Using my 5d3 I seem to find the noise is higher than i would like or expect. I have seen others post that they have low noise with ISO as high as 10,000. Honestly, it doesn't look a whole lot better than my 20D. I am shooting with low ISO, anywhere from 100-400 in raw format. Importing with LR as DNG in case that is important. Any thoughts?
Thanks.

Here's a few snakes and lizard photos I took recently. Canon T2i and Tamron 90mm.

I have both for my 6D. However, if I were shooting crop, I'd pick up a Sigma 30, and sell the 50/1.4 to fund a 40STM.

I use the 50mm f/1.4 when I need the low light for events where I can't use a flash, or I want extreme depth of field.

However, at almost every other point, I've got the 40STM on my camera. I like the slightly wider focal length. It's also incredibly sharp. If I'm shooting an event with a strobe, I'll go with the 40STM over the 50mm every time, set it to f/4 and you've got IMO the right amount of DOF, and super sharp images.

I also like that if I want to travel light and without my camera bag, I can throw the 40STM in a pocket, and keep the 70-200 f/4L IS on the 6D. It covers most of the range I need, and I don't need to worry about bag checks or the weight.

Also, another nice bonus is that the 40STM is cheap enough I don't even bother with a lens cap for it, so it's always ready.

Finally, despite thinking that us Canon owners are the only ones with a "body cap" lens, Olympus M43 users have an even smaller option! http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/893289-REG/Olympus_v325010bw000_15mm_F8_0_Lens_On.html Only downside is it's a fixed f/8 with the focus set permanently hyperfocal.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

There is some evidence that the new bodies like the 5D MK III focus more accurately and consistently, at least with the center point (with some of the newer lenses). Certainly, FoCal users find it more consistent than a 5D MK II.
No one knows exactly why that is.
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/07/autofocus-reality-part-ii-1-vs-2-and-old-vs-new

Click to expand...

I think I read somwhere there's a new focusing mechanism in the new bodies that also requires support from the lens side. And relatively new lenses already have this thing implemented. Can someone confirm that?

Worc22 said:

I live in Vancouver and would like to purchase the above. I would like to know:

1) Where is the cheapest/best place in Canada to buy this camera?

Click to expand...

PhotoPrice is your friend:
http://www.photoprice.ca/product/03868/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-price.html

It compares all the prices of US stores to Canadian stores including tax & shipping. (Make sure you set your province to 'BC')

Looks like cheapest for warranty (non grey market) is Adorama shipped to Vancouver for $3380.05 incl tax.

Cheapest Canadian is Aden shipped to Vancouver for $3665.03 incl tax.

Worc22 said:

2) Is it better to drive across the border and purchase from the USA (eg have B&H deliver to a UPS in Washington state to pick up?

Click to expand...

If you plan on declaring it at the border -- you will have to pay tax anyway. The only thing you save is about $20 of shipping as shipping to the US is free and shipping to Canada is about $20.

If you don't plan on declaring it at the border you'll save the HST.

adhocphotographer said:

i think she charged it too, as it was not put in the box as i had put it! all is good!

Click to expand...

Truly a top notch wife. Reminds me of mine.

Hey dude.

I had exactly the same problem.

It worked the first few times, and then it stopped randomly!
I haven't figured out how to bring it back.

I've twiddled with the Live view settings, in particular the
- AF mode
- Silent mode
options, to no effect.

I just set the AF mode to quick, or something, and I can tap on the screen on a large rectangle (like the LV one) and then take a photo and it will AF first before shooting.

If you find a way to get it to work again it would be good!

It worked on a Sony Xperia Ray with 2.3.4 and then it stopped working. Then I upgraded to 4.0.1 and it still didn't work.

On an unrelated note, have you manged to get the content sharing from the camera working? To like, upload directly from the camera to facebook et al?. The manual says I have to register the camera with canon something gateway but then the software won't talk to the camera to push some setting cos some certificate is invalid.

*shrug.

Maybe it will work eventually, but, yeah, that's my AF button work around.

Some fun features of the app some people don't know, cos it's not obvious!
- If you tap the picture it rotates it.
- The AF button can be slid up to the take a photo button.
- You can select several to save(to phone)/delete by pressing the weird looking button bottom left.

And it looks like we are still in for a wait......


http://forum.photozone.de/index.php?/topic/2874-lens-tests-on-the-horizon/

wickidwombat said:

babiesphotos.ca said:

I have 5d Mark III, Tamron 28-75 2.8, and few primes 40 2.8, 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 135 2.0, and finally 17-40 that I got recently (used) and seem to rarely use. I'm mostly taking pictures indoors, fast moving twins, trying mostly without flash, as I can't bounce effectively when subject is very close (jumping on me).

I use 28-75 quite a bit, always on 2.8, unless one of the primes is on (love shallow depth of field). I find that I often want just a bit more than 75mm to not change position and capture moment.

So I find myself constantly drawn to 24-105, though I rented it when I had 5D mark II, and I wasn't crazy about it, 4.0 felt slow inside of my house. But, I feel like it would be such practical lens because of range, set and forget, that I'm thinking of selling 17-40 and buying 24-105. But then, I can spend few more bucks and get Tamron 24-70 2.8. Currently, in Toronto, it would be less than 50% to jump from craigslist 24-105 to retail Tamron 24-70 2.8.

Am I just going crazy because I want to spend some money? Or is there real benefit to getting one of these 2...

Click to expand...

with the 5Dmk3 the absolute best lens for shooting your kids in what you describe is the 40mm f2.8 which you have

its very light and short so easy to shoot one handed even indoors your 5dmk3 is good at high iso to keep shutter at 1/80 or 1/100 sec its vey sharp at f2.8 it focuses accurately and it has a 250mm minimum focus distance so very easy to shoot if the kids are right on top of you.
Any of the zooms with the longer barrels are going to be alot more cumbersome to engage with the kids especially if youa re playing with them as you pretty much have to use both hands with the 5D3 and 40mm is very easy to shoot 1 handed

Click to expand...

Yes, you're right, I've already discovered this, 40mm is very useful Many wonderful pictures from seemingly unremarkable lens. It gets right in there, easy to shot one handed, easy to aim blindly, and somewhat wide angle helps with aiming errors. Gets less attention from kids, so it buys me another minute or two before they notice and attack camera (gimme, gimme) ...

BTW, I thank everyone for thoughtful answers.

I haven't made any decision, but I'm really blown away with quality of responses and I appreciate differing viewpoints, as they help me reexamine my thinking. I will continue experimenting before making any decision...

Gino said:

If you're looking for a messenger style bag, then you might like the Tamrac Rally Series. I think they are a good looking bag and they offer various sizes, plus the bags are well built and they have good padding.

http://www.tamrac.com/f_rally.htm

I have the ThinkTank Retrospective 20 and the Tamrac Rally 6. What I like about the Tamrac Rally series is the bags weight is 1-1.5 lbs. less than the same size bag in the Retrospective series.

When I'm walking around all day, the ThinkTank bags can start to feel heavy, so I now generally use the Tamrac Rally because it is much lighter.

Click to expand...

cool and a 1/4 of the price i just ordered a rally5 to see how it goes

No.
Lenses, not bodies are where your investment should be. Saving $500 on a body is peanuts compared to $!0K - $20K in lenses. How many would want to invest that much in lenses from a company that may possibly go away in the coming year or next.

Niterider said:

I'm pretty sure Magic Lantern does HDR video through varying the ISO. It alternates between two ISO's every other frame.

I've never tried it, I just always see it on the ML menu and wondered what kind of effect it would have on video.

Click to expand...

I mean every frame concurrently and using pixel offset to produce 3 exposures which are blended so every frame is a combo of 3 exposures extending the DR. I dont think it can be done on existing bodies because I think the readout hardwar would need to be different to be able to do this but with processing power increasing i think its something we could see in an upcoming camera

These look so good, so long after they were taken, because they were shot in Kodachrome, the most archivally long-lasting of all the practical color films of the time (and, even much, much later as well). It is essentially a three-layer B&W film, each layer of which later has attached to it a very stable primary color dye in processing - a very complex and expensive process that is just recently, unfortunately, unavailable and lost to the pages of history. Those photographers did a wonderful job with what they had - probably 4x5 Speed Graphic types of cameras and horribly "slow" film (i.e., ISO 10?) - by shooting subjects whose movement they could tightly control and either shooting the "type A"emulsion with big cumbersome tungsten floods or the daylight emulsion with flash - not electronic flash, but, most likely, very large, multiple flashbulbs; this last is quite hard to do well without a lot of trial and error, so they had to be very experienced to properly get what they got. Their results were sometimes stilted, compared to the 35mm B&W negative shooters of the time, but they did the best they could and sometimes even overcame that limitation as well.

As to the image manipulation in scanning or in actual post, I actually see very little in the examples shown here. It looks like the images were lightened just a bit from whatever the darker examples represent, plus maybe just a very tiny goose in saturation - overall not much of anything.

We should all be very grateful for the tools we now have and the relative ease it affords in our work. Our predecessors had to bust their humps, generally have to deal with many more technical issues than we do, and work through very cumbersome limitations to achieve what they did. Finally, it's just so much fun to see what these men and women tried to show us of our country and our people in a time not too long ago.

I loaned my 300 f4 IS to a girl at a soccer game (a friend, but I was working on more) I mentioned that it was a prime lens. After about an hour she came over with a dreadful look and told me she was really sorry, she'd broken it. How? I said. "It won't zoom anymore" she explained. I explained the prime thing again and she admitted she had no idea what that meant or that there were any lenses that would not zoom. She swore it was zooming when I first gave it to her.

LetTheRightLensIn said:

Atonegro said:

I once dropped a 24-105L, but Canon could not fix it. :-((
They said it was terminal, it has passed away, as dead as a dodo....
It fell about 170 meter into the rocks, all I had was a little pile of glass and a few rings.

Click to expand...

so much for L build 'quality'!

Click to expand...

I phoned the shop to ask if there was any warranty if I had dropped the lens, and the man said ; Bring it along, we will replace the damaged parts and re-align and recallibrate the lens.

When I came the eyes of the man went twice as big....he was impressed....

Marine03 said:

as a 450D user I'm on the hunt for a good deal on a 5d2 or save for 6D or 5d3

however I always see people selling bodies with 5-25K clicks attempting to sell the 5d2 for 1500 or even more, because they spent 2 grand on it a year ago.

I dont think I'd pay more than 1400 with body and kit lens. Is everyone crazy hoping we don't know what the market looks like or just hoping to find a sap.

Click to expand...

Considering you can buy a 6D with 24-105 kit for $2,499 and sell the lens for $800 with no questions asked. That makes the 6D a $1,699 camera.
For the extra $200 you're getting way better AF, and better ISO performance. You also gain the "silent shooting" which is great for events.

The 5D2 for that price makes no sense at all. I'm sure it's people who factored in "depreciation" when the bought the camera, and planned to get "x" amount when the sold it. The onslaught of the 6D was probably unexpected. Maybe these sellers thought, I paid $2400 new, 25% depreciation in year one takes you to $1800, and 20% depreciation in year two takes you to $1440.A perfect example is lensrentals.com, they'll have a rental price based on what they paid for the lens new, and then what they expect to get when they sell it used. That's why occasionally you'll see gear pop up used on LR.com for the same as the current new price. I.e. they listed the 50mm/1.4 for $300 last week, which is the same as what B&H was asking new. Strangely enough it sold, but the point is that LR.com likely doesn't want to take a write down on what they expected used gear to be worth.

neuroanatomist said:

ReeneP said:

550$ 5d mark 1 with 25630 expo, 3 batteries and etc, 3 month warranty without papers, is it legit? (new body)

Click to expand...

A 'new' 5D with warranty? I'm skeptical.

Click to expand...

I agree, but it is possible. B&H sells their used equipment with a 3 month warranty... ditto with Adorama. It is also possible someone bought one 2.5 years ago and purchased a 3 year service/warranty plan... and they are just at the tail end of it now.

We used to be exceptionally well served by camera shops in Cambridge UK but we will be down to two shops (the same company) now that Jessops was closed last night. The local Jessops was a good shop with some good staff who knew their job, and the company was quite competitive in Canon gear, considering that the bodies all have Canon warranties. It's very sad for the staff that they are losing out. The insurance is a racket on low end goods because the premiums are so high relative to value. But, they maxed out at £205 for two years cover, which is a great deal on higher end goods, working out at under 2% per annum for all accidental damage and including all repairs for sensor cleaning etc. Fortunately, the insurance comes from a sound insurance company.

I had this happen on a old 70-200L f4 non IS lens. It started getting white. I cleaned it and then put on some of this stuff:

http://www.amazon.com/303-Products-303-32-Aerospace-Protectant/dp/B004YJQE0S/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1357977841&sr=8-3&keywords=303

Worked like a charm, looks like new. Like the other person said, it's just the rubber drying out.

EquivalentTrade said:

Has anyone upgraded directly from the 7D to the 5D2? How does it do in terms of low-light performance? Is it worth the jump?

Click to expand...

I've made that upgrade and low-light ISO and IQ in general is much better. It sounds like you desire the wider field of view you'll get, so the main other thing you may miss is a good spread of AF points. Controls are somewhat different to the 7D (which is better in that regard) but not really enough to be a major concern. Personally I did later sell both and get a 5D3, but only because I also shoot a bit of action type stuff, for portrait style photography I think the 5D2 is much better than the 7D especially in low light.

As Hobby Shooter said I wouldn't dismiss the 6D without trying it. I haven't myself but assume being a later camera the menus and controls are closer to a 7D. I don't know what real-world performance / noise is like but the 6D goes to higher ISO as well. Not sure how it compares to a 5D3 but my 5D3 is noticably better at high ISO than a 5D2.

pwp said:

crasher8 said:

1400 USD for 'competent' is a tough pill to swallow. I think the 17-40 is priced right.(699)You get what you pay for with that one but as for the 16-35, the one stop in light and not very much and according to others, no better in the corners for twice as much?

Click to expand...

If you were to track the 16-35 f/2.8II price since launch, you'll see that it dropped a LOT. Historically, I'd regard $1400 as a great buy for this lens. Agreed, the 17-40 f/4 is seriously good value at $699, and it will match the IQ of the 16-35 f/2.8II once past f/5.6. If it's important for your shooting style to have the option of shooting commercial quality files at f/2.8, then the 16-35 f/2.8II will be your UWA zoom of choice.

Back on topic, I don't think the 16-35 lens needs IS. It's already bulky in the weight and size department and IS would necessitate a chunky price hike. Personally I shoot with the 17-40 f/4 as my UWA work generally needs f/8-f/11. Any update on the 16-35 should be directed at the difficult to solve IQ issues.

The lens that will grab my attention is the 14-24 f/2.8, Canon's current daydream special.

-PW

Click to expand...

I personally feel the 16-35 II is significantly better than the 17-40 the extra stop is big if you use it

Hi, just speak to him on your first day. All these questions can be answere within 10min. Don't worry.

Be polite, listen carefully, take notes when necessary and ask for clarification in case something is unclear to you.

You probably got the job because of your abilities and current knowledge. So all you need to know in this new position they will teach you, like in any other job.

Here he is in his new truck at the Spokane County Fair last fall. (Canon 5D MK II with 70-200mm f/4L IS)

I borrowed a 50 f/1.4 from a friend when I went on vacation over the weekend, and I think I probably used it about 50% of the time along with my 24-105. Whenever I knew I was going to be indoors or in a more low-light area I took the 50, and it made a huge difference. Though, I feel the 24-105 is the best lens for walking around, especially when you don't know what you'll be shooting. Given that I used the 50 so much, I am now leaning towards getting a 50L. If this is going to be one of my primary lenses, I would most definitely want the best quality. All of the advice has been extremely helpful!

Thanks, privatebydesign, for your pictures and post about using the 1DSMkIII at higher ISOs. It's been my experience that the camera gets rather noisy at anything above 800 or so, but your suggest of shooting at 1600, then underexposing two stops and pulling the details out in post-processing is certainly worth another look.
Despite having the same sensor, I agree that the 5DMkII is better for these things, but I find the build quality far too fragile for the way I nearly always shoot. The 7D seems a bit better, but only just. That's why I was looking for another 1D series body for about what I'd pay for either one of these.
True, I can achieve better IQ by cropping a 1DSMkIII file, but, since many of my clients only need work for the web, sometimes I don't come even close to requiring all the resolution I have.