Would you rather be a photographer that is known for producing thousands of 'good' images (but never produced a masterpiece)

OR

Be famous for producing only ONE masterpiece ever (all your other work was mediocre at best)?

Having just posted some questions regarding my T3i in the BODY forum I want to post my worries about my new lens purchase here. I snagged this 24-105 L online and it seems to not be pulling in the quality as a previous version I had and show reflection issues I've not seen in my other lens including the previously owned 24-105.

I know this lens was pretty sharp the first one I owned. This one seems to be having issues keep things sharp. Here are two examples:

1) http://www.flickr.com/photos/64364083@N03/8106703478/# (taken at f/5, 1/80 sec., ISO 200, 93mm)
2) http://www.flickr.com/photos/64364083@N03/8106698744/# (taken at f/4, 1/1600 sec, ISO 1600, 80mm)

Finally, I started noticing little green spots are strong reflection issues. I used a previous version of this lens to shot concerts and the stage lights didn't cause problems with that one.

Here are some examples:
1) http://www.flickr.com/photos/64364083@N03/8106674803/#
2) http://www.flickr.com/photos/64364083@N03/8106674803/#
3) http://www.flickr.com/photos/64364083@N03/8106670297/# (Green spots are under the carvings MUG)

There is a UV filter on it that came with the purchase. It isn't a top notch one. Could that have anything to do with it or is this all normal?

Hey guys, I picked up my Nikon D600 with a 50mm f/1.8G yesterday (sold my 7D and other Canon gear to get it) and happened to go to a card game at my boss's house last night. This was the perfect chance to try out the low-light focus, big aperture of the 50mm and the high ISO capabilities of the D600. Here's what I came away with:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedmud/sets/72157631808729691/

These were all shot _without_ a flash and it was pretty dark. All, or almost all, are at ISO 6400. I was shooting in the highest quality jpeg modes and had High ISO Noise Reduction set to "Normal". They were only slightly edited in LR3 before getting posted.

I am super impressed with the quality. Yes, there is noise (of course at 6400!) but there is a TON of detail in there too. I applied just a tad more NR in LR3, but I think the balance between noise and detail is awesome. I uploaded the full resolution jpegs to Flickr so you can grab those there if you want.

I didn't have any problems focusing in the dark. I used a lot of off-center focus points and never had any trouble. Unlike the Canon 50mm f/1.8 the Nikon version _does_ have an ultrasonic motor... and it focus fast, accurately and quietly. It's also damn sharp wide open.

I'll embed a few here for those who refuse to follow a link ;-)


Rich Shuffling by friedmud, on Flickr


Highland Park by friedmud, on Flickr


Yaqi Just Lost a Hand by friedmud, on Flickr


Thinking by friedmud, on Flickr

Last night, I was shooting sprint football in awful lighting. Unfortunately, my rebel XSi could only go to 1600 ISO and even with the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II, the photos were very underexposed. The itch to upgrade is getting stronger!

But I do not want to spend over $1000 for a new body.

At this point, both will be amazing improvements over what I have now. But I need your help in deciding between the two of them. The 7D has great AF but the T4i has a newer processor -and if that means less noise, then that's going to sway my decision.

I'm selling my 2011 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 lens, and a person interested in the lens has asked me if it's all metal. Mine has a metal mount but plastic body.

The potential buyer claims the "new" 50mm f/1.4's are all metal. Is this true? I follow Canon rumors and other sites daily, and I've never heard of a new all-metal 1.4...

Previously we tested the Canon 5D Mark 2 with the Canon L 24-70 F2.8 lens vs the Canon 60D with 17-55 F2.8 APSC lens. At Aperture F2.8 the 60D setup is slightly sharper. Article found here.

Some dpreview commenters suggest that I should test the 5D Mark 2 setup at higher aperture. So we have both camera setups are on the table shot at aperture priority. ISO 100. Aperture at F7.1. Shutter speed is around 1sec. I tried mirror lockup but that does not make any difference. Both lens zoom in at their longest i.e. 55mm & 70mm respectively.

Here are the results

http://hkfreelancephotographer.com/5d2-vs-60d-test-at-f7-1/

How do you think the new Tamron 70-200 2.8 zoom might compare to the venerable Canon Mk II? I have a T1i and am currently using the Canon 135 f2 for indoor sports.
Thanks.

I rented the 100-400 mm for a trip to the San Diego zoo, and thought it was a really nice lens. In terms of utility, though, I'm not sure I have a day-to-day need for it (though need & want aren't always correlated).

As I already own the 70-200 F/2.8 II, I'm wondering if getting the 2X converter is a viable option.

I believe Neuro has previously written that the quality of the 70-200 + 2x is comparable with that of the 100-400. Does anyone have any experience with how fast/accurate the AF when compared?

Moreover, has anyone made this decision before and either been really happy with it or wished they'd made a different choice?

Thanks

Shawn L.

Hi everyone,

I'm just a photographer enthusiast who just bought a 5D Mark iii. The store is offering a 3 year warranty for $469 at Henry's here in Canada. Is it worth the warranty? I used a credit card and it does offer extended warranty for a year but has anyone ever had experience using warranty claims through a credit card? Is it a hassle? Should I purchase the extended? Thanks

Here is a useful article, by Rudy Winston, found at the Canon Digital Learning Center on how the new 1DX firmware 1.1.1 works and can benefit the shooter. ;D

http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2012/eos_1dx_firmware_update.shtml

Jim Kirk

I am looking to purchase the Tokina 16-28 f2.8 . Due to its bulbous front element there is no filter thread. Are there any adapter/method or some sort of holder out there that are used on such designs so that one can use filters. I am hoping to use ND filters and really need to figure out there are ways I can attach filters before I hit the buy button.

Thanks

Hey everyone! I'm on a tight budget and I currently have a 5d2, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 24-105L, 50 f/1.8 and a 35 f/1.4L. I'm happy with my 35mm generally speaking but lately I've been looking more into a 50mm f/1.2. I have the opportunity to buy obe from a friend and I just can't afford to buy the fifty L and the 35 L. My question is of you could choose one: 35L or 50L, which would you choose? Oh, I do most portraits , wedding, and lifestyle/fashion photography. Thanks! Looking forward to hearing peoples' thoughts!

Yesterday I received 5d III. I got an extra battery too, Canon genuine (I ordered everything from B&H so no doubt in that).

This morning, as my first battery was about to get empty, I had swaped it with the other one and got cannot communicate error. I chose cancel and put the one that was at some 15% before back in.
For some reason I got the same error for that battery as well.
Now it seems that I have an issue with both batteries.

What should I do? I mean, it is a $3000 camera and the second day I used it...
Is this a firmware problem? The camera came with 1.1.3 Is there a way to reload it?

I cannot belive that once I finally got the camera I have to send it back.
Should I ask for a new one?

Is this acctually a battery or a camera problem?

spotted the good old 1DX on the season premier of Nikita ;D

Hola,


The EF-S 15-85mm turns 4 years old next year, which is quite old in technology years (in my humble opinion). So I searched these forums and this website for any news of a redone 15-85mm and found nothing, which has led me to post here.
I seek this out because Canon have just re-released the 18-135mm and I was hoping that they would do the same with the 15-85mm.


Could someone please point me in the right direction, or link me to any news available about the aforementioned lens.


Thank you for your help.




n∆te

Anyone using the Kirk PZ-148 plate for the 5D3 and a hand strap? I have one on the way and was wondering if it's the wonder solution I've been looking for. I hope the fit is flush with the contours and the hand strap doesn't loosen the plate.

Hey all, I recently got a 5D Mark III and a 70-200mm. When shooting moving objects my photos are out of focus on the point of focus. Sometimes there's front focus and sometimes back. I tested the lens and it seemed to focus correctly. Any body have ideas what this could be? Could it be the camera? If it is the camera, why? Is there any way to fix this?

I accidentally saved an auto focus point somewhere on the right of my points and I cannot seem to remove it. I did this by holding down my AF selection button and pressing the LCD light button. I have tried saving it to my centre but now if I move individual points to the sides, the middle still flashes meaning it's saved.

I cannot find anything to do with this feature in the manual so any help would be great.


Thank you

Yesterday after months of debating I finally pulled the trigger and ordered a 5Dmklll from B&H. Got it today and all I can say is WOW. My first upgrade since my 40D (!) and they are worlds apart. After taking my first shot with it I am blown away and cant believe I waited so long. the focus is amazing. I think I will finally see the true potential of all the L lenses I have been collecting and cant wait to start playing this weekend.
so if there are any holdouts like me left out there, dont wait, buy this camera!

So, I'm a long-time lurker here on the forums. This is my first post, because I need the collective wisdom of the folks here. Here's the scenario:

A year ago, I returned to photography after several years away from it (long story), and decided it was time to make the move from film to digital. I sold all of my Pentax 645N gear and lenses, and picked up a 5D Mk II and several lenses. I knew at the time that I wasn't buying my "final" gear, but then, when is that ever true... Anyhow, in the past year, I've returned to the field to find an old passion rekindled - primarily in landscape/outdoor/architecture sorts of area. Obviously this means some low light/golden light photography; however, I do have a tripod and know how to use it, so 2.8 glass isn't perhaps required, even if I lust for it. I don't do any wedding photography, relatively little wildlife/birds, only the occasional portrait, and once in a while, a sporting event.

Now, I have an opportunity to spend a bonus. I've been very busy at work of late (it's non photographic), taking on several massive projects, working long hours etc. In what is a very flattering offer, my boss has asked me what I might like as a bonus, and we've settled on a solution - the company is prepared to buy me $8000 in photographic equipment, of my choosing. I don't expect I'll ever have this opportunity again, so I'd like to do this right the first time - hence, I come here for advice.

Here's what I have

• 5d Mark II
• 100 2.8 macro, non-IS
• 17-40mm f/4L Lens
• 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
• 35 f2 (left over from a former career as a journalist)
• 200 f/2.8L (also from journalism, not the newest version - the version with the built-in hood

My wife allows me to use her 70-300 4.5-5.6 IS when I need a longer lens.

Now, here's the equipment I'm lusting after (Prices are B&H):

• 5D Mark III - $3460
• 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II - $2130
• 70-200mm f/4L IS - $1200
• 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS - $1400
• 24-70mm f/2.8L II - $2300
• 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS - $1530
• 24mm f/3.5L II Tilt-Shift - $2000
• 180mm f/3.5L Macro - $1430

Here’s what I’m leaning toward:

• 24mm f/3.5L II Tilt-Shift - $2000
• 24-70mm f/2.8L II - $2300
• 70-200mm f/4L IS - $1200
• 5D Mark III - $3460

I’d dispose of:

• 5d Mark II
• EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
• EF 35 f2)
• EF 200mm f/2.8L

And would end up with:

• 5d Mark IIi
• 24mm f/3.5L II Tilt-Shift
• EF 100 2.8 macro
• EF 17-40mm f/4L Lens
• 24-70mm f/2.8L II
• 70-200mm f/4L IS

So, here are my questions:

1. Should I spend half my funds on the upgrade to the Mark III? The images from the Mark II are lovely, and focusing speed or extreme low light hasn’t been my issue. I do find my images at 1600 ISO seem fairly noisy, but I don’t know whether the Mark III would be substantively better, often enough.
2. What’s the best mix of overlapping zooms? The 75-300 that my wife and I have been sharing is convenient, so in some ways just replacing that with L glass seems like a good choice – in others, I wonder about a 70-200 and 100-400 combo. Or maybe a 70-200 and a 1.4x converter...)
3. How much use will the Tilt/Shift get, really? (I know, that’s hard to quantify an answer)
4. If I keep the 100 Macro, which I love, will I really need the 180 macro?

Thanks for reading what got much longer than I intended, and for advice and comments!

I've read and heard many people say, "there's no way I'd ever put a $35 UV/Protection filter on the front of my $1800 L-series lens." I'd assume the reason for them saying this is that they don't want an optically inferior piece of glass ruining the quality they bought such an expensive lens for in the first place.

What seems to be overlooked however, is the fact that a flat, single element, optically neutral piece of glass is not going to cost that much to produce. Would you run a UV/Protection filter if they charged you $2000 for it? Would that be fair for a simple and straightforward piece of glass?

The last 5D Mark IIs are selling and after they are sold out Canon could just release a firmware update for the camera which implements the notorious AutoISO in M mode. How hard can it be? Who wants to write an open letter? My english ain't the best, I'll have to pass. :

So I've been doing some research and comparing different lenses on The Digital Picture's ISO comparison tool. What I am seeing is that the the same lens on both full frame and crop cameras shows a sharper image on the full frame camera. According to Ken Rockwell, he states that full frame will always be sharper. I know people don't like quoting him much, but from what I see, he appears to be right.

Here are a couple examples...

50mm 1.4
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=4&LensComp=115&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

85 1.8
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=106&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=106&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

Is there something I'm missing here? Is the difference between the two cameras making a difference, or does full frame generally produce sharper results than crop using the same lens?

I know that these lenses are completely different, but I have the 35L and it almost never comes off of my body. I love it.

I shoot wedding, portraits, street photography... etc. etc. The 70-200 is great and all, I just never use it...

Should I sell it and get the 85mm 1.2 and then have the 35L, 85L & 24-70mm?

I'm open minded. Just looking for some opinions

I'm shooting a 5DMKii & 1vHS.

Hey Canonistas, I very much value your opinions and make most of my decisions through the experiences of others.

I'll keep it short. I shoot typically architectural and landscapes with the 5D3 but have been shooting soccer on the weekends with my 7D mainly for the extra reach and speed. I upload images to SmugMug for players and their families to view, print, purchase.

Here is the question: I can get a 1D4 body with 100K shutter count as a trade for my 7D with $2K attached. My 7D has about 40K shutter count. I think my biggest concern is the 100K shutter count on the 1D4. Replacing a shutter, I'm guessing, is about $300? If so, it might be a good investment to get faster speed and better low light capabilities.

Your thoughts on this would be very much appreciated.