/16' or 2.5m/8', respectively, for a 100mm lens). The reason for that is if you calibrate at the MFD, the optimal adjustment is usually not applicable across the broader focal range, whereas calibrating from a greater distance gives a result that's more applicable across the range of subject distances. The only lenses where you might want to be calibrating at such short distances are UWA lenses.

Viggo, I see the phenomenon you're describing, with the LensAlign at 25x focal length, but it's less pronounced. I generally find that as I step through the images, when approaching the best adjustment, the shots with focus starting from infinity will be off, then at the best adjustment they’ll all be spot on, then as I move away the shots with focus starting from the MFD will be off (or vice versa).

Click to expand...

Did another test with the other 5d, and it's the same crap there... Jesus Christ... 4500 usd camera and lens-kit, and it can't focus from more than one distance, fantastic Canon, just fantastic.

At least this explains why I have every other shot tack sharp and the other either non-usable or "keep because it's a good picture, although it isn't sharp"

So that's what 21 megapixels does, shows you all the F A I L in autofocus and lenses. And this isn't nitpicking, it's one good and one oof image. I'll try to post an example....

*EDIT*

Here's the example, and keep in mind, this is very close, about 1,2 meters, shooting near infinity and this misfocusing are tens of meters.....

First of all. I am, all of a sudden, utterly unimpressed.

Sample images, at the very least, should make sense. Looking at the shutterspeeds and aptertures used in some of the shots makes me wonder if the photographer had shot those scenes for the first time. Take the football picture for example. He shot it at 1/8000s at F4 (on a new 400 2.8 IS II none the less). Looks to me like it was shot in bright daylight. Not nearly what you would expect for a stadium environment. Of course there are daylight matches, but most of the soccer would be shot with flood lights, mostly in the region of 1/1000s f2.8 and iso 1250-2500. Also the detail level (not only in this shot) doesn't impress me one bit. I have much clearer pictures with my late 2007 1Ds3.

Also, a camera with a standard ISO-range of 100-51200, one would expect to see some low light indoor-sports or concert photography samples.

Canon, you better redo those sample images (let them make sense please) or people will assume that this is the image quality they can expect of the new 1Dx and might consider going for a 5D series camera after all.

When I saw samples (with the preproduction model) and talked a bit with Canon Ambassador Frits van Eldik
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/ambassadors/frits_van_eldik.do at a seminar, I got a different feeling about the 1Dx. Those samples do not represent what I've seen and heard there.

just my 2c

Stuart said:

...as will the IS version when it comes.

Click to expand...

LOL can we stick this comment in a time capsule and open it in 10 years time when the CR1 Rumour comes out for the IS 24-70

Boyer U. Klum-Cey said:

I still haven't maxed out the capabilities of my 24-70 v 1. Weight might be an issue, as I am not getting any younger, eh?

Click to expand...

Neither have I!!

It's such an amazing lens, and I bet II will be better...
Besides weight, I can't Imagine an average person to be able to tell the difference in the final output.
But then, the average person can't tell the difference between DSLR and iPhone photos anymore.

I would have been really tempted to sell and trade up if it had IS (just for handheld video stabilization).
Without it, not a chance.

They add IS to the 24 and 28... but it's only 2.8.
If it's 2.8, it might as well be part of the 24-70 II - since it sports "prime-like" quality through the zoom range.

I don't get it, bad move Canon.

What they really need is a 12-24L IS and 24-70L IS.
Those two lenses on FF, with the added range on a crop - sounds like a no-brainer money machine.

KyleSTL said:

I have resized the four MTF graphs onto a single picture. Much easier to read this way. Looks like the new one is definitely sharper.

Click to expand...

but how noticeable would you say these would look like side by side? when it would come to sharpness? just by reading these charts? i guess we may just have to wait for hands on reviews.:S

SPG said:

xROELOFx said:

i'm curious about the results. could you maybe post somekind of comparison between the Odin and PWs? stuff you do and dont like about the 2 different systems, that would be really great!

Click to expand...

Sure, it's going to be a few days before I can get out and do that PW vs Odin test since me and my PW owning buddy seem to be on opposite schedules. So far there isn't anything I don't like about the Odins. They're just super easy to set up and adjust, and have been nothing but reliable in the short range stuff I've been doing with them. The last thing to check out before I pass final judgement on them will be long range. If they do that, then we have a winner.

Click to expand...

I'm loving the group controls on the screen on the back of the odins super easy to tweek your ETTL settings

AvTvM said:

sublime LightWorks said:

Honestly, if Canon had put a 15 or 19 point AF system based on the 1Dsmk3 and 5fps in the 5D2 when it was introduced 3+ years ago, how many people here would be complaining about not getting the 5D3 released yet? They could have listed that at $2999 back then and the technology was available to do it.

A camera of that type would be heads and shoulders above todays market for IQ, handling, and ability. I know I would not trade that for what's on the market today.

So....given that, are we asking for too much? I don't think so.

Click to expand...

+1 ... exactly my opinion!

And now ... as far as I am concerned bothe the 5D III and the 7D II should come not only with the 1 D IV AF-system but with Eye-Tracking AF on top. Of course improved from the EOS 3 days to 2012 state of the art.

That would really benefit most of us every time we peek through the finder to frame a shot and try to get into focus whatever we want to be in focus. ANd it would benefit Canon big time, as they would have a USP that lasts 3+ years.

Click to expand...

hah all they needed to have done was put the 60D AF system in the 5D2 and no one would be complaining...

Mich said:

wickidwombat in the case of an import from Hong-Kong from one of these Ebay sellers, do you know how much can be the duty tax here in the UK ?

Click to expand...

not sure but here in australia up to $1000 is GST (VAT) exempt

obviously a fake >.> very poorly made... fast fade ins/outs

Well, here is one more opinion to thoroughly confuse you.

Your interests are macro, wildlife and landscape.

I think the 15-85 EF-S is a better all-around walkabout lens outdoors. It's a 24mm equivalent at the wide end, which is wide enough for 90% of the time. It's a 136mm equivalent at the long end, which is handy when outside and you need a bit longer reach and don't have time to change lenses. With this lens, you may not need anything wider for quite awhile.

It's slower than the EF-S 17-55, but as sharp and solid. Kind of a tossup between the two, but if you don't need the faster speed, it's a less-expensive equally solid performer.

If you are interested in wildlife, I would skip over the 70-200mm lenses. They don't have enough reach and I'm not a tele-converter fan. I haven't tried the 70-300 L, but I understand it is a great lens and very sharp. A bit slow though (f-stop, not focusing), but that's the price you pay for longer reach. It is a bit expensive to my way of thinking and hard to come buy on the used/refurbished market, probably because they haven't sold all that many yet.

The 100 L Macro is a fantastic lens. If you have any interest in macro, it's a no-brainer. Worth every cent and the IS makes it very useful for portraits, short telephoto shots, close-ups etc.

If you are seriously into wildlife, don't rule out the current 100-400. It's regularly available on the Canon refurbished site if you are in the U.S. When and if a new model is finally released, I expect to see the same price inflation that we've seen with other new Canon lenses, so unless you're prepared to go well north of $2,000, I'd consider the 100-400. I rented that lens, the 300 f4 and the 400 5.6 at various times. The 100-400 is the one I decided to buy.

If you do decide to eventually go extreme wide-angle, I like the Tokina 11-16 f2.8. They have announced an updated version that won't be available until late summer. Tokina makes very good glass. The Canon super-wide EF-S is supposed to be a fine lens as well, so no criticism there. I just like the Tokina better.

Finally, I wouldn't take my advice or anyone else's without first going to the LensRentals.Com site and reading "Roger's Take" on the lenses. He knows this stuff better than anyone here does (and since he rents every lens, he's tried them all.)

Personally I think the biggest dilemma is choosing the right telephoto zoom, because there are so many choices out there.