Unless you LOVE the 14mm FOV, which is noticeably wider than the 16mm, or shoot detailed photos for huge prints, the 16-35 is about 1000x more versatile. It's bigger, not as sharp, mostly in the extreme corners on FF, has less CA, but takes filters, doesn't have fragile glass dome, zooms, and can be used to shoot just about everything from landscapes to portraits to architecture.

I'd suggest renting the 14mm if you really think you need it. I was underwhelmed by it, but others (who love 14mm) consider it irreplaceable. I'll trade 2mm, and a bit less corner sharpness for a lens that I can use for tons of stuff.

Of course, the dark horses in this are the Nikon 14-24 (w/Novoflex adapter) or the Zeiss 15mm, but you really have to love wide shooting to consider those...

There are also other issues related to fast lenses and bayer sensors, CA for example: http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/6147351879/#

The one lens that has been quickly gaining in popularity for both video and stills and also as an excellent walk around lens is the 18-135 IS STM. Yes, it's variable aperture (so is the 15-85), but other than that it may be the only video lens you will ever want. It's $549 but you can get it for less used.

AvTvM said:

fxk said:

They *might* just sell one. The rest of us will settle for a bit less and save a dime or two. :-\

Click to expand...

don't think so. Sony was apparently able to sell some RX-1 cameras @ 3k ... and the RX-1 is a far cry from the hi-end mirrorless system camera described above, which I would love to buy from Canon.

Of course one can spend less money - like USD 299,- - and settle for even less ... e.g. the current Canon EOS-M.

Yes, the current EOS-M may be a very good choice for many. But for me it is simply no option, irrespective of its (deservedly low) price. The older I get, the more I try to avoid spending money and time on gear which evidently is inadequate or unsuitable for what and how I want to work. One of my knock-out criteria for a camera is a "look-through" viewfinder. I only ever take pictures squinting at an LCD on a device I have to hold with stretched out hands if I have absolutely no other choice in view of a really appealing photo opportunity.

Therefore, neither the current EOS-M or an ever so slightly improved EOS-M II [e.g. 70D sensor w/ dual-pixel-AF] without an excellent viewfinder are of any interest to me. I will eventually replace my bulky APS-C DSLR plus lenses with a smaller, lighter AND more capable mirrorless camera system with 35mm "FF" sensor. But only once I can do so without any sacrifices ... except the change-over from a reasonably good, but not top-notch optical viewfinder [7D] to a truly excellent electronic (or hybrid) viewfinder.

This is my highly subjective view on the "state of mirrorless affairs" ... and I know, I'm not the only one.

Click to expand...

On a decent (or superior) (E)VF, we can agree. Arm's length is neither natural nor condusive to good good, fast, steady, sharp photography. :
As far as a sensor, APC-C is wholly adequate (for me). With the various rectilinear ultra-wides available, FF is not nearly the issue it was for me. Assuming the current M lenses DO have an image circle to cover FF (which l'll bet they do not), I would not cough up a $1K premium for a FF sensor, though some premium for the larger sensor (yes, very, very desirable) would be considered, now that I'm invested. Of course, if the image circle only covers APS-C, then the FF point is moot.
At the current $300 price point, the M was an obvious choice for my M/C travel camera - space is at a premium. At the original price, the current camera was not even on the radar.

My take is the M photographing experience is less than satisfying - quite frustrating in many respects, but it does produce some nice images, due to decent optics and a good sensor. Far better fro me than a P&S.

I can say after a very short time of using the current M, the screen only view operation is wholly inadequate, and the always-active touch-screen is a real PITA, especially on such a small body. Like the dial lock on the DSLRs, there needs to be a screen-lock. They need to make use of the existing buttons and dials better (make them able to access more functions).

One addition I purchased and makes the body so much more stable is a Fotodiox Pro Thumb Grip http://fotodioxpro.com/index.php/fotodiox-pro-thumb-grip-for-mirrorless-digital-cameras-type-b-black.html. The accessory adds greatly to the stability of the camera, but unfortunately eats up the hot shoe, and makes the ON switch nearly inaccessible.

On my wish list would be the means (a second shoe? add grip to the body? (and PLEASE don't cover it in plastic!!)) to use this type of grip with an EVF AND flash.

And ask to keep it ~$1K... (we all can wish...)

In the meantime, I'll make lemonade.

sandymandy said:

Rienzphotoz said:

Mt Spokane Photography & sandymandy,

Those pics of the bread loaves look very yummy ... they truly have the "MMMMMMMMMMMmmmmmmmm" factor.

Click to expand...

Thank you! Altough my bread is more arabian than german

Click to expand...

Nice photos and i love BW. Still, I think Macros seem more interesting in color. BW macros work well with really closeup abstract objects e.g.

http://pelfusion.com/media/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/macro_photography_25.jpg

mrsfotografie said:

This is nonsense, check this out and tell him to get a 300D instead!

http://www.saratogaskies.com/articles/pattern-noise/

Click to expand...

aj1575 said:

I completly disagree with the noise in the 350D; the 350D is quite awfull when it comes to noise; but hey, this is an 8year old design. Otherwise I have no quality issues. The eyepiece fell of twice, so I needed replacement. The grip starts to loose its texture, and the screen has scratches (so it is even harder now to really see something); but everything is still working, and it reminds me that the most important part is the photographer. I have to work a little harder, and I have to understand a little better what I'm doing than the other guys with new gear.
My conclusion is, that the equipment is not the most important thing; and yes, upgrading from one consumer camera to the next is a waste of money; wait a few years so that there is a bigger improvement. Upgrading to a semipro or pro camera is also a waste of money, when you are not using the camera often.
The real luxury is not having a 1Dx with 10 L-lenses, no it is having time to make good photgraphs whit any decent camera.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry guys I meant to say he had a 300D (orig Rebel). My mistake.

Weird, very weird, and I know I'm in the minority. But hey if this person can make a few bucks teaching others how to use their iphones more power to them.

Camera phones are great for snaps and capturing simple images, period. I believe its a trend (that's not going away) and largely generational. To me its no different than listening to great music. Many people are satisfied with their ipod and earbud speakers. Myself, I run my music through a HQ multi-channel audio system. Sure, sometimes I have to settle for portable audio and sometimes I have to settle for my P&S camera, and sometimes I have to pull out my phone.

This describes my use of a phone camera very well:

captainkanji said:

My iPhone definitely has it's uses. It's great when I'm at work and I need to take a quick photo of a machine part and can text it to my boss on the spot. It will never replace my beloved 6D.

Click to expand...

Marsu42 said:

neuroanatomist said:

If you mean 1:1 macro, the 1.6x effect on DoF doesn't apply.

Click to expand...

I meant macro as in "very close up" like in the "macro" focus limiter range of the 100L - I very seldom really shoot at max. mag 1:1, too short working distance and too long exposure times for handheld or anything that moves. But for "just" close up macro the shallow dof is also a problem, so I was wondering if the same effect as in other shooting distances apply (i.e. higher iso capability gets nullified by the need for smaller apertures).

Click to expand...

As I understand the explanation of our friend Neuro, to fill the frame with a pair of rings (maybe 0.5X magnification), full frame oblige you get closer to the object, and use more closed diaphragm to match the depth of field of APS-C.

Dear Robboesan
I have only EF 135 MM. F/ 2.0 L USM = Great Lens and super sharp one, and do not know about canon 135 Softfocus. But Please read the Review at below

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-135mm-f-2.8-with-Softfocus-Lens-Review.aspx

Good Luck
Surapon

About all you can do is to try resetting the camera to its default settings, just for the remote possibility that settings are a issue. If you can establish that its a shutter button contact issue, they can be cleaned by a do it yourself method, or perhaps by a local repair dealer for a low price.

Otherwise, wait until its bad enough that the issue is repeatable and Canon can possibly fix it.

Be aware that the camera is likely not worth any major repair bill, since you can sell it for parts for about $125-$150, and a working one might bring $250 - $350. So a $200 repair bill is about the max you'd want to deal with.

You can buy a refurb T3 body with 1 year warranty for $359, and if you use the CLP and trade in a old broken 35mm slr or powershot, you can get up to 20% off the body, and sometimes extend that discount to refurb lenses that you buy with it. They charge sales tax, but canon must also charge it on repairs.

Regarding remote shutter release or timer remote, you could install Magic Lantern and have that capability without additional hardware.

fxk said:

UrbanVoyeur said:

Any word on:
- Flip up screen
- WiFi
- GPS
- Built in flash

Click to expand...

Current M camera can utilize Eye Fi cards, so Wi Fi is solved. :-*

Click to expand...

Eye Fi just gives you file transfer... many like WiFi for the remote control abilities.

CarlTN said:

If it just wouldn't avoid the center point with all points active as often as it does, it would do better.

Click to expand...

This sounds really annoying, maybe you should try posting this in the official Canon forum, bugging Canon about the 5d3 af assist beam bug worked and they released a fw update.

Unfortunately Magic Lantern won't be able to help here, Canon removed some firmware hooks from the 5d2->6d as they obviously really intended to "distinguish" (nice phrasing...) the 6d from other models designed for af tracking.

awinphoto said:

In studio, my lens of choice is the 100mm L BUT due to lack of space, I often swap out for shorter lenses and use this lens for newborns, or head/shoulders or 2/3 view. I use the 5d3 and so I do not focus/recompose, but my hit rate is usually very high... I may get the occasional 10% every now and then that are just a hair off. I also check AFMA every 1-2 weeks to ensure it's dead on. Since the 60D doesn't have AFMA, could that be a factor? I do notice however that if I get a nice tight headshot or head and shoulders or whatever, focus is extremely reliable, but if i back up to the point where I'm doing a 2/3 or full body shot, focus maybe drops to that 10% miss rate give or take...

Click to expand...

Agree. Without AFMA, you're asking for trouble. One of the many reasons I never liked the 60D. My 50D had AFMA and it worked great, so the 60D was not an upgrade in my opinion (other than its video ability...which most 60D owners seem to use often, to good effect). I upgraded from the 50D after 4 years, to the 6D. I absolutely loved the 50D, but it does not really compare favorably in any way to the 6D. On occasion it could probably focus my 135 f/2 lens a bit faster than the 6D does, but for all other lenses I've used on both, the 50D's AF was not quite as good. Both bodies needed AFMA for my 135L...the 50D's was "+2" and the 6D's is "+3". This 135L can wayyy out-resolve the resolution of the 6D (and could go past the 50D's too). But with the 6D it's still more than enough resolution considering the wider FOV and a few extra MP in the tradeoff. The 100L is known to AF slower than the average lens, but for portrait photography I suppose that's less of a factor.

petach said:

petach said:

Canon 6D +17-40L


Under a Cloud in Maldon by petach123 (Peter Tachauer), on Flickr

Click to expand...

cropped landscape shaped without losing sky drama. Think it looks better. Cheers

Pete

Click to expand...

I think it does too.

Chiaroscuro is great but I want to see into the shadows. Just a little bit of separation between figure and ground gives more depth to the image. Rembrandt uses dark shadows but they have detail. More detail in the highlights helps as well.

RGF said:

mackguyver said:

Anything that won't burn holes in my gear (like the Better Beamer) would be nice

Click to expand...

If the device will focus the light from the flash to the subject it will also focus the light from the sun to your flash

Sorry, unless you have a 1 way mirror, you risk focusing the sun.

Of course you could always make sure that you are focussed in the direction of the sun.

Click to expand...

Yep, I'm sure this will be a problem with any tool that magnifies light (damn you physics!), but I'd rather fry my crappy old 430EX than my 300 2.8 II or 5DIII!

AJ said:

helpful said:

Nailed both aperture and ISO on my first guess... f/4 and 12,800.

Of course, there's just my word for that fact, but I felt pretty good so I posted this worthless post anyway. Fun challenge!

Click to expand...

Those settings sound about right to me.

To the OP: be careful with the 50/1.2 Narrow DOF can be nice for video with actors who move carefully with pre-planned motion. But in the chaos of a pub crawl, you can end up with nothing but blur, giving your viewers a headache. I'd be on the safe side - stop down.

Click to expand...

I will. But I figure at least I'll have it there if I want to use it.

Most of what I found that was really nice and bright was using f/2.8....so, guessing 2.8 and below will help me out of the most dark of the places we'll be hitting.

Tonight, Ihave to go through that footage and see what it looks like.

I shot some of it with Marvels Cine style, some with Canon Neutral, and some with Canon Standard.

I'm still not an expert with color correction, although I'm getting better....I'm needing to decide if I want to risk it with shooting it all in a very "flat" style and correcting it all in post, or taking what I can get out of the camera.

i'm leaning towards flat style...since if I mess up in the confusion, forget to set a good custom WB...I'll have slightly more leeway in POST to correct any problems that I'm sure I'll run into with all that will be going on.

Not to mention, it now looks like a very high chance of rain storms in the area, so that's one more thing I"ll have to worry about. I guess I'll wrap my camera bag in a large trash bag to protect from rain while walking between venues, and carry an umbrella in addition to my sling bag (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007234626/ref=oh_details_o09_s01_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 ) and monopod.

Ugh...

This is going to prove to be very interesting....

cayenne

Rienzphotoz said:

Hi chas113, I believe you've already made up your mind to go with the body upgrade ... 5D MK III is a fantastic camera I'm sure you will see a far much snappier performance in the way your f/4 lenses work on 5D MK III over the 5D MK II.
5D MK III is my first full frame DSLR as I upgraded it from 7D ... but I took a different approach i.e. upgraded my f/4 lenses to f/2.8 lenses before upgrading to 5D MK III ... no "scientific" approach, other than wanting to invest in f/2.8 zooms (16-35, 24-70 & 70-200) before I made the body upgrade, it took several years but I eventually did it.
Good luck with your upgrade ... may it serve you well.

Click to expand...

Good to know, thanks. It's nice to have confirmation from multiple sources. My approach to kit building was "slow zooms/fast primes that are lightweight and sharp enough"...but with the 24-70 II coming down in size and weight....it's very tempting. For me, my 17-40 and 24-105 serve me well enough, but there are times when the AF of the 5DII just is so frustrating. Hence my original post. I don't shoot a lot of thin DOF and everyone here has pretty much confirmed upgrading body would be more worthwhile. If the 16-50 f/4 IS comes to pass — (and is great!) — I could see it replacing both zooms. That and my 70-300L and I'd be set.

duydaniel said:

what make you think the 7D2 will kick ass?

Click to expand...

If Canon wants to introduce new tech, they'll do it in their premium (crop) camera and set an according price tag - also some Canon top exec recently stated that they want the 7d2 to be make a big splash.

Concerning the thread: Obviously people have lost faith that the long-time vaporware products like 50/1.4 + 50/1.2 mk2, 35/1.4 mk2 could actually appear :-o ...

... but my money for a 2013 release is on a new 430ex2 successor with rt.

Hi Neuro, I had a chuckle. :

My question is can the "extra DR" of a Nikon really enable images taken in the maner with which they use their cameras really enable such image enhancement?
Half the time the camera body is still moving when they hit the button!
Also has anyone else noticed the way Horatio leaves most of the shots by falling out of the frame?

Where my workshop for my classic cars is three of us were burgled, our CSI arrived with a camera, a bloody great tripod, I mean built like the surveyors put their theodolites on! and a flash on a cord he also took time to frame things accurately, my finger is in many of the pics he took holding the L shape measure on the door for scale and also holding a pencil to point to tool damage on the locks in situe, they then asked for the locks which were damaged beyond use so we let them take them.
No fingerprints were retrievable due to the surface they were on and though they had a suspect no arrest was made.
I wish we could have got some of the staff from tv, they could have got the prints, and the DNA in the prints and found the *#%€$¥*# with the loot before he disposed of it! ;D

Thankfully it was not my home as I think the feeling of intrusion would have been terrible having seen what it did to an old work colleague when his home was done.

Cheers Graham.

jthomson said:

neuroanatomist said:

jthomson said:

Isn't it obvious?

The higher dynamic range of the Nikon camera's is what enables them to pull so much detail when they enhance their pictures. :

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Well I thought it was funny.
The magic they can do with photographs is only surpassed by the speed with which they can do DNA tests.

Click to expand...

While an X100s would be a valuable addition to any photographers camera bag, you've currently got a brilliant second body in your 7D. But you'd miss shots with the X100s that you'd pick up with the 7D. You're talking about a downgrade.

As a suggestion, maybe you need to take a look at the way you carry your cameras. Two bodies with standard neck straps are seriously clumsy and downright painful for a full days shoot. A move to Spider-Pro holster system and more recently the CarrySpeed sling strap system have for me completely transformed the experience of working with multiple bodies. I use both systems together for some jobs. On Saturday I had a long all-day shoot where I was on my feet all day. I had the 5D3 with 16-35f/2.8II and 1D4 with 70-200 f/2.8isII on a CarrySpeed Double Pro and a third, much lighter body, a tiny SL-1/100D with 24 f/1.4II clipped onto the SpiderPro belt. Each camera was instantly ready for action and I my body didn't hurt at the end of the long day. With just neck straps, a shoot with last Saturday's flexibility and comfort just wouldn't have happened, and I was able to deliver a much stronger result for my client.

FWIW, the pin on the CarrySpeed F1 plate is 100% compatible and interchangable with the SpiderPro holster.

-pw

My advice-

Take your camera to the camera store and have them bring every 70-200 2.8 II out and try them in the store until you get happy. Don't leave until you get one.

Another lesson learned, if it ain't broke (as we say in TX), don't fix it. That old lens is looking better.

Anyway, picking an argument with Canon ( I had one originally with my copy about a year and a half ago) will be fruitless. To save you all the middle steps, here is what will happen. You will send it in at your expense a few times (shipping plus insurance), and have to be without the lens. Finally, after many letters and calls to low to mid level service reps, they will send you a refurb in exchange for your new lens. Save the ulcer. Some battles you just won't win.

Good luck with the lens

Aren't you the Lambo/Maserati poster?

Viggo said:

candyman said:

I bought mine last year in october. I do not see this halo effect.
I would say that this person got a defective lens. Recommendation is to bring it back and exchange it.

Click to expand...

..only that he has done that 3(!) times already...

Click to expand...