Howdy,

I'm thinking of getting a T3i (600D) converted to full spectrum. Objective is to use it for IR and visible light (with external filters) Have a few queries, would appreciate if any of you could help me with them.

1. How good will the visible light IQ be with a quality UV/IR cut filter when compared to a stock camera?

2. I've read different wavelengths of light focus at different focal planes resulting in chromatic aberration when shooting full spectrum, any remedy to this? Also would I still get CA when say shooting only IR or Visible with filters?

3. Your recommendations on a quality UV/IR cut filter.

Would love to see some samples, if you have any please do post.
Any additional info you can provide would also be appreciated.

Thanks,
g2

I did a high school football game Friday night at a Division 6 high school game and let's just say the lighting was the worst I've ever shot in. Even late in the 2nd quarter, the auto ISO in CWA was registering ISO values higher than what I was wanting to shoot at, and I was even at f/2.8 and 1/500. So I spot metered off the players brightest part and although that left the remainder of the player underexposed, it didn't matter because 1. ISO was about 6400, and 2. the 1DX allows you to pull a TON of shadow detail after the fact in post. I want to emphasize that this is much much easier if ISO is 6400 vs. say, 25,600. This may be a great alternative way to handle this siutation if you dislike shooting at high ISO, which I do. It was still very challenging, but again, I didn't see any of the other photographers shooting anything in the 2nd half, and I still could.

So I'm saving up for the II and was wondering how much I could get away selling my 24-70mm L I for since they're discontinued. It shows some wear but still works pretty good.

Greetings CR community! I am inclined to update my arsenal, and I'm looking for advice.
I'm currently in the process of becoming a journalist, and I'm looking to incorporate my photography hobby into my profession. I currently have 5DmIII and 70-300L, and that's I think is sufficient for now
However I'm short on cash and that's why I was thinking of maybe trying my skills as a wedding photographer, but I don't know which lenses will I need. Except the 70-300L I've just mentioned I also have 24-105L and Sigma's 50mm.
Any advice?

I am wondering if anyone (preferably a professional landscape photographer) can shed some light on a few things:

1) How did you get your foot in the door in that industry?

2) How were you able to build up your name and get to a point where you can make some real money?

3) Have you found your Canon gear to be enough or do you use medium-format digital?

Thanks in advance.

I've been waiting for this for a while, checking the rumor sites every day. Do you guys think this will release by Photokina? We haven't heard many rumors that makes me doubtful. A positive of that might be that Canon is taking extra time to add some more features, looking at the competition coming from Sony, Nikon, and Panasonic.

I'd use this for both photos and video, so a better sensor for low light, a higher bit rate, better downsampling, and 1080p 60p is a must. I hope Canon delivers.

I know I'm rambling but whatever.

Sorry >_< I'm pretty sure in the time that it's been announced somebody has asked this question.

But will Canon sell the M as a body only camera? I don't really need the lenses that it comes with and I'd rather just purchase the M with the EF connector so I can put a 24-70 I on it or my 24-105 to use it with.

Thanks!

I just did a shutter count on my 1.5 Year old 7D. Its been through quite a bit in a year and a half.

Its almost half-way through its life.

Since people asked... Here are some outdoors comparisons...
First thing I must say is the new lens is exactly 10% brighter. For this comparison, I adjusted ONLY the brightness and made them both as close as I could.
At first glance, they look almost the same. There are 3 crops. Center, Left and Right.
Not only the old lens gets blurry on the edges, but also the horizon line drops significantly! I drew a red horizon line on all crops to illustrate the effect... The new lens has an almost perfect horizon line all the way thru... Amazing!
Sharpness is just awesome. The buildings on the center are probably 3 miles away and the 2 towers on the right hand side are over 6 miles away... Still there is enough detail in them and this is just a 70mm lens.
Check out the Subway billboard on the right... Unbelievable!
I am not a landscape photographer but I used the lens for the first time to shoot a model. In another forum topic I complained about how many out of focus or soft images I was getting out of my 1D X. I was disappointed and frustrated. I must say that I didn't miss any today. ALL images are super sharp and the focus is spot on! I am happy again! The old 24-70 will be on ebay tomorrow!

Here are the links to the comparisons... Just rollover the image to switch and prepare to be amazed!
If you are an outdoors photographer, the perfect horizon line and the sharp edges should be a life changing experience

One more Thing. Since the lens is brighter, it seems more light goes into th sensor, it is even better for low
Light situations. I would guess it's
Like 2 stops brighter. At the studio, When i used to need ISO 640, today I used ISO 400! Same
Lighting setup! Awesome!

Hope u enjoy!

Cheers

Patrick

http://clicstudio.com/2470test.html

http://clicstudio.com/2470test2.html

http://clicstudio.com/2470test3.html

Ok... If i were to give this a rating it would be a CR2... plausible rumour, but new source...

I picked up a 70-200 IS II (woohoo) from a canon image store in Bangalore... started chatting the manger about the D600, and asked him what he thought canon would do to counter it... he said, straight up, the 7D mkII and a new FF will be out soon!

nothing new, but hey, thought i would share!

Enjoy (i'm off to have fun with my new lens...)

Just got my new 24-70 F2.8L II today!
I ran some simple focus test for fun.
I took a photo of my studio with available light. Handheld 1/160 F2.8 ISO 800.
Single focus point on the red lamp in the center of the frame.
The out of focus "things" on the image are an Ikea lamp in front of me. I did other test shots for sharpness and bokeh.
The bokeh is just a little smoother on the new lens but almost identical... You can see the lamp on the last attachment.
First thing you notice is how much brighter the new lens is. Look at the tufted white pattern on the right.
Then at 100% you really see the difference. Notice how much sharper everything is.
At first I thought I could add some edge sharpening to try to match, and it does get better but adding sharpening also adds noise and artifacts. So a subtle sharpening is fine but it won't match the quality of the new lens.
Color seems similar although I noticed a lot less Chromatic Aberration on the new lens.
I will do more tests when I can. This is a simple, good start, I think. ;D

Hello,

This is my first post to the forum. My interest is shooting at 24mm (on a 5D Mark III) with no flash. Nighttime cityscapes, museum exhibits, indoor group shots, poorly lit indoor events (e.g., cocktail parties, banquets), and outdoor evening events (e.g. social gatherings in patios, courtyards, backyards, etc.) would be the subjects. Would the prime lens be sharper at 24mm f/2.8 than the zoom at 24mm f/2.8?

I would appreciate ideas and opinions anyone might offer (cost is not a factor in my decision).

I own a 7D and 10-22. I just purchased a 5D3. Is IQ better with the 17-40 on the 5D3 than the 10-22 on the 7D? I'm trying to decide if i should sell the 10-22 and buy the 17-40. I do not do video so this is just for landscape photography. Thanks for your input.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-Digital-SLR-Camera-Body-22-3-Megapixels-USA-Warranty-/390468355036?forcev4exp=true

Pretty sweet deal!

In response to the folks here repeating that the D600 beats the 6D, here's a feature comparison that applies to the kind of photography I do, which is a mix of travel, landscapes, & weddings (usually as a backup photog). For other folks it's surely different but here's my take:

• 20mp vs 24mp: the smaller the files the better. I'm going to run the thing in MRAW mode most of the time anyway. Point Canon.
• High ISO performance: top native ISO on the 6D is 25.6k. It's 6400 on the Nikon. 6D is certainly not two stops better than D600 but if they've got the balls to give it native 25.6k then I'm betting it's at least somewhat better. Point Canon.
• AF: D600 has 39 points vs. 11 for Canon. Point Nikon.
• Metering: too early to call it, but they had both better be pretty good. Draw.
• Shooting speed: Nikon is 1fps faster, which is too close for me to care as they're both fast enough for me. I'd award Nikon a point if I could definitively figure out if D600 has DX high-speed mode or not but AFAICT it doesn't. Draw.
• Max shutter speed & flash sync: Both not too hot but not horrible either. Draw.
• Storage: I prefer CF to SD & they both use SD to keep the size down. D600 has two of them, but I really don't care. Draw.
• Weather sealing: The basic seals on my 40D have been good enough to keep me out of trouble so far. Draw.
• Built-in flash: point Nikon (but my 270EX II will always be in my bag...).
• Built-in GPS & Wifi: point Canon. I hesitate to award two here as they are both optional on the Nikon.
• Of course, 6D takes my EF mount lenses & EX flashes, but I won't award any points here. It's also worth noting that the D600 will drive old-school Nikon screwdriver lenses.
• Price: 6D is a couple hundred simoleons cheaper & under the ephemeral double-deuce mark. Point Canon.

So, I've got 4 points for Canon & 2 points for Nikon, without taking into account the fact that I'm already a Canon customer. Looks like they've spec'd it right for geeks like me. For me, the D600's better AF & built-in flash just don't outweigh better high ISO performance (the most important thing for me after handling) & the built-in GPS & wifi.

Regardless of my conclusions, bear this in mind: in this economy, the less expensive camera wins pretty often...

The autofocus range of the 5DIII is from EV -2 to EV +18, this must be based on the amount of the light entering the lens and the sensitivity of the autofocus sensors.

If it can autofocus at EV -2 at f5.6, can someone explain why it can't autofocus at f8 at EV -1, f11 at EV 0 or f16 at EV +1.

Why the f5.6 restriction, it is so limiting particularly when using extenders.
I have yet to see someone using a f2.8 telephoto, where this wouldn't be an issue.
In the UK the 400mm f2.8 and 500mm f4 cost around £10,000 (16,000 USD).

I have the excellent 400mm f5.6L, but soon as I put on a 1.4x, I have manual focus, and the lens doesn't have IS, so it difficult to use.

I think autofocusing down to f16 lenses should be standard.

i couldnt find this anywhere on the forum so i figured i would use this as my first post.
I currently have a 50mm 1.8, 24-105 f4, 70-200mm 2.8, 5d mark ii, 60d, 580ex ii, h4n
i have money i have to spend at Best buy and i can not decide what to get. I have thought about a studio flash or new lens.
the flash i am looking at is http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Elinchrom+-+Style+500/500BXRi+Studio+Strobe+Light+Kit/2663916.p?id=1218343206104&skuId=2663916&st=elinchrom&cp=1&lp=8
I dont exactly have a lens picked out but here is what i shoot.
I shoot equal amounts of video and pictures, I only make money off of pictures currently, for pictures i mostly do weddings, senior pic and family pics.
For video i do a wide range of things from short documentaries for my church to promo video for groups in my town.
i am open to recommendations other then just strobes or lens but those seem to be where i end up. I do want something that can still help me make money or improve my video skill where i can start getting paid more for those things. I do believe in buying good quality equipment that will last. I will eventually buy the 70-200mm 2.8 is ii in trade for the non-is i have now. any wisdom from people smarter than me would be amazingly helpful. Love this forum and read through most post about everyday! thanks for you help!

Hi everyone! Been reading posts on this forum for some time now, and have quite a high regard for most of the canonrumors forum's members' opinion and knowledge, so decided to join and post a topic which has been on my mind for everlong. Based on what I read on many photographers blogs and websites (cfr. 35mm - 50mm poll) people claim that by walking forward or backward one changes the field of view of the lens mounted on ones camera (don't like the angle my 35mm lens is giving me, no worries, just walk forward and magically change it into a 50mm lens or back off a bit and it becomes a 28mm...) So in a way, moving closer or further away from an subject equals zooming in or out with your prime. I have noticed a few very clever people here on the cr forum, and would be very happy if one of them can finally put this myth to rest in a 'scientific' way!

I just purchased a 5D MKIII

I photograph high end watches in a light box.

Ideally I am thinking a 50 or 60 mm

What will work will with the D5 and still work with the autofocus?

I have heard the Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact-Macro is a bit dated really.
The Canon 60mm f/2.8 EF-S Macro does not mount in the 5D.

Does anyone have any other suggestions?

Hi everyone,

my name is Dotun and I'm new to the forum.

1dx owners, have you noticed the colors of your raw file look a little too cool and not consistent with color from other canon bodies? if you see the same what steps have you taken in Lightroom to bring its color to look closer to lets say the 5d mark 3 or 1ds. I currently own the 5d II, 5d III and 1dx.

This focal length generally will determine the first set of primes someone will buy.

EX:

35mm - 85mm - 135mm

24mm - 50mm - 135mm

What is you preferred standard lens choice?

I am mostly doing weddings and engagement sessions and usually just use 70-200 2.8II on 5D3 and I use 35L on 5D2. I am on the fence about selling 35 to buy the new 24-70? I am not in love with having to be spot on to get perfect sharp image with 35 with aperature below 3.2 when doing a pressure shoot like a wedding. I know these lens are different beasts, but wondering if anyone who has experience with both lens can tell me why I should make the switch.

Beside the obvious more reach or the 35 have ability for lower aperature below 2.8.

A month ago, I asked this forum for tips on any way to get the tripod/head I wanted to buy, cheaper
My thread was
[Is there a cheaper way to buy from "REALLY RIGHT STUFF"?]
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=8611.0

As no other way was found, I bought it from RRS website, directly, at full price
Paid postage, VAT and import duties, in full
It hurt much less after I opened the box

In my opinion, already having photographic gear, costing the best part of 6K, and investing almost 300-500 hours yearly in my photographic hobby, I have no hesitation in saying that I am glad that I bought that ultimate tripod combination
And, cost less than a set of alloy wheels and should prove more useful
There will hopefully not be any need to upgrade, for a very long time (perhaps until light motorised tripods are invented by Apple)

Of course, some may think that the price is not a good value, or other makes will be better, like a Gitzo
However, if there will always be a single right answer that should apply to everyone, we should expect to find one make and model of cars, owned by everyone
We don't. Because people differ in their needs, tastes and amount their are willing to spend

How to "possibly" get it 30 - 40% cheaper, for Europe residents:
If you postponed your purchase, until your next trip to USA "assuming you that will go there of course", you can get it delivered to your hotel within 24-48 hours
1- Postage is free for USA addresses. I would have saved 10%
2- No duties or VAT. I would have saved 30%
In my understanding, which could well be wrong; after you use it while you are in the USA, it becomes 2nd hand, thus no VAT or duty (I could be wrong here), when you arrive at the airport. Of course, you must declare them and leave it to customs to decide
Naturally, you will NOT need to bring with you the packaging. I heard that some people post them to themselves in UK, and I am not sure why!! :-\
Now, hopefully, no further duties at UK borders, as it is not new stuff anymore, with all the mud and dirt that you have collected on the legs

In what Aperture settings do the Canon EF 50 F1.2L and EF 35 F1.4L lenses produce the sharpest images?

Thanks.