Well, I spoke to Adorama and they basically said no. I can't get the $1199 promotional price on the 7D with the double-rebates. Doh... oh well, it was a worth a try. I still saved $200 more on the lens and body combo than what it's priced at right now.

RichATL said:

Functionally it's not a problem, I just have an OCD habit of wanting all the lenses set to their smallest profile when they go back into my bag (un-zoomed, etc)

Click to expand...

hahaha, that makes (at least) two of us...

RichATL said:

and if you don't focus the 85 to infinity before removing it, you can't get it back in by turning the focusing ring.

Click to expand...

I found that if you focus with the lens cap on it will hunt and stop at its shortest extension.

watching those productions clips on youtube got me really excited on the movie. they're simply brilliant. also a lot of camera porn in the - 48 red epics.

i'm keeping an open mind and am very anxious on seeing the end product

certainly something wrong....

I'm not sure I would buy that camera even if I could afford it. Technology is changing so rapidly, the C300 camera could be obsolete in a half a year.

Poll closed, the results are in! And amazingly, there are less than 50% troll votes either advising people to get rich quick or bashing the 5d3 because they cannot afford it ... so there's still hope left.

Ryan708 said:

Anyone heard of any problems installing magic latern? It kind of scares me haha, im too poor to buy another body. Curious what it adds to the 60D in terms of functionality, thanks guys and gals!

Click to expand...

It's very stable, I've been using it for a year. The one thing to remember: In the very, very unlikely event anything should go wrong (Camera stops responding) _remove_the_battery_ instead of just turning it off. Otherwise you might fry your cpu, because the "off" switch doesn't cut the power.

FunPhotons said:

Not a lot of people use light meters anymore since we have them built into our cameras. I guess the answer is up to Sekonic.

Click to expand...

Maybe not a lot of people, but a lot of photographes do . . especially in the studio or outside in tricky lighting etc. You uise them if you need the best possible exposure of a scene or in a studio setting . . PERIOD.

I went all out and bought the L-758DR . . great for video and stills.

Our cameras can meter fairly well in many situations, but they are not as exact as pro light meters, and can get tricked in MANY lighting situations. With a handheld lightmeter, you can measure incident and flash etc, etc. . . and alter camera setting accordingly. Done!

I guess the reall point in the end is that if you make money off your images and are expected to be exact with less hassle, in studio or out, then a light meter should be in your kit. Not everyone needs it.

Thank you for your sharing!






-----------------------------------------
studio lighting camera flashes softboxes

This topic has been moved to Portrait.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=6217.0

If anyone is interested, Markins got their camera plates for the 5D3 in last Thursday. I received mine today and I'm very pleased.

There are many good plates available but I prefer Markins plates because they are lightweight and low profile yet they are bulletproof. Like heavier, larger competitors, there is a place to attach a hand strap or screw in a 1/4-20 stud to the bottom of it. Unlike many competitors, the attachment point is square so the plate fits into the clamp in either direction.

Compared to the Markins plate for the 5D2, the new 5D3 plate is somewhat larger, though not thicker. And, unlike the RRS plate for the 5D3, the inside edges of the new Markins plate are curved to perfectly match the contours of the 5D3 body. This was a big deal for me. I didn't care for the RRS approach.

psolberg said:

full resolution FTW. storage is always cheaper, always faster, always bigger. In 10 years you'll laugh at the notion of 30, 40, 60, 100MP per image and will be dealing with much much bigger files. Yet you won't find it one bit funny when you can't go back in time and retake that one image in time to get more detail or quality out of it. You never know what tools and demands you'll have 10 years down the road and so it makes no sense to capture anything in less than the best quality you can afford.

Click to expand...

Heck yes. Don't spend 3500 on a camera if you don't use it to its full potential. Just get yourself a rebel.

If you plan to do a lot of video, then the flip screen on the 60D and T3i are critical.

The video image quality among the three are said to be about the same.

I only have the T3i, but specifically chose it over the 60D. My main reason at the time was that I wanted to put the extra $200 to $300 into lenses. My reason now (the original one still stands) is the 3x zoom feature that peederj mentioned. It has been a true life saver in a couple of situations. Plus, it is just really handy. The 60D doesn't have this capability. Put the extra $300 (or, if you're able to afford the 7D, then the extra $700) toward a good lens to benefit both stills and video. I recommend the Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 lens.

And, I would wait another couple of weeks. You still might end up getting the T3i, but you might be able to get it at a cheaper price.

helpful said:

Sounds to me like the emperor who had no clothes! If such a kind of glass really existed, would it be able to refract light? Anti-fogging, self-cleaning, etc., seems like it is just a mist with no refractive properties. Really, I don't know why I'm responding to this post... just happened to pop up in front of me at the wrong time.

Like the second poster mentioned, it may be impossible to make a lens out of it. If it really exists, then perhaps it would be a great window glass, to shoot photos through. But it might not refract sufficiently to actually make a lens out of it.

Click to expand...

Thats phase 4, there will be 3 phases of million Dollar government grants required before they get to that point.

I'm all in favor of supporting research, but its a shame that Schools like Harvard make fantastic claims in order to get research money. They have people actually expecting a product to happen, but that is a pretty unusual event.

neuroanatomist said:

Bosman said:

neuroanatomist said:

[quote author=Canon Rumors]
Sandisk Extreme Pro CF 32GB Save $100 NOW: $138.95
Last November, the same cards were $99 from B&H, and I bought two of them.

Click to expand...

nuero, what gig card was an extreme pro cf for $99? That doesn't add up.

Click to expand...

The card listed above, Sandisk Extreme Pro CF 32GB (90 Mb/s). What doesn't add up, except for the fact that is was a very good deal? The pricing was for buying two of them, but for the first day or so of the SanDisk sale, B&H was giving the $99 price for single cards, too. The bottom of my email invoice:

Click to expand...

Holy crap someone needs to kick you for not getting 4 more! LOL
heres mine, now mine seems to be the one screwy not adding up!

Damn.

Well now I really do want a 1d4 as a second body.

Just curious - does anyone know if sales numbers are posted anywhere? I'm always curious to see how a new body sells.

I owned a copy of the 24-70 f2.8 Mark I. It is a great lens but heavy and bulky. You notice it only when you pack your Kiboko backpack and run out of space. I replaced it with a 24-105 f4. It is smaller and lighter. Good for travel. If you need the speed go for the Mark I. It is much cheaper.

I've had my 7D about 18 months now, I'd still consider buying it again if I were purchasing something new now.

Timing-wise:
- The 7D2 may or may not be out by the end of this year. Don't expect one in your hand until at least January even if they do announce it this year. Also expect it to either be unavailable (if it's a decent upgrade) or not much of an upgrade to the 7D, and probably expensive either way.
- the 650D is just starting to be rumoured now, probably with the same sensor again, probably not in shops before August at least.
- The more you wait, the cheaper things will get, is there a regular mid-year sale in the UK?

- Specs-wise:
- I do a lot of MF on my 7D (like FL 55mm f/1.2). I just bought a KatzEye screen for it, which wasn't too hard to replace despite their warnings.
- Also consider the 60D for this. You can also get a KatzEye screen, apparently it should be even easier to replace. The 60D has the Pentaprism, 550/600D only have pentamirror, so darker and crappier viewfinders.
- Live-view MF is easy enough on the 7D. I know it looks gimmicky and I don't like it, but there are times I could really use that flip-screen on the 60D.

- Competition-wise:
- I hate to say it, but the Pentax K-5 has a lot of things that the 7D should have had included, for a 60D price. Including weather-sealed 18-55 kit lens, which doesn't work too badly.
- But you don't get to use Canon's great range of lenses, which is reason enough to stick with the Red camp.

K-amps said:

Depends on if it's a controlled environment or not... i do product photography and sometimes I have to go into the macro realm where dof is razor thin, hence I have to do focus stacking to expand DOF. in an environment, it's easy to manually do it... if your handholding outside taking pictures of flowers or whatever, it would be a bear to deal with...

Click to expand...

Flowers on a windy day is what I had in mind
[/quote]

bring a shovel, dig up the flower, bring it in a studio, then you can spend hours shooting it to your hearts content haha. =)

I would also recommend the Sigma 15mm f2.8 fisheye. At ~$600 it is much cheaper than the Canon 14mm.
See a recent shot here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dpayne1/7103879039/#in/photostream/lightbox/

I also use the Tokina 16-28 f2.8
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dpayne1/6275856418/#in/set-72157622598215723/lightbox/

and the Canon 24mm f1.4
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dpayne1/5274394251/#in/set-72157622598215723/lightbox/

Still shows up as $899 on B&H's website for me...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/732047-REG/Canon_4460B003_EOS_60D_DSLR_Camera.html

I mentioned in the previous post that I do have the Sigma 70 2.8 Macro. Using normal viewfinder AF it is right on the money, on both my t2i and my 5D Mark III. It does make more noise than any other lens I own while focusing, but it locks right on pretty quickly, espcially with the Mark III's improved AF system. It does, however, have problems focusing with Live View on the 5D Mark III, often taking several runs at it before it finally locks on, but occasionally never getting there. If I'm in a position to use Live View (ie, on a tripod), I will often do manual focusing. No problems using Live View on the t2i, other than taking longer than viewfinder AF to lock on, but that's the case for most lenses. The image quality of this lens is so superb, that I can live with the Live View issue. Given the ability to use the 5D Mark III at higher ISO's (allowing higher shutter speeds) I find I am not using Live View and a tripod nearly as much, so most of the time I use this lens now with normal viewfinder AF which works fine. I have taken some landscape shots with this lens and it is as sharp at infinity as it is close focusing on flowers, so it's a good all around lens regardless of subject being photographed. One minor quibble is the hood is a screw-on type, so you can't easily put a lens cap on and off without removing the hood.

This is cool

jaayres20 said:

TrumpetPower! said:

Not to go against the grain, but I'm thinking that 200mm is already on the long side for wedding photography. If you need more than that, you're too far away from the action. As the wedding photographer, it's your job to be in the right place at the right time, and that right place isn't going to put you farther away than you can comfortably cover with a 135.

I could maybe see an exception for some super-compressed fashion-type staged portraits...which puts you right back to a supertelephoto, if that's the look you're going for.

Click to expand...

I would agree, however, there are a lot of big long Catholic churches with very strick rules and a few times a year I find myself stuck at the back of a church with NO option of moving or getting closer. That is maybe 1 out of 15 or 20 weddings but it does happen enough times that I need the extra zoom to get some of the closer shots I want, and am used to in those situations.

Click to expand...

In that case, I'd suggest a $250 "venue restrictions require exotic equipment" surcharge for those clients. Half you'll put into renting a Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 for the wedding, and the rest you'll put into your pocket.

Why should you eat the capital expense for expensive non-standard equipment for a small fraction of your clients? That's a special service you're providing, and one you should charge for either way.

...and, incidentally, I suspect you'll find that, when faced with an extra fee, the mothers of the bride will convince the priest to look the other way when you shoot the wedding like 95% of all other weddings get shot.

Cheers,

b&