I'd go with a 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro for closeups and a 50mm f/1.2L for shots further away.

I took pictures with the 5D Mark III and two years before the 5D Mark II and my final verdict is that the 5D Mark III posterize more fine detail to vibrant colors and lower noise about only a few people I rebut this opinion ... I have tried different settings and I've had enough Canon disappoint me again as well as the recent 70D which has a lot of noise even at the lowest ISO

I have dual memory slots in the 1D MII and didn't appreciate it for a long time. Now that the 5D MIII is here in the same format with Eye-Fi available with the firmware update I like it. The pro 16 GB card sending to a cloud storage for safe keeping... I like the idea. I've lost images when cards dies between camera body and computer. Lost my cable years ago so had no option. Even shooters clinging to older 1D * bodies can use the dual slot with Eye-Fi. I got to try it with the 1D MII. I see Live View focusing for large area photographs as a plus using a tablet or laptop to see a bigger image with more detail than the small back can show. And another + is moving forward with the faster cards of both types in the bag already.

Promature said:

I'm sure people out there want exceptional subject isolation out of their walk around lens.

Click to expand...

Well, I'd call f/2.8 on APS-C more like barely adequate subject isolation, certainly not 'exceptional'.

A few things.

First, if you're not viewing at full size or anything close, problems with coma, chromatic aberration, and astigmatism are less important. Resized to average web viewing can cover a lot of sins.

Second, as Nubu said, you can use tracking mounts with reduced speed if you're shooting foreground/horizon too. I've never used the 1/2x speed on my iOptron SkyTracker, but others have with good results (within reason of course, especially at reduced size).

Third, the Samyang/Rokinon f/2.8 is a wonderful lens for daytime and night ultra wide angle work. You can't get front-mounted filters for it, but I was wondering what kind you meant? If astro filters, the slot-in type (for crop sensor) are good (this is why I use it on the 50D). Other wide angle lenses may take rear-mounted gel filters.

One thing not widely discussed is ability to focus. I would use the 24-105 f/4 for astro work, but it is too dark and the magnification too low (even at Live View x10) to get accurate focus on stars at 24mm, so has never worked for me. You can try different manual focus points through trial and error - I found the Samyang's less loose focus ring easier for this. But with a wider aperture lens, the brighter image can help with focus.

Stopping down isn't always worth the effort. I have experimented with the 85 f/1.2 II at various apertures, and I'm not sure the benefits of less vignetting and distortion at narrower apertures exceeds the loss of light. Do look into flat frames, which are master images taken that can be used to cancel out most of the colour and vignetting problems (but not coma etc; NB it can be hard getting flat frames at the shortest focal lengths).

One last thing. It may be cheaper and easier, depending on where you live, and if you drive, to go to darker locations. Most of what I do in astro work is fighting light pollution. If you can go somewhere dark, any camera will take good wide angle astro images. Good luck in any case!

Below: Milky Way from suburbia, Samyang 14mm (70mins stacked + tracked, no darks/flats).

Evaluative is potentially problematic in scenes like this, for a start it is proprietary and Canon have never said how, exactly, the scene metering, and subsequent exposure, is influenced by the evaluation.

It looks to me like it automatically underexposed to protect the highlights, which most of the time would be a good thing. Obviously you needed to over expose the Canon image and under expose the Fuji image, but an interesting "test" would be to use each different exposure mode on the Canon and see what different exposures you get. If you can't chimp in a situation like this then any of the other three metering modes is going to be more consistent and predictable as there is no proprietary evaluation in the exposure calculation. Trying to outsmart Evaluative is not easy and often not intuitive.

It is not scientific. And reviews are too much work! I applaud all the reviewers out there...!! Thank you all.

http://greypartridgefilms.com/reviews-on-fuji-x-e2/

GMCPhotographics said:

mackguyver said:

kirispupis said:

Very true, but that doesn't mean I can still wish they filled it.

Then again from Canon's point of view:
- I purchased the 100-400
- I purchased the 70-200/2.8 II + 2x III. The image quality + AF was close enough to the 100-400 to no longer justify carrying it.
- I still wasn't happy with the image quality + AF, so I bought the 400/5.6
- I still wanted something with IS and a bit more reach, so after some time I used the money I was saving for the 600/4 II and bought a 200-400/1.4x with the justification that it is far more flexible.

So in the end Canon got a lot more money out of me than if they had just introduced a 500/5.6 IS in the first place.

Click to expand...

Sounds familiar - my path was 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 IS, 70-200 f/4L IS (+1.4x II), 400 f/5.6L, 300 f/2.8L IS II + 1.4xIII & 2xIII. I will say that the 400mm had me satisfied for many years.

Click to expand...

Lol....I passed on the 100-400 LIS, and went straight for a 400mm f5.6 L.
Then I took up a 70-200 f2.8 LIS II and 1.4x and 2x teles.
Then I sold the 400mm f5.6 L and picked up a 400mm f2.8 LIS.
Apart from the weight, I couldn't be happier!

Click to expand...

Canon, the retailers, and eBay love us for sure!

TAF said:

But I think most camera companies will survive. I also think the future looks particularly bright for the first company that can produce an APS-C mirrorless camera, that has DSLR-like performance, small size and well laid out controls. Yesterday, in 35+ degree heat (>95F) and almost 100% humidity, I was sporting my little Fuji X-E1 at a local tourist attraction. I was getting a LOT of envious looks from sweaty, overburdened DSLR users.

Click to expand...

X-E2, and the X-Pro1 replacement whatever it's called(X-Pro1s, X-Pro2, etc)

surapon said:

neuroanatomist said:

The new nylon caps for the MkII supertele lenses are much easier to use than the previous pleather ones.

If you were looking for a reason to upgrade to the 600 II, maybe now you have one!

Click to expand...

Thanks you, Sir, Dear My Teacher, Mr. neuroanatomist.
Sorry, I will not Up date to New 600MM Soon, Because, The Last time that I use this 600 mm = 6-8 month ago, No, Sir, I am not the Birder or the Sports Photographer---BUT, I use just for the summer time for Shooting the Beautiful Ladies ON THE BEACH , FROM THE 10 th. FLOOR OF THE HOTEL BALCONY----hA, hA, hA---And My Wife get real up set with me , that the last summer---No, She does not up set for another Beautiful Photos, But She up set, because I just took her photos 3-4 Picture, and take 1,000 Photos of the Beautiful young Girls----Ha, Ha, Ha.
Nice to talk to you , Sir.
Happy Holiday to your family and you too.
Surapon

Click to expand...

LOL ;D ;D ;D

5D. No comparison. It's a GREAT camera.

clartephoto said:

But unfortunately, I was disappointed with the 2.8 IS II. I thought it would be a "halfway point" between the 70-200 f/4L IS and the 200 f/2L IS, but unfortunately the reality was the 200 f/2L IS at f/4 has more smoother backgrounds than the 70-200 f/2.8 does at f/2.8!

Click to expand...

Bokeh is not really the strongest point of the 70-200 2.8 II. It can get real nervous under some conditions.

I believe there always are some compromises in the design of zoom lenses. Yes even in excellent lenses such as the 70-200 II.

The Canon 24-105 is selling for $600-650 new, do you feel the Sigma is worth the 40-50% price premium?
[/quote]

Depends on your wallet... the 24-105L could go to $450 and that would not take away from what the S24-105 can still do. It's worth the money... and probably a good $200 more worth it for me. If I made money off this, I'd get a 24-70L or wait for the IS, but apart from that, I like it very much. I was on a speed boat going quite fast, snapping shots as we went along, I got almost no blurry shots... AF nailed, OS nailed. Great product.

How about "The Kitty"? They are a new photographer and walk around photography meet-ups timidly. They finally gain the courage to ask a more experienced and accomplished photographer their honest opinion on the Kitty's latest masterpiece. No matter how nice the pro is, the Kitty is crushed and will forever scowl the pro.

slclick said:

Some Costco's still offer this service, mine just stopped but your mileage may vary. I'd check.

Click to expand...

Closest Costco is thirty minutes away Oh well, the search continues... Thanks for the suggestions, slclick!

This is not a Canon thing, its a industry standard.

Canon complies with the industry standard Design rule for Camera File system. JEITA specification number CP-3461

it requires that the first digit of the file name be a leading underscore for files with a optional colorspace such as Adobe RGB.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_rule_for_Camera_File_system

neuroanatomist said:

Sounds like the modeling light (high speed pulse lasting 1 second). Could you have been (accidentally) pressing the DoF Preview button?

Click to expand...

You're 100% correct. I just tried to take the picture next to the lights without and with pressing the DoF Preview button. In the former case it behaves just fine, in the latter one it does exactly as I described before. Thanks so much for your help so much yet to learn…

Interesting article from December 20. Says smartphone selfie-shooters are not embracing the mirrorless bodies in the way it was hoped they would take to a somewhat smaller setup. Perhaps they will eventually leave off trying to make a "kinda smaller" camera that is too small for most serious shooting, but still too big for selfie-phone man, and keep making cameras that are the proper size for 2-handed shooting.

Also says the Big 3 will endure but the also-rans like Panasonic, Pentax, Olympus, and even Fuji don't seem like good bets going forward.

Personally I hope Fuji at least makes it. Original sensor tech and an elegant package.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2013/12/29/business/29reuters-japan-cameras.html?_r=0

Does not work on my camera ........ Pls specify more ....

I've often been impressed by how sharp my 100-400L is, whether on a 60D or the 7D I no longer have.
my 7D+100-400 would AF with extreme accuracy w-o having had to AFMA it.

I'm eager to see how the new Tammy compares in optical performance and AF as it'll be running on my Nikon bodies.

I just hope the 50mm with image stabilization comes out in January!!

Just a heads up out there if you still need a last-minute stocking stuffer ... LensAuthority has the biggest Bigma of them all, the Sigma 200-500/2.8, for just under $15,000. See the item under "Specials". Only one available, so better hurry! (PS: Anyone actually used one of these monsters before?)

mackguyver said:

One other related thought I've had - what if they made Metabones Speed Boosters for the EF mount - i.e. Hasselblad, Leaf, etc. to EF. If it works as well as the EF to m4/3, that would be pretty nuts.

Click to expand...

Here's to that!!! Excellent point!!!

Mr_Canuck said:

Well, I've made my decisions. I have ordered a 6D and a 40/2.8 STM (had to try it, for $129) which are waiting across the border for me to pick up next week. I picked up a nice used 70-200/f4 IS already but it's fairly useless so far without a body.

Click to expand...

Good choice. I think you'll like the shorty forty. It was by far the best lens you could find in its price class even at $199. Now, it's just a steal. I ditch my battery grip and use that lens when I want my giant DSLR to seem unobtrusive, and most of the time, I feel like I could get away with that lens, a 16mm prime, and my 70-300L if I had to limit my lenses for some reason.

Guess the Fuji's weight is probably too much at 330 g no lens yet. Guess eos m isn't that far behind at 260 g.