I feel like they wouldn't have presented it to a scientific journal if their claims weren't accurate.

I'm always very excited to read about these kinds of breakthroughs.

Dylan777 said:

Your lens is coated with UV layer. I have B&W Clear Filter on my lenses:

Click to expand...

Practically speaking, for a dSLR there is no difference between a UV filter and a clear filter - my advice is to get whichever one is cheaper. That does vary based on size, vendor, and geography. For example, here are some prices from Amazon.com today:

• B+W 77mm XS-Pro MRC Nano Clear 007M - $115
• B+W 77mm XS-Pro MRC Nano UV 010M - $73
• B+W 82mm XS-Pro MRC Nano Clear 010M - $126
• B+W 82mm XS-Pro MRC Nano UV 010M - $253

So, if I wanted to purchase from Amazon.com, for a 24-70mm MkI which takes 77mm filters, I'd get the UV filter and save $42, and for a 24-70 MkII which takes 82mm filters, I'd get the Clear filter and save $127.

I'm guessing canon is involved and am curious if they will test bodies already on the market. I have family who are fairly high up the ladder there so ill see if I can get more info

neuroanatomist said:

[quote author=Canon Customer Disservice]
Dear Ryan Williams:

We appreciate your continued interest in Canon products

After further investigation and inquiries with our engineers, we have discovered that we cannot tell our asses from our elbows. This issue has been ecsalated to the janitorial staff, so they can squeegee our eyeballs and vacuum our ears, in the vain hope that our observational skills and ability to listen to customers will be improved.

Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance. Thank you for choosing Canon.

Sincerely,

Anonymous
Technical Support Representative

Click to expand...

[/quote]
+1000 ;D

That is good news from Canon. I experienced a similar issue with my 1DX and an EX580II flash. During my last outdoors senior portraits photo shoot, I noticed that my flash was struggling to give enough light for my shots no matter how much I cranked up the FEC or how close I got to the subject. I had to do quite a bit of correction in post production.

A few days later I did a test with my 1D4 and my 1DX and I noticed that with the EX580II flash externally shot inside a softbox on a stick with radio poppers as triggers (always use them), the 580/1D4 combo exposed the scene perfectly and the 580/1DX was waaaaay inconsistent with many under exposed shots. Switching back and forth produced the same results (1D4 was perfect and 1DX was way off).

I now need to figure out what settings or combos are causing this but for now I am shooting all off camera flash with the 1D4. Glad I didn't buy that second 1DX and kept the 1D4.

Canon has made an important annoncement on this topic:

http://forums.usa.canon.com/t5/EOS/5D3-AF-assist-beam-slower-focus/m-p/13547/highlight/false#M1486

Thank you for mentioning CLP I forgot all about it I wonder when the 5d3 will go on there

Can someone identify the gear used here?

http://www.wimp.com/birdsproject/

I've reread my post and my LOL falls flat. Sorry. Why not buy the 100 IS USM L Macro and after using it for awhile you
will know if you want more from a lens. you have been given lots of suggestions to research. Macro Photography is a fun
learning experience. With the 160mm focal length on a crop sensor it will make a great portrait lens for Portraits of people and pics of Flowers. My research on the 100 mm L Macro makes me think it's a must have lens. The 70-200 2.8 ll is another very popular lens. Although 77 mm filters are more costly to buy. I like my 70-200 F4 IS USM and usually mount it on my 7D before going out to take pics. As BIF are my first priority, I want to be ready to shoot. I have C1 set for this. C2 for Flash and C3is going to be set for bracketing for HDR.
Spring isn't here yet so there is still time to do more research before you buy.

Lovely pictures - well done

this guys reviews are really bad

hmm would 54mp results in +- 150-170mb raw files?

Gonna take a toll on the buffer ,

I think with the latest computers and some good cards, it should be no problem to handle...
The d800 files didnt slow me down at all..., ( only when viewing files on the pc when a slow sd cards (30mb/s) was in there.

billmarsh said:

Thanks for the replies.
I always use the center focus point when shooting BIF so would I really need 61 AF points on the 5D MK3?
Does the MK3 need to lock on with the center point first before it will track the subject? Also, if the AF point drifts off the subject and is picked up by another point will it lock on to the closest part of the bird like the outer wing causing the head and body to be out of focus.
Thanks Bill

Click to expand...

Well, I'm no expert, but I've been using a 5d m3 for the past 6 weeks or so, trying my hand at BIF.
1) In general, depending on what settings you have and how you tweak them (and there's a lot to play with in the 5D), the 61 points are handy for BIF.
2) Depending on what objects are present around the bird (foreground / background), I switch from 61 points to 1, 5 or 9 points in the center, which is easy to do in the 5D (can't speak for the 6D).
3) It makes sense for the camera to focus on the nearest object, be that the body or the wing. It doesn't know what you consider important. But, in most cases (and I've only had a few), it's more luck that the camera happens to be in focus on the body (or the bit I want in focus), since the time frame I'm dealing with the bird is around 1-2 seconds

Just my 2 cents worth

Well you have all types of options

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50715221

http://www.ebay.ca/sch/i.html?_trksid=p5197.m570.l1313&_nkw=Meike+MK-14EXT+Macro+TTL+ring+flash&_sacat=0&_from=R40

I think the 8-15 fisheye is plenty sharp. One of my funnest lenses.

I had high hopes for this lens, as I'm not 100% in love with my 24-105. I read with disappointment Roger at LenRentals confirmation of the very poor image quality at 50mm, and just now read the new detailed review at SLR Gear, which pretty much put the nail in the coffin for me. Even at the other focal lengths, the full frame blur plots don't have the edge sharpness I would expect in a brand new state of the art, high dollar "L" lens. The other big concern is the lens they did the analysis on was the best of three they tested, the other two were far worse.

Key takeaway from their review "the lens' performance at 50mm stands out as unacceptable, especially when you consider the lower-priced option here still costs $1,500."

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1573/cat/11

Aha. I see. Yeah. The 5D mkiii is more for reference rather than sync. And unless they come up with some magical update, it is pretty much just a marketing scheme

neuroanatomist said:

charlesa said:

Quite the price, the Canon counterpart is priced better true.

Click to expand...

sanj said:

My heart sinks. Canon may price their next 800 to match this...

Click to expand...

Back to the actual topic of this thread...

If/when Canon releases an updated 800mm 5/f.6L IS, it may very well be in the same price range as the Nikon 800/5.6, if not higher.

Consider the MkII versions of the 500/4 and 600/4 lenses. Look at the selling price of the MkI versions at the time the MkII's were announced, add in the price increase that Canon applied during the long delay between announcement and availability, and you see that the MkII lenses were a 45-50% increase in price. Based on the current 800/5.6 price, that gives a range of $19-20K for an 800/5.6 II.

And don't expect Canon to throw a TC into the deal...

Click to expand...

I bet higher, and made from titanium and carbon fibre...

Hey all, I read this on the other rumors site, and it got me intrigued to what canon might have on their test shelves!

The rumors for the d4x are :

Same body as the Nikon D4
36 MP sensor without AA filter, designed and made by Nikon, with some new improvements (moire in-camera reduction)
6 fps (11 fps is the maximum possible fps with the current shutter)
Few video improvements
Price should be few hundred dollars above the D4 (currently listed for $5996.95).
Announcement expected in fall of 2013

(scource: the other rumor site)

Could canon have something similarly planned for the 1dx-s?, or maybe a high mp body based on the 5dIII (Like a 5ds )

6 fps for that many pixels sounds really interesting, if they could include a crop mode ( like the d800) and boost the fps 50% like the d800 with grip in dx mode, it would give you 36mp 6fps and 14mp(1.6 crop) with 8-9 fps...

I hope canon is planning something like that, i would love a '2 in 1' camera with high fps ( and still hoping for better buffer sizes on the cameras, like 60 raw....)

Hi sorry ... forgot about this thread, yes I got it 10 days ago.
The image quality is very good, easily comparable to 24-70 f/2.8 (version 1 ... not the new one).
VC in Tamron 24-70 is more effective than the IS in Canon 70-200 L IS II ... I tested hand held shots at all shutter speeds from 1/40th of a second to 1 second ... I will post them tomorrow.
The only thing I don't like is the build quality, even the cheaper Canon L zooms have much better quality than the Tamron 24-70 VC ... having said that it is still the best built Tamron lens and it is nicely priced, giving value for money.
I'll post the VC vs IS comparison photos tomorrow, meanwhile check this video
Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC Lens Review

Wow thanks for the amazing conversation. I would love to see some of your shots with the 50. Please post and share some please. I'm so interested in what others do with this lens.

Erik
www.solargravity.com

Image quality is affected by filters depending on the quality of the filter and on the surface area of the filter.

The larger the surface area of the filter, the greater the reduction in image quality. (You can see this with a softening filter--when your lens is stopped down, the effective diameter and surface area of the filter are reduced. When the surface area goes down, the image quality goes up, and hence there is less of a "softening" effect from the softening filter at smaller apertures (large f numbers).)

A filter with twice the diameter has four times the area. Large filters are bad in this way.

But ultimately, it is due to the expense--the larger the filter, the more expensive it is to make one the same quality as a smaller filter.

In fact, achieving that same level of filter quality isn't enough because even at the same level of filter quality the image quality will still be worse because of the larger area.

Sometimes stores seem to leave the rebate up for a day or two. Canon is not going to give them the rebate unless they cheat and change the date of sale that they submit to Canon. Stores must give the rebate to the customer up front, and then submit all of the purchases and dates to Canon and wait for a rebate. It ends up costing them $$ in interest.

I just ordered one. I played with it yesterday @ sony storeAGAIN. I doubt the next FF nex-9 will be smaller than current rx1, due to fixed lens. Can't wait, I'll post some pics once the camera arrived.

Impressive for such high iso