Infer what you want, it was just so left field iyam.

a good polarizing filter... it cuts 90%+ of uv and "polarizes" stray light.

for protection. use the lens cap.
canon's coatings are good.
well to admit my 90 TS-E needs a UV filter but that's for UV.

Very nice visually, some great material.

Needs:

Either to be half the length (lots of similar shots, longer cuts) or to have a narrative structure.
Lots of folk running about. Must have been lots of stories. Who? What? Where? Why? When?

Cut in tempo with the music. Sharper cuts.

I do appreciate this thread very much, as I am going FF 5D3 within the next few month. Will rent a body and test it, to get accquainted a bit with it.

I will be getting the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM soon.

"L" grade

I have 3 600's and a controller (now in hand). It's pretty slick and love the the control and ease of use - can control all flashes via the controller, as a group or each independently. Unless you're using multiples (which can be good for recycling time on fast shooting situations), I'll stick to 3 of these and invest in strobes and packs for bigger shoots or situations that require more/larger lights.

FunPhotons said:

KitsVancouver said:

Astro said:

why would you buy that?
buy a phottix odin instead.

ps: with the ST-E3 RT the sync time is down to 1/100s on everything except a 5D MK3 or 1D X when using radio.
otherwise you will have some shadowing on your pictures.

Click to expand...

I am in the same boat as the OP. I'm really curious as to why inventory is so limited. I might end up buying a 5th 600EX if the STE3 isn't available soon.

I was considering the Phottix Odins for my 580ex IIs but in the end I'm glad I didn't because the 600EX' are so easy to use. The Canon system has a very significant advantage in that they are a closed system and don't require as much set up as an IR system or a third party RF solution.

I still think they 600ex' are a tad expensive but I'm a believer. I sold 3 580ex II and bought 3 600ex. Very shortly after I bought a 4th and am considering a 5th (since I cant find an STE3).

Click to expand...

I absolutely love the 600 and have three. Also considered getting a fourth for on the camera control, but I really want the controller for light weight and low profile. I held off upgrading my flashes hoping that Canon would release a RF solution, glad I did. I have a single 580 which I keep in my outdoor bag as I don't want to take out a 600 while at the beach or camping.

What do you use your fourth flash for? Three plus the controller seems maximal to me, other than for ganging.

Click to expand...

I had a Wimberly for my 600mm f/4 and it was wonderful. However, it would be overkill for the much lighter 500mm lens. I'd go with Neuro's recommendation, or use it handheld or with a monopod.

Re: PowerShot SX160 IS & PowerShot SX500 IS

SX500: I'm impressed with the fact that they FINALLY moved that obnoxious frame-assist button away from the thumb grip, where I was ALWAYS hitting it by accident on the SX30/40.

I'm anxious to see the back, tho. Looks like they may have eliminated the viewfinder - which would NOT be cool.

Can't wait to see all the specs, whether it's enough of an improvement over the SX40 to lure me to an upgrade.

At a guess, Quantum or Metz or Canon/Nikon branded speedlites, possibly 2-3 of them on a single bracket with, as you said, the large reflector to concentrate all the light from them as much as possible.

Radiating said:

TrumpetPower! said:

Considering today's 35 f/1.4 is already superlative...what, aside from the price tag, will be different with the new one?

b&

Click to expand...

The 35mm 1.4 was spectacular when it was released, now it's just average. It's so average in fact that a third party 35mm 1.4 Canon EF lens you can buy for $350 brand new is much better than Canon's own $1350 35mm 1.4, which is ridiculous:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=771&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=1&LensComp=121&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

Just from that comparison I see the following that could be noticably improved:

-Corner sharpness
-Mid frame sharpness
-Severe Color Fringing

Here are some other factors which could be improved:

- Flare resistance (better coatings)
- mid frame and corner sharpness for meridonial detail stopped down
- Color fringing stopped down, it's plainly visible even at f/8.0
- Purple Fringing (I notice this in my copy)

Don't get me wrong even with all these problems the 35mm 1.4L is probably my favorite prime of all time ever, the combination of pleasing quality, focal length and aperture are amazing.

However if it were as good as say this, well... we can only dream.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=121&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=458&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Click to expand...

I bought one of those SammyYang coke bottles you refer to, but the autofocus would not work on any of my cameras.

Globe Futsal Invitational Cup by alabang, on Flickr


Globe Futsal Invitational Cup by alabang, on Flickr

It looks like the uneven polarization you get with a CPL and a wide angle lens (a variable ND is just stacked and crossed linear and circular polarizers - that issue is why I done have a variND). The effect gets worse as the filter is darkened. I'm surprised to see it at 50mm, though, unless you've set it beyond the max marking.

jmanley said:

Has anyone seen anything new in the last few weeks? I have my preorder still "pending" at JR.com

Click to expand...

A few weeks ago I readon the "internet" that late Sep was a possible ship date... take it for whatever it's worth.

I got my 1DX from Norman's in the middle of July, Norman's is a great place to do business with!

As with any photography, there are often compromises to be made. I usually try to avoid f/22 on full frame, unless I really need the DoF (or I want to lower the shutterspeed) and am willing to sacrifice overall sharpness to get it, as overall loss of sharpness is often less noticeable than part sharp and part soft. With a natively sharp lens (like the 24L MkII), the effects of DLA results in less softness, so it may still be sharper than a lesser lens is at f/16 anyway (I have noticed this in comparison with the 24-105). I don't really notice any major problems at f/16 on either my 5D MkII or MkIII, but on the 7D the decreased sharpness is definitely noticeable. If I could get enough DoF at f/11, I'd use it, but for the type of landscapes in my area, it is rarely possible. It really depends on whether anything is blocking infinity or not, but you can get away with more at 24mm.
While DLA (which involves pixel densities and Airey discs, as well as light diffraction) may start around f/10 (or whatever the exact figure is) for the 5D MkII/III, but as the TDP article states, that doesn't preclude using narrower apertures and it is much lower before it becomes usable. What they don't state however, is that lens quality will also come into play, IQ on a higher quality lens will have to degrade much more before it is unusable than a lesser quality lens.

If its occasional wildlife I would crop, basically for the reasons given above. But mainly because I find that putting the 100-400 on a 2XTC is pushing it a bit on the 7D as far as IQ is concerned. And of course there is the AF issue, ie it wont.

This makes me think I must try the TC's and the 100-400 on the full frame.


EDIT
Having tried it, its a pain not having AF, my type of shooting tends to want a quick shot.

I love my 100-400. On my 50D, it's Ike 640mm, but I can't push the ISO enough sometimes. I usually shoot with my 5Diii because the high ISO and the insane autofocus, and I love it.

It seems like the answer to your question is obvious - 800mm, but I'm assuming you don't want to sell a kidney, in which case get a 100-400 or a 400 prime.

Peter Dawson said:

Richard, you genius. Not sure how you figured that out, but thanks for replying.
Peter

Click to expand...

Thanks Peter! So..., that makes 2 people that think so, you plus my Mother.

Rich

zrz2005101 said:

The one point of having primes is for the extra stops of light and their reliable performance. Yes the 70-200 II is more than outstanding but even with IS sometimes it cannot have the picture just because the object may be moving too. Turning up ISO means losing IQ so having the extra stop of light is very helpful.

Click to expand...

Yes but everytime you turn the aperture wider, you thin your focal plane. Much rather have to remove noise than have a completely OOF shot because I didn't get the focal plane correct. This is especially true on shorter focal length lenses when you're doing close ups.

The Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM is a very sharp lens with a beautiful bouquet. Strongly recommend.

I've always wanted to try one of those super zooms. I could see how there would definitely be a trade off in weight and IQ (to some extent).

I can vouch for the 70-200mm versatility on full frame. I use the F4 L IS version and love it. Light and easy to wield. I did, however, miss the long end of 300mm on a crop. So I eventually added a 100-400 F4.5-5.6L IS to the kit. If you shop used you can get both of those for less than the 70-200 F2.8 L II and a 2x TC. The 70-300L interests me as well, but the above post about visible CA is the first I've heard of any flaws. I havent researched it thoroughly though.

On the wide end, thr canon 17-40 F4 L does a great job, and is a lot cheaper than the 16-35. With the awesome high ISO performance of the 5D Mk III I'd save the bucks on the lens if you decide to get a zoom in that range.

-Brian

Can you post some samples of your best shots with that camera?

Does Canon offer licensing options to 3rd party lens manufacturers?

The point is to transfer this feature to other cameras (OK the new ones) and allow them to produce jpgs from the
processed raws. I know it seems too much but usually someone wants to give jpgs to others not raw files.

Anyway this is NOT for me (and my 5DII). But I respect someone's wish to be able to do so since Canon made the first step in this direction. I just mention how I think this feature would make more sense:

1. To add it to the new cameras (5DIII, 1DX) and
2. To produce jpgs from the raw files (in addition to existing unprocessed jpgs

I am starting to see sale pricing on the 60D. Last time I observed sale prices like this, the T4i replaced the T3i. While these are just internet prices and Canon Store prices, I will keep an eye on local brick and mortar shops in the Detroit area to confirm my suspicions.

Could this be a build up to the October anticipation of the 6D?

Is the 70D nearing release to the masses?

Just stirring the pot!