jhpeterson said:

I'm curious about the possibility of using the FD 400mm 4.5 on EOS digital bodies. I already have a couple of the big white lenses I regularly put to work, but this sounds like a most interesting option as a handheld lens for all-day situations on both full and crop bodies.
I though I'd seen on here that one would work to or near infinity focus. If that is actually the case I'll have to get one.

Click to expand...

-----------------------------------------
studio lighting camera flashes softboxes

The nature of evaluative/matrix metering is prone to underexpose an image if a bright light source or surface is present. Technically using the term "underexpose" is not suitable, because it is still an accurate exposure based on what you have requested the meter to do - average the scene. This is most likely why images often appear underexposed when shot indoors (as others have complained about above). There are windows, doorways, reflective surfaces like white walls, etc. When these hit your meter, it flips out and cuts them down in an attempt to hit 18% grey.

This is why other metering modes like spot or centre-weighted average (in the case of a centred area of focus) exist. So, if your mother Jane standing by the window facing you is underexposed while your father Joe is illuminated like Blackpool in festival time, it is probably best to either spot meter to the subject you most want correctly exposed or ask Jane to move away from that window!

Hi All,
There is quite a bit of talk (yes some of it from that ken guy) regarding the 5D3 feature of in-camera lens correction and how it improves the qualities of average and older lenses. I'm wondering if someone has a lens which is profiles and could show a with and without examples from what one could expect from this feature of the camera.

Thanks!

JR said:

neuroanatomist said:

Fleetie said:

akiskev said:

ω is Ω = omega. When it is in a word, we pronounce it like an o.
It has nothing to do with w.

Click to expand...

Exactly. I thought he was asking whether the 5D3 was gonna be the last model in the 5D line, when I saw the subject header.

Click to expand...

I confess - I thought the same thing.

The 5DIII is a 'wedding camera' and so it's not for you, because you don't shoot weddings? Let me ask: What happens at weddings? Anything and everything. Posed shots and portraits, low light in the church, sometimes fast-paced action (reception dancing, kids running around), families, decisive moments, etc. Life, in microcosm. So, if the 5DIII is a great ωedding camera it's also a great general purpose/hobbyist/amateur camera, except perhaps for the price tag.

Click to expand...

+1 i think this is one of the great appeal of this camera which is that is can suit so many situation. If the 1 dx was not coming soon, i would get the mkiii with my eyes closed!

Click to expand...

Thanks for your posts guys, and to decipher my intention with the omega thing. That's what photographers are, aren't they ? Open eyes, open mind, seeing what others barely notice, twisting reality to make pass their underlying vision.

Anyway, I am not moaning. Just trying to find the key to my handcuffs. At the end, I am quite sure I'll bag of those brand-new-all-shiny-badass-totally-desirable 5Dω much sooner than later. As for the waiting, I am a bit like the fool hitting his head with a hammer: it feels so go when it's stop.

I have read a number of articles about fill flash and setting your flash exposure one or two stops below the exposure that you are using in the camera. I have read that the Nikon system allows you to do this by dialing in an ISO and aperture setting into the flash--you also need to factor distance in, which apparently the Nikon system does. I don't see how you would do this with a Canon Speedlite 580EX II. Am I confusing concepts?

Any assistance would be appreciated.

Jack Siegel

Yeah, it stinks that DXO doesn't have the software yet, but i'll wait.

I just don't see how this lens stinks. Out of the dozens of reviewing sites i look at from time to time I've never found a review that came to that conclusion. I find things like hey, nikon's 14-24 is the best thing ever, much sharper than that canon. but i've yet to see them tested against each other. Everyone's fav, Kenrockwell used to say that. then he got an f-EOS mount converter and he never pitted them against each other. Then he went to saying that some tokina was as good as the canon, which was in turn as good as the nikon. Besides, if it was such crap, why do so many pros have it and use it so much. Occasionally they must need a clear image out of the thing right? That said, i'm actually thinking of selling mine to reallocate the funds. But, i'd miss it.

@peederj: You may be right about an eventual Canon Inc response but it sure is nice not to care -- as though Canon was the single source of all good things. If I recall that BM spokesman interview there is already or soon will be an external battery, and you can run their thing from the wall.

To recover, CanonSan will have to do more than simply relent, or relent part way -- he'll have to sprint to the other extreme, genie being out of the bottle. The same outfit that took AFMA away from those poor 60D buyers, perhaps the most deserving women and men ever heard of? I wonder...

Amazeballs doesn't describe it, but I have my 5D Mark III now, and it rocks. It's everything I'll need in a camera for a long time. All you haters can go switch to Nikon for all I care.

Thank you, Canon! You rock!

-Chris

Baader film is cheap too. You can get it in A4 and either hold it or even better cut it and make a custom filter according to instructions they give.
It looks like aluminum foil.

Welder's glass is safe too. My only question is if there will be flare since it is ... glass.

Anyway both choices are safe and cheap.

They both look fine to me. Its highly unlikely that something is wrong with your lens. Try shooting at a brick wall, from a tripod, same focal length, ISO, and shutter speed. Make sure the camera is SQUARE to the wall. then look. You will get distortion out of both lenses at 24mm...

Agreed. Canon needs to work on their corner sharpness with wide angles. Waiting patiently...

My jpegs run around 5 to 11 mb on 5760 X 3840. Noticeable that a more detailed photo is larger mb.

Canon supplies images for the stores to use, most stores use three images, one with it attached to a camera body. All are from the front, so you don't see the joystick.

At the moment SanDisk 18GB and 8GB 60MB/s cards going to get slower 32GB with 30MB/s for time lapse w/ TC-80N3 but yeah those are my cards.

Yeah, that happens when you know what you are doing. Only thing I would find even remotely bad to say about this is that silly 6-blade aperture bokeh in some of the shots.

BRAVO!

elflord said:

When I am working with shallow dof, I don't want the camera choosing what to focus on.

Click to expand...

So go manual focus or chose a focus point manually and then only use that one for autofocus. I dont really understand the problem.

I can't wait for the flood of D800 vs. 5D3 DXOMark results... (not!)

sephknite said:

Hey all. I'm eyeing the Canon 50mm 1.2L, but am also considering the 85mm 1.2L for some portrait photography. I do see a lot of posts about the 85mm not focusing as fast, but being very sharp, while the 50mm focuses quite quickly but isn't as sharp as the 85mm.

What does everyone suggest?

Click to expand...

Should you require reasonably fast AF or should be using APS-C go for the 50 - otherwise the 85 is your first choice.

Nice footage

AAPhotog said:

Cancel your order and purchase it from Adorama, this is my first time using them, I ordered on saturday and it was shipped today. It would have been shipped the day I ordered had it not been for their holiday... If you order it from them tomorrow, you'll more than likely see it before the week is over.

Click to expand...

I ordered from Adorama on the 11th and my 5D MkIII should be here tomorrow.

It's up @ Rob Galbraith's site

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-11676-12522

Today is the day... anyone report a potential delivery?

My 28-70 f/2.8 was kind of OK on the old EOS-1n film body but was punished by the then massive sensor of the original 11.4 megapixel 1Ds of 2003. Since the update to the 24-70 f/2.8 there has been a marginal improvement but the 3 copies I've had have all been a great disappointment. There are good copies around which a few lucky photographers have, but my experience is all too common. There have been a million threads over the years discussing the feeble quality of most 24-70 f/2.8 zooms. If you have a good one treat it well!

Until the 24-70 f/2.8 MkII ships I'm getting very completely satisfying results with a pre-owned 24-105 f/4is. Definitely look at this lens ahead of an ancient 28-70 f/2.8. Most of them were dogs from an era when Canon and the rest were still learning their way around L quality zooms. Recall the dreadful 17-35mm f/2.8L of 1996. Errgh!

HTH,
Paul Wright

DzPhotography said:

Canon got a lot of awards from TIPA this year:
- Best Professional DSLR Lens: Canon EF 8–15mm f/4L USM fisheye lens

Click to expand...

Uh. Wow. thats... interesting