No not a pro but on a weekend trip in the keys my camera went down and luckily one of the others in them group had a spare 7d so I could continue with the trip. Prior to that I never would have thought about having two bodies. After all the good comments I am going to kept my 1div and get rid of my two 7ds at whatever I can get for them. Thanks again to everyone

bruce

i only rented a copy of the tamron for a weekend alongside the 24-70ii so my experience may not be as great as some, and since no one has hands on a 24-70 f4 the rest is speculation on my part. What I can tell you is that compared to your 28-135 you won't be disappointed with the tamron. Its sharper than any 24-70 f2.8 mark i I have ever used and it's $1000 cheaper than the 24-70ii. The 24-70ii is sharper across the range than the tamron, but I wouldn't call it twice as sharp which is what it should be for twice the price. I suspect the 24-70 f4 you are considering will be likely as sharp as the Tamron, but you lose the f2.8. AF does feel a tad bit slow when compared to the 24-70ii, and it does struggle a bit more in low light, but then again you have primes to cover that issue. I would say for a GP zoom it is probably the best bet right right now. You get the f2.8 advantage over the 24-105 and it has the IS advantage over the 24-70ii, and while canon says you can have a 24-70 f4 maybe by christmas I'm going to guess the normal canon production delays will end up tossing it into february.

Personally I am holding out for a price drop on the tammy to closer to $1100 before pulling the trigger. In the mean time I picked up a nice copy of a 24-105 on craigslist a few months back for a little less than $700 and if I ever want to sell it I won't lose much if any value. Heck if the 24-70 f4 is not that great I may even make a little money on that lens.

24-85/2.8L IS
100-400L II
7DII w/>20MP and f/8 AF
In-camera stabilization for short primes instead of the new 24, 28 and 35. I already have a 35L and 85/1.8 that I wouldn't mind being stabilized.

IMO, difference between 100mm and 105mm is irrelevant, it's more about a tradition within within lens makers (Most brands take 100mm, Nikon for some reason decided for 105mm, most likely to set themselves apart).

However, 28 and 24 mm are slightly different lenses. I am so used to the 24mm that feels more "natural" than the 28mm (that's highly personnal and subjective). The difference in angle of view is not so big, so if you have room behind you, moving a couple of feet back will allow you to put as much in the frame with the 28mm.

But in the good old times of film, 28mm was a more common focal, the saying was that the 28mm is the widest angle you can use without showing excessive perspective distortion, typical of very wide angles. Fact is that the 28mm is a wide angle that gives a very natural perspective, without that "super-wide angle" look.

I had this problem before. it was the card reader for me.
i was using the Transcend reader, everything corrupt,
i switched to Kingston everything was fine.
you can check this by see if you can see the pictures in camera, if can't then i think its the card.

One more.............

Thanks again for the help, Mt. Spokane.

Shawn L.

http://michaelhodgesfiction.com/

hmm, wishlist, yes!

70-200 f2.8 L USM II
This version should have:
-less weight (however achieved, it just shouldn't feel cheap)
-less purple/green LoCA fringing at f2.8
-a tad more contrast and sharpness wide open
-even faster AF (feedback loop would be nice)
-a hood with the click like the IS II version has
-weather sealing
-focus limiter with more steps (1.5m-inf, 3m-inf, 4.5m-inf)
-AF stop button(s)
-white-white instead of muddy-grey-white paint OR a black painted version of it...

the old version (17years old) is a really nice lens, but the above mentioned points could be improved. except for the optical formula it wouldn't require much R&D. It would become a little less versatile lens compared to the IS II version due to the lacking IS, but I hope the pricing would reflect this. the IS II version shows that stellar performance wide open is possible...why not have the same thing without IS? I think this is not asking for too much and I would pay a premium over the old version. for that I paid 1100EUR and never regretted the purchase. a lens with the above mentioned improvements is probably 1500€ to 1600€ worth to me, maybe 1700€ if it is featherlight.
also if someone invents a 70-180 f2.2 L USM lens at the same weight...oh well, now I'm dreaming... :

Yes, it's completely awesome! And you can't fake your way there with anything else, 24mm at 1,4 is magic stuff...

skitron said:

PackLight said:

skitron said:

PackLight said:

It would be price fixing if Nikon, Canon and Sony agreed to sell at certain agreed prices. It would be price fixing if all retailers agreed to set a fixed price.

This is not price fixing. A manufacture can require it's retailers to charge a certain price. It happens all the time.

Click to expand...

Actually according to US anti-trust law, manufacturer mandated prices to their dealers perfectly fit the descriptions of prohibited actions described in the Sherman Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Clayton Act.

However...the acts also have language about "reasonableness" of the actions that fit the descriptions. Which in legalese means its up to the courts to determine who gets to violate the acts and who doesn't.

Obviously a manufacturer of some sort with a dealer network, was in the past, given a favorable ruling in a court case and now "dealer network price fixing" activity is essentially exempt from the acts as a result.

But that doesn't mean that dealer network price fixing doesn't fit the descriptions of prohibited activities under the acts, it just means the courts have issued an exemption is all...which of course if you're Canon, that's all you need and care about.

Click to expand...

What you miss with your interpretation is that the "Dealer" is not setting the price, the manufacture is. The manufacture can set the price of their product and dictate the amount it is sold for, provided the manufacture has adequate competition in the market. This is a common practice with manufactures. You can call it "Price Fixing" if you like, but it is not illegal "Price Fixing".

Click to expand...

Actually the fact the dealer is not setting the price is precisely my point. The price is being set by one party, the mfgr, and other parties are acting in concert to also set the identical price, the dealers. It's classic price fixing with the caveat that the courts have allowed an exemption under the "reasonableness" language of the acts. And as I stated in my first post, it is not illegal since they (apparently) have court precedents where courts have granted exemptions for this practice, assumingly for the very reason you cite - that there is competition between mfgrs therefore competition between dealers is not needed for an efficient market. Which the economics minor in me knows is pure hogwash. But yet I agree Canon is within their legal comfort zone to do it. And we of course are within our right to not buy their wares.

Click to expand...

Canon is only one example, this happens with Cars, TV's, electronics, Apple Computers, iphone plans, furniture companies and much much more.

Plus the reason for the price control in Canon's situation is to protect the Mom and Pop stores that can't compete with B&H, Adorama and Amazons of the world. Protection of the Mom and Pop stores is the essence of why the Sherman Act was created in the first place. To say this law should be used to destroy the very entities it was created to protect just so we can buy a 5D III $200 cheaper online is ridiculous. And apparantly the courts have agreed with this.

iaind said:

tron said:

zim said:

chasn said:

I have used HDEW and while they may import from HK or wherever you have no risk of import duty ( as they are UK based ) and they bolt on a three year warranty. It may not be a full Canon warranty but I have had cause to rely on it with an earlier purchase and the camera was repaired quickly, no quibbles and well by what looks to be a reputable repair shop in Glasgow. So only one experience but one satisfied customer here ( £2000 for a 5D III not too bad )

Click to expand...

Hi Chasn

I'd be interested to know the name of that repair shop?
If you don't want to broadcast it please PM me

Regards

Click to expand...

hello,

I am interested in learning this information too since I bought my 5D3 from HDEW.


Was it A J J________
in Hope St

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

That's actually what I was wondering too

I would go with the 35L. Very natural FOV on the 60D and other 1.6x cameras.

The 70-200 2.8 is an excellent lens but in my opinion, it would seem way too obvious for street candids (it's big, it's white, it's heavy, it's attention-grabbing!)

Another option is to grab the 40mm 2.8 (excellent lens for the price) and then hold out for the new 6D (will come out to ~same price as 70-200). The 6D is supposed to be able to focus in lower light than any of the current Canon cameras currently out at the moment.

hbengtsson said:

I'm not sure if this has been discussed before but I recently upgraded from Mark2 -> Mark3 and one thing that I noticed instantly was the improved colors/character in the RAW files compared to the Mark2. Not only do they look (according to my tase) more pleasing and vidid but the entire files seem more balanced and neutral yet punchy out of cam. It's almost like I don't need to color correct (which I ALWAYS need to do with the Mark2 files, even with accurate WB, there's a warm/reddish bias)

And when processing the Mark3 files further it only gets better. I'm not sure if this is thanks to a much better AWB or the new color filter, improved profiles or whatever. The last time I got this "feeling" straight out of cam was when shooting with the old classic 5D original - and that's a good sign! Of course, we are talking about subtle observations here but still to me very very noticeable - and I thought it would be fun to share and perhaps hear your opinions as well.

Cheers,

Click to expand...

I admit the 5D3 files are fantastic. I went from 5Dc ------> 5D3 and it has a similar color tone. I still like the 5Dc a-little better but the 5D3 is close enough.

Thank you for the information: I don't know if I should be happy that my lens creeps naturally.

The hood requires much more torsion if mounted the "wrong" way, I don't know why, but that's the way it is. Anyway, if I get the chance will as a Canon dealer to give me his opinion about. I plan to get the STM version (to take videos with autofocus and for better close ups) as soon as a new crop Canon with a decent sensor comes out. For now I have the 550D, which surprisingly is better in IQ than the 650D: congratulations to Canon for the devolution.

Just an fyi (I didn't look at the date of this point)...the latest versions of the eyefi cards (I just purchased the 16G class 10 with new firmware)..don't require a network or hotspot when you're out in the field working. The new Direct connect option just requires that you have your cell phone with you, with the wi-fi turned on. Took me a little while to configure it but it works very well. Haven't tried geotagging yet but it will probably work the same way..and will be as accurate as cell-tower gps can be.

Thank you. Am using my commonsense now.

Thanks Neuro! I knew you'd clear that one up!

I believe under $1000 is the new under $500 for Canon.

As far as aperture blades go i wonder if they choose how many blades based on the type of photography the lens is intended for like landscape lenses getting the best sun stars due to blade design. More blades for better bokeh balls with portrait lenses as well as cinema applications.

neuroanatomist said:

The 6D goes up to 1/4000 s, not 1/2000 s.

But even with 1/8000 s available for me, I still bring along 3-stop ND. My fast primes (35L, 85L II, 135L) all take a 72mm filter, so I only need one.

Click to expand...

Thanks
I dont know where I got the 1/2000 from
still need ND though

I haven't posted anything here for ages, and thought someone might like this shot. This is of Wyaralong Dam in the Scenic Rim of QLD, Australia.

5D2, Ef16-35 lens @16mm

bycostello said:

yeah my error.. thought 23mm before crop factor taken into account and not after....

35mm quite wide though.. i'd still think 50mm if i was to go for a prime...

Click to expand...

I get what ppl say about 50s but for me especially in a crowded narrow street i rather have 35.
In anycase I got my cheapo 50 1.8 that will fit on FF and is very sharp (af is a different story there).

What camera gear you take depends a little on your approach to travel - some prefer to travel light. Either way, I wouldn't go without a short lens. A circular polarising filter is probably a must-have - and won't take up much space!

Weather-sealed equipment is nice for the dust, especially in places like Etosha. With due care, however, you can make do with less resilient gear. - My EOS650 did just fine in the Fish River Canyon.

wickidwombat said:

dpedro said:

All I need now is the 24-70 and I'm done.

Click to expand...

famous last words! good luck with that

Click to expand...

24-70? You'll need a 50mm/85mm for portrait, 70-200 at least when your subject is far, and a UWA when you want to get all the scene. You might also need a macro and a fish-eye. You'll want other lenses other than 24-70 because the more you take pictures, the more you learn, the more you explore and the more you need other lenses in order to explore every possibility.