Hello guys! I hope you're doing just fine and getting ready for forthcoming holidays I keep reading reviews on how great Zeiss 135 f2 lens is, and this made me think whether or not I should get one. I'm definitely not a professional and once in a while take pictures of my girlfriend/sister and some friends, which are 99% portraits. I have 5d and few lenses: 70-200 2.8ii, 85 1.2ii and 200 2.0. If you were me, would you get Zeiss 135 f2 in addition to these lenses? Would I gain anything special by having this lens? Or would you sell any of the lens I have to get Zeiss? I don't really mind doing manual focus and as I've said, I shoot almost exclusively portraits and not an action. Thanks for your suggestions!

They've just announced results at http://www.senscore.org/

Hi all. I think I might be in the market for a 6D, having recklessly and somewhat regretfully sold my 1DSIII. I'm in the UK, well, Guernsey (VAT benefits, yay!) and wondered if any of you think it's worth holding out for the end-of-November Black Friday craziness? Do you think such an item will receive any deals and where do you think it's worth watching?
Thanks for your replies!

I am looking to buy an extender for my 70-200 2.8L and have found a solid used 2x extender (version 2) for sale. It will be used on my 5D Mk III.

Thoughts on this purchase?

I have a 6D + 70-200f/2.8 II + 2X III TC. As discussed elsewhere, AF is not very good. Do I change the body or the lens? Regarding lenses, I would like to be at 560-600mm with converter. So I see three options: Sigma 120-300 + 2X III TC, Sigma 150-600 or Canon 100-400 II + 1.4X III TC. But the Canon 100-400 II + 1.4X III TC will not AF on a 6D.

So what move is recommended for BIF?

And on another note, what is GAS?

Thanks.

Going to the Zoo this weekend and hiring a Canon 6D and some lens. Will also take my 50D. Unfortunatly no 7d2 for hire.

Forecast is for cloudy. How much better off will I be with the 2.8II than the F4 Non IS?
If I get the f4 I can also get a 24mm 1.4 to play with over the weekend.

I could get a longer lens but I will be doing some portrait stuff so I need the 70mm

Hey all,

I caught this story doing the rounds on PetaPixel and SLR lounge:
http://www.slrlounge.com/lightswitch-tries-change-nd-filter-game/

Watch the video. Besides being a wretched sales pitch (zero details on filter size or reasons why this is better than anything else), this idea appears to be an alternative for the Lee SW150 holder, which is made for non-front-threaded lenses like the Nikon 14-24. It has the added upside of automagically not needing any threading or assembly -- it's a pretty simple one-piece push-on usage.

Commenters on the stories are calling BS over a $265 asking price for just the holder, but upon further review, the Lee SW150 holder is a solid $400 in comparison (I had no idea!).

I'm a happy Lee 100mm (standard/foundation) user and am invested in that setup. So this new product certainly isn't for me. But I was curious what I'm missing with this idea -- what (besides the push-on use, which I am not convinced is a net positive thing) is the point of this system, and what might it offer over the Lee SW150 or Wonderpana setups?

- A

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Comparisons/Canon-EOS-7D-II-1D-X-5D-III-AF-Comparison.aspx

Very helpful comparison, I think.

Wondering how many of you have seen this: Using rechargables in my 580EXII. Also use a few Yongnuo's (YN560III). The Canon, however, drains 1 of the 4 batteries MUCH faster, however, and I've started to see poor performance from that battery over time. The Yongnuo's don't ever do this.

I noticed the problem when I started putting the four batteries into my hi-dollar charger/discharger and the amount of remaining charge was always extremely lopsided when compared with the other batteries from the same flash. Seems like a very uneven draw. Hmmm...

Like I said, Canon only. Yougnuo's don't show this. Ever.

Thoughts? This actually worries me and I'm less likely to buy another Canon flash if this is common.

TIA!

I have a canon 60d and recently purchased a yn568ex ii... now I want to do off camera flash, so which YN receivers should I use yn622 or yn603... 1 light stand with a shoot through umbrella will be the set up

Hey all, I am considering upgrading my current body. I have a t2i. I am thinking of making the switch to the 6D, but I am not sure if this would be the best thing to do. Would it be better to invest in glass and wait it out to the 6Dii? My current glass is 35mm f2, 50mm 1.8, and sigma 17-50mm f2.8/canon 75-300mm which I am planning to sell because both are not compatible with full frame. I considered the 7Dii because it would support my sigma 17-50 but I mostly shoot landscapes. Let me know your thoughts!

I bought a 7D as my first DSLR mainly because of what I read about the 70-200. I loved the idea of the 2.8 plus it allowed me to add a 2xIII for what I thought would be occasional use. Well, with 4 kids and my wife all in sprint canoe and kayaking the 2x is on more than not, and frankly still not enough lens often. I love using the 70-200 alone, but find that if it isn't at 200, it is mid-range wide open and has made many of my favorite candids of the family.

The announcement of the 100-400 II has had me constantly in deep thought about my entire lens line-up (wouldn't my employer love to know that). Ultimately owning both these zooms would be great, and it isn't so much a financial decision, but if I ever want my wife to smile at me again, there is only room for one of these in my house! So I'm going with the advise I've read over and over here, buy the lens for the focal length you need, and for me that is the 100-400.

At the other end of things, when I have the 24-105 mounted I more often than not wish I could get wider, and when the 10-22 is mounted I always wish I could reach a little further. Also, 90% of the time the 10-22 doesn't get below 16.

Before:
7D, 70-200 2.8 IS II, 2x III, 10-22, 24-105L, 35L, 50L

After:
7DII, 100-400 II, 1.4x III, 17-55 f2.8, 50L, 85 f1.8, 135L

The process has already begun, the 7D is sold (at an obvious loss, but not bad as it was a used purchase), the 10-22 is sold and I replaced it with a 17-55 for even money. The 35L will be tough to let go, but it is mint and I should be in money when I swap for a used 135. The 17-55 is obviously no 35L substitute, but with IS it can actually get non action shots in lower light, and I need the 135L to not miss the 70-200 soooo much.

Am I making crazy moves? I see it as a reduction in flexibility, but covering more of the range I need with zoom, while covering the remaining areas I gravitated to with the current zooms with quality primes.

All comments or suggestions welcome.

Hello everyone

The 400mm f4 DO lens is something of a mystery to me. I have personally never seen one in action and if you look for tests and reviews (e.g. on youtube) the offer is quite limited. And from the few sources I found the opinions on the lens were mixed, so that one could get the impression that the 400mm F4 DO lens was overall not very popular. If so, I don't know if that would be because of real, noticeable technical disadvantages compared to other lenses or because of the price (or both).
Still Canon found it reasonable to announce a newer version of the lens at photokina, so they expect an demand for this lens.

Compared to the 400mm F5.6 is the image quality (sharpness) of the 400mm f4 DO Mark I better, equal or worse? I would expect the AF and IS to be better (most certainly the IS ).

Is there anyone here in the forum who uses the 400mm f4 DO Mark I and/or would be interested in the Mark II version?

I've been given the above ringflash. I'm assuming that it should work with my 5D3. Is anybody still using one of these (it probably dates from circa 2000) and can give me any pointers?

Hello Canon enthousiasts,


Since it's my first post on this forum I'll first give you a short introduction of myself.
My name is Laurens, I come from the Netherlands and work mainly a photojournalist for a newspaper.
I read the topics on this forum quite often and also regularly check the main page too see what's going to be out there.

I'll get down to my issue. I bought a 7D II and noticed that the top LCD doesn't show the lightmeter in manual mode anymore... Like my 7D MkI, 5DII and III do. There is however a exposure correction bar(in AV or TV) that could do this. But I'm not able to find anything about how to make it work like that in the manual, nor the internet.

Does anybody have any idea why Canon deleted that function, and more important, how to get it back?? Noting has taken the place, it's just a blank field when I press the shutter button half way on the 7DII.

You can see the pic's below to understand what I mean.



7DII


5DIII


I'm sorry if there are faults in my post, but English isn't my native language and I haven't been on a forum for a long time now.

All the best,

Laurens

First, I may have placed this in a thread / topic in which it don't belong. Feel free to inform me or move it (if you have such powers). Was the best I could figure out for now, and no search returned anything showing the same or similar content.

For those who want to waste a few hours, or if you just need to know all and everything about what can be found inside a typical CR2 file and which structure it has, then you might enjoy some information found here -> http://lclevy.free.fr/cr2/
It is presented as a work in progress, so take it for what it is.

There should be some "But I knew that already", a few "Oh, that's interesting", and perhaps even a "Bah, who cares".

Found this video on Youtube this evening, South African photographer Roger Machin shows the new 100-400mm at about 18:00 minutes in. Looks very similar to the 70-300 in operation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecqOqE4Ck8Y I don't think I've been this excited for a lens update in a long time!

I currently own a T3i and want to photograph my son at his wrestling meets. I know the f/2.8 will work with the T3i. However, would the f/4 allow me to still upgrade to the 7dII? Will the improved focusing and iso quality allow the f/4 to function well inside of a gym? I know that the f/2.8 will create a nicer background but I am willing to make some compromise with this. Thanks.

As an Adobe Creative Live annual subscriber I'm disappointed that Apple beat Adobe to the finish line by providing their Digital Camera RAW update to support several new cameras including the 7D Mark II. I have, for the moment, switched back to Aperture for post processing. If Apple had not announced that they have stopped further development of Aperture I might make it a permanent switch back, sigh.

Sample RAW image from 7D Mark II processed in Aperture:


Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) by Tony Varela Photography, on Flickr

For image quality, which would you prefer/recommend: 6D (FF & low-light capability) with a 1.4X converter or the new 7D2 (at native resolution, without a converter).

I have the 300/4L, 135/2L & 50/1.4 - it is the 50mm performance that I am most interested in (70mm @ 2.0 with converter, versus effective 80mm @ 1.4).

Short story:
I have the 7D and will almost certainly upgrade to the 7D2. I mostly use the 135L lens, although the 300 would be more useful to me on FF than it is at the moment. I find the 7D/300 combo limiting due to the lighting situation, and believe the 7D2 would give a significant improvement for my typical use.

If I buy the 7D2, I will sell the 7D, but I am also considering the 6D "at some stage". What are your thoughts?

Long story:
I used to have numerous items of 35mm kit, including AE-1, AV-1 & various typical and mediocre lenses. My former favourite was the T90 & 85/1.8 prime. I am fairly used to judging my required shot with a prime, rather than a zoom.

Having moved up through various digital models, including early 'point & shoot' to the 20D & 7D, I am now looking for my final camera body. I've rented the 5D3, and would love a 1Dx, but have ruled that out financially.

As for lenses, I thought I wanted the 400/2.8L, but after using it, I know it's too big. The 200/2.0L was also on 'the list', but again is too bulky. My future lens purchases are now probably the 35/1.4L (for FF) or temporarily the new EF-S 24/2.8. The 70-200/2.8 non-IS is also a possibility.

Based on my existing lenses, and possibly the wish list, which combination will give me the best quality images: the 6D with converter, or the 7D2? I've ruled out the 2.0X, the 5D3 and most other zooms/primes. Having two bodies offers an advantage, and I realise there are other considerations (AF being the main one).

Maybe the question should be, which do I buy first: the 6D or the 7D2? I know the 7D is more suited to my typical shoot.

Many thanks.

I can imagine that getting rid of that huge clunky mirror would be welcomed. Hopefully, it would use the same lenses and body, just minus the mirror. Its not a sports camera, so lightening fast AF is not required. In a studio, a LCD monitor will work fine to compose. I'm not sure what options might be coming for landscape photographers who work in the daylight. Perhaps a EVF?

You can probably get one starting at $43,000 for the beginner model

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9012734727/phase-one-to-introduce-a-series-mirrorless-medium-format-camera-system

Canon EF 500mm f5.6L IS.

For bird and wildlife photographers who can't afford the f4.
Like to regularly hand hold their equipment in the wild
A sharp prime weighing less than a 300 f2.8
Enough reach without convertors and their associated drop in AF speed and IQ

Costing $2.5k

Just a thought