Hello 5Diii and 6D users =) I would like to hear opinions on the following.

I've been wanting to upgrade my 5Dii because I've always struggled to get satisfiable results at high ISO (I mean noise and image sharpness), and I shoot in low light situations at weddings (churches in Europe are a bit dark, and I have to go to ISO 3200 most of the times, that being the limit, and I don't use flash in churches). For this upgrade what interests me is to have good to very good results at ISO 6400, that's my main objective. From your experience, is the 6D better than the 5Diii at 6400 or 12800? Are images at such high ISO usable?

I got used to work around the 5Dii AF limitations, but having missed shots when using the outer AF points always or because I had to recompose while shooting with the center point annoyed me, and still does, so I would like to have better AF. I think would take advantage of the 5Diii AF system and I'm afraid of, after a while shooting with it, becoming anger at those 10 non-crossed AF points in the 6D. So, 6D users, please advise on this particular subject, please.

My current kit is: 5Dii, 7D, 550D (all with battery grips), 16-35ii, 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 70-200 non-IS, two 430EXii.

Here are my options:
- Buy the 6D and 70-200ii IS, sell the 5Dii, the 7D (i really don't like how it performs above ISO 1600, and I think the 550D RAW files are better) and the 70-200 non-IS, spending a total of +/- 800EUR.
- Buy the 5Diii, sell my 5Dii and the 7D, and keep my 70-200 non-IS, spending a total of +/- 900EUR.
- keep the 5Dii, sell the 7D and the 70-200 non IS, and buy the 70-200ii IS, spending +/-250EUR.

If money didn't matter I would buy the 5Diii and the 70-200ii IS. But money matters. And one of the questions here is: can the high ISO on the 5Diii allow me to produce sharp images with the 70-200 non-IS, since it will allow me to go up in ISO while maintaining a 1/200 shutter speed? Or is it better to go with the 6D (with its shortcomings regarding AF) for the high ISO and add the 70-200ii IS, which is a razor sharp lens? Or will I keep my 5Dii for one more year and go for the 70-200ii IS while living with the missed shots and the noisy images at ISO 3200?

Thanks.

Hi,

I own a 6D, 70 - 200 F4 L IS, and have recently been using a borrowed 24 - 105 F4 L. Previously I was considering upgrading the 70 - 200 F4 L to the F2.8 II version, but ready responses and other threads I am happy with the F4 IS.

Now is the time to actually purchase a 'walkaround' lens, as I need to give the borrowed lens back...therefore I would like your thoughts. Portrait & Travel are probably the key requirements for me. Choices (plus any other you come up with):

- 24 - 105 F4 L
- 24 - 70 F4 L IS
- 24 - 70 F2.8 (non IS)

Where will I see the the best in terms of image quality? Is the F2.8 II worth the difference in price considering it is not IS? Will I (purely as a photographic enthuasiast) see a significant difference in image quality between the 3 lenses? I have a bonus due, so the F2.8 is financial viable...

Thanks for your help!

Dave

to get this ad here on CR..

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/marblelike-lens-smartphone-slr,news-17607.html

I'm not even sure where to begin with this article. If anyone can find the paper on which this is based, I would love to pick apart their scientific method.

Is there any news as to when or if Canon will be releasing the SX60?

Just saw a CPL comparison on a webpage and saw the nuttiest thing. See attached pictures or the link below.

I call this nutty because it looks like a 24-70 F/2.8 Mk I with the 24-105's hood on it.

Link here:
http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2013/09/24/best-circular-polarizer-filter-5-top-models-tested-and-rated/

1) Did I get that combination right?

2) Why on earth would you put that hood and that lens together in such a fashion? I recognize how much smaller that is from the 24-70 Mk I hood, but if it's not correctly shading the lens... why use it?

Thx,
A

I just read a comment on a forum saying that the Canon 70D, when set to Auto ISO only chooses ISO's in one stop increments. So for e.g. if ISO 800 is not enough, it will jump to ISO 1600, and will not select ISO 1000 or ISO 1250 in AUTO ISO. Similarly if ISO 3200 is not enough, it will jump to ISO 6400 and will not use ISO 4000/5000. (Assuming you have set max ISO to 6400).

I would think that by setting ISO increments to 1/3 stops (C. Fn I-2, page 365 of 70d user manual) ISO will increase in 1/3 stops, even in AUTO ISO. Can 70D owners kindly confirm this for me ? I don't have one, but am considering buying one and AUTO ISO is a part of my shooting style.

And yes - I know if I have a problem with higher ISO's I can use Manual ISO and all that - as I mentioned, it's a part of my shooting style and I want to keep it that way.

Thanks.

Found this via Engadget.

Pretty bold claim on being able to provide a high resolution fisheye FOV in the palm of your hand that beats out the EF 8-15L. Neat stuff!

http://www.jacobsschool.ucsd.edu/news/news_releases/release.sfe?id=1418

is there a Canon shooter on CR that owns a Fuji x-pro1, im just after a opinion on the Fuji where you like it or not?
on a side note... would'n it be wonderful if Canon made a Camera like this or even better a full frame version, arghhhhhhhhhhhhh ;D

Hi

I recently purchased a 6D together with the kit lens 24-105 f4L and have been very happy with the results so far. However, I was photographing a event with the 24-105 f4L earlier this month and noticed I did not have enough reach to get the shots I wanted without cropping. Therefore, I have decided to look into buying a lens with a longer reach than my 24-105L for those situations where I want more reach.

I will mainly use this lens for:
- Nature
- People / pets
- Event
- Travel (I guess the 24-105L will be my go-to lens here anyway)

So far, I've looked into three lenses:
[list type=decimal]
[*]70-200mm f4L IS
[*]70-200mm f2.8L IS II
[*]70-300mm f4-5.6L IS
[/list]

As I have enough for the 70-200mm f2.8L IS II, this seemed like a no-brainer by reading all the rave reviews online. However, I tried it out in the store yesterday, and found it to be quite heavy compared to the 70-200mm f4L IS. I am afraid that I might buy it, but don't use it as much as it deserves because of lugging around a 1.4kg lens and a 0.7kg camera a full day might be quite tiresome on my arms and back.

And then came the next logical alternative: 70-200mm f4L IS. I am currently very happy with my 24-105 f4L so I figured I would be able to live with the f4 and the half weight compared to the f2.8 makes it much easier to operate. On the other hand, when I'm shooting in low light situations, I either use my 600EX-RT or switch to my 35 f1.4. So I fear the f4L might be a little slow when shooting indoors.

My the third alternative is the 70-300mm f4-5.6. It is 300g heavier than the 70-200 f4, but still 400g lighter than the 70-200 f2.8. It also has longer reach and would perhaps be more usable for travels or those situations where you want a little extra reach over 200mm. However, as I see it, the same arguments of usage in low light shooting applies to this lens as well.

My main concern is not an economical issue, but which of these lenses will best fit my needs down the road? I am afraid that I might buy one of them now, and then regret it later if I find it too heavy or not able to shoot as well in low light conditions. Have any of you been through the same process? What did you end up with, and why? Which of these lenses would you think complements my shooting the best?

My current gear:
Canon 6D
35 f1.4L
24-105 f4L
600EX-RT

I love my 5D MK lll bodies but I often struggle with getting high quality skin tone even though I use a custom white balance. Too often I am challenged to reduce excess magenta, red and pinkish tones from skin color and also deal with too much yellow.

I'd be much happier with more brown tones in caucasian skin. I see those wonderful tones from large format digital cameras. I have a hunch the 5D can pull it off, I just need to learn how, either with camera set up or post production Photoshop techniques.

Tell me it's possible

Thanks

Rex

I'm working for my college newspaper and they've procured me a credential to shoot on the sidelines of a D-I game in two weeks...never done this before. I've got a 5D3, 16-35 II, 70-200 II, and a nifty 50, as well as a 430EX. I also have a 500L II and a second 5D3 coming via the CPS Loan program that I plan to use at this game. I can buy a monopod by then for the 500. I also have the appropriate Arca plate.

My question is...any tips? Keep 500 on one, 70-200 on the other I assume? Any reason to switch to 16-35? Flash of any use? Obviously I want to keep my team facing me, but how is movement governed on sidelines. Can I get up and go where and when needed or am I locked down?

I'm sure there's tons I'm not even thinking to ask. Any help is greatly appreciated.

I wanted to ask if any Canon users here have switched from Nikon and if so what are their experiences? Specifically can you please comment on:

- What Nikon bodies, lenses, flashes you were using and what you are using now
- Experiences surrounding gear quality
- Other experiences in general.
- How long have you used Canon for and would you do it again?

Specifically if anybody has any experience going from Nikon D300s to Canon 7d &/or Nikon 17-55/24-70 to Canon versions of these lenses, please do chime in. I am considering a switch (I slightly prefer Canon ergonomics and also believe that Canon 7D image quality is superior to Nikon D300s). You would think it would be easy to find opinions of those who have switched on the internet, but apparently not.

Thanks - and do note that isn't meant to inflame a Canon vs Nikon thing in any way.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/nex-ff-is-said-to-be-competitively-priced/

The only probable downside - will it have any lenses available? (I'm assuming this will have interchangable ones). Thats one area where Sony really lags. A good UWA landscape prime and a nice walk around zoom might be a good start.

Hi all!

I am continuing to test my new 600ex-rt.
Flash Setting at full power 1/1, 105mm direct flash firing at a piece of white paper.
Using ML v2.3 RGB spot metering, I needed to WB my camera to 6300K in order to
get all 3 RGB values to match.

This tells me that my 600 is about 300K bluer than a "standard" flash, which is at 6000K.

My real life shooting has confirmed my test. I needed to dial K about 300K higher than my
usual setting to get the correct skin tone. i.e. when I gel with CTS I used to need 3700K but now
I need to go to 4000K.

Out of curiosity, I pulled out a mint Nikon SB-80DX and tried that too. It is spot on at 6000K.
BTW, camera used was 5D2.

So I am just wondering if others r seeing this too?

Thanks!

Long time reader, first time poster

I currently own
5D2
24-70 f/2.8 I
70-200 f/2.8 II
50mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.8

I've been second shooting weddings as a hobby for the last year or so and am considering either a 5D3 or 24-70 f/2.8 II as an upgrade.

The 24-70 f/2.8 II is such a highly rated lens and it sounds like it'll be an upgrade in every aspect to my version I, even its weight! But I'd love to have a 5D3 for it's higher DR, better focusing system and I'd had 2 bodies for shooting events (less time switching lenses!).

Any suggestions on which to pick? In an ideal world I'd get both but can only afford one or the other right now.

Thanks in advance!

I took advantage of the 6D package deal on B&H a few months ago, and have since moved the 6D into regular rotation as my primary backup/second body. This was a position that was held by my 7D (now since sold) for three years, and it did a very good job at auto-exposing in the shutter/aperture priority modes. However, I'm finding that the 6D is INCREDIBLY inconsistent in these modes, giving me images that vary +/- 2 stops or so, even in the vary same scene/composition!! I can also see the metering indicator bouncing ALL OVER the meter between exposure checks, even without moving the camera or recomposing!! WTF??

As a result, this requires a ton of extra tweaking time in post to get images to look right, and limits my ability to bulk-sync settings, since each image is always different from the next. I've since resorted to using my 6D in manual mode only, but it kind of defeats the purpose of having a second body to grab and shoot with in certain instances when I just need a quick shot. Basically, the aperture/shutter priority modes are completely unreliable. This approach has me rethinking the versatility of the 6D in the field, especially since my 5D3 and 7D never experienced such irregularities between shots in these modes.

Has anyone else experienced this issue? Will a trip to Canon Irvine solve it, or is this common across the body? Is Canon aware of it, and is a firmware update planned?

I love the quality of the 6D images - when it works. But spending needless hours to compensate for wonky exposures is quickly becoming infuriating.

I know this is a topic that has been kicked around a lot but I am looking for some words of wisdom. I am planning to go to Bosque del Apache some time in November. I will try to avoid the Festival of the Cranes just so I won't have to maneuver around huge crowds.

As you can see below, I have a 100-400. I have gotten some decent pics in good light with this even with the 1.4x. But, some of the photos I will be after are dawn and dusk so the lighting won't be great. I am thinking of renting a super-tele for this trip.

Given the 5Diii high iso performance but the lack of a crop body, I am thinking about :

-300 f/2.8 with the 1.4x (effective 420mm f/4) or a 2x (effective 600 f/5.6)
-400 f/4 - don't think it offers much over the 100-400 except a little better IQ)
-400 f/2.8 with 1.4x (560mm f/4) or 2x (800mm f5/6)
-500 f/4 - would yield ridiculous reach (700mm and 1000mm) with extenders but slow (f/5.6 and f/8)

Given that I'll use a tripod for a lot of shots and only hand-hold a bit, what do you all think you would do? Anyone ever shot here? I handled a 300mm f/4 years ago in the early morning light but that was on a crop body without an extender. FYI, I will need to fly to New Mexico so my stuff needs to be able to fit into the overhead and some of these lenses are a bit large.

I could always bring my M and use a super tele for reach

... I just ordered a 16-35L f/2.8 II and a 70-200 f/2.8 II ... What to do of this addiction?

I own a t2i.


100mm 2.8L
70-200 F4
28mm 2.8
50mm 1.8

I wanted to get peoples ideas should i got to the 6D, 5d Mark 2 or get a lens?

Another TC question ...

I've not yet got any TCs as they would not have been useful for any of my gear. I've been wanting a 200mm f/2.8 prime for some time now but am considering the 135L + 1.4x extender which will given me roughly 190mm at f/2.8.

Has anyone used this combo? Anything I should look out for?

Cheers ... J.R.

Looking for Super Tele for sports.. Any Suggestions?????

What is the sharpest aperture from 1.2-2.8??

The 28-300L is a unique lens - exceptional range and ok, but not great IQ.

As Canon cycles through it's lenses, any rumors, thoughts, etc about the future of this lens.