Sporgon said:

MLfan3 said:

my plastic 6D

Click to expand...

The 6D can hardly be described as 'plastic'. The top plate is plastic as I'm sure you are aware. The rest of it is pretty much the same construction as the 5D mkii.

I mention it because your comment is misleading to anyone who may be thinking of getting a 6D.

What's interesting is that when you hold the two cameras together and tap the pentaprism housing it is impossible to tell any difference. However I've noticed that there are a couple of scratchy 'smears' on the top of the 6D now whereas the 5DII is still unmarked.

I agree with you the high quality polymers are suitable for these kinds of applications, and though I have no issues with the smaller L lenses being made from the stuff I'm a little twitchy about the top of the 6D being made from it. Maybe I feel the camera bodies take more knocks than the lenses.

Click to expand...

Note that it was either a plastic top cover or sticking an antenna out on the top for allowing wifi and GPS signals in and out. Ahhh... compromises, compromises, when you get us.

Thanks for your warm welcome my friends!

I've been coming to CanonRumors daily for well over a year and find it an amazing source of reliable information, but I just decided to take the plunge and create my account for the forum.

I live in an area of the province of Québec (in Canada), where most people only speak French. Of course being surrounded by over 300 million English speakers in North America helps to learn the language!
My reading comprehension is excellent and my listening comprehension is quite good, so you won't have to speak too loud if we ever meet Graham! My written English is not too bad, but I have to take my time and really think about what I'm trying to say. Speaking in English is still quite a challenge though, cause I never get the chance to practice around here. For some reason it seems my mind goes blank when I have to speak and I'm always trying to find my words...

I have found tons of great information on this site (especially on the forum, where many people are extremely knowledgeable) and I hope I can contribute a little.

I hope you have a very nice day,
Sébastien

Ok what do I shoot?

I shoot photos of my kids and friends. I shoot field sports using 70-200 and 100-400(borrowed) and I shoot occasional indoor sports though not as often recently since they have given up basketball. I shoot indoor school events and gatherings primarily with the 24-70 though sometimes with 70-200. (Sometimes with flash). I take pictures of kids outside playing or hiking with 70-200. I shoot at zoos and other animal parks with 70-200 and 100-400.

I use the 50 1.4 when I don't want to bother with flash.

So what could I improve on...I guess both the 14 and the macro don't help with what I do. They are more aspirational. I would like to be the guy who takes cool landscape, nighttime or macro shots but as of yet I have not been. This or course is why I don't own them. However at as little as 300 and 400 for these lenses it isn't too much to spend.

I do like the 85 fl. However the 85 1.8 is not as good as my zooms and I can't justify the L. I considered the sigma but I don't think I can justify that either.

If my kids started playing more indoor sports I would definitely consider a 135L. If they started doing more drama I would consider either the 135 or the sigma 85 though something with IS would be nice For video.

For what I shoot the best addition would be a 300 or 400 2.8 but I don't have that kind of money. I guess I could sell the 24-105, 17-40, 2ti and 50 1.4...then beg lens authority to sell me a used one for the cyber Monday price but I would still need 2500 or so and I don't think my wife would like that.

What does all this mean...looks like I'll ask for the rokinnon for my birthday...might be going to Alaska and a wide angle would be fun.

Digic 4+ is old, F6.9 is ridiculous

Good question.

I've been using rubber lens hoods for a few years and have only found two drawbacks.

But overall they give me more confidence that the lens won't get hurt (thick rubber after all)
and that the lens hood won't break or get lost.

And they let me stuff my long lens in a camera bag without taking the hood off.
The lens hood just smushes up (technical term) nicely.

1. They do "vignette" (meaning corners tips are solid black)
if you don't adjust them carefully.
They have three settings so you can back them off to eliminate this "vignetting."

2. They are so cheap, I'm trying to cut the rubber to mimic the lens hood
"leaves" or petals from the plastic wide angle lens.

The bother is that these hoods screw on so they don't always line up
exactly where they were when I cut them. (Hint to manufacturers: I'll
buy several if you can do this for us.)

The bottom line is I use the rubber lens hoods 95% of the time
over the perfectly good plastic hoods that came with the lenses.
The remaining 5% is for wide angle when the sun is right on the
cusp of lighting up the front lens.

Here's the 77mm version that I use.

http://www.camera-filters.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=483_724

jdramirez said:

mackguyver said:

jdramirez said:

I put some spinners on my 5D mkiii neck strap... you know... to impress the bitches.

Click to expand...

I put neon on the bottom of mine for the same reason Sending it off to get it chromed after I finish paying off my tats and the hydraulics I put on my ride ;D

Click to expand...

I know we are making fun... but I would live a chrome body... oh... and a hotter wife.

Click to expand...

Imagine all the finger stains you'll get all over them

Thanks for the help. I'll dig in to it later tonight..

Got mine just before christmas, also from DigitalRev. Really happy with their service, was so quick and well priced.

I've just stepped up from a 400D, decided to get the 18-55mm IS STM with it as well to replace my old kit lens. Really impressed with everything so far, the AF is nice and snappy. The live view AF with touchscreen is just excellent. ISO performance is just fine for me, been trying it out down the beach over the new year and I'm so impressed with how the AF handles tracking moving subjects (you can see some of my first attempts here - http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikefrancis/

So much more to learn about it yet, I don't think I've even scratched the surface! Be very interested to see what everyone else comes out with.

Marsu42 said:

GMCPhotographics said:

My mkI is a stellar copy and I have to say that I won't be buying a mkII. It's a good lens and a lot to rave about...but against a stellar mkI, there isn't any great benefit for the cost

Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification, and it squares with lensrentals' review of the mk2 in which they say that the *average* mk2 is better than mk1 but a above-average mk1 can be about the same as a mk2 from the bottom of the pile. The distinction they see is the better built quality of the mk2 which is said to be more resistant to decentering after a bump.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/11/canon-24-70-mk-ii-variation

Click to expand...

The other thing I considered when comparing my 24-70L vs mkII was that between 24-35mm, my 16-35IIL was a better performer than both lenses. Especially when shooting landscapes. Less distortion, a lot less flare, better sunstars, slightly brighter (although still f2.8) and sharp enough. Sure it's not as sharp wide open and the 24-70IIL, but it's certainly sharp enough, and there's more to a lens than critical sharpness. I've not had any build quality issues with my 24-70L, it seems very heavily built even by L standards but 've read enough people who have had genuine issues with theirs. I do wonder if Canon performed a silent upgrade to this lens during it's production life. Both mine and my 2nd photographer's copies are very good...in fact her copy is slightly sharper than mine. So while I say that mine is stellar, her copy is the best I've seen from a mkI.

The 24-70IIL certainly seemed a very nice lens, it's just not that great an upgrade to what I've already got. If I was in the market for a new 24-70, then I would snap one up...but unfortunatly, I have other lenses which are serving me just as well. If I need sharpness, I'll use my primes and stop down to f2.8.

My 16-35IIL is on it's second front element due to scuffing and really has had a hard life and it's the only Canon L lens which I've had any issues with. It was the result of the harsh realities of pro wedding abuse. It's the only lens I don't use a hood with (it's a pointless piece of plastic) and the front element is quite exposed as a result.

wsmith96 said:

CR5 - I like it!

Click to expand...

There should be CR inflation just like with money... it's not the site owner's fault, but given Canon's secrecy and often counter-intuitive strategy a CR1 nowadays qualifies as a joke, CR2 as an idea anyone can have and CR3 is "it makes sense, but unless we have the press release already we don't know anything about it"

I suggest inflating the CR rating 1 stop per year, this means dumping CR1 right now because it's not worth anything anymore and adding CR4 for rumors that actually have some basis to it... How about it :-> ?

Many of the mirrorless camera makers will not be around next year, or they will give up the line. Sales is tanking, and that means no upgrades or customer support.

When buying a new camera, you need to look at the whole package, body, lenses, support, and availability of accessories.

I'd say hold off on any mirrorless purchase and go for a low end DSLR. Canon has the advantage because so many used lenses are available, and a person on a budget can add lenses fairly easily. Nikon also has a lot of entry level bodies and lenses, but their service and support is only slightly better than Sony, which is almost totally non existent.
Lets face it, cameras occasionally need service, and waiting 3-6 months for a repair makes a owner very unhappy.

To all,

On Thursday I dropped my 5d Mk III off at the Irvine center, they found 3 potential issues all based around the mirror box so I should have word from them soon as to what is what. My wife was in Disneyland at the time and offers that she feels it will be "magical"! I hope as much.

Thanks again for the direction and advice,

Chris

Bohns said:

Thank you all

Following what I read, I booked the used 1D mark III of the same seller (he bought a 1DX, the lucky guy, agreed that the mark IIN would be enough for back up, and accepted to release the mark III)

I anyway just understood I may have issues with my memory cards compatibility. Another post to follow to get advices on this specific question...

Click to expand...

Don't know if this is of help but about the fastest card in a 1D3 is the Sandisk Extreme iii 8GB SDHC card:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/SanDisk-Extreme-Video-Packaging-Varies/dp/B00422FBJ2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1388950666&sr=8-1&keywords=sandisk+extreme+iii+8gb

The 1D3 is the ONLY camera I know of where SD cards perform better than CF. These cards are now pretty cheap - see above link.

johnf3f said:

I find the AWB on my 1DX is only confused by indoor lighting (so far!), everything else is fine virtually all the time. This is exactly the same as every other Canon digital camera I have owned/tried.
I just use AWB and shoot in RAW - 99% of the time the WB is fine and on the odd occasion it gets it wrong it is a simple adjustment in pp.

Click to expand...

Same here. Indoor lighting often gets too warm. But, like Neuro said, it is easily fixed in post, so I don´t pay much attention to it.

I have both lenses. They work very well in digital cameras and quality is like the new ones. The 28 80 is USM and focus work manual or auto all the time without the need of change the slider button. Quality is better than the 24 70 2.8L that have many problems with the alignment on the camera sensor: one side is out of focus.
The 80 200 i use mainly for video, always at 2.8, and manual focus is very easy and smooth. In autofocus mode it is not an USM lens, but is very fast. And is black! Is for this reason i never changed it for a new one.
If the lenses worked well on film work well on digital.

neuroanatomist said:

I'm not certain it's a good idea to meet up with someone you strongly suspect is a thief, even in a public place. You may go home without the stolen camera...and without your wallet.

Click to expand...

+1.
A favorite trick is to get someone with $$ to look, and then rob them. Even in a public place, its done all the time. Even happened in a bank!

mrsfotografie said:

ecka said:

dilbert said:

ksagomonyants said:

Sonyalpharumors.com has recently posted a link to the top-selling mirrorless and DSLR cameras in Japan http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/2013-sales-sony-nex-5r-is-the-most-sold-mirrorless-camera-in-japan/
According to this link, Canon EOS-M is the second top-selling mirrorless camera in Japan. I know it's not worldwide but anyway, it seems that Japanese like it.
Another interesting thing is that EOS Kiss X5 (T3i) is the top-selling DSLR in Japan.

Click to expand...

DSLR percentages:
Canon share: 48.7%
Nikon share: 41.5%
Ricoh share: 3.4%
Sony share: 1.7%
Mirrorless percentages:
Olympus: 25.4%
Sony: 23.1%
Panasonic: 11.5%
Canon: 9.2%
Ricoh: 7.8%
Nikon: 5.7%

Click to expand...

Canon's single EOS M body gets 9.2%, while Panasonic's 10 (ish) bodies are getting only 11.5%?

Click to expand...

In the Netherlands, the Nikon-1 is a hot seller

Click to expand...

Then we have the solution for Canon and Nikon ending inventory of mirrorless cameras: ??? Canon sends all their stock of M for Japan, while Nikon sends all of its stock of "1" to the Netherlands.

dgatwood said:

Doubtful. Although the 6D is a pro body, it is mostly marketed as a step-up for Rebel users who want to move to full frame. The Rebel line changes approximately annually. Based on that, I'd expect the 6D line to have a similar upgrade interval, or at worst, only a little slower.

Click to expand...

Well then, the 6D II is already 4 months late...and counting.

dgatwood said:

With that said, I half expect Canon to fold the 7D and 6D together into a high-MP full-frame body in 2014

Click to expand...

Exceptionally unlikely. High MP full frame paired with good AF will be a 'merger' of the 6D and 7D is in the sense that it will cost at least as much as the 6D and 7D combined. A camera like that would come in above the 5DIII in the lineup, and may well only be available as a 1-series.

Full-frame cameras are expensive for two reasons: economies of scale, poor fabrication yields, and inefficient use of the wafer.

Economies of scale are straightforward. When you sell more of a product, the cost of tooling up the manufacturing line is amortized over a larger number of units, as is the cost of R&D. Additionally, if you sell more of a product, yield becomes more critical (because if you sell a million units, even a 1% failure rate is a *lot* of returns), which means that you're forced to do more work up front to polish the design, which tends to pay off in the long run.

Fabrication yields are also directly affected by the die size (the chunk of silicon that turns into a single chip). The larger the die size, the more problematic flaws in the silicon wafer become. Suppose you know that 10% of the surface of the chip will be unusable (it really isn't that high—I chose a big number to make the math easier). Suppose that manifests itself as a stripe across the middle of the wafer. If that wafer has a hundred chips on it, that might affect only the ones near the center—maybe 15 chips, which gives you an 85% yield—close to the 90% ideal yield. If that wafer has only four chips on it, that same stripe might affect two of them, resulting in only a 50% yield. If you're really unlucky, it might also affect the corners of the remaining two parts, resulting in a 0% yield.

Of course, realistically, a wafer that bad would be rejected, but there are lots of random flaws that can occur when manufacturing a chip, and the flaws almost all occur in rates that are proportional to the surface area. If you know that you'll have one bad pixel out of every million and a 10 MP crop body sensor, you'd expect 10 bad pixels on average, so if you consider 20 to be the bottom acceptable limit, most of your chips will pass. If you move up to a full-frame sensor with the same density, you're now at a 25.6 bad pixels on average, and most of your chips will fail.

Finally, there's the question of inefficient use of the wafer. The wafer is round, which means there's some waste whenever you make a square chip on it. The bigger the chip, the bigger the waste. Now if you're careful, you might be able to print some other minor parts (e.g. voltage regulators) in the remaining space so that you don't waste as much, but otherwise, there's a significant overhead to bigger dies.

Having been a lifetime user of Zeiss optics from my Zeiss Ikon, my Contax/Hasselblad SLR days and now using some of those lens with adapters on Canon, I can say they do make some average lens that are based on really old designs like the Sonnar or Planar for their short and middle focal lengths.

Now having said that, one can say that Zeiss has a common problem it shares with many old companies and that they rest on their laurels. They do have some exceptional lens designs, like the Distagons, like my 28mm f/2 and 35mm PC lens. Both have light falloff into the FF corners but there is little to get around this optical phenomenon, and with Photoshop, no real need to either.

Zeiss' Makro-Planars are well regarded by those who have used them, and a 50mm or 100mm version would be on my "to buy" list, if I wasn't already using my old 120mm f/4 from my Hasselblad.

To use a macro lens, you need to be careful to do all you can to reduce shake: Tripod, mirror lock-up and a remote (or self-timer) releases need to be in use.

I finally got around to having another go at cleaning my sensor. I think I'll leave well enough alone at this point. The current condition seems much improved. I see three obvious spots, and I feel comfortable ignoring them since they do not show up in "normal" (i.e., non-dust-detecting) photographs, whether the images are processed or unprocessed. Only though choosing deliberately close levels in Photoshop to look for/find/show dust do these three spots appear. This will do for now. It happens to be that the sensor is now cleaner than it was when the camera was new. That helps take the sting out of the frustration of a few days ago.

To give more information on the cleaning, I cleaned the sensor today with a Visibledust VSwab (green) moistened with VDust Plus. After taking a test shot, the smears and fibers of before were gone, though there remained a section of droplets on the right side of the image--something along the lines of what an inefficient wiper blade might leave on your windshield (windscreen).

I then wiped the sensor with a second swab moistened with Visible Dust's Sensor Clean, and that got me to what you see in the attached image. Before and after each swabbing, a Giottos Rocket Air Blower was used, and I insepcted the sensor with a VisibleDust Quasar Sensor Loupe 7x.

In the past, I was able to get a T3i Rebel sensor cleaner than what you see here, and it was when shooting the test image at f/32. Only one faint spot would show up in the photo.

For the images I've posted, I photographed an overcast daytime sky. Part of my interest in having dust-free images at f/16 is because I photograph aircraft from time to time, and the shots are taken often in the f/10 to f/16 range. With the sky as a background, dust spots are easily seen, and when there are upwards of 17 of them (which was the case with the then new T3i), removing them in post is can be a "PITA".

Practice and proper technique are important in sensor cleaning. As VisibleDust cleaning swabs are somewhat expensive (over US $40 for 12 of the green 1.0x size), there is incentive learning good technique quickly. In the meantime, I am waiting for delivery of a Lenspen SensorKlear II so that I have another option for future cleanings.

I give my sincere thanks to those who replied with their helpful comments and suggestions. I also stand with Neuro in his caution against doing more than is warranted under given contexts or circumstances.

troll troll troll.... go away to Smartphone photographers forums...

I saw the Calumet boom and stand today. The boom has " a remote crank at the back of the arm controls the direction of the light source mounted at the other end up to 135°" (from product description). I have to say that the remote crank is a delight to use and operates smoothly. The whole apparatus can assume a smaller profile, and one need not attach the casters if frequent repositioning of equipment is not necessary. There is no doubt that this piece is more than is necessary for a 43-inch softbox and three Speedlites, but I am going with this option, as I intend to use more substantial lights and modifiers in the future. It will be my only boom, and it fits well with my current and future lighting tasks.

As always, I am grateful for the tremendously sober comments and suggestions from the members of this forum. Many thanks to you all!

why should canon rebate their big white lenses. I think that everybody who bought one, would own it until he dies ;-)
I was looking more than one year to get a uses one, but their wasn`t any offer !!!
So in May I bought a new one - it`s an awesome lens, the best lens I ever had - - I will own it for the rest of my life ;.)
The price since may is exact the same - I don´t think canon will rebate it.

I have never used any filters on my lenses, since I`m shooting digital (2009). In analog times I uses filters, but in my whole fotografic life, I`ve never crashed a filter or a lense. So I don`t think that they are necessary - I think they damage the IQ of the lense.