I think a TS-E would be a great choice. Which one would depend on how much room you have, if you can back up to where 24mm is wide enough, I'd choose that one. The TS-E 24 is nearly distortion-free. Up on the ladder, you could use a little downward shift to keep the window lines straight.

the canon xf300 actually has a feature built-in to recover card issues. check that out. you might loss 10 second of the footage

I have read comments from some users that turning off AFMA of my 5D MK III will let the TC work. I'm not going to even consider that.

That's almost certainly the reason. It will work on any APS-C camera, except for the 10D (which predates the EF-S mount).

Not the first time I've seen Vegas recommended, I may have to try it out. I'm interested in rendering timelapses in HD in addition to video editing, I'm not happy with what I get from my older version of Pinnacle Studio. I've read that the newest version of Pinnacle Studio is quite a disappointment.

nightbreath said:

Sorry for the off-topic. I just wanted to ask a question.

Everyone says that there are good or bad copies of lenses. Isn't misfocusing on specific distances fixable by Canon?

Click to expand...

I have done this and i have sent in my camera bodies and lenses calibrating them all. Its expensive as H just to ship because of insurance and weight. One thing i will say is camera sensors are also part of the problem many times. Some camera sensors aren't perfectly aligned on the body so it affects lenses that are mounted. Some lenses don't cause trouble on a body that doesn't have a properly aligned sensor with it but i'd say the big glass isn't as forgiving.

Yes sir, i have used the 70-200 i believe it was with a 12 and a 25 on it and it worked fine. The only thing i didn't like is being steady with a heavy long lens. It does render flowers really well with a tripod or monopod too. I used a spider holster setup but attached the 2 hooks on a think tank belt on that belt i also have a bag hanging behind me. In the bag i kept my fisheye lens, color checker passport and cases of unused recharged batteries to change out. The beauty of the 40 is its small even with an extension tube and that will be in the bag instead of my fisheye lens. I sold that lens. I don't want a macro lens or at least commit to paying the money for one.

tron said:

insanitybeard said:

tron said:

bakker said:

if you do a lot of landscape/wide-angle then I wouldn't go for primes. The comfort of being able to zoom beats shallower DOF.

Click to expand...

The zoom cannot beat the quality at the edges though. Zoom lenses are worse.

Click to expand...

Having the said that, in the case of some of the older primes like the 28 1.8 and 20 2.8 the corner performance isn't really any better (and in some cases worse) than the zooms. I considered getting the 28 1.8 as a fast standard prime for a crop camera but was put off for that reason.

Click to expand...

In an attempt to compare apples to apples I do not think that 28 1.8 is a good example. I mean the comparison must be between L lenses and L zooms or non-L lenses and non-L zooms

Click to expand...

Very true..... mind you, the non-L full frame zooms are getting a bit thin on the ground these days!

neuroanatomist said:

NormanBates said:

Canon's DPP is a joy to use, simple and effective. Nikon's ViewNX is a nightmare that takes ages to update the metadata on an image and crashes more often than any other piece of commercial software I've ever used.

Click to expand...

IMO, DPP is a joy to use in much the same way that a visit to the dentist for a root canal is a pleasant experience.

DPP's UI reminds me of WordStar (I know, I'm dating myself here). If ViewNX is worse, that's pretty bad.

Click to expand...

OK, DPP is not "a joy to use", but it's moderately fast, and it works. ViewNX can't say any of those. Real nightmare stuff.

This should really depend on your budget and mid term planning and if you want/insist on using a second camera as a backup.

If your budget allows purchasing a 1D-X, then I would definitely recommend that one, because currently it is the best you can get. If on the other hand your current budget will be strained too much by such a purchase, you should go for the 5D Mark III. It is really good, although not the same as a 1D-X.

I expect you will find yourself wanting to upgrade to a 1D-X as soon as you end up with the 5D Mark III and may eventually end up with purchasing one in addition to the 5D Mark III. In this case you end up with a great 1st/2nd camera combination. I have this combination, but I find myself using the 1D-X much more often than the 5D Mark III (about a 10:1 ratio). The only thing better would be purchasing two 1D-X, but that's a lot of money for a backup.

I love my ipad 3 for showing off my good shots - absolutely fantastic color, contrast, and detail! Barring that, my HP 27" 2560x1440 display is also nice

crazy that they're just about the same resolution...

Thanks for the offer but the instruction sheet that came with it has a fairly decent description of aligning the mirror, I checked and it was properly aligned to start with so that side of things seems OK.

The focuser doesn't look like it would be easy to modify, the various parts of the mechanism run pretty much along the full length of the tube. But thanks for the hint on the eyepiece projection adapter, I found a local supplier so just shot them off an e-mail to see if they think it will solve it and if it's OK to return if not.

Early DSLR's were susceptable to high voltage at the triggering of a flash. Canon redesigned the flash circuits so 250 volts is not a concern, but I'd stay away from flashes that produce 400v or higher.
here is a popular list http://dpanswers.com/roztr/volt_finder.php

Old flash units can be had for $5, so just pick a low voltage one, imho.

I do not have experience on version 1. Only what I read in the internet but that you can find it too. However, I do have version 2 and I love it. I believe that it is one of the lenses that are worth their money. I wouldn't risk with version 1 anyway.

PackLight said:

at just a bit less than twice the weight of the f/4 it will keep your arm in shape lifting it.

Click to expand...

Interesting way to put it ;D

risc32 said:

well, just the other day i noticed that someone somewhere on here said something about how they loved their 135f2, but the focus was not so great. now, i know that's bull cause i've used one for an indoor soccer tourney, but this is the sort of stuff you can find all over the net. So no one has made an even somewhat scientific test minded test? with all these sites out there, nothing?

just stupid stuff, like the site i read the other day where the guy was recommending a 24TS for sports, and a 50mm1.2, and 75-300 IS L as good beginner's lenses. I forget what the recommended the 90mm TS for, but it was retarded. actually, I don't even have a clue what a 90mm TS might be really good for, but i bet it has a use.

it must... right?

Click to expand...

Most will tell you that the lens focuses quickly.
In regards to some sort of a scientific test, in order to be scientific, you need a test procedure that is repeatable so others can run the same test and confirm the results.
Any given lens will focus differently on different subjects and test charts, on different camera bodies, and, of course different brightness or color of light. This means that one person could use the lens in a situation where it was slow to focus while another might use it where it focused quickly.
So far, no one has stepped up to coming up with any sort of test method to determine the speed of a autofocus lens that is scientific or repeatable.

If you are looking for price with quality take a look at Benro. I use their carbon mono and tripods and have found them all well built and great value for money. I use the monopod with a 5diii 300 2.8L without problem. I would only say that I prefer the clip lock rather than the twist lock.

What is the point of a expensive 24-70mm F/4 IS when there is already an excellent 24-105mm F4 IS that can be found used at a great price? Canon is thinking backwards.

Yes, that's normal. My 50D clicked when you took the pic, the 5D3 does not. The 5 and 1 series are the same, that's how it makes you feel like a pro; you're only one camera away from the top, like the vice-president.

Sheesh give the guy a break guys I had no intention of starting a sharpness witch hunt it was merely an observation perhaps some AFMA might help. Cute subjects though

Lock up the mirror and use the blow cleaner again.

I did not see any images that I thought would tax the autofocus of any Canon or even a third party lens.

If a photographer is capturing a series of photos of a subject rapidly moving toward him and needs them all to be in focus so he can catch a critical moment, thats where excellent and fast focus makes a difference. Then, its a combination of body and lens that makes a difference. For example, 1 series bodies use more voltage to drive the focus motor faster than say a 5D MK III can. They have a 12volt battery versus 7.2 which is a huge difference.

Using one shot AF, try focusing on something close, then point the camera at a distant object and press the shutter fully. The camera will take the image when the lens is focused. Compare that with a 85mm f/1.8. You will see a huge difference in the time it takes to focus.

However, its only that one initial focus that takes the long time. Subsequent shots that are more or less at the same distance, focus will be fast. Thats why its not a problem in actual use.

If its working on the one body then it should work on the second without an issue, as long as the contacts in the hotshoe are touching the contacts on the transmitter it will work.

Again you can call me if you want to walk through it.

Colin

I dont believe DPP overwrites the originals unless you tell it to. When you make changes to the image, it saves the changes in a sidecar file and just applies them to the original. You can revert back to the shot settings. Just load the image and under adjustments on the menu bar there is an option for that.

DPP corrections are not the same as in camera corrections. They attempt to achieve the same function but I am told they are different. DPP is supposed to be better. I assume that is due to the limited resources available in camera.

tron said:

Mt Spokane Photography said:

tron said:

bkorcel said:

Raw is raw...no corrections or in camera adjustments will be made even though you have the settings configured in your camera. All Raw adjustments must be done in post processing.

Configured corrections will be applied ONLY to JPG files.

Note, that in some bodies, the corrections will affect the drive mode buffer by reducing number of shots that can be taken in sequence. This is due to the extra processing required to make the corrections. Also note that once the corrections are made to a JPG, they cannot be undone.

Most bodies support creating a corrected JPG from a RAW image in camera so you can have both.

tron said:

Distortion correction is not supported in camera. The other corrections do exist.
Now I have enabled both features. However, unless I activate the lens correction in Camera Raw (which contains the lens profile) I do not see these corrections.
So I am cannot tell if something is happening in the Camera ! I have a question here

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

THANKS! It seems I have missed the obvious! (plus I usually shoot only raw so there was no hope that I would see these corrections).

Click to expand...

You can make them in DPP, but do it sparingly, since the size of the corrected cr2 image file will be approximately 2X - 3X the size of the uncorrected one.

Click to expand...

I have seen some similar settings in DPP. But I guess these are irrelevant of the Camera settings. They more likely seem like Adobe's Camera Raw lens corrections.
I am hesitant to use DPP since it seems to overwrite the original .CR2 files (Didn't want to save my experimental changes on DPP). I always wanted to check on that but didn't really need it since I used Camera Raw. You just confirmed this and I THANKYOU for that. I will keep using CR that does not change the original but uses xml files to save the settings.

Click to expand...

AdamJ said:

One UK online retailer has come out early with a price on the Sigma 35mm, of £599. For comparison, that is slightly less than the Sigma 85mm f/1.4.

http://www.microglobe.co.uk/sigma-35mm-f14-dg-hsm-lens-for-canon-p-9455.html

Click to expand...

I like the Price. If its any good, I will Buy one ASAP. I tend not to buy first gen products immediately.