stevenrrmanir said:

the-ninth said:

Modify it for infrared photography and have some fun.

http://www.outbackphoto.com/reviews/equipment/digital_ir/digital_ir.html

Cheers, Robert

Click to expand...

NOOOOOOOOOO!!! use Photoshop for that! STOP destroying a good camera for the sake of "experimenting"? You seem to have forgotten the $$$ you paid for it... what has changed now? The camera can't take pictures anymore? It is the SAME camera with same IQ as way back then when you got it for big $$$

Donate it to some kid who enjoys photography! Give it to your parents!

Click to expand...

Put it on its back and use it as a coffee cup holder ;D ;D

Pieces Of E said:

Natural upgrade for the 7D owner would be a 1D4


Or a 7D with the new updated, God blessed, improved, squeaky-clean, fast, no-noise firmware update!!

Click to expand...

yeah - a few updates here and there but practically the same body... same IQ...

neuroanatomist said:

AvTvM said:

Canon is the master of intensely annoying "market differentiation" - meaning crippling of camera features for pure marketing speculations, which most of the time turn out to be dead wrong and are costing them market share.

Click to expand...

Why do people make statements like this? What makes you think it is costing them market share, and more importantly, do you have any data to back that up? The availbale data show that Canon's market share for dSLRs has been increasing for the past several years. So by the relevant objective measure, Canon is doing things right, not 'dead wrong'.

Click to expand...

"Canon is losing market share" claims usually boil down to a bunch of internet fanatics who think their opinions are more important than they really are, just because like-minded internet fanatics give them e-high-fives and virtual pats on the back. Gee, my online buddies agree with me, so it must be true.

I have the 70-300 L and I love it except for the zoom and focus ring placement. You get used to it after a while but the focus ring on my copy turns quite freely so it's easy to knock a picture out of focus if you aren't careful. I had lots of OOF shots the first day I got it and was really concerned that the AF was missing 20% of the time! Then I realized that I had been inadvertantly changing focus just by brushing the MF ring, so I changed the way I grip the lens and problem solved. As mentioned, this lens is heavier than the 70-200 f4, but I have tried both and it helps that the 70-300's weight is closer to the camera since it's a shorter lens. If you don't need faster than 5.6, it's an all around great lens with good optical quality, robust build and fast focusing.

3kramd5 said:

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikonD800/3

"Movies can also be shot at two different crops from the sensor, FX and DX. This makes it easy to vary the field-of-view for grabbing footage, even if you’ve got a prime lens mounted. However, the ‘FX’ size is a significantly cropped version of the full sensor (it’s 91% of the sensor’s width), so the field-of-view will be a little narrower than you’d expect for any given focal length."

Click to expand...

interesting. I will be testing it now that I got a hold of a D800. but every 5DIII vs D800 comparison looked identical. the live view does look cropped.

edit:
so I did some testing and found that yes there is indeed a slight crop. I'm unfamiliar with the camera, but I found it on the manual(so Nikon does disclose it using a diagram). The actual factor I roughly calculated is about 1.095X from a quick snap vs video. So yes, technically you'll gain some focal length (or lose wideness if you prefer). So I guess I owe Ken an apology...this ONE time.

Reading the manual, I found that the HDMI out has two modes. 95% crop or 100%. I don't know if the HDMI set to 100% does this out does this as I have not yet used a external recorder (but definitively plan to since one reason I'm switching to the D800 is the 4:2:2 8bit for external recording).
see ->vimeo.com/40788982

Once I find out, I'll report back here for whoever would like to know.

The question is it noticeable? I think the answer is it depends. If you are shooting very wide AND look for it (and I'm talking below 24mm before the FOV change may matter in composition) you'll see footage is not as wide as with a 1.0 crop. I just took delivery of the D800 yesterday and had been shooting video quite a bit, and hadn't noticed which tells me I don't shoot that wide that much. For mid lengths to telephoto, the difference is far less noticeable.

For practical purposes, I think the full frame "look" (if there is such a thing since they all crop the tops) of the footage isn't affected by the slight crop (this isn't like a 1.5 crop or anything like that). But if you're shooting sweeping vistas with an ultra wide it is definitively something to keep in mind. Conversely if you shoot telephoto (bids, sports) the slight crop is a plus. Not a big issue IMHO (and actually a plus if you shoot telephoto) but YMMV. As mentioned, I'm ordering an atomos Ninja and will test the 100% HDMI out output setting from the menu to see if that yields the missing 0.095 8)

I think the 17-40 is a good bang per buck lens, but it's getting old and the optical quality seems to be hit or miss with lots of copy variation. I'm waiting for the MK II, and if it's still constant f4 that's just fine with me. I almost never set my f4-5.6 lenses wider than 5.6 anyway because I just hate having the aperture change as I zoom. And besides, the long end is where you need wider aperture.

Never was in stock... The title says so but i think he meant a shipment was received by b&h...
It seems Orders made before march 22 were fulfilled...
I spoke to a CS rep at b&h, he said they are expecting to start receiving a shipment every week!

Hi there! Just to share my thoughts:

I had a 500D a few years back(About 2009?), Went through a 7D(My sister's) and just bought a 5d2. On the time i was with a crop, i only had Non L Lenses to work with, 18-55,55-250, and a 50, then upgraded to a 70-200L II, then had the 7D. I was deciding on this also because i think that the 7D really suited the part of me that wanted to get fast action. But my heart still was on landscaping.

So i bought a 5d2 + a 17-40L( So now i have a 5D2, 17-40L, 50 1.8, and a 70-200L II, and a 7D that i can burrow anytime.) As a Amateur switching from crop to FF, I was shocked out of the very first snap i took out of the 5d2 with a 50mm 1.8, and i was at a loss for words. After that I've only been shooting with my 50 and 17-40 for landscapes. My 70-200 was ignored for a while. I love the 50 on the 5D. I've learned to love the nifty fifty more now than when i had a crop body. I haven't tried a 50 1.4 (But im very excited to, alot of people are defending it), but the 50 1.8 is just splendid.

Just experience from an amateur hope i helped. Good luck on your purchase!

Any idea when/if the Mark iv will ever make it back across to the States ? Several of the larger retailers have it "back ordered" as opposed to "discontinued". I am finally in the market for one. I certainly hope the DX is not going to completely swallow up the iv market. :-[

recon photography said:

its their products that undoubtedly gain the revenue you can't make claims that their pricing is perfect really ever but the most suitable time would be when they have gone seriously wrong each way and since apple don't really change their prices.....

Click to expand...

I suppose it's a matter of perspective. The goal of a company is to deliver value to their shareholders - really, it's the one and only goal of any publically traded company. Their pricing is perfectly aligned with that goal - sales are strong, profit is high. If prices were really too high (i.e. higher than the market would bear), sales would fall, profits would fall, heads would roll, and things would change. They haven't, at least, recently. Steve Jobs dies, it changed nothing, double production, stock price and market cap hit a new record high.

From a consumer perspective, of course, everything is priced too high. We want all the best products, and we want them for free. Anything more than free is too expensive. :

wamsankas said:

So I'm trying to round out a good artillery of lens for all around use. I have the 16-35 2.8 ii and I am about to purchase the 50mm 1.2L and 70-200 2.8 is ii with the lens rebate. Does everyone think that's an all around good set of three lens? I shoot a lot of video and all around general photo

Click to expand...

Yes that's a great setup, now go shoot and stop worrying about gear.

It's been out a while, it's decent, but the focus action is kind of choppy. I'm waiting for the Manfrotto remotes to be released, they're friggin' awesome.
http://www.manfrotto.us/product/8709.1018696.54581.0.0/MVR911ECCN/_/HDSLR_CLAMP-ON_REMOTE_CONTROL
http://www.manfrotto.us/product/8709.1018696.54581.0.0/MVR911EJCN/_/HDSLR_DELUXE_RC_FOR_CANON

I hear good things about Q-flashes but wouldn't buy a $1000 flash that still needs a $ 450 battery pack. The output is excellent from what i have seen and personally witnessed however.

There's more to it than 'f/ocal and forget it'.

Click to expand...

Well, of course the system isn't perfect. And, again of course, you should put some thought into how you use your tools. If you always shoot one particular way, optimize your system for that; otherwise, the 20x focal length is a good all-around compromise. And you need to know and understand the limits and how to work with and around them.

FoCal is the best tool I'm aware of for determining the optimum AFMA setting, but it's up to the photographer to determine the optimum environment in which to use that tool.

b&

Whats a good purchase price for the kit lens that comes with the 5d3?
I see many can be purchased for about $800. What would be a price that everyone here would believe it to be a MUST BUY?

!Xabbu said:

skitron said:

Sure, go to your link and then click the "Measurements" tabs and look at the five different charts of raw data.

Click to expand...

OK, ISO sensitivity a slight edge for 5D III (about 10%-20%), SNR they are essentially the same, DR huge advantage for D800 to ISO 800, then essentially the same, tonal range essentially equal and color sensitivity slight advantage for D800. So, apart from ISO sensitivity I don't see any real advantage of 5D III in measurements over D800.

So, I still don't see your substantially better...

Click to expand...

When you're shooting in low light, the amount of available DR is pretty small, so being able to capture 9 or 10 stops, when there is perhaps 6 stops at most is pretty meaningless. The amount of noise when exposed correctly is much more important.

Are they shipping serial numbers that have "1" or "2" as their sixth digit, that have been repaired (i.e. with the white dot on the battery door)? Or are they shipping "3" serial number cameras?

elflord said:

So this would be more of a stop gap solution for those who already have a large investment in EF lenses than a replacement for a strong system of native lenses for the new mount. With EF lenses, they would need some kind of electronic coupling because this is required to adjust the aperture.

Click to expand...

Its also of course a potential option to allow specialist lenses to be used that might not sell enough to justify mirrorless specific versions. Many such speicalist lenses(macro's, long/fast tele's) are likely to be used on a tripod aswell which means size and balance become lesser issues aswell.

If Canon are looking to put out more high end mirrorless bodies(espeically ASPH or FF ones) then access to such lenses is obviously going to be a big advanatge.

Photoshop and panning, you can have unlimited sized sensor....

It looks like he just adjusted the hue to a bluish tone via basic color correction. There are some presets in Magic Bullet Looks that look very similar. Either way whatever it is it didn't take much time or effort.

Yeah, I use an EP-EX15II for my Mk2 and love it. I really wish that there was one available for the Mk3, or at least something like it. The hoodman won't work for me because I mostly shoot with my camera inside a sound blimp.

prefer lightroom 4 myself.... adobe got loads of vids telling u how to use too..

IMO the 50 1.2 regardless of what f/stop makes a much, much nicer image. It may not be sharper but the images are superior in every other way. f/2.0 and wider are magical but even 5.6, while not at it's sharpest, still has a way of pulling the subject out and having a WOW! effect. It really exemplifies why we choose primes to me.

Justifying the cost is an individual thing. If all you seek is sharpness the 50L might let you down. But if you seek the WOW! effect it shouldn't let you down.

neuroanatomist said:

IMO, it's definitely a factor to make one consider an f/2.8 lens over an f/4 lens, provided the trade offs (cost, size) are acceptable.

The 5DIII and 1D X have five of those high-precision f/2.8 AF points.

If it helps, I wrote up a description of EOS AF Systems, which includes a discussion of the high-precision points, as well as the differences between cross, dual cross, what f/2.8 vs. f/5.6 'sensitivity' really means, etc.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the very useful background information - worth reading for anyone contemplating a big lens investment - f/2.8 better than an f/4?

It was posted on the site that they 7d was on sale at Adorama for $1199. I checked into it, here is the response I received....

"We apologize but the price previously listed was an error in the system. We are not aware that there will be a future discount on the camera."