After reading too many posts to remember where people are wondering if they should wait for the next big thing, I want to offer some advice:

[list type=decimal]
[*]If the lens/camera JUST came out (and isn't a Rebel), it will be years before the next one, so please don't ask about the 200-400 1.4x II or 6D II anytime soon
[*]If it's a lens, buy the current one if you need it. If they announce a new one right away, you can either return the lens you just bought (if possible) or sell it for nearly or sometimes even more than what you just paid
[*]If it's a body, check the timelines of how often Canon updates them. The 1D series is many years apart, the 5D (and probably 6D) is 3-4 years apart, the x0D series about 2 years, and the Rebels about a year. If it's been that long since the current model came out, deal with what you have or buy the current model if you need it. Bodies, unlike lenses, don't hold their value well, so it can be worth the wait in some cases. Of course, Canon doesn't always follow these timelines (5D III for example) so it's harder to play the waiting game.
[*]Finally, most lenses are only refreshed every 5-7 years, at best, and those are usually the common Pro lenses (24-70, 70-200). Other lenses like the 50 f/1.4 may never get an upgrade as long they keep selling so well. Or maybe it just seems like it.
[/list]
I'm sure other members will have better advice to tack onto this post.

Hi,

I'm visiting the US (Chicago) next month...can anyone recommend a reputable Canon dealer so I can pick up some cheaper gear (cheaper than UK anyway!).

Thanks!

Dave

With all the smartphone cameras and other want to be photographers our there, have any of you pro wedding photographers experienced this:

http://fstoppers.com/attending-a-wedding-soon-be-sure-to-watch-this-video

Are "High ISO" noise and "long exposure" (at low ISO) noise the same qualitatively? Or is one slightly more managegable than the other? (Practical Reference: When photographing a night scene of a city is it preferable to choose high ISO and faster shutter speed, or is it preferable to choose low ISO slower shutter speed, assuming I do not want to consider the motion blur of moving subjects resulting from slower shutter speed as a factor)

Hello guys

Is there any possibility of a problem or harm to my CANON camera body (60D) if I attach a Nikon SB-700 speed light in manual mode in the hotshoe of the canon?

Also can you tell me if i can use it off camera with a wireless transmitter and trigger...may be yongnuo

Hi,

This is my first post even if I have followed this forum for long time.

I was shooting today bird time lapse sequence with Canon 5D mark III + 70-200 F2.8 IS II. Sequence ended just after sunset. I took one exposure in every three seconds. Exposure settings were M mode, F2.8, 1.6 seconds and auto ISO. I took more than one thousand pictures. First picture was taken with ISO 160 and last with ISO 4000. ND 400 filter was used to get long exposures.

It was however strange that almost 400 pictures at the end were shot with ISO 4000. Pictures were more and more underexposed towards to end. First ISO 4000 picture was correctly exposed. I got an idea to calculate exposure value of last pictures. It is EV -3 !!! According to specifications almost all Canon DSLRs are metering between 1-20 EV. I should not get -3 EV exposure metered but somehow I did

I made some further testing. I managed to meter -5 EV with Sigma 85mm F1.4 (1s, F1.4, auto ISO 6400). Also other -5 EV exposure parameter combinations were possible. I did not use ND filter with these additional tests. So it seems that 5D mark III meters up to -6 EV with F1.0 lens. Every stop of lens brigtness drops this result by one stop.

My friend tested Canon 30D metering with EF-S 17-85 zoom. I understood that he tried metering with full zoom in Av mode and lens cap on. Exposure paramters were F5.6 and ISO 100. Resulted exposure time was ten seconds. That gives exposure value of one and two thirds of a stop (1.7 EV).

Does anyone have explanation to my findings?

-Teemu

Higher resolution LCD screens

If Canon were to produce an LCD with the same pixel pitch (326 ppi) as the iPhone 4-5S and the 3:2 aspect ratio it would have a resolution of -
3.0": 814 x 542 (1.32 million dot)
3.2": 868 x 579 (1.51 million dot)
3.5": 960 x 640 (1.84 million dot) - same size as iPhone 4/4S

If Canon were to produce an LCD with the same pixel pitch (441 ppi) as the Samsung Galaxy S4 and 3:2 AR it would be -
3.0": 1100 x 733 (2.42 million dot)
3.2": 1174 x 783 (2.76 million dot)
3.5": 1284 x 856 (3.30 million dot)

Better than the current 720 x 480 (1.04 million dot) displays (288 ppi @ 3", 270 ppi @ 3.2"), and could allow Canon to tout the highest resolution LCD on any DSLR (Samsung would still have the biggest, though, with the almost-unusably-large Galaxy series at 4.8"). Does anyone know what type of panel technology is used in current DSLR LCDs (TN, MVA, PVA, IPS, eIPS, etc)?

What are your thoughts?

Hello, friends. I have just completed and published my fairly extensive review of the Rokinon/Samyang 14mm f/2.8 lens. Some of you have been asking questions about the lens as I have been posting pictures from it over the past couple of weeks. Hopefully this will answer them. Thanks for your time:

http://www.dustinabbott.net/2013/10/rokinon-14mm-f2-8-wide-angle-review/

http://www.canonwatch.com/whats-1-series-camera-body-model-marking-pointing-canon-event-october/

does the 1 body without model markings mean something... what do you think?

A Guy I work with is into Bird Photography. Since we are all challenged by distances, he mentioned that if I was willing to go manual, that this might be an option:

http://www.swarovskioptik.com/nature/equipment-c210703

It might be a bit pricey, but if it can do decent 1700mm equivalent shots, might be worth the price.

Anyone used this sort of non-standard set-up? What are the results like.

Those brazen plagiarists at Yongnuo are at it again. They're about to launch a Canon RT compatible trigger with an RT compatible flash to follow.

http://www.lightingrumours.com/new-yongnuo-triggers-flashes-fully-compatible-canon-rt-system-4728

I am getting more serious about wildlife photography and recently switched camps from Nikon to Canon. Loving the Canon glass I have been shooting. One thing though for budget wildlife photography that Nikon currently has going for it is the D7100's "reach" between being able to AF with teleconverters at F8 (for example the 80-400 + 1.4TC) as well as the 24mp pixel density.

Do others think Canon will try to keep up paces and add F8 AF abilities in the 7DmkII, like implemented in the 5DmkIII, to keep up paces with the D7100? The 400mm F5.6L + 1.4TC on a 24ish megapixel crop sensor would be a budget/travel wildlife photographer's dream! At least for me. Curious if others think the demand is there for this AF implementation to make it to crop sensors in Canon land.

Cheers -L

I have the ultimate in lenses for my T1i and was wondering if much would stand to be potentially gained by moving up to a 70D. I do it all with maybe 40% or so of my photography being indoor volleyball (where 6400 ISO is common).

So I'm pretty pleased with the T1i, but am wondering if I'm missing out and if it would be a nice step up from a Rebel without being overly complicated/minimal learning curve and maybe something like a 7D being maybe more features than I'd need.

Thanks for any insight.

Is the 100-400 mark 2 still coming out this year?

Seems like every few months there's a rumor that it's around the quarter, but 2013 is almost done and still nothing from Canon.

The last I saw was that it was due out "around the time" of the 200-400 release. Maybe I missed something...

I just read a comment by PBD as to how the 50mm f/1.4 was extremely sharp at f/8. I checked out my photos and found (to my dismay) that I couldn't confirm this because over 90% of my shots were at wide open or at f/1.8 or f/2.

Then I proceeded to check my other lenses. I was surprised to find that most of my shots (again approximately 80-90%) were at wide open.

How do you guys shoot? Do you tend to shoot at max aperture most of the times?

Cheers ... J.R.

I've seen rumors that Nikon is working on cameras that can have an interchangeable sensor. I found it interesting and also clever marketwise. At this moment the cameras ar covering pretty well the photographers needs, and it can become interesting to start to sell specific sensor for the diverse kind of shooting (high iso specific sensor, a low clean one and so on). ithink that there is a chance to sell many of them.
Now, I found really strange that Canon, that's producing both Camera and Sensors is not working on something similar.
Canon il the market leader and could set a standard for all the companies, no?

I visited Niagara Falls this past weekend. This was my first time shooting there. I briefly looked at some tips and chose to stay on the Canadian side. I had my 5D Mark III, 16-35mm II and 24-70 I. I also had polarizers and Hoya 9-stop ND filters. A tripod too. I got there about 6:30PM, check in and went to the falls. I did not realize how wet it is near the horseshoe falls. I ended up walking down to the near the American Falls and photographing both the American falls and the Horseshoe from there. The photos in the night were blah. Pitch black and they actually put the damn lights on at 8:30PM!!! By that time in later September, the sun has already set (7:00PMish) and its dark. Even with the falls lit my long shutters were boring. Way too bright against the night sky. I concluded that if they light the falls up at 8:30PM, you should visit around July, where the sun actually sets at that time and you can get some nice shots with orange/blue/purple sky. Also, even though I walked to the America falls, I got wet, so I suggest weather sealed bodies/lenses. The next day was a bit better. I waited for the sun to be high south and took some shots using my tripod and the ND filter. I were pretty happy with those. Also, I found that on a full frame, I had mt 24-70mm on the entire time. My 16-35mm was a bit too wide for what I was shooting. Let me know about any shooting experiences you've had at the falls and any recommendations. I will definitely be back next year for round two!!

Wow...I was amazed to see this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oReLN5nntKw&feature=player_embedded#t=1

I mean, I've heard of officiants getting testy inside of church buildings, but even then, usually setting the rules before the ceremony.

This guy blows up in the MIDDLE of the ceremony, embarrassing the bride and groom....and this ceremony was OUTDOORS.

I read one quote someone made on YouTube that I agreed with. The groom should have leaned into the priests ear and said something like "I'm paying the photographers much like I'm paying you, please continue. And..if you do walk out, I'll sue your ass off, now, please get back to marrying us..."

cayenne

I was told that macro lenses are always sharper compared to non macro lenses but I was also told that the EF 135 L is called the "Lord of the Red Rings" because it is so incredible sharp, so which one of them is sharper, especially at maximum aperture?

Hi all,

I've given some nighttime tripod work a go recently to shoot the LA skyline, which is not my normal fare. I'm a handheld natural light guy for almost everything I shoot.

I shoot a 5D3, and I'll upload two shots I took -- one with the 24-70 F/4 IS (on the 70mm end) and the other with the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II (around 165mm). I'll run through my method, and I welcome any and all pointers you have for taking the shot or post-processing it. As you'll see, I'm a novice at this -- many simple pointers should immediately come to mind if you've done this before.

Starting declaration: I'm an aperture-priority shooter 98% of the time. I'd rather not climb 'why don't you shoot manual?' mountain in this thread unless you feel it is absolutely necessary, thanks.

SHOOTING

1) Set tripod, frame shot, level the shot in viewfinder, weigh the tripod down, hook on the corded shutter release, etc.
2) Switch IS off (it was windy, but not that windy. Was worried about the IS motor actually inducing shake. Does that still happen, or are those lenses tripod sensing?)
3) Switch to manual focus, turn LiveView on, set ISO to 100.
4) As I was not shooting anything remotely close to me (see shots), I set aperture for the sharpness sweet spot of the lens, somewhere between F/5.6 and F/8.
5) Meter (left it on evaluative, see #7 later for my rinse and repeat method)
6) In 10x LiveView, I manually focused on a building in the skyline. I kind of threw out the classic 'focus 1/3 of the way into the frame', hyperfocal considerations, etc. because, again, most everything would have focused out to infinity with this framing.
7) Take shot. Due to shooting a nighttime scene in Av, it was much brighter than needed, so I used exposure comp and brought it down to something more like my native eye would see (-1EV to -2EV depending on the shot in question). I sort threw the histogram out the window in this case, as the goal of the shot was clearly not a bell-curved histogram.
8 ) Take final shot or shots (sometimes I bracket three on +/- 1 EV just in case). Shot in RAW.

POST-PROCESSING (I use PS's native Adobe Camera Raw tool, which is nutty, I know. But all the sliders are there, running -100 to +100 if you haven't used ACR before.)

1) Set WB to tungsten and that lifted the horrific Blade Runner-ian amber haze of LA at night. We all will likely disagree on that call, but I felt it let me capture the true light were I there on the street near the larger signs.
2) Given the crazy contrast (I don't like HDR work particularly), I push shadows up somewhat (+30) and pulled back highlights immensely (-80).
3) I actually give up on avoiding black clipping and went -30 on blacks and +30 on contrast. The goal to me is a crisp night shot, so I don't want to invest a lot of work to make a murky dark part of the skyline slightly more recognizable at the cost of a ton of noise.
4) I give a slight boost to luminance (+15) and a very small kick to saturation (+3).
5) Skipped lens correction work as this aperture wouldn't vignette, the shot was already straight/level, and chromatic aberration was already handled in camera as the 5D3 had profiles for both lenses.
6) Sharpness runs 0 to 125 in ACR I believe, and with such a low ISO, I can climb up to 75 with both lenses before I've 'overcooked' the sharpening. (I always sharpen and do noise reduction at 100% pixel view.)
7) Didn't pursue noise reduction (again, low ISO shot, didn't want to trade sharpness for noise reduction with so little noise.).
8 ) Exported to PS.
9) Cropped to taste (prefer to do this in PS for some reason) and save as 10 quality JPG. I only save PSD or CR2 files if I plan to take a shot to print, which is rare in my case.

OTHER STUFF

Didn't use filters or deliberately aim for a long or short shutter speed. I left the big stopper in my bag as there were no clouds or waterfalls (lol), and no large field of traffic to blur. This just didn't seem like the right place to use it.

Again, please see attached and help me along.

Thanks!
A

Hey all,

Photozone finally got around to testing the extremely well-reviewed Sigma 35mm F/1.4 'Art' lens on a FF body. (Their FF test camera is a 5D2, btw.)

Of note, that now gives us an aperture vs. sharpness breakdown that's pretty simple to read. See attached. As their test went, the Sigma was an astounding performer wide open, esp. in the corners compared to the Canon. Note the stretchy-fonted Canon section is not stretchy from data-doctoring -- I just stretched that chart to better line up left to right with the Sigma data for comparison purposes. (Raw link below for skeptics. )

Keep in mind that I believe that they only test one lens. Not everyone has LensRentals' statistical power.

For the record, I do not suffer from sharpness syndrome, in which the sharpest lens is deemed 'the best'. So I encourage folks to read the whole reviews...

Sigma: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/848-sigma35f14eosff
Canon: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/516-canon35f14ff

...and read about other items, like handling, focus shifting, 'nervousness' of the bokeh, distortion, chromatic fringey stuff, etc.

Or better yet, rent both and see for yourself. Despite the very strong sharpness-per-dollar argument made by an overwhelming majority on this forum, there are many who love their 35L and are holding out for a (weathersealed!) 35L II rather than to go after Sigma's terrific new offering.

- A

...

I'm sorry but I have to share this. Today I went to a nearby park to take some pictures. Very nice place, there is always lots of folks with DSLRs taking pictures there. But today this guy really caught my attention. He was carrying this very expensive Leica rangefinder camera (I tried but could not see which model; digital, for sure), taking lots and lots of pictures. All with the lens cap on.

I always knew Leica makes some very fine cameras and some of the best lenses money (mountains and mountains of it) can buy. What I didn't know, though, was that the camera and lenses were so damn darn good that they could take pictures even with the lens cap on. Maybe it's for protection, a cap for sure does a better job protecting the front element than UV filters. Now that's something worth paying $9,000-plus for!

New here- pardon if this has been asked / answered before.

After some lengthy searches and comparisons, Im about to purchase a new Canon 6D; some of the packages being offered includes a 24-105mm f4 IS L lens and a 70-300mm f4-5.6 EF w/ IS. (one of the local retailers was trying to match this but was offering the tele w/out the IS)

~12 years ago, I purchased a 300D Rebel (1st gen), and with it, a 70-300mm f4-5.6 EF w/ IS lens (and another lens).

My question, then, is

1) is this the 'same' telefoto lens?
2) EF is EF? jumping to the large, full frame format, this telefoto will work?

3) if it is the same, I don't want a redundant model. Suggestions for another lens to fill out the range? My focus is wildlife and landscape along with some outdoor action (lake-based water sports).

Your replies and insight are most appreciated.
T

I bought a used 600mm Sigma lens this morning for $135, and thought I'd compare it with my 100-400mm L + 1.4X TC. First, I took several shots and found that in the dark windy rainy weather that a 1/1000 sec image took a very high ISO setting on my 5D MK III, such that the image was noisy. So, I mounted the lens on a monopod, held my breath, and set the shutter speed to 1/320. My tripod was in the studio, and I did not want to brave the weather to go out and get it.

Then, I used the same setup with my 100-400 + TC. I could immediately see the difference thru the viewfinder, but went ahead and took the image for a first shot at comparing them.

To be fair, $135 versus almost $2000 worth of lens is a bit extreme, but I wanted to see the difference. I may have to get out that tripod after all, because there was a lot of difference, and some of it was movement.

Here is my first try, with images cropped and sharpened in Lightroom.

Sigma 600mm




Canon 100-400L + 1.4X MK II TC




To be fair, if you were printing the images at 8 X 10, I doubt that most people would see the difference, they look pretty good at a small size.

I'll try again later with my heavy duty tripod just to compare.