moreorless said:

Personally I'd say the most obvious gap is a wider prime, either something like a 30mm 1.4 ala Sigma or a 20-25mmish pancake to go with the SL-1/100D.

I have my doubts as to whether theres a market for a 50-150mm f/2.8, I think crop users tend to want the extra reach so will go for a FF 70-200mm f/2.8 instead, as I understand it going EF-S isn't going to effect the size/price of tele's much.

One zoom that I think might be interesting is something between your typical normal and UWA ranges. Tokina seem to be targeting this with there new 12-28mm, I think something like a 14-35mm could be very popular if the price wasn't too high.

Click to expand...

It is. Canon offers fast primes that are wide angle on APS-C ... EF14mm f2.8 $ 2100, also TS-E 17mm f4 $ 2300. I do not seem suitable to the purpose of the user 7D, for example. Tokina and Sigma has experienced major innovations in this area. Maybe a 15-45mm F2.8 costing $ 800?

dilbert said:

So is it a dust issue or an oil issue? The post is about dust and the link to Nikon provides advice for dealing with dust (which is a problem for all interchangeable lens cameras.) It may be that people who are having problems with oil don't recognise it for being such but it is wrong to think that Canon DSLRs do not have dust problems or to say that they do not.

Click to expand...

When did I state Canon sensors don't get dust on them? The link is talking about a known issue of the D600, not a 'problem for all interchangeable lens cameras' (having your car run out of gas is a problem for all cars, did your car maker issue a service advisory for your specific model telling you to put gas in the tank? : ).

The 'customer friendly' Nikon folks of whom you're so fond may be slow (they take weeks to service a lens), but they aren't stupid enough to call it oil. So, they state, "Some D600 users have reported the appearance of random spots on their images which is generally attributed to the natural accumulation of dust...It has come to our attention that, in some rare cases, they may be reflected noticeably in images and removal may be difficult using normal measures." Since 'normal measures' are usually sufficient for removing dust, they're clearly not talking about dust alone.

same answer as everyone else.

when you afma, you are correcting the alliance of manufacturing tolerances for both bodies and lenses. so each body can be within a certain limit and same with the lenses. if you do the math, you can find out what the exact number is for your lenses and both bodies.

VelocideX said:

I'm from Australia... Central America is not that close

Click to expand...

Touché. If you are going to make it a photo-focused honeymoon, take your good equipment and just be smart. At the resorts where I stay, its not uncommon to see tourists with 1-series bodies hanging around their necks, so you won't be the only person there with nice gear. My vote goes for the simple and effective combo of 24-70 plus 70-300. I agree a fill flash is a good idea.

VelocideX said:

The consensus seems to be to take a telephoto over the UWA, which is helpful to know.

Click to expand...

When visiting the jungle with waterfalls, caves, large Mayan complexes, and whatnot - there are ample opportunities to use the UWA. But if you want to pack light, just reply on the wide end of the 24-70.

bsbeamer said:

how can these new cameras shoot 1080/60p but the new T5i and 70D cannot? humm...

Click to expand...

DIGIC 6.

I'm hoping the EOS M/SL1 successor has it.

Haven't heard back from Focal about the focusing issue, but after extensive trial and error I landed at+9 which looks great at distances. And what a lens, I don't think I want to keep the 70-200, I would regret mounting it instead of the 200 every time, lol.

Anybody have a tip for a lens case? Which holds only the lens as snug as possible. I like the Lowepro lens cases.

7d 600d tok 11-16 sig 18-50 can 70-200, beachtek, sennheiser k6/me66

All natural lighting. Had softbox kit on hand but didn't need, reservations about using cabled mains lights on train platform.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

I occasionally find the site below invaluable for downloading free copies of old cameras flashes, and light meters.

Be sure to donate a few dollars to help keep it going.

http://butkus.org/chinon/index.html

Click to expand...

Thanks

The AF died in a 200/2.8L I owned once. I bought it new and it died a week later.

Long exposures at night, and uploading through FB! Unfortunately you can see the compression and detail loss from the JPEG the camera converts for your phone. :-\

Seen this a few times already...

paul13walnut5 said:

I personally like the dofp button. Prefer the position on my 3 (similar to the 1 series) but it is useful for me at times, especially if using off camera flash on a stand, gives me a visual preview of flash modelling.

Click to expand...

It also makes a handy flashlight in a pinch.

Meh said:

Well, there is either 1) something wrong with the lens, 2) something wrong with the body, or 3) something wrong with the particular combination of body + lens. Or you are just being punished by camera fairies for some offense you have caused them.

Click to expand...

I'm going with the camera fairies.

Thanks for the ideas. I do feel that I can understand some of the issues better now.

Pi said:

Terry Rogers said:

I read that modern full frame cameras 'expose' or 'reveal' the flaws in lesser lenses more than crop cameras. To me this doesn't make sense save a couple caveats.

Click to expand...

There is a good reason that it does not make sense to you because it is false, in the majority of the cases.

Click to expand...

+1

FF sensors will always produce a sharper image on a given EF lens. I would not believe everything I hear. Its true that there is more viginetting.

Jess_Ryan SM_READERS

Broadcast on Scottish Television in March

Don Haines said:

There are tripods where you can mount the column upside down and get your camera down to ground level

Click to expand...

Absolutely. That's one of the reasons I have long wanted a DSLR with an articulating screen. Thanks to using the M, I now want one with a touchscreen as well...

If this would be an advertising post than we would recommend one of these items.

rcarca said:

I went to the North coast of NI recently. A couple of photographs:


Giant's Causeway by RCARCARCA, on Flickr

EXIF: 5Dmkiii, 24-105mm @ 82mm, ISO320, 1/50 sec, f22

Click to expand...

Richard, so did you see these muscular bees that could open the stone hives? I mean the giant bees...

Fantastic pictures! And I am not saying that just because they are B&W...

Just a wee personal project for fun. Main camera EOS t3i, with an M used for a couple of shots (handheld interviews at end)

http://youtu.be/JAaGKMMTksU

cdnphotog said:

It might be worth your time to look into "stepup rings". These are threaded adapters which convert a large diameter filter to a smaller diameter lens. So if you had two lenses which take filter size 58mm and 67mm, you would buy the larger size filter and a 58 to 67 stepup ring. Now one filter can be used with both lenses. Not as convenient as two separate filters but certainly less costly since you seem to be just starting out with a SLR system. Good luck.

Click to expand...

Not a big fan of step-up rings, at least not for the "UV Haze" type filter that resides on a lot of lenses. Part of its "job" is to protect the front element from impact and damage. I recently dropped my 70-200 f/4 IS in an asphalt parking lot. The B+W 010 filter shattered but stayed in the ring. I was able to get it off and there was no damage to the front element. There was some internal damage but it would have been worse had the front element shattered instead of a filter.

I suspect I could have had a 67 -> 77 step-up ring and a UV Haze on it. This way I could use the 77mm circular polarizer that I had when I bought the lens, but the impact might well have damaged the ring and left it, at best, stuck in the threads.

I understand the appeal of using step up rings, but the OP is going to have two lenses. If you believe the results at http://www.lenstip.com/113.4-article-UV_filters_test_Description_of_the_results_and_summary.html the Hoya UV filters beat B+W slightly. A Hoya HMC UV filter is $19 at Amazon right now. A 52 -> 58 step up ring is $4. And then he might want a replacement cap. I'd buy two filters. Consider the difference to be full time insurance on both lenses.

Some caveats. This is a new user (based on this and his other threads) and I'm speaking only of protection/UV filters. If he wants to use a polarizer or something more expensive his decision might be different, but by then so might his lens choices.

Kata minibee 111-UL is one of those bags that never disappointed me ever in my quest for good bags. The build and strength of these bags are remarkable. The most important quality of a bag is that it must be able to handle stress in rough conditions. This bag stands out in that department very nicely. During my Auckland tour at New Zealand, I purchased a bag from a local online store and there I found another great piece of it. I guess I am being lucky to get quality materials delivered everywhere. Here is their website : http://www.wiseguys.co.nz/computers/laptop-accessories/laptop-bags
Take a look.

Just checked for a rental option of the 200-400mm in Switzerland, but it seems that no online rental service has that one
I guess I would take either the 70-200 f2.8 with a TC, or the 100-400 without one. There is one thing that I haven't seen mentioned yet and that is dust while changing TC/lens. I have no idea how it really is on a safari, but my belly tells me that there might be quite some dust/sand in the air which would be bad to exchange the TC/lens.
If that really is the case, then I really would go with the 100-400, as it is probably most of the time enough reach.
There are many online rental services in Switzerland that offer the 100-400 and also the 70-200 f2.8 IS though, so you might want to rent instead of buy it.

EOBeav said:

dolina said:

My hope is that Canon will speed up the 135 and add IS to it.

Click to expand...

It's a good thing I've already got mine. Any additions like this will add another grand to the price tag. I really don't know what they could do that would improve upon this lens.

Click to expand...

135/1.8 or 1.4 with 4 stops of IS?

Vossie said:

If your company name would be Digital Professional, your acronym would be DP, which can make some people believe you're into certain genres of photography only

Click to expand...

Being a DP Photographer would be a very a small market. I'd suggest promoting video skills as well.

Anyways, back to the OP. If her business is doing well, I wouldn't stress about it. If she's happy with the name, then great! In fact, I think I'd be more inclined to use a company called "BS Photography". I'd imagine they'd have a sense of humor and would be good to deal with.

If her business isn't doing well, you could diplomatically suggest a change of name and image as part of a complete re-branding exercise. That way, she wouldn't feel like a idiot (or worse, hate you for pointing out her flaws) when you point out that she's chosen a BS name. People develop a strong attachment to their business name and don't like being told they've chosen a bad one...tread gently.