Hi all,

I currently have an EOS 7D with a number of lenses, mainly Canon mid-range stuff (24-105L IS, 70-200L F4 IS, 17-55 2.8 IS, 100L 2.8 IS Macro, 85 1.8 ) and two Sigmas (30 1.4 EX (i.e., the old one), and the 10-20 3.5-5.6 EX).
I had always wanted a short FL prime lens which ended me up with the Sigma 30 1.4, but its lousy AF (both regarding precision and consistency) and soft images below f2.0 make me use it only on rare occasions where I can live with a low number of keepers.

I had been eying the new 18-35 1.8 since it was announced, even more so when the first rave reviews came in. Prime like quality and aperture in a zoom, simply amazing. Getting what basically seems to be a "variable FL prime lens" I pulled the trigger when there was a good deal on Amazon recently (710€).

When it arrived, I was thrilled by the lens' haptics and feeling for quality, which is better than any of the Canon L lenses I own and just light years away from the Sigma 30 1.4 EX with its delicate "crinkle" finish and scratchy AF ring.

Focal-length-wise, while the 18-35 is definitely not an "always on lens", I found it to be very useful for a variety of situations.

I had no intentions to shoot any test charts, so I started testing it mainly indoors in mixed light with mainly static real-life subjects, which is my primary use case for such a lens. To my great disappointment, this particular copy on my particular body appears to exhibit a considerable frontfocus. So I printed an autofocus test chart (the one found at http://www.klein-bild.de/focus.htm ) and did some test shots at 35mm and varying subject distances. I always set focus back to MFD or infinity before autofocusing again and did three test shots at each distance and AF adjustment setting. For each subject distance, I concluded the series with a shot focused manually with live view for comparison.
The good news is that different from my 30 1.4 EX, autofocus was very consistent. But that's where the good news ended already.

It turned out that both at around 1 meter and at 0.5 meter subject distance, I needed to dial in a whooping +20 to get about the same level of sharpness that I got from MF (see screenshots below, the legend is in German, "Motivabstand" meaning "subject distance"). While I would not like the idea of having to do such a huge adjustment, I guess I could live with that.
However, at 0.35 meter subject distance, I got the best results at an adjustment setting somewhere between 0 to 10. That meant that at the +20 setting that I would need for the longer subject distances, I would be in the "barely acceptable" range of sharpness. Anyway, at that point it became pretty clear that even for a single focal length, the single adjustment value my body offers me would not suffice.
Being tired of test shots for the moment, I then did some additional research and found the "dot tune" focus adjustment method (check out this video: DotTune: Autofocus fine tuning in under 5 minutes ), which seemed to make a lot of sense and promises much faster adjustments and does not require taking hundreds of test shots.
I tried it out at 35mm and 1,75m subject distance (as recommended for dot tune, 50 times FL). I found the range where I got a stable focus confirm to be between -3 and +16, which would indicate a correction setting of +6 or +7.
The big surprise was at 18mm and 0,9m subject, the range of stable focus confirmation only started (!) at a correction value of +17.
I could visually confirm both correction values with actual test shots.
A quick test on my trusty 450D basically confirmed the results on the 7D: Considerable front focus at 35mm which gets better at shorter subject distance, and a plain massive front focus at 18mm.

tl;dr

I found that the Sigma's AF is consistent at a certain focal length and subject distance, but would require different correction values for different FL/SD combinations. This gives me some hope that I could fix it with the Sigma USB Dock and some patience, but I am just not sure if I am willing to accept this.

So what should I do?
Keep it and get the USB dock? I have a week before my "no questions asked" return period expires.
Or send it back for good?
Any comments or similar experiences welcome.

Regards

Grummbeerbauer

So, I've been using a 5dIII since November now. Its awesome, but doesn't quite cut it for me.
I shoot loads of really bad light gigs, so I'm often at rediculous iso. I like using the 5d in servo but it's not always accurate. It's probably the light being not good enough, but may be the camera being too slow.
I'm getting a 1DX this October. It's a given. But I've got a few questions anyway.

1) the 1d series has quicker autofocus. Is this noticeable? Is it a big difference?
2) due to the light I'm shooting in being mostly one color (red, blue or green) the 5ds metering usually sucks. Obviously a meter that only works in monochrome is going to see red and blue differently when aiming for 18% neutral grey. I shoot in manual which is great for when the lighting is even or unchanging. Neither of those apply. TV with the ec set to -1 works great in red light apart from it often bumps the iso and brings the aperture up. Not why I bought a 1.8 lens.
Will the 1DX RGB metering help here? Will it stop the reds clipping horribly with no exposure comp?

I get by with my 5d but I'm bored of it being a struggle. The second issue could be fixed with auto iso exposure compensation. Set to M, set ec to -1 and set my own shutter and aperture. I guess that's too clever and not totally a useful feature at all.
Any answers welcome, TIA

Pretty simple question here. Please don't flame me with the "rumors are just that" or "you never know when..." stuff. I currently have a 50 1.8 II and want to upgrade it. I'm familiar with the current upgrade path options but...

What does the forum think of the odds that Canon releases a 50 update, either to the 1.4 or L, by the the end of the year?

I know relying on rumors to make upgrade decisions is bad practice and that I could be out making photos with either of the current iterations right now, but I'm not in a terrible rush. If either stand a solid chance of upgrade, it's worth it to me to wait.

So what say you, betters all, tellers of the future? 50/50? 75%? less?

Hi everyone

Thinking about swapping my backup/travel 60D body for a 70D. I see that this new camera has brought back AFMA... After remembering the hours locked up calibrating all my leses with FoCal on my 5Diii, i was wondering if this has to be done all over again with a new body?
Or will the values calculated previously be pretty accurate?
My gut is telling me i should do it all over again but im hoping some one will tell me otherwise!

The biggest improvement by far was with my 50 1.4 lens, the rest were less noticeable.

Thanks!

Hi again

I'm about to purchase the Canon 70-300mm L, but am not sure if the optional tripod collar will be of much benefit to me.

I will using the lens exclusively on a tripod for landscapes. I understand that the lens will be better balanced when used with a collar, but doubt this would be a major issue then shooting static subjects. I am however concerned about the strain that an unsupported 1050g lens will put on my 5D Mark 2's lens mounts. Does anybody else use this lens on a tripod supported solely by the lens mount ?. If so have you had any issues in this regard ?.

OK,
Given one would benefit from the extra range-
So from what I've read the 70-300mm is as sharp as the 70-200mm f/4 IS through 70-200 at the minimum, perhaps even further out. Also, while the 70-200mm is f/4 constant, again my understanding is the 70-300mm is f/4 up to 200mm.

So, even if the 200-300mm range is ever so slightly less sharp and is also f/5.6, since the overlapping range between the two lenses is basically the same I am not seeing any disadvantage with this lens vs the 70-200 f/4 is... Thoughts?

I posted a video comparing DPAF video tracking with STM and USM lenses: http://youtu.be/djOPPQycZ8g

Hi Folks
There is a Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 fo sale second hand near me. Is this lens any good, looking to pair it with 7D, is it worthy of this body? Been trying to get some larger aperture lenses on a tight budget.
This lens fits the available budget, as did the nifty fifty I bought second hand for £40 earlier this month.
The sigma 18-50mm f2.8 is up for £160. Worth it?
The looow budget is due to a huge endowment shortfall, so much as I'd like some nice new L glass I'm preferring somewhere to keep my gear dry! 8)

Cheers Graham.

My future wife and I will be taking our honeymoon in Central America (Mexico, Belize, Guatemala). We will be spending most of the time on a tour.

We will have backpacks for our gear, so can't travel too heavy.

Balancing considerations of weight and practicality, what lenses do you think I should take?

I currently have a 5D III which will be coming.

I am also thinking

• 16-35L (yet to be purchased
• 35L
• 24-105L

I have the 24-70L II which I am considering taking in place of the 24-105L. The image quality is just so much better. I don't think that I will miss the long end. As always, IS would be great but I find my photos from the 24-70L to be so much better than those from the 24-105L.

I have a 70-300L but don't think it will be needed. I'm not into birds at all, much more landscape, culture and people.

I also own a 24L, 85 f/1.8 and 135L but don't think that it's worth the weight to take these.

I have a 600D that I will probably take as a backup body in case I get robbed at any point.

Thoughts? Thanks
[/list]

Atlanta in 3 weeks... For 2 weeks. Work 9-5... But I will have 2 weekends completely free...

I mainly photo wildlife, nature, landscapes. But happy to have a go at night and cityscapes...

Camera - 7d

Lenses - all canons
10-22
16-35 f2.8 mk ii
24-104 f4
70-200 f4 is
300mmf4
100mm f2.8 macro is

Others -
1.4 ext mkii
Gorilla pod SLR tripod


So I need to a) pack light and b) make sure it fits in a medium sized day pack, think 20 litre...

I am thinking 10-22, 24-104 and 70-200 plus the gorilla pod and extender.

Sound sensible?

Rich

Let's face it. When a wide angle zoom spans more than three focal ranges quality either end drops. Increasing the span light loss comes in the equation from the higher number of elements. Why can't we have a pure wide angle 24-35/2.8L top performer instead of stretching the limits in the name of "higher portability".

The way I see it 24-35/2.8, 50 (), 80-200/2.8 is the dream team (with 50mm possibly redundant) instead of anything else. What Canon does is marketing the exemplary 24-70/2.8L II albeit with vignetting at the higher range. Tells you instead of 24-35/2.8 + 50() I give you 24-70 with a weaker 50-70 segment. Well, alright, but some of us put quality above "portability". Give us the proper 24-35/2.8L and we'll combine it with a 50/1.2L.

Unless we expect the competitor to make the first move, like the 14-24/2.8.

I do some video during a photo shoot with the canon 6D
Canon 6D vidéo Gaëlle bikini

I have a question for something I've read and heard multiple times but am not sure about why.

I read that modern full frame cameras 'expose' or 'reveal' the flaws in lesser lenses more than crop cameras. To me this doesn't make sense save a couple caveats.

I would expect a 20-24mp full frame sensor to 'hide' certain lens defects due to the lower pixel density compared to 18-22mp crop sensors. I would expect greater sharpness from the same lens on the full frame sensor compared to the crop sensor because of the decreased pixel density. I don't know how CA is affected by this.

I would expect corner sharpness to be decreased on the full frame sensor compared to the crop sensor, but that could also be accomplished by shooting wide and cropping in on only the ff sensor.

Could someone explain to me why a full frame sensor would 'reveal' the deficiencies in cheaper lenses compared to the same lens on a crop sensor?

Thanks

I've really got into playing around with how i take my photos recently, been using black glass for a few years, got a Lensbaby last Christmas, added the macro/wide/tele accessory kit around Easter, then a intervalidameter, then the lensbaby fisheye optic last month... Also using Instagram and Kitcam on my iPhone almost daily. I've read about people using old retro lenses, popping adapters on to use new lenses like the Nikon 14-24 etc... Then I've read recently about the Lynny Lens, but what else is there ? What playful fun do you get up to with your Canon, with lenses, sliders, flashes, timing accessories and such...

Tell me which EF-S lenses you would like to buy if it existed. Would have some advantage over existing lenses, even if it is just the price.
My short list:
EF-S 8-16mm F4-5.6 $ 800 (non-fisheye)
EF-S 16-55mm F2.8 IS $ 900 (I have a dream ...)
EF-S 17-70mm F4 IS $ 500 (not impossible)
EF-S 55-150mm F2.8 IS $ 1100 (so sexy)
EF-S 135-500mm F4-5.6 IS $ 1200 (not too heavy)
Does my dreams will be met? What is your dream lens EF-S?

http://youtu.be/P9EZIzkygb0

As broadcast on Scottish Televison earlier this year

Jess_Ryan SM_READERS

Broadcast on Scottish Television in March

I am calling upon the collective wisdom here to help me understand something that has bedeviled me for some time

I generally use Canon lenses though I do own the Sigma 50 1.4 and in the past had an assortment of Tamron and Sigma lenses.
I am puzzled as to why some lenses hunt and others do not. For instance, a Tamron 24-75 and a Canon 28-105 that I used to own would hunt mercilessly.
If the AF module is in the camera and it sends its instructions to the lens why would the lens hunt? It seems to me that if the AF module sees OOF images it sends a correcting command to the lens and the lens should stop. Many comments I have seen seem to imply that the lens is making some calculations of its own but I can hardly imagine that to be the case as the light just passes through the lens.

For CDAF I understand it is an iterative process whereby the lens overshoots perfect focus and then backtracks to eventually settle at correct focus but what is the case for PDAF?

TIA

So I have a buyer lined up through CL to sell off my hardly-ever used 24-105mm for $800. Ever since purchasing the 24-70mm mk2, it has been gathering dust. I'm not lacking anything over that FL range, so it shouldn't bother me, but...

I just wonder, am I missing something obvious about this lens? I have wanted to love it since I bought it over a year ago. So many people on this forum and others extoll its virtues (IQ, versatility, IS). To be frank - I just haven't seen it. And I think it sounds great on paper - good FL range, IS, compactness. It SHOULD be my go-to walkaround lens. But it isn't.

I did the AFMA on focal, but I've never been able to get true sharpness from this lens in darn near any situation. My prior workhorse was a Canon 17-55mm 2.8 on a T3i, and I didn't observe signiciant difference in the "upgrade" to the 24-105 (although, I felt color was noticeably better).

I'd hate to have seller's remorse if there is some secret to its awesomeness I just haven't unlocked yet. Or maybe I just have a crap copy. I suppose since I'm getting about the same as I paid for it. No loss, and hopefully prices will be similar in the future if I want to try to jump in again. What do you think; will I regret it?

Just a wee personal project for fun. Main camera EOS t3i, with an M used for a couple of shots (handheld interviews at end)

http://youtu.be/JAaGKMMTksU

It all started with the sensational announcement of MoVi. The possibilities with this gyro-stabilzing system are incredible. The technology of the gyro system isn’t a new concept but this new interpretation gives all filmmakers a new instrument to realize their creative ideas. Mindcut blog has created a compilation of all current systems.

http://www.mindcutfilms.com/3-axis-camera-stabilizing-systems-overview/#.Uhc4WrwR5pc

Hi everybody,

after years of absence from photography I'm about to start again. I will go for a 70D with the 18-135 mm IS STM kit lens first as this fits my current budget.

In the next two or three years I plan to add some L lenses and after that maybe a FF body (after the dual-pixel AF will made it into the FF bodies).

Thats at least what I hope for, now for the reality check:

Is there any information available if
- Canon will put the dual-pixel AF into the FF bodies? And when?
- will Canon come out with L lenses using STM? And when?

Thanks!

I thought this fabulous lens (canon 200-400) needed a fabulous lens coat. . . .

Lenscoat and the others that sell these things don't have much besides bland colors and camo and are fairly expensive. I saved about $50 doing it myself and have something unique now. I know, I know what's $50 bucks after spending an arm and a leg on the lens but every bit counts . . . .

So, I bought some neoprene (3mm), seam seal and seam tape. I made this in about an hour. I don't do a whole lot of wildlife, mainly sports so no need for camo - just want some extra protection. . . .

I might re-do the top piece - working around the bump out for the tele-converter was tricky. . . . I'm also thinking about using the leftover pieces to make some cool clothes for the kids . . .

I really like the lighter feel and the more comfortable grip of the 6D. I returned my D600 due to dust problems... I have been a Canon G series user for YEARS and loved all of them. In film days I used Nikon,,, F2s & F3s.

The D600 was uncomfortable but I lied the DR and IQ.

How do the 6D users here like the camera?

I do fine Art, Street photography and landscapes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_from_Tomorrow

AWESOME!