Hello everyone!

I just rented a 24-70 f/2.8 VC from Lensrentals.com and have been using it to shoot around Disneyland. One thing I'm noticing, and wonder if it may be just this copy is that the VC/IS, isn't nearly as good as I had expected.

I have extensively used a 7D & 17-55 f/2.8 IS combo, and the IS on the 17-55 seems at least a full-stop equivalent better than the Tamron's VC, closer to 2 full stops. I could handhold 80% of my shots sharp on the 17-55 at 1/8, but I'm only hitting about 20% sharp with the 24-70 @ 1/20th.

Has anyone else been able to do a similar comparison?

Experts.
I have an unplanned trip to Masai Mara coming up with I am very excited about.
I sold my 600 ver 1 few months ago and have not been able to replace it (waiting for 200-400).

Now I have 300 2.8 ver 1 and 70-200 II for the trip. I am concerned that I might not have the required reach on my full frame cameras (X and 3).

A friend has 100-400 which I can rent for real cheap.

My questions: Will the 70-200 wit 2x be as effective as the 100-400 in regards mainly to IQ. AF speed is important by I think if there is any difference in this regard it would be minimal.

I intend to shoot at the widest f stop in most situations.

Thank you for your help.

Sanjay

I am torn. I shoot both weddings, and shoot real estate. I shoot both wide life and the night sky. I shouldn't buy them both. Which one would you choose and why?

http://davidhunt.ie/?p=2641

This is a very cool implementation of a Raspberry Pi into a Battery Grip. It basically puts a Linux computer right on the camera with a connection through the USB port.

Since I would like to get to the point where I can add GPS coordinates into my photos as I take them, what do you think the chances are of attaching this device, having the photos go to the Raspberry Pi, adding in the GPS stream parsed into Lat and Long, and then writing the data back to the Compact Flash card?

The other things it can do would be nice too.

Hey all,

I am new on this site... I stumbled upon it when I was doing some research on the Canon 1D Mark III.

I am currently shooting two Canon 1D Mark II N's. I photograph mostly sports action and nightlife. I am thinking about upgrading to the Canon 1D Mark III.

The most annoying thing I find with the II N's is the ISO. If I push it past 1600 I get major noise. I was wondering if anyone has had any experience with better ISO quality with the 1D Mark III.

I understand the AF issue debacle. From my understanding as long as the body has been serviced at Canon or the serial is out of the (bad zone) there are no issues at all. So if anyone want's to lay in on this subject too that would be great.

Aside from those two questions... any thoughts on the upgrade? I look forward to hearing everyones opinions.

Please and THANK YOU in advance!

Hello,


I just purchased Canon 6D. I need advice on what is the best lens to buy for portrait photography...or what kind of lens I am lacking?

These are the lenses that I already have:

Canon EF 50mm 1:1.8 II
Canon Zoom EF 28-80mm 1:3.5-5.6 V USM
Canon Zoom EF 75-300mm 1:4-5.6 III

any advise would be great! Thanks!!

Hi all,

I'd posted some of this in passing while discussing other stuff on another thread, but figured this might warrant its own post here.

I'm trying to shoot video, a self done (one man band) cooking show with my 5D3.

I'm trying to learn lighting...and I'd bought myself some clamp lights to try to do a little DIY style. I'd gotten CFLs all at a 5000K temperature.

I've had a heck of a time getting white balance set.

I've had a bit of luck using one of those insta-disks..that you put over the lens, snap an image and use that to set the 18% grey and do custom color balance. That seems to really help!! I've had more success in some test footage I shot recently, while also using the marvels picture style, and actually slightly underexposing.

Doing all that, I actually seemed to do better on in camera white balance, and left myself some good range for after shoot color correction and grading.

That being said....

I figure if I could light the kitchen with its native lights at the same temperature as my clamp lights (on stands, AC vents, you name it, I clamp to it)....I'd have a WHOLE lot less variation and ease in PP.

Again, right now, my clamp lights, all are currently CFL bulbs 5000K.

I've started researching, my regular lights are track lighting, and use U10 halogens which appear to be about 2700K. This is a rental house, so I gotta work with what I have.

I've been looking around for what will fit in a U10 socket...and choices are limited. I can't seem to find any halogens that are higher than about 3000-3200K. I found some LED ones that go near 5000K, but man, those things are like $20-$25 each...and I'd need about 11 of them?!?

Now, I'd gone into this, assuming it would be best to try to light the whole thing in the daylight, sunlight temperature range....am I wrong there? Does it matter, as long as everything is the same temp?

Should I look into getting softer CFL light bulbs for my clamp on lights?

Is there an easy way to shoot with mixed color temp lights and I need to know the trick?

Thanks in advance!!!

cayenne

Hey gang,

I continue to be intrigued with the new 24-70L F/4L IS. I don't own it yet, and I won't bite at the current price. That said, I'm poking around at early data and reviews.

Despite a few near universal opinions on this forum:

• Yes, we all wanted to see a 24-70 F/2.8L IS announced instead. (Minus points if you link the Tamron sarcastically)
• Yes, the current asking price for the new 24-70L F/4L IS is unreasonable.
• Yes, 24-105 F/4L IS is already available -- with more length and lower cost!

I'd like to put those comments on the "I understand, but we're not talking about that here" parking lot. Otherwise this thread will spiral into 'why did Canon do this instead of what I wanted' territory. Please don't go there, thx.

I still am intrigued by a few points on this lens:

• 70% max magnification from a standard zoom in L quality? That's really ducked under a lot of people's radars. This is a formidable on-demand macro option. I often leave my 100L macro at home, especially when I am traveling, and tubes are a pain in my hands, so this is an attractive feature for me.
• Smaller, lighter, etc. I am carrying primes much more often than my pickle jar 24-70 F2.8L Mk I these days.
• Better IQ. I am confident that the new 24-70 F/4L IS will trump the 24-105 F/4L IS, but I am waiting for more data on how it stacks up to my 24-70 F2.8L Mk I.

Or another way to put it, isn't this new lens just a 24-105 minus length, but plus smaller size/weight plus better IQ plus 0.7x Macro?

I am not proposing that it is a good call right now, given its price, but given how little I shoot macro and how heavy my 24-70 F2.8L Mk I is, this lens could conceivably do an 8/10 job at replacing both. I certainly wouldn't argue to pitch better lenses for this, but this could be a killer travel / vacation / 'fight all battles' lens call.

Thoughts? Does anyone here have one and could share their usage experience?

Thx,
A

Hello everyone. We will be travelling to Australia this August and am trying to plan out what my telephoto choice will be there. We will be travelling to the following locations

- Cairns/Port Douglas area. We have rented a house outside of Port Douglas on the border with the jungle.
- Fraser Island - staying on the island (Kingfisher Bay)
- Lady Elliott Island
- Gold Coast (obviously not needed for amusement parks, but we may go to the bird park)

My current max telephoto is a 70-200/2.8 II with a 2x III extender. It works decently well enough that I sold my 100-400 long ago. My current thought is to buy a used 500/4 v1 and take it with me. That would be about the extreme of my budget, so anything priced above that is simply not possible. In terms of the telephoto, the following is my logic.

- Canon is unlikely to release a new 100-400 or 400/5.6 IS before this time. Even if they announce it, it will not likely ship before then. Even if it does ship, the 500/4 v1 will still likely outperform it.
- Any other telephoto Canon releases (200-400/4) will almost certainly cost more than a used 500/4 v1
- This is a very popular lens and will be easy to sell for roughly what I paid if I later raise the money for something like a 600/4 II.
- Although big, it is more convenient (especially for travel) than a 600/4 v1
- I won't have the budget for this until early July anyways, so if Canon surprises me I can change direction
- The telephoto isn't just for Australia. I take a lot of wildlife photos here in the PNW too.

Now, the main question I have is - is it useful to take a lens this size to these locations? I am mainly interested in photographing birds and mammals. In particular I want to photograph dingoes on FI. Does the wildlife get close enough that a larger telephoto is not necessary?

Secondly, will I run into problems on the flights if I carry this on in a Gura Gear bag or something similar? We are flying Hawaiian to Brisbane (brief stopover in Honolulu), then flying Virgin Australia to Cairns and back to Brisbane. I am already aware of the weight limits for the flight to LEI.

i am always in need for photographic presents or gifts.

please post what you think is a great photographic tool or gimmick under 100 bucks.

Hey, does anyone use Ring Lights for portraits? If so, LED or what kind? I'd appreciate some suggestions from anyone who's used one or has an opinion.

Thanks!

I guess what I'm wondering is whether there's a chance that there might be an extension on the Canon rebates. I'm waiting for my tax return to show up and I'm pretty sure it won't make it before Saturday.

If it ends, when will there be another one? $400 off of that 70-200mm f2.8 IS USM mkII is looking nice - I'd hate to lose it!

You know, those cheap little frosted white plastic boots that go on the end of your flash?

I was at an event this week with a hired photog to capture portraits and the event. I was surprised to see he didn't use a softbox or umbrella, he just had a 580ex on a stand with a bulb diffusor. The photos are being used for PR and are pretty important, each one had to get approved, so I would have thought he'd have a more elaborate kit (I stupidly didn't think to ask him). I got to chimp some of the shots which looked good, so maybe he knew what his business was, but I haven't had good luck with those things, no matter how easy they are to use. Am I missing out on something?

TOKYO – Japan’s Canon Inc posted a 17.9 percent drop in quarterly operating profit on Wednesday, hurt by a strong yen and weaker demand for compact cameras as consumers switched to smartphones.

Click to expand...

Canon says sales in China down more than 30 percent in 2012

TOKYO – Canon Inc said on Wednesday that its sales in China fell more than 30 percent in the year to December 2012, more than it had expected, due to a slowdown in that country and a territorial dispute between Tokyo and Beijing.

Click to expand...

http://www.canon.com/ir/conf2012/conf2012e.pdf

First of all, THE important thing is this is mainly for sports (hockey-often, basketball and volley ball- sometimes, football and soccer-rarely) Will use 2470, 70200 and new Sigma 120-300 when it comes out. Currently I use the 1Dmk3 and 1Dsmk3 with the 2470 and 70200 and find the ISO fairly hard to push over 3200, even at 3200 they are not great. Previously I had a 1D4 but it was sold so I'm looking to get the 5D3 (never used it before) or the 1D4 back, advices?

Hi,

I would like to step up my portrait photography - and maybe even have a little home photography business.

I have a limited space (my living room - about 20 square meters) and would like to purchase quality, small, lighting for portraits. The whole setup needs to be totally collapsible, and easy to setup /dismantle - so I can pull it out, do my thing, and put it away. I was thinking of LEDS on stands ? Can anyone guide me here to some kind of kit ?
Any feedback is appreciated.

I am considering getting a 24-70 f4 to replace my 5 year old 24-105 to use on a 5D3. has any one got one and are you pleased with it.

Review of http://www.kirkphoto.com/Kirk_Security_Strap.html

Background, I haven't used the popular BlackRapid strap or other variants. My issue with the BlackRapid is that you have to screw something to the bottom which precludes easy Swiss-Arca plate usage. I know many got around that by using a SA clamp, but the setup seems kludgy to me. Additionally the BlackRapid solution seems over engineered to me. As an engineer I would opt for a simpler design, the swivel buckle, screw in attachment and such looks like too much, never mind adding a Swiss-Arca clamp, which also makes it much more expensive by the way.

Enter the Kirk Security Strap which had the features I wanted on paper.



A built in clamp. A strap which attaches directly to the clamp. Minimal failure points and foo. How does it stack up?

The claim to fame of the BlackRapid is rapid shooting. Important to professional event shooters, less to me, but as it turns out I suspect that is more marketing than reality. As it is the Kirk has zero issues with rapid deployment. Instead of sliding the camera along the strap, a move that seems error prone, with the Kirk you can simply raise the camera to eye level without readjusting anything. It just folds more or less in half with the padded part staying in place. When done drop it back down, zero fuss. Frankly it seems like LESS fuss than the BlackRapid, but as I say I haven't used that one.

Second, how does it 'sit' when by your side? It comes from the factory with the clamp knob toward you. This is a neat feature, what it means is that because the clamp naturally lines the camera up in a particular orientation (front-back) the knob is always there giving some standoff distance between the camera and you. Keeps the back of the camera from knocking into you. Cool.

Third it has a rail on the bottom for quick mounting on a SA system.

Fourth I'm not a walking advertisement. No logos blasted over it, the unit is extremely lightweight and low profile.

That's the good. The less good is that the strap isn't a super deluxe item. Fine by me, actually perfect for me, I don't want some overdone solution. Just a simple strap thank you. If you don't like it, it can be easily replaced at any rate.

Also with the default strap it wants to go over one shoulder (at least for me), not across your chest to the other shoulder. Again my preferred approach, I like being able to quickly take it on or off. If you prefer across the chest then replacing the strap with a longer version will do it for you.

That's my take.

TELL ME WHY!

Custom WB test between 5D Mark II, 5D Mark III:
- Same studio strobe light
- Same Exposure/ISO
- Same Lens
- Same CF Card (swapped between bodies)
-Shooting RAW images
-ZERO processing in ACR or Lr

Essentially, all I am changing is the body. I manually meter, shoot with an Expodisc, perform a custom WB, and repeat to make certain that my exposure and WB are as precise as possible. Trade the lens with expo disc still attached, swap the CF card and do the exact same thing.

Results: WB "As Shot"
- 5D Mark II: Temp 5500 Tint -6
- 5D Mark III: Temp 6050 Tint +4

That's a variance of +550 kelvin and +10 Tint variance!
(I have RAW files if anyone wants to download & evaluate)
I called Canon Professional Services and spoke to a Tech- they argued that the sensor is so new & different that this is normal. I said that color temperature is NOT subjective (and noted that my 1DS Mark II Color Temp is almost the same as the Mark II) and that I had performed the above tests leaving no room for error. They still argued that this is normal, cited all the new sensor capabilities... but said that they would test the body if I wanted to send it in.

I hope others read this and add their test results because I feel like I am alone in this issue.

The standard lens requirement for shooting events/weddings seem to be a combination of 24-70/28 and 70-200/2.8, I read both are nailed to a pro's camera 90% of the time (though I have problems doing the maths )

A lens with a larger aperture afaik has three advantages: better af on some bodies, better subject isolation/creativity (just one eye in focus) and last not least a "fast" lens is required for "low light" shots.

My question rose when I read the great book "Captured by the Light" by David Ziser who - believe it or not - writes that f4 to f5.6 (for convenience or added safety) is his bread and butter setting for posed candid wedding flash shots, and he used the 5d2 at that time.

Question: So according to this f2.8 is more important for available light and movement shots, but if that was case with the 5d2, I'm confused why still seems to be still valid with the 6d even though it's about 1 stop better ... either f2.8 was borderline in the past, or f2.8 - 1stop = f4 would be sufficient now - or am I missing something here?

Disclaimer: Please forgive slight traces of irony, this ia a real question because I don't entirely understand the issue, it's great people get whatever gear they like for any purpose they want.

Hi, I recently started getting into bird photography. I have been using a Canon 550d and a Canon 100-400 in center point AI servo mode. I have had fairly good luck, but I find the AF to be a little sluggish and it tends to hunt quite a bit when trying to focus on birds in trees. To be fair the birds are only filling the center point of the frame. That said I am considering getting the 7d given its renown AF performance, but in my research I have read a lot of people stating that even with the 7d they mostly use center point AI servo mode. I have read that some people use center point with AF expansion, but it has the tendency to lock on to a leaf or something at the worst times.

So my question is, is it really worth it for me to upgrade to the 7D for bird photography? Obviously aside from AF I would gain a faster FPS and build quality, but the unless the AF is much better the IQ will stay the same since the 550D and 7D share the same sensor. I don't mind getting the 7D if it will drastically improve AF performance, but otherwise I have been planning to get a 5DII or 6D for improved portraits and landscapes.

Thanks in advance for your advice!

All,
Starting point -- I have three bodies: 5Dmk3, 5Dmk2, and a 30D, which I rarely use. I do this for a living.

I see no new bodies coming soon and don't like the sound of (and the reviews of) the 6D. My desire to get more flexibility and back-up in my bodies was accelerated yesterday when I discovered that my 5Dmk2 shoe doesn't work! I have an evening charity event I am shooting Saturday night and was testing everything. There are few rental opportunities in my area but I was lucky to find a mk2 I can rent for flash backup.

I am interested in opinions of the trade-offs for a third FF body between another Mk2, a 1DIIIs, and I guess I'd have to consider another (used?) 5Dmk3.

I should say I am disappointed with the focus ability of the Mk3 in certain conditions so am leery of adding another Mk3. Canon can't duplicate the conditions in which I see difficulties in their repair facilities; Canon and I have gone around and around on this already. Leaves a bad taste in my mouth about the variability of the Mk3 bodies.

The 1DmkIIIs would be used for product work, food, landscape, portraits, architecture, tripod work in general, when I have the luxury of lower ISO. At or lower than 400 is my guess, and often using lighting. I think I would want to shoot high-speed-sync in some real estate or architectural work to balance windows (HDR still problematic for this in some conditions.) Further, I read that the skin tones are good on this sensor. Would shoot this body tethered a lot.

Did I read about focus problems on some of these?

I *don't* get asked to shoot sports.

I get the "old technology" epithet, but we used to buy a couple of used Hasselblads and their lenses and use those for YEARS in billing good day rates. And in a couple of years there may be another Canon to consider. I have to say that the lack of extra DR in the Mk3's low ISOs (over the Mk2) was a big disappointment.

This sounds like a lot of complaining but I am willing to work with the gear as it is... just find the right mix for me. I have never used a 1D.

Thoughts?

jonathan7007

I currently have the following lenses and looking for advice on "what's next"...welcome thoughts of the group

Canon EF-S 10-22mm
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8
Canon EF 24-105 f/4
Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC

The Tamron lens is an OK lens but I am finding limitations from an image quality perspective. I typically use the 24-105 as more of my everyday lens now that I have a started to become a stronger photographer.

So what do folks think I should consider next? My problem with choosing is that I love taking portrait shots but landscape is a lot of what I shoot as well.

So what say you wise ones?

Dear 5D3 users,

Canon has offered us a new Firmware update for 5D3 and we need to ask them to include Digital Video Crop mode why?

As a wildlife video and photography aficionado I am always interested in having more reach to obtain finer details of the critters that are not so comfortable with my presence in their surroundings. The standard solution to this legendary problem is to use super-telephotos but this is not always the best solution for all. Some of the inconveniences of these special lenses are weight, size, and cost.

For videographers using DSLR cameras with huge megapixel sensors now there is a new and better solution to get more reach. Unfortunately the lack of understanding of this technology has kept many people from WANTING and requesting (from canon) such extra-reach solution.

Fortunately this technology was implemented in the Canon t3i (EOS 600D) so now you can find many videos in
Vimeo that show the capabilities of this technology.

t3i w/ 100mm Macro + 3x Zoom: T3i w/ 100mm Macro + 3x Zoom on Vimeo
Canon T3i / 600D Macro Test with 3x-10x Zoom Feature: Canon T3i / 600D Macro Test with 3x-10x Zoom Feature on Vimeo

The t3i has an 18 MP sensor of 5184 pix by 3456 pix. It is important to understand that this sensor is much larger than the pixel size (resolution) of HD video which is only a 1920 x 1080. So to make HD video with these huge sensors they implement a system of under-sampling to reduce the resolution of the sensor to the resolution required by video. But what if we only used the center portion of the sensor to make HD video of 1920 x 1080? Well this is what the new technology calls Cropped Digital Video which was first implemented in D4 and D800 Nikon cameras and also the Panasonic GH2.

So if we look at the numbers and only use the 1920 pixels the ratio between the original 5184 by 1920 represents a 2.7 crop factor or an approximate magnification of 2.7X. This means that if you used a EF 300 mm f/4 lens and applied this video crop factor you would be obtaining an equivalent magnification of an 810 mm lens at f/4! (300 X 2.7 = 810 mm). I addition since this camera is and APC cropped model, there is an additional 1.6 X magnification (as compared to a full frame camera) giving a total reach of 1296 mm.

I assume that this cropped video implementation could be done through a firmware update so I ask everyone of you who are interested in this technology to request canon for such upgrade. I own a 5D mark III and a 7D only dream of having this kind of feature in my camera.

Here are other discussion about this subject:
Why no crop mode on 5d mkiii 1dx http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=6308.0

5DMK3 Video Zoom
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5279.0

Looking for recommendation for a 15mm f2.8 lens?