A very reliable source has told me today Canon will not be launching or showing anything above the C500 MKII at NAB. Stated this camera will come at 2016 NAB.

mrsheel4 said:

I want to upgrade to a better photo/video DSLR. I am interested in the Canon 6D. I have read it is a great camera but its main down fall is that it doesn't have continuous focus and it doesn't shoot RAW?. (of course I wish I could afford the 5d mkiii but that it not in my price range right now)

Click to expand...

Canon 6D do not continuously focus during video or live view. 6D shoot RAW, but only photo, not in video mode.

At this time, 70D offers the best automatic focus for video (and 7D Mark ii).

T5i does continuously focus on video, but is not fast enough for fast moving objects. The new T6i, and T6s promise an improvement in the focus speed, compared to T5i.

I know they're only cheap in the US, $15 to $20, but we get ripped-off by Canon in Aus so they are 40 to 50 bucks here... I can think of much better things to spend that much money on than a redundant remote.

This thread is a little old, so I thought I'd bring it back to life now that there are new bodies on the horizon.
I'm thinking of buying the 135 f2 lens for a 6D, is there any reason that I should hold off (any talk of newer version on the horizon?) since it's getting a little long in the tooth as a nearly 2 decade old lens? How future-proof do you think this lens will be - ex, Do you think it'll maintain its renowned sharpness on the newer high res bodies (5DS, 5DSR?)

Zeidora said:

I would think that the biggest problem is internal reflection of light inside the mouth, so that it will affect color the the target area. It is like bounce flash in a room with pink walls: the shots will have a pink tinge.

Click to expand...

+1

Perio said:

sometimes I don't like the colors of the mouth tissues

Click to expand...

I think you should try colored flash-lights rather than grey-cards or xrite-cards.

A mouth is mostly red hues (even teeth is red hue), and then you have the white tissues.
If you experiment with colored flash-light, you may be able to achieve a much more pleasing color-palette. It can be as simple as putting some colored plastic over your flash. Try a red or pink bag for example, or whatever color gives you the result you prefer. A tiny thin plastic-bag, it doesn't have to be transparent, just thin enough to allow the flash to shine through.
Which color is ideal for what you want, I don't know, but I would start with reddish hues, then orange. Green, and to some extent blue, will likely make the mouth look very dark or even blackish like.

http://www.canon.co.uk/springcashback/

Canon 5D MKIII £ 250 cash-back
Canon 6D £ 100 cash-back
Canon 70D £ 50 Cash-back

Plus on certain lenses and printers etc.

gqllc007 said:

Maybe I did the lighting thing all wrong...I used a 150 watt flood light from Home depot and mounted it in a reflector work light from home depot and placed it 2 feet from the chart at a 30 degree angle. The focal program said EV of 10.9 and that is all I used???

Click to expand...

I use something similar with no problems - a pair of 75 watt equivalent floods clamped to a lightstand. Just make sure to set the white balance to the color temperature of the bulbs. This did make a difference in my tests.

I tried similar LED based floods with mixed results - sometimes you would notice the scanning in liveview which suggested they had AC flicker problems similar to fluorescent bulbs. I get more consistent results with the halogens.

Photos taken with a cell phone, talk about lack of DR

Thank you for your help. My questions have been answered.

The Digital Picture has the crops up for comparison:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=14614

It looks very good to me, and I'm pleased to see how sharp it is compared to the other lenses in the range. It holds its own against the 16-35 f/4 IS, with less distortion, is better at 24mm than the 24-70 f/2.8 II, kills the Sigma 12-24 II, and stopped down, is as sharper or sharper than all but the TS-E 17 and 24II lenses. It sure makes me feel better about the money spent.

it is April 2015 I was with Canon CPS at LFW last Friday and had both the 5Ds and 5Dr in my hands, when I asked date of release they said April 2015

ScottyP said:

How about a flash sync speed above 1/180th? ... it would be a nice selling point on all Canon cameras.

Click to expand...

Good point, I wasn't thinking about that one. Fast flash sync seems to be more like a "pro feature" to prevent professionals buying the 6D instead of the well-rounded 5D-series. Still, I think the 6D series will continue to be a good & not-so-expensive backup camera. For me, the 6D mk I is the best go-to workhorse from canon for astrophotography (I do that a lot). I'm excited and looking forward to the arrival of the mk II, hopefully in 2015.

I had a cousin who got arrested for pulsating exposures within 500 feet of a middle school.. :

Thanks guys. I finally figured out the AF point select. I'll do some checking with a different TC so see if that solves the AF issue at f8. I knew someone here could help me out!

Trying to keep up with Angenieux who are the leaders in Motion Picture zooms currently.

Re: Canon Receives Prestigious Accolade From FORTUNE Magazine As One Of The World's Most Admired Com

1kind said:

fragilesi said:

Just lighting the blue touch paper . . . "Canon received its highest ranks in innovation, social responsibility and long-term investment value."

I'm not one to put a massive amount of store into such awards but it is a timely reminder of the paucity of some of the claims about Canon not being innovative.

Click to expand...

Canon does make other products other than cameras and lenses. Mixed reality, 4k reference display, medical, semiconductors and many other items.

Click to expand...

Really? Who ever would have thought it?

untenchicken said:

I just assumed (never smart, I know :-[ ) that my 6d would do what my 1d m3 would....

Click to expand...

In that case, it is indeed smart to cut back on assumptions 1d->6d or you might be in for a few other disappointments

Thanks for the quick reply!

I googled it a bit to understand the problem better and it seems like I've somehow managed to switch my format into something that makes the flickering problem appear. Not knowing the name of this problem caused me to panic and post a thread in CR!

I was so ready to send my camera in for some repeairs. Technology is sometimes just too complicated! =)

-Dan

Tinky said:

Nope. Same principles. Even with a dslr the mirror is out the way during still or video exposure. In live view or video its essentially in mlu position.

Even if you were doing rapid exposures in stills mode the mirror would be out the optical path (the r in dslr is for reflex) so there would be no difference.

Click to expand...

I think what he is asking is because mirror less cameras use the sensor for everything (evf) will you see this more often and the answer is probably yes but mostly in the evf and not any more in stills than a dslr. Unless the evf uses a super slow refresh rate you are probably somewhere in the range of the cycle. Also if the refresh is extremely fast you might see it more since you will catch more cycles. Yet another reason mirror less is dumb. Lol just kidding there is a time and place for mirrorless. That place is probably not in my bag though. I say probably only so I don't look like an idiot if and when I add one.

[quote author=Tinky]
Even something as old as the 600D or 7D
[/quote]

I couldn't agree more. After the first 5 or so videos I made on my YouTube channel I upgraded from an iPhone to a 600D (T3i) and it has fantastic video when set correctly and edited properly. I was very happy with it. I did eventually upgrade again to the 7D2 but that was more for the stills side. It does have its benefits for video though. The DPAF and AFMA on top of the focus racking that stm lenses offer are all really nice features that in the rebel line. And the 60fps frame rate is nice to have even if it doesn't get used much, saves me having to try using something twixtor that blends frames and can (but not always) look artificial and low quality

Gentleman, you made my day

YuengLinger said:

What is more unusual, pairing a weasel with a woodpecker or a 70D with an ef 300mm 2.8? Hmmm... :

Click to expand...

Don Haines said:

But what camera do you use to shoot a woodpecker on a weasel?

Click to expand...

BLFPhoto said:

I shoot outdoors all the time with speed lights. My recommendation, if you can afford it, is to go with the 600ex-rt kit at BHPhotovideo that comes with two speedlights and a remote transmitter. The radio control works flawlessly in all conditions. And use a different modifier than umbrellas. Umbrellas always catch the wind, and with ultralight stands, probably give you fits.

With the kit above, you have many options for lighting. Two off-camera light positions in one or two groups. Both speedlights paired for more power, particularly where you're using hss. Or one light on camera and the other off camera, with the on-camera as master, firing bounce or not firing. The paired speedlights stacked does reasonable when cross lighting with the sun over the subject's shoulder. I use that a lot for sports portraits and hss action shots.

The only drawback with my rec is that you cannot pair your current 430s with the setup unless you go back to the optical trigger for all of the lights, and that is a nightmare outside in bright light.

I have amassed 6 600ex-rts and two remotes. There is very little I will not try to tackle with that setup. And for those jobs...I'm buying two of the profoto b1s for when I need raw power.

Seriously...if you can stretch it at all, the 600ex-rt system is the way to go. No more pocket wizards or other outboard triggers, and absolutely reliable firing and control of the lights.

Click to expand...

Agree, 100%.

privatebydesign said:

geekpower said:

Regarding the section on your guide about infinity focus, isn't the purpose of the "past infinity" part of the focus ring to allow for the effect of different temperatures on the lens?

Click to expand...

Yes it is.

And the TS-E lenses focus even further past infinity to give you more control over the plain of focus.

Click to expand...

That's only true on the TS-E 17. The 24, 45, and 90 do not have that much extra room past the marking.

It probably has to do with the field curvature of the 17mm when fully shifted.

I would recommend renting the 100-400 L II and a 1.4x III converter. I own both the and the new 100-400 works really well with the 1-4x converter.

It is still a collection of parts, and some will fail.

What would prevent the possibility of a different part or assembly failing on a replacement camera?

If it had been in the shop several times for similar issues, yes, I would want a new one. I couldn't see Canon giving you a new camera for one failure any more than a car dealer giving you a new car if the transmission fails in 4000 miles.

privatebydesign said:

It is true, the 16-35 f4 IS is a considerable image improvement over the 17-40 f4, and you get IS. Having got the 16-35 f4IS I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to pretty much anybody.

Click to expand...

I agree.

The 16-35/4L IS is a very big improvement over both the EF 16-35/2,8L II and EF 17-40/4L. I have over the last 10 years owned many copies of both lenses, got frustrated with the IQ, sold them and after a while bought them back because Canon had no alternatives. In the end I switched to Nikon and the AF-S 14-24/2,8 which I had for three years. The IQ was very good, but it isn't possible to use filters on the Nikon, which is very important for me, and it is very large and heavy. It was therefore a great satisfaction for me to try the new 16-35/4L IS which is very sharp, actually in the same class as Nikons 14-24mm.
16-35mm is the ideal zoom range in the wideangle area. 14mm is in my opinion too wide. Then it is better to use a 8-15mm Fisheye which I also own. If you know what you are doing, a Fisheye gives in many situations more natural pictures than a 14mm wideangle. Also with people in the frame.

Which lens I would choose? Not the Canon 11-24/2,8 or Nikon 14-24/2,8. You can't use filter on either of them. And both of them stop on 24mm. I then had to buy also a 24-70mm zoom because I need the 18-28mm area. Silly to switch between two lenses (Which I did for many years with the Nikon) when a single 16-35mm can do it all.

The winner? None of them! The EF 16-35/4L IS is the best. It is cheaper, lighter, more compact and it takes 77mm filters. Of course it lack f2,8 but instead it has IS which is more important! Especially with the new 5Ds 50Mpix camera. Nobody really needs f2,8 for landscapes or street photos/architecture. The DOF is then too narrow. F2,8 is of course great for photographing the Northern light, but then you can buy the 14/2,8L II instead?