privatebydesign said:

All recalibration does is measure the amount of power the battery holds at full charge, obviously as they get older the capacity decreases, this is then used by the camera to report charge levels more accurately.

The best method for recalibration is to fully charge the battery first, then take it off the charger, then put it back on and push the Calibrate/Performance button. The three lights then flash red, as the battery discharges two, then one, then none light, then the recharge cycle starts automatically if the charger is plugged in and the three lights start to go green, first one, then tw,o then when the charge is complete all three.

Click to expand...

Thank you.

Ruined said:

ecka said:

Ruined said:

e17paul said:

Back to zooms, if Canon do release the mythical 14-24/2.8, that would leave a gap in the range for a better quality 18ish-35/2.8. That would allow better quality optics than the existing 2.8 without much extra weight.

I read in (I think) the dpreview review of the 24-70/2.8 that Canon did not make an IS version of the 2.8 because the weight would increase. If Canon made an 18ish-35 2.8/IS, it would be excellent and versatile for low light interiors. I know that is far from the only use for ultra wide zooms, but it would be smart to cover all the bases.

On the other hand, a good prime at or just below 20mm, would be awesome, especially with reasonably sized filters. As a prime fan, I will cross my fingers, watch and wait. My credit card is safe for now.

Click to expand...

Just to keep in mind, I believe the only example put out thus far of a f/2.8 16mm-ish lens without bulbous element sharper than the 16-35 II was the Zeiss 15mm, which has a 95mm filter thread. Could you imagine how large that would be if made into a zoom?

While I think we will see small improvements in quality similar to the 16-35 I to 16-35 II generation, I don't think we will see an improvement the 24-70 got unless the 16-35 is made significantly larger/heavier (arguably incompatible with its target market). Which is also why I think the 16-35 II will not be updated for a long time, with a wider bulbous zoom complementing it instead (i.e 12-24, 14-24, etc).

Click to expand...

Yes. The new 16-35/4L IS USM is almost as big and heavy as the 16-35/2.8L II USM. IS is nice for videos, but if it's not much better than the 17-40/4L, then it may end up on the same shelf with 70-300 DO, 200/2.8II and 28-300L.

Click to expand...

well, I think the 16-35 f/4 *will* be significantly better than the 17-40 and based on the mtf sharper than the 16-35 II. But, while it replaces the 17-40 it does not replace the 16-35 II as it is a full stop slower. In low light for event photographers/journalists that will likely be a deal breaker regardless of the sharpness. The market is there for both though as landscape photographers won't use f/2.8 much and would rather have the sharpness.

Click to expand...

I hope it *will* be significantly better than 17-40L, which has very soft corners at 17mm. However, it may be considered sharper than 16-35L'II, because that one has a bit blurry corners as well . I know many "landscapers" who prefer Sigma 12-24mm or even adapting Nikkor 14-24mm over Canon L UWA zooms, because of the bad corners. If Sigma releases a cheaper and perfectly sharp 12-24mm ART, then it could hurt Canon sales very much. That could explain why did they put the IS in it - to add one more reason for choosing Canon over the competition.

Probably not while there's a warehouse full of 24-105's waiting to unload. I imagine that sales of the 24-70/4 have been on the slow side, and I'd guess it's because the 24-105's go for 500-600 bucks in a kit, which is half or less than half the 24-70/4 price. But I hope Canon doesn't take that as an indicator of preference. It's merely people's budgets talking. I've already got a 6D and I had no interest in the 24-105 kit. But might've looked seriously at a 24-70 kit if it were available. Start a petition...

Huge fan of this lens. And I was lucky to get a good copy optically (it needs a MFA adjust of +5).

I can't see myself dumping it, even for the 16-35 IS. Maybe I'll look at a 14mm prime.

Extremely reliable, workhorse of a lens that has lived through brutal drops and abuse. Still looks great.

Dylan777 said:

So you have to select ISO in M mode with 1D X? This is one the reason I didn't like about 5D II + AF of course.

Click to expand...

Eldar beat me to it, but here's my reply as well:

No, but in his case, he's using the unsupported screen and in the 5DIII he would have to set ISO manually in the 5DIII to add 2/3 EV. In the 1D X with the new firmware, you can set Auto ISO in Manual mode AND dial in +2/3 EV and the ISO will automatically adjust to keep the +2/3 EV, just like it would in Av of T mode. It's one of the cooler features of the new firmware and one that many of us have asked for for years. It's also one, along with the Auto ISO minimum shutter speed going above 1/250s that we all wish they would add to the 5DIII

klickflip said:

Took it to repair shop today, apparently they are very delicate and even a really minor bump will cause the heavy elements to come off the plastic rails they are aligned with. So not built like a take at all!! would be that the flimsy feeling 1.4 is much more tougher inside, but certainly doesn't feel that way.
Bad news it it may need a whole new barrel assembly as its quicker/easier for them to do that but prob more costly in the end.

Click to expand...

Dropping a heavy lens 30 cm (a foot) to a concrete floor is a huge shock, even if it has some carpet on it. Those heavy lens elements magnify the shock. A drop like that will do some level of damage to most lenses, even if its not readily apparent. The amount of damage depends on how it lands.

Make sure the shop is a Canon Authorized Repair facility, it depends on the Country, but in the USA, Canon does not supply the software and test fixtures required to align and adjust the autofocus to independent repair shops. That means that it might be repaired, but still need to be sent to Canon for a expensive adjustment.

neuroanatomist said:

They sit in their original plastic bags, tucked into the styrofoam cutouts in the original lens boxes.

Click to expand...

Yes, then when you go to sell the lens, having the pouch adds substantially to the price it will sell for.

Not sure if anyone else noticed this, but Canon created a cool microsite for this milestone:

IT ALL BEGINS WITH GLASS

Dylan777 said:

9VIII said:

A new supertele from Sigma would be the real test of the new global vision line. Making good lenses is one thing, but making lenses on the level of a big white is a whole 'nother story.

How many lenses are sharpest at maximum aperture? Not many, and every MkII Big White.

Click to expand...

+1

Click to expand...

+1 and reduction in weight

Using AI servo for both stationary and moving subjects with the 1DX. It's rather liberating not having to think about toggling AF modes now.

The 5D3 can shoot up to 30 Minutes at a time with the files split into 4GB files (these files playback continuously when linked together in editing). When you get to the end of a card the video stops. When you hit record again it will start recording on the next card. There are no heat issues with the sensor and recording more than 30 minutes unless you are in blistering hot sun (which you still can expect to not have issues). Magic Lantern has a work-around that will start recording again automatically after reaching the 30 Minute mark, but you do lose about a second or so of coverage.

I shoot a lot with my 5D3, always with magic lantern, and often longer than 30 Minutes. So this is from experience =)

This is absolutely just my opinion of course, so please keep that in mind. But in my experiences shooting soccer at the collegiate level you don't have much time switching between two cameras. For instance in football I'll have one camera with a 400 on it and a 2nd camera with a 70-200. I know you're not doing this but it'll bring me to my point. I would suggest that the 1D4 is a great choice. But why don't you go for an intermediate lens, such as the 70-200 f/2.8L II IS or a 300 f/2.8L I IS lens. Save up some money and focus on ONE camera and ONE really good lens and then if action gets too close, just do like I have to do and move back. I was pretty much able to shoot every soccer game with either a 300 or 400 lens on one camera this year.

Just my opinion. I know it's extra money that you didn't budget in this thread description, but maybe if your son continues to play soccer at higher levels, it would be a good investment.

Re: Canon Announces Two New EF Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom Lenses and White EOS Rebel SL1 Digital SLR Came

rs said:

GMCPhotographics said:

Lol....UK pricing for the 16-35 f4 LIS seems to be nearly as expensive as the f2.8 version!
While I'm sure the UK price will fall dramatically once the product is on the shelves, i really thing that canon urgently needs to refresh it's UK RRP policy.

Click to expand...

It's a tax for the impatient.

Click to expand...

I've been an early adopter in video game systems and that's about it. I've been able to not go nuts and buy camera gear at launch.... which I believe shows great moral character... though I'm the only one that would believe that.

Re: Images of the New EF 16-35 f/4L IS & EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM

wickidwombat said:

You must need to work on your abilities then as I have no problem with 1/5 sec or even 1/2 sec on my eos m and 11-22....

Click to expand...

Ironic you state I need to work on my abilities when you are attempting to argue in favor of Image Stabilization making a big difference in an ultrawide angle lens. Image stabilization helps a photographer's camera shake, recall

Eldar said:

I wonder if I´ll ever get my arms around this AF system. Every time I think I´ve got it ... I haven´t ...

Click to expand...

I know what you mean in spades, get it all set up at Home, latest updates, latest AF Guide, do some Images of the next door neighbours Cat (no way I'de show them on CR, only a few Guys that like Cats here), then get on a Plane, Fly to Africa, local flight to the Delta in Botswana, into the vehicle, out to the best place on the Planet to take Images with your 1Dx of Cats, the big spotted ones, and......

WTF ??????

Steve Todd said:

Quasimodo, don't know if you got the PM I sent, but here's the post I intended to send you last time about using the dual back button AF method:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=19945.0

Click to expand...

Steve.

I got the PM today. I am happy about this solution. The funny thing is that I actually read the thread you linked when I had my 5DII and 1Ds III, so I read it and forgot about it. It suddenly became WAY more interesting now that I have gotten my new baby 1dx.

Btw: Thanks for sharing the very interesting answer you got from Chuck Westfall about the real difference between Ai Servo and One Shot!

Gerhard.

Wow another wide angle zoom from Canon.

Not sure if being pandered to,

Or being ignored.

In all seriousness, the 10-18 4.5-5.6 is a different version of the 10-22 3.5/4.5 which is faster and has longer range. The 16-35 only complements slightly on the 24-105 f/4.

The only reason I can see for these lenses to exist are as cheaper, mnore profitable versions of lenses they plan to discontinue.

Thanks RL, Sporgon and Graham
I will try the blower>sensor swab (Why didn't I want to try this? Because I'm skittish)>Canon, unless I decide for the Ee-S sooner, in which case I might just send it in.
I don't have an f/1.2 lens though, I'll have to see how the 5D AF feels with the f/1.4s and the 135/2.

wickidwombat said:

i was kinda hopeing the m had the digital video zoom enabled like on the 600D but it appears not :'(

Click to expand...

No "core" ML dev has a M, so it's a second class citizen port like 6d and unlike 5d3. For the M, you can try the unofficial "Tragic Lantern" fork which has more bleeding edge features available but is unsupported by the ML forum: https://bitbucket.org/OtherOnePercent/tragic-lantern-6d/downloads

I stand corrected. Did not know about Canon's tripod-sensing IS. Looks like your 600L should have it, unless it's not sensing properly for some reason. You could try mirror lock and shutter delay to see if that helps.

mrzero said:

I agree that the viewfinder issue is not resolved, but I just don't think that many people use them anymore. I agree, it should have had the dual pixel AF. Guess they have to save something for the MkIII.

Two things I wanted to point out -- It does have a touchscreen on the LCD, and the detachable lens cover has been replaced with an attached shutter. It looks like a beefier version of the one on my wife's new SX280HS. If you add the filter adapter, you're back to using clip-ons, of course, but I thought this was an acceptable upgrade.

Click to expand...

I was out testing one in my local Camera store earlier this week, and it does indeed have a lens shutter, and touch screen. Its also quite a bit smaller. I was very tempted to buy one.

I do wish the sensor was a upgraded one, but overall, its a big improvement in a lot of areas.

wickidwombat said:

what does the 200-400 cost to rent for a day there?

Click to expand...

I'll be there for three days, possibly four if I get to the pit day on Thursday. Four days rental is 411$+tx, 7 days 540$, 10 days 720$. Four days rental is just shy of the tickets for the whole race weekend. I can't afford that, even though I'd really like to try this lens.

Not to mention that I'll feel like I need this lens when I'll send it back so I will cost me another 11000$.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

I thought I saw that a new MF camera was rumored to be coming out with a 16 bit AD. I'll have to search. MF might benefit from 14 bits actual.

I found it! The Ricoh Pentax 645Z. Lots of megapixels (51) and 16 bit AD converter. Dual SD slots and 4:3 format. Maybe it is just a big point and shoot

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/04/15/ricoh-announces-medium-format-pentax-645z

At $8500, its not a consumer grade camera, but its not a $30,000 MF body either. I'd like to play with one, but its not something to carry around.

Click to expand...

3fps hehe

Looks like a black "Apple Cube" with a lens.

scottburgess said:

zlatko said:

...
Total of the above = 37 lbs.

That's after making careful choices about what to bring and after replacing a few items with lighter versions. I've included some mirrorless and I'm considering further reductions. It used to be more (I used to use a wheeled bag).

Click to expand...

Have you considered going entirely mirrorless, or do issues like low light or image quality make that unlikely at this time?

Click to expand...

Thanks
I almost snorted beer out of my nose when i read that