One reason might be all the OS failures on the Sigma 120-300. It seems to be carrying on the Sigma penchant for unreliable OS. Everyone is hoping that the newer version beefs up some of the weak points. I will not be wanting to buy one just to see.

cayenne - I'm glad you're enjoying Handbook.

I'm back to admit that I might have been a little harsh toward Resolve. I hadn't tried it since version 8.

I took another look at it this weekend. My reason for revisiting Resolve was that I recently decided to pre-order a BMD Cinema Camera. I'm still not finally sure that I want one, but I decided to pre-order now, figuring that I can do more due diligence before it ships. If I'm not convinced that I want it, I can cancel.

Back to Resolve... I wanted to do a bit more research on the workflow that I might have if I work with raw files. So, I downloaded some sample dng files and the new version of Resolve Lite and started working on them. I still stand by my statement that Resolve it a bit cumbersome. But, like any software, once you learn its quirks, things aren't that bad (notable exception for me is Microsoft Office 2007 and later - still get frustrated by it!). Anyway, the updated UI in v9 is much better than I remember than with v8. I'm also more up-to-speed on color correction, in general (still learning a lot!), so that probably helps.

I also picked up Handbook again and now that I look at it again, it really does give a lot of guidance on Resolve.

So, like you, I'm going to be learning more about Resolve in the coming weeks/months. It is just so powerful. And, I'm enjoying it. The round-tripping thing isn't that bad with a combatible editor. Alas, I use Vegas Pro. The new version (v12) just added the XML import/export ability. So, I'll be learning this, too.

On the other hand, I've been using Magic Bullet Looks for the last year. I still prefer its UI. Looks is just fun to use. Plus, it integrates so nicely with Vegas. If it only had some of the tools that Resolve has. So, I'm not quite ready to give up on Looks, but I can see a point where I might use both.

Anyway, thanks for the report back. Good luck!

the on-camera modifier market is astonishing to me, and filled with more claims to lighting perfection than carter has little liver pills. Thing is, they all have their areas of strength, but unfortunately too few of the mfgs are really candid and up front about their weaknesses. Spotting the over marketed and over-stated capabilities of certain pieces of plastic is even amusing all one has to do is go watch their videos.

almost any small diffuser or on-camera tupperware or similar contraption works well when there are sufficient reflective surfaces of suitable color. For example, when confronted with a situation such as found in the wing light video, I would suggest that fongs and stofens would produce similar results (bare bulb diffusers love venues like that). The possible exception to this may be the floor bounce advantage, and of course having a nice white bouncy floor is clearly commonplace on location, as is the look one obtains when lighting from below but I digress.

Admitting that I haven't used/played with it, what strikes me initially about the wing light is what it could do without sufficient reflective surfaces for direct, on-camera flash. It would be like holding an ordinary garage trouble light (one of the long florescent ones...) next to your camera. Horizontally, it is a larger light source. vertically its nearly as small and horrible as the bare flash head.

As long as folks remember that light always travels in straight lines, the mystery of tupperware and other contraptions is lessened somewhat, as well as the temptation to buy into the many and various overstated claims. I suspect the wing light will work well in a number of situations and looking forward to seeing some example photos -- especially in less than ideal "many white reflective surfaces" situations.

I say get the 24-70 refurbed from Canon for 1100. I love mine, no issues whatsoever, in fact this weekend it made me money.

killswitch said:

I currently have the Canon 60D and will upgrade to either 5D Mk III or 6D. I currently own the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 DX Pro and absolutely love it. However, once I make the jump to full frame I am contemplating buying one of the following UWA lens. I currently have the Canon 24-70L as well.

1) Canon 16-35 f2.8L
2) Canon 17-40 f4L
3) Canon 14 f2.8L II [not too eager as it's way too expensive ]

Though I hoped there was a 14-24 version from Canon.

Of the 3 mentioned, which one delivers greater contrast and sharpness. If there are any other lens from Canon or other brands that will delivers stellar sharpness in the center of the frame as well as in the corners then I am open to suggestions. Thanks in advance!

Click to expand...

If you were will to spend for a 14-24L, Why no look at the 15mm Zeiss? Its stunning.

I'm hopeful about the rumor of a smaller and less expensive flash unit using the radio system. I have an STE3 and two 600s and can't justify a third one. But something in the $350-$400 range with less output would suit me perfectly.

Steven_urwin said:

pwp said:

Steven_urwin said:

So I was wondering if this was just me, but the AF seems to hunt for a while before finding the lock.

Click to expand...

The 5DIII has a raft of AF settings that will definitely have a bearing on your results, depending on what it is you are shooting. Get them back to default and then experiment. With the correct AF settings for the job you are doing, the 5DIII should easily out-perform your 7D.

Maybe you are using AI Servo where One Shot may be more appropriate. Or try using a selected AF point rather than trusting the entire auto 61 AF point array. In my experience, in most circumstances a selected AF point will deliver more keepers than leaving the decision up to the AF brain. You're the boss.

Paul Wright

Click to expand...

Thanks for this Paul. I should have been a little more clear, you're right. I work in nightclub, and have learnt not to trust anything other than centre point with the AF. I also only shoot in single shot, as I like to choose the focus, and then compose the shot.
I think what I am really waiting for it for the lock. It seems to find the focus ok(ish), but the hesitates to find the lock. I am used to waiting for the VF to flash up red to confirm this (I have switched it from auto to enable, so it's not a case of it achieving a lock, and me not realising) before moving the to re-compose.
After finding what I think, it thinks is focused, the time the camera 'hesitates' is just long enough for the subjects of the photo to become self conscious, and look at each other a the moment is lost.
I am aware there is a setting in the AF setup to prioritise on shutter release, over focus, but I don't this is an option as I like to choose my focus, then re-compose.
I aware that the lighting is terrible in most nightclubs, but I have the 580ex2 and have never has this same AF lock 'lag' before with the 7D. Just a little upset with it really.
I wasn't needing anything better than the 7D AF wise, that's not the reason for the purchase. I just really wanted a FF 7D.
After reading about the 5Dmk2 AF woes, I thought I would hold out for this MK3. And am just wondering really if the 'massive AF improvement' is 'massive' compared with 5dmk2, but possible a little step back, from what I consider a faultless 7D's AF system.

Sorry for the essay, but wanted to be as specific as possible to try to clear this up

Steve

Click to expand...

I got the same problem as yours.

A little bit lock 'LAG' on 5D MARK III with low light situation. Sometime slower than 5D MARK II's center point.
But in very-low light situation my Mark III can focus while Mark II can't.
So when both can focus. Mark II won't have any lock lag symptom. Not saying about 7D. It's Superb !!

BTW Ai-Servo on MARK III is lightning fast than MARK II for SURE.

neuroanatomist said:

Glad to help. Just to add for any APS-C user who happen to be reading this thread, the crop factor is taken into account, so for example in Av mode on a 7D with a 100mm lens, the camera would keep the shutter at 1/160 s to as high an ISO as possible.

That behavior is the same as bodies which do not feature a minimum shutter speed in Av mode setting.

Click to expand...

I think it is unique to 7D and may be 60D.

For the rest of of APS-C cameras the min shutter speed is set to 1/60 I believe.
I shoot with T2i and camera chooses 1/60 as shutter speed when I am at 250mm.

RunAndGun said:

Mt Spokane Photography said:

I hate that button. I've lost a lot of the feeling in my hands and can't easily operate buttons. In 14 years of using DSLR's. I've never had the dial turn by accident. I wonder what it might cost to heve it removed

Click to expand...

I bought my first 5DMKII in '08 and have two plus a MKIII. I have NEVER turned the mode dial by accident on either MKII. I don't know if I hate the button on the MKIII, but to me it is definitely more of a hinderance than a help. I would definitely prefer the camera without it.

Click to expand...

I do a lot of photography on the move... with the camera hanging from my shoulders by the straps, mode dial issues were ALWAYS a problem for me... I would have the dial on M or AV and bring the camera up ready to shoot and next thing I knew it could be in B or C1 or whatever and if i was lucky, i would catch it before I did a shot and got burned... if I wasn't, I would lose shots. First time I ever really had that problem.. 50D, didn't catch the problem... lost an entire shoot. My camera usually goes whereever I go and that mode dial has always been a liability for me... not anymore...

As someone who buys not-working/for parts cameras and lenses regularly on eBay, I would say you could get about $250-350 for a submerged 24-120mm. That'll be a nice little chunk of change for a new replacement.

I thought about using a 5D3 that way. As it turned out at ISOs of 800 and below, my old 40D looked better than the 5D3 image cropped to APS-C size. The same is true comparing cropped 5D3 to 7D, although the 7D improvement over the 40D has been something of a disappointment.

Secretariat said:

How reliable is Ken Rockwell?

Click to expand...

You can absolutely count on KR, 100% of the time, to say anything on his website that will generate more clicks and thus more revenue, whether it's the gospel truth or an outright lie.

smi said:

What do you mean by another set for manual AMFA with FoCal settings Neuro?

Click to expand...

FoCal specifies certainl settings like spot metering, +1 EC, etc., and the shots need to be JPG (and is the only time I don't shoot RAW). That's for taking the shots yourself and having FoCal do the analysis on the images, rather than driving the camera. That was before the 1D X was supported at all. Fortuantely, FoCal for Mac supports full auto calibration now, which will come in handy the next time I do an AFMA (which will be very soon).

@AdamJ- thanks for that.

It will be interesting to see when they come out with their version of the 600-RT - it could be a game changer.

neuroanatomist said:

You're going to look very odd (says the dad who'll be taking a 1D X with 28-300L on a pre-K field trip this week ).

Click to expand...

What, a 1DX and no 600mm f/4L, lame, you might as well take an iPhone

Re: Lens Rebates Extended & 5D Mark II $400 Instant Rebate

Canon Rumors said:

Canon USA

Click to expand...

Anything on an European program? The € prices of Canon recently jumped up considerably, so maybe that's a sign of a rebate program to arrive...

that1guyy said:

Canon will obviously fail like usual.

Click to expand...

I'm always happy to bash Canon I think it's appropriate ($2099 6d vs d600...) but let's see what they'll do about aps-c next year. The market is more mobile since users didn't invest thousands of $$$ into L glass, so Canon cannot get away with its high-price policy like in the ff sector. If they improve the sensor some and then don't cut back on the features we might see a Canon comeback - maybe after the dslr execs got fired for the 6d.

i'm looking forward to seeing this new one!

Maybe I have an exceptional copy of the 300/2.8 L, that I haven't seen any benefit to upgrade to IS. Looking back, I recall that the first one I had was very good, though maybe not nearly this great. In the more than two decades I've used the two copies of this lens, I've gone through several 70-200s, a couple f:4 models as well as four f:2.8s, along with three of the old 80-200/2.8 "magic drainpipes". Only the latest Mark II version of the zoom can compare with my current, yet old, 300 in terms of overall IQ, both sharpness and "look".

If you find one anywhere near a performer as mine, at least if it's you can buy it for less than half the price of a new IS model, I think it's too good a deal to pass up.

Nate said:

HI,

When I travel I usually shoot on wide lenses, architecture and landscapes 65% of the time on my 17-40, 20% of the time I shot on 50 1.4 street photography, and in my bag I always have my 70-200 2.8 IS II for just in case, and when I walk all day long, after a while the weight of it starts to annoy me, so can you guys recommend me a tele lens with is pretty sharp over f8.

(Not necessary Canon lens)

Thanks

Click to expand...

Not sure what focal length you need or want for that purpose. I love love love my 135L and 200 2.8LII. They're both light and extremely good value.

A bit of an outlier and not suited for all applications but I'm also occasionally using my FD 500 f/8 reflex lens with the Ed Mika EF adapter. Given its design it is very sharp but has some inherent issues that need to be considered, e.g the typical "doughnut bokeh" and the fixed aperture.

Other than that I would look at something like the 100-400 or 70-300 DO but have no experiences with either. Not much gain probably over your 70-200 as far as weight is concerned. Maybe one of the f/4 versions without IS?

But for anything that resembles "street photography" I started bringing a 50 and the 135 and don't really miss anything.

SJTstudios said:

Pretend you aone going on a wildlife expedition, or to a sports game. You are going to use this lens handheld, with a monopod, a tripod, extenders, etc.
Which would you choose.

Click to expand...

I would choose a 300mm or 400mm for sports, and a 500mm or 600mm for wildlife.

You didn't mention what type of body you were using, but if you would like to compromise, then you could add an extender and crop body to the shorter lenses, for wildlife.

Schruminator said:

While I haven't used either filter, if you're already paying $2000 for the lens, I'd think an extra $30 (or even $100) for a filter is a no brainer. There's no good reason to buy the best glass out there and then slap on a mediocre filter.

Click to expand...

That's completely true, but up to recently Hoya HD was the top class Clear glass filter from Hoya.
I wondered how much better this new one is. On the other hand, it might even be worse that's why I ask here.

neuroanatomist said:

If you plan to shoot outdoors wide open (portraits, etc.), you might also consider a 3-stop ND - sometimes even 1/8000 s isn't enough.

Click to expand...

I'll use Hoya ND filters from 35mm L so it should be fine, thanks.

Canon's old lenses need adapters to work on anything new
Nikon's old lenses need adapters to work on new Canon or some other bodies.
Nikon's old lenses still work on new Nikon bodies without adapters (with some AF issues on low end bodies)
Therefore, Nikon lenses are more versatile, and there's a pile of old used ones to be found out there, more than Canon's.



True.

But.

Not all things are equal.

Some Nikon Lenses are better than similar Canon lenses of that time.

Other Canon Lenses are better than similar Nikon lenses of that time.

Also Nikon shooters like Nikon Lenses and Canon shooters like Canon Lenses.

So blanket statements are broad, comfortable and kind of cover all the bases but are just barely more right than wrong in any given specific case.

Absolutely!

Do not try using a Nikon non-AI lens on a new Nikon Consumer body. Or one of the "G" lenses that were optimized for APS-C before Nikon actually had a FF digital camera.
General statements lead the unaware into actually believing the misinformation and even into damaging their equipment.
You need to carry a large table around with you if you want to use old Nikon lenses on a new body, or at least have a good memory.
Those wanting to mount old Nikon Lenses need to read this first, or risk damaging their digital body!

http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/slr-lens.html

http://www.aiconversions.com/compatibilitytable.htm

I am very pleased with the 70-300 L. Though I use it mainly for sports (a "poor man" lens for sports) The frontbarrel of the lens is smaller than the rest of the lens and it extends about 7cm (being 7cm wide/diameter) - filter size 67mm
Depends on the fence but you should be able to move it through the fence.

I use the 24-105L as well. Great for general purpose and the 105 reach (plus IS) will be appreciated on a FF camera

This combo works great for me. I hope it will also when I will get my 5D MK III in October

Doubt we will anytime soon. Current 50mm f/1.4 is 19 years old and still sells.

I'd rather see an upgrade to the L version, but that's a ways off too.