Correct - a simple integer linear regression between the two values across the focal range of the lens. For the plot below (with the 1D X, but the 5DIII is the same) each lens was set to W = -10 and T = +10.

Ive owned a 1DS3 for 5 years and its one amazing bit of kit. Its been in rain, snow, deserts, has been dropped onto rock and tarmak 5 times and still works perfectly. It does what it does and was designed for very well and keeps going where only pro bodies go.Colour renidtion is excellent, autofocus is good. Its used for landscapes and the odd portrait where its not going beyond iso 400. It can go higher but i dont need to. So buy one, its built like a tank, will last a lifetime in all conditions but its slow shooting and limited iso is its achillies heel. And if you loose your hammer you can knock nails in a wall with it.

As for why the 1d4 has kept its value is easy to explain. Its the crop factor. Not wanting to buy bigger lens's as they cost so much to negate the loss of crop is to much for many so the prices are holding up well. People want that crop factor.

Albi86 said:

That would require to use live view though, wouldn't it?

I shoot 99% VF only

Click to expand...

So if you only want to use the viewfinder, ML does not work
But the 5D3 works like nomad85 said earlier
OR
Figure if some of the interchangeable focusing screens will work for you on the 5D2. I dont have one so I cant help there...

Yeah .... It is officialy out 1-2 weeks ago. See Canon EOS 6D Specification here : http://news.entecity.com/canon-eos-6d-the-cheapest-full-frame-dslr-ever/

Read the early verdict on the canon 6d in that article. And comparison of 6D, 5D mark iii and nikon d600 is also there.

Hope you all ill find this article helpful...

Hesbehindyou said:

To everyone else: I've never seen the point of P mode. Are there any situations in which it's better than the other modes?

Click to expand...

The only time I ever use P is when I hand my camera to a non-photographer. This worked great at my own wedding, where I obviously didn't want to have a camera in hand. I switched it to P before the ceremony and handed it to my sister-in-law. She got some great shots, but would have been lost in any other mode. Av can be pretty simple, but I didn't want to risk it.

Never used P myself though. I'm usually in Av, M, or a custom.

wellfedCanuck said:

<ctrl>+<home> in Windows, command+home (I think) on a Mac.

Click to expand...

Thanks! I guess you learn something every day...

Halfrack said:

Roger over at LensRentals has to be hit with this ask every day... Of all folks, he has the tools on hand, and I believe folks would pay a premium if they could purchase new lenses that have been checked out.

Click to expand...

Roger has tools to check a lens, but only has the know how to tweak a few adjustments in a lens, and some he leaves to Canon.
I do not think it would be feasible to sell new lenses, since people would only pay a premium for the top 10% and you would be left with the other 90%.
A testing and report issueing service would put the onus on Canon to fix a bad lens, and would not void a warranty.

This is like a question from 2009

the only limiting factor on the 24-105 in my opinion is the f4, I would prefer a lens wider than 2.8!

So I guess the equation is:

Focal length(mm)/sensor height(mm)=distance to subject/height of subject

7D sensor height in landscape = 14.9mm
7D sensor height in portrait = 22.3mm

Example: d=300mm/14.9mm X 6'= 120.8' ; distance to 6' height subject to fill 7D frame using a 300mm focal length lens in landscape orientation

Lol no the filters where correct way.. Will give it another play tomorrow see what results I can get

With 70-200 f/2.8 II and 2x TC MkIII, it's truly "Set to f/8 and go." f/8 seems to be the setting with TC III that gives you tremendous sharpness and contrast still.

bbasiaga said:

What's wrong with just letting the sun be blown out? When you look at the sun with your eye (which you shouldn't do, so let's say when you look NEAR the sun with your eye) the pupil can't dial down enough anyway, so what you see is 'blown out'.

You can HDR the rest of the image as you like and it'll look fine, IMO.

-Brian

Click to expand...

Thanks for the answer, I finally got around to trying some options on this, and here is one of the results.
Sun is blown out, as nothing could be rescued there at all anyway. I guess I thought that shooting differently might have helped.

>>Mind you, the JPG looks terribly noisy, the TIFF seems to be OK.
Recreated the JPG directly out of PS instead of LR. I hope that looks better.
Cheers Brian

Looking back at my purchases, IF (and that's a big if) I wasn't doing any video at all, I would've opted for the 16-35L over my 35L. But i absolutely LOVE the 35 L when I shoot videos. Yes, I use it at f/1.4-2.0 for video and it looks gorgeous. As a walk around, on the rare occasion when I switch out my 24-105 for the 35L, I use it at f/1.8-2.0 without flash and it does a decent job, but I'm realizing more and more that primes, awesome as they are, aren't really well suited for my style of shooting. It's a pain to have to switch between my 35 and my 50 when I'm walking around so 90% of the time, I just keep the 24-105 on. This might change as I just got my 70-200 yesterday and have fallen in love with it.

to sum up: I like primes for video shoots when I have time to set up one lens and one shot. Lots of fun playing with manual focus. I'd prefer an f/2.8 zoom for photography and it seems like you're lacking in the wide angle area so I 2nd that notion.

Hi what about downloading the trial version of LR 4.2. This handles. NEF files. Michael

wickidwombat said:

the statement is true to an extent however there are only a handfull of L lenses better than the sigma 85 f1.4
regardless of cost and focal length and they are all the seriously expensive massive and heavy ones.

also IMO the new sigma 50mm f1.4 is better than all the canon 50mm lenses

the 40mm pancake is sharper and better accross the frame than the 24-70 f2.8L mk1 at 40mm the center is similar but edges and corners the 40mm dominates heavily.

Click to expand...

+1

So I'm a pretty big guy WITH ripply muscles... and I just have to say... OH MY! It's heavy and I can see why people complain about the size... but I really kinda like how big it is.

I purchased the SX50HS with a 30 day money back guarantee and I just finished my first day with it. The AF is pretty fast and image stabilization and auto frame assist works very well on the long end. I've been shooting in auto mode to get a feel for handling the camera. I've been shooting exclusively with DSLRs with grips since my 20D and BG-E2. The smaller, lighter feel and zooming via a lever takes some getting used to. I'll get into the creative modes and settings next week when I pop into NYC.

Promature said:

Roger Cicala on shooting air shows:
"One effective technique to get some room when you’re at a crowded airshow: set the 600 vertically with the hood end on the ground, get a serious look on your face, and announce loudly 'you folks should step back from the blast area before we launch this.'"

Click to expand...

Must be a large closet

1D mk III, isn't that the one with a APS-H sensor and 8 frames per second? Do you need speed in a wedding? and do you need the crop for anything that a 70-200 cannot cover? Given your list, I would actually opt for a used 1Ds MK III. It is an awsome camera, and was the flagship camera for full frame until the 1Dx was released.

pwp said:

rpt said:

Forget all that! White plastic bag and a rubberband works for me when I can't bounce the flash!

Click to expand...

That's a great idea, particularly if you're getting good results. It could save the day! I'll put a white plastic bag and rubberband in my camera bag.

If you're shooting for a client, there is the often overlooked matter of perception. Photographers are expensive people to hire. Regardless of the results you can achieve with a white plastic bag, clients don't want to see that. They want to see you with a camera and lens combination that they either can't afford or justify, and accessories that suggest innovation and professionalism.

Assuming you have the required personal, ethical, business, creative and technical abilities, the way to make money from photography is to be reassuringly expensive, and that means turning up with shiny new equipment, nicely dressed and in a decent car. On one level it's total BS, but on another it's complete reality.

-PW

Click to expand...

I don't shoot for money so it works for me. If I were shooting for a client I'd buy one of those diffusers described above. Even if it were a non paying kind of shoot. You are right, perception is everything...

jaayres20 said:

I switched from the pocket wizard system to 3 600ex-rt flashes.

Click to expand...

I did exactly the same thing, and get rid of the PW. I'm very happy with that system. It's working fine up to 170 m.

You can try the in-camera raw processing to be able to have more control over image quality. If you want the best, avoid jpeg. Its fine for ebay and craigslist photos, but for archival work, they won't stand the test of time.
Raw images I took several years ago and processed with Lightroom 2 can be reprocessed with the latest version, and do look much better. You can't do that to in camera jpegs, they are frozen in time, and best used for cases where time is more important than quality.

This is just awesome

Christmas today in October!! Woohoo!

Santa just came in the disguise of a UPS man!

NewEgg came through with my 24-70 ll, AND Amazon with my new 1DX. Fun this weekend!!!


OK OK.. crappy pics, but taken quickly with my iPhone5!

Happy days!