I'd welcome the opinion of those who have these lenses. I currently have the 17-40L which I find has good IQ and the 24-70II which has discernably superior IQ. Very sharp, contrasty - the whole shebang. I have had the Zeiss 21 Distagon on my radar for awhile now and am wondering about (generally) replacing the 17-40L with the Zeiss for landscape work. I find the zoom very handy for landscape and will still use it but am wondering just how special the Zeiss really is. Is it similar in IQ to the 24-70II? Or is it 'better'? The new 24-70 has spoiled me somewhat, and am keen to maintain that degree of awesomeness into something a little wider.

Thoughts welcome.

(Before you say it, I will likely pick up a 24 TS at some point in the next 12 months as well). Perhaps this is generally cramming the focal range?

Ireland 25 England 0

1.)


2.)

3.)

4.)

5.)

6.)

Thanks for looking

Hi there,

im gonna shoot 120 film (6x6) in Thailand in some weeks just for fun. Gonna use Kodak Portra and Tri-x. Does anybody of yall know a good place for getting the film developed? Preferably a place that offers good quality and not just cheap prices. Maybe even some private people on this board here are willing to do it? Portra should be easier since it just uses C41 processing. For the BW photos maybe there is even a place offering baryt paper?
Any input is welcome

I have a question that has been plaguing me for quite some time. I have searches every where but apparently I am not typing in the right search terms.
Whenever I have a flash on either 5d2/3 and it is in av,tv mode I feel as though the camera is not compensating for the flash. IE instead of an appropriate exposure of 1/60 it will be at 1" as though I didn't even have a flash on there. I felt as though it did this on my 60d when I still had it. By my 5d2 didn't. I assumed it was like the ISO 400 thing and would be fixed on 5d3.
However after using the 600exrt and 5d3 tonight it seems much more likely user error.
Please can someone explain this and possible some other flash thing like why it goes to ISo 400 ??
Or tell me where to look or how to play and figure it out.
This forum is so useful to me in learning the functions of some of the more technical sides of cameras.

So I sold my 7D not too long ago for some financial reasons (long story) and turns out that I actually didn't need to sell it. Ended up having a big budget pool and now I want to reinvest in a camera and lenses.
Background:
I'm going to shoot mainly video. Will do pictures, but my focus is videos, videos, videos!
I'm planning on getting the 6D.
I'm going to buy 2 lenses (most likely used, due to the price and availability.)

So, here's my conundrum.
I'm for sure getting the 70-200mm IS (Mk I) which is estimated around 1300$ used, correct? (Please correct me if I'm wrong, more info would be great!)

Now it comes down to this.
Since I'm going to do video, I'm thinking of either the 24-105 f/4 IS or the 24-70mm f/2.8 Mk I (Average priced around 1,300$ used(?)).

Which lens between those two should I get?
The 24-105 f/4 is almost half the price of the 24-70, offering a wide angle and IS, which would be great for my hand-held situations.
The 24-70 f/2.8, however, is faster and sharper(?) from what I hear.
If I'm going to have a 6D, is the 24-70 really worth having over the 24-105 because it's faster?
ISO performance of the 6D seems pretty great.

I'm a noob, so please be kind in your words ;_; Correct any mistakes I make, but don't flame me.

hi,
i can't decide what to get as an upgrade to my 40d, which is having some metering issues after getting wet (or perhaps it's just the age).

I am not a professional photographer, although I do enjoy it as a hobby.

I also like the crop factor of the soon to come 70D and the 7D, but I also really-really like the focusing points in 5D 3. low light improvements are great, but not as important to me as they are to other users.

It would be nice to have a built in flash, although I use it very rarely I like to have an option. ALthough higher ISO capabilities and better sensor of the 5D 3 would probably not require a flash at all...

To make the story short...I'm not sure the 5d 3 price is justifiable for me, but 7D is an old model, and when an upgrade will hit the market I'd be thinking that I should have waited longer... and 70D is not out yet (although a couple of months is not a big deal for me right now), but there is no guarantee it would have more focusing points for instance.


what do you think?
I've been debating over this on and off in the summer and decided to wait for a new release to the 40d/60d cameras, and now that 70d is coming I'm having doubts again...I need to make a decision by mid-May13.


my lenses are: 100mm macro (use rarely), 70-200 F2.8 (use a lot) and a 10-20mm wide angle which is my "primary lense", but needs an upgrade to possibly the 24-70mm. So I'm not taking the 10-20 into account when making the body decision.

I finally decided which UWA lens to get for my 5DM3 and took delivery yesterday of the Tokina 16-28. I made that decision based on the large number of positive reviews I'd read. I especially wanted it for its sharpness edge to edge, as I'm not getting that with my current widest lens, the 24-105 kit lens. The Tokina is a nice solid, heavy lens that appears to be well made. I took it out to my normal lens testing spot this morning, on a tripod, cable release, etc running a large number of shots at multiple apertures, focal lengths etc.

My problem is two-fold, which are probably related. In Live-View mode the lens just won't ever come to a focus - occasionally it appears to lock-on, but I can tell looking at the screen that it didn't lock on in-focus. It was a bright sunny day, so it isn't a lack of light issue. I don't use Live-View focusing that often, but wanted to compare the focus with the standard viewfinder focus, to see if any AFMA was going to be necessary. Since I couldn't get Live-View focus to work, I did the next best thing, which was to use the Live-View mode, go to 10X magnification and manually focus. The Tokina has a unique method of switching the lens from AF to MF - you slide a ring on the lens. What I found has me stumped. I was focusing on a rock outcrop probably 50 or more yards away in the center of the shot. Both the manual and autofocus were in pretty good agreement in the center of the image, although the widest-aperture shots, 2.8 and 4.0, were better in manual focus, suggesting some minor AFMA is going necessary. The problem is with the sides of the image. Regardless of focal length, or aperture, the left side of the image would be blurry using manual focus, and the right side would be sharp, the AF images were just reversed, ie the left would be sharp and the right would be blurry. It isn't a depth of field issue (at 16mm most everything at f8.0 should be in focus), and the out of focus sides are both near and far objects in both cases. I had my old trusty t2i along with me so did the same set of tests with it. Same problem in that it would never focus itself using Live-View. Again comparing Live View zoomed manual focus vs viewfinder focus, one side is sharp and one fuzzy, with the sides flip-flopping depending on focus method. It's almost as if there is a out of alignment element that gets moved out of alignment the opposite direction when shifting from MF to AF.

Has anyone who owns this lens seen this sort of problem? I'm pretty sure I'm going to send this back and see if I just got a bad copy, unless someone here has a suggestion in the next day or two.

https://vimeo.com/59278065

I did a time lapse of the effects of the blizzard at Lechmere Station in Cambridge, MA from 10am to 6pm.

This was done using relatively short exposures taken every 30 seconds. Normally i'd try and stick to a 180 degree shutter angle, but to do so in this situation would have blurred the scene because of the sheets of snow.

I used a 5D mkii shooting sraw on a 100mm 2.8L Macro. Iso ranging from 100-3200, F-stop: 11-7.1 . I exported the video from Lightroom 3 using custom slideshow preferences.

Feel free to offer constructive criticism (or even just S___ talk since i'm usually hypercritical of everything).

Note: you should download the original MP4 to get the preferred viewing experience.

Canon has super lenses at the telephoto end, could they do crazy things with UWA too?

So this half-way goes here, half-way goes in the 3rd party lenses section, but I figure this section gets more traffic.

As my post subject implies, I'm looking for some information on the Autofocus performance in AI-Servo, specifically on a 5d3, of 24-70 f/2.8 lenses. I've been highly tempted to get the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC because of the lower price than the Canon v2, pretty good sharpness/IQ, and image stabilization. Just rented it for the second time, and in very poor lighting conditions both times. Most of the time it was doing just fine, getting decent to good focus, but there were quite a number of times when it just wasn't getting the focus. I was using Case 6, as this was a dance performance.

As I said, it was very poor lighting conditions, and I've attached a sample image where it didn't follow them and keep them in focus. I checked in DPP, and no AF point had focus, and the shots immediately preceding this one were a bit wider, and it was actually 5 shots previously that was the last time it had focus lock. I was in Zone, and with the center 9 AF points as the active points. Most of the time I had the AF running, even if not actually taking a photo.

So, anyone using the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 v2 or other 24-70 f/2.8 lenses that has been using it it for something similar, with difficult lighting, very active subjects? I'm trying to determine if it's more the Tamron lens than my 5d3, or if the Tamron is not able to keep up with the 5d3. I am thinking I'll rent the Canon v2 for the next performance in April, which will likely have pretty similar lighting, so I'll be able to test it in pretty similar conditions.

Just a heads up, I really like the iDC Triplethreat flash bracket. I wanted to get another couple (I keep losing them!) and emailed iDC, I pointed out that at $59 they were well above the price of the Bruce Dorn version available for pre-order from B&H, I made them an offer of $100 for three.

They just emailed me back saying they are selling their last remaining stock for $33.99 each, then they are done. I ordered three, I just need to stop losing them now!

http://www.idcphotovideo.com/store/triple-threat-traditional

EDIT: I forgot to add why I prefer them to other designs, I love that they are evenly spaced around the modifier shaft, I can use two on one shaft for six lights (I have five 550EX's and three 600EX-RT's) but best of all, they don't have clamp coldshoes, the slots work much better for the lever style Canon strobes. Great $35 worth.

Hi,

this is basically one of the stuck at home ideas that I came up with mainly because I wanted to play with off camera flash and I seen the chopsticks in the kitchen... however this is one of the cases when I end up with two pictures and I'm not sure with which one to go on with, so in case you feel like giving some feedback, please let me know which (if any) you like better

... and, if you feel like, I would also welcome other "stuck at home" ideas ,

thanks,

Stig

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ccy020/

I use B+W 82mm Slim MRC UV Filter for my 16-35 f/2.8 L II & 24-70 f/2.8 VC lenses.
The problem with that filter is that you cannot use the regular lens cap as the slim filter does not have any threading ... B+W does provide a lens cap but it keeps falling off all the time.
So my question is that do any of you use a lens cap for 82mm slim filter and does the cap stay on securely? if yes, please give me the brand name or better yet a web link where I can buy it online.
Thanks in advance.

I'm brand new to DSLRs having recently bought the T4i. I currently have two lenses, the "shorty" 40mm 2.8 and the 18-135 IS STM kit lens.

I love shooting with the 40mm and have been using it almost exclusively. It focuses fast, I enjoy working with the shallow depth of field, and image quality looks great. I thought I'd want to keep the kit lens because of its versatility, but I'm not finding situations where the 135 focal length comes in handy. For instance, I've tried using it to shoot birds in the back yard, but I find that it just isn't long enough for that purpose. I know that portrait photographers use the 85-135 focal lengths, but this lens only opens up to 5.6 at that range. So far I've been getting better portraits with the 40.

What I'm looking for is a second lens to compliment the 40mm. Something well under $1,000 that is fun to shoot with, and that will serve a clear purpose where in situation X I'll definitely prefer my new lens to the 40mm prime. I think the answer probably involves a focal length that is further removed from 40mm (such as 200?).

Thanks in advance for any advice you can lend.

Ok
I rock a 60D and Love it.
Trying to get into Full From
Dont have much money, just enough for a 6D or a 5D Mark2

So, Im only shooting street Photography and want start doing Street Modeling

for glass i have:
50mm
40mm
Stock lens 24-200 mm
Sigma 10-10 EX

your thoughts on what to get a 6D or 5D MK2
Should i get the body only?
What lens should i invest in

I understand my needs may be different than yours. I'm curious as to what YOU would do. Not necessarilly what I should do, but what you would do. Background:

I consider myself an advanced amateur. I originally had a 60D, but sold it at the beginning of last semester to focus more on school (and knowing that the body would inevitably experience a price drop soon. Glad I sold it when I did!). I thought I could live without for a year, but I couldn't take it anymore and I bought the 7D a couple of weeks ago for $1030. Now I can get the 60D for $560. That makes the 7D an extra $470, or 84% more. I don't do sports photography or BIF. The closes thing to fast moving is my kids playing, so I don't really need the 7D AF. Before I sold the 60D, I was doing some smaller paid video gigs. I would like to take that to the next level. I would like to do TV commercials for local companies and product advertising videos as well as what I was previously doing. I live in a small(er) town, and the ONLY competition is the local cable company who makes horrendous commercials. One concern of mine, Is it unprofessional to take a 60D to a shoot? Like I said, I only did smaller paid gigs, and nobody really knew anything about my gear. I was still a bit self conscious bringing my 60D, even on the smaller gigs. I did keep all my other video equipment when I sold the body since all the other items don't lose value so fast.

Why I would keep the 7D:

• 1080 HDMI output durring recording. This is pretty important to me, but alone doesn't quite justify the extra $470. Almost though because the screen going black on the 60D upon pressing record is incredibly annoying.
• Magnesium alloy body. For obvious reasons over the 60D's polycarbonate. This, however, isn't as big of a deal, as the 60D's body is still good.
• The 7D will have a better resale value. Again, though, this isn't as important as I can't really see myself selling it in the near future. Upon purchase of my next body, the 7D/60D will become my back-up.
• The AFMA and better AF of the 7D will be invaluable IF I end up actually needing that in the future. IF.
• It looks good in my hands

Why I would exchange the 7D for the 60D?
$$$$

So, what would you do personally if you were trying to decide between the 60D and the 7D? And, I suppose, what would you do in my situation?

Why is there that flash manufacturers don't make purpose built batteries for speedlites as you have in the camera bodies? Using those AA or AAA whatever batteries seems to me to be a waste. Maybe this is is a again from me a stupid question where I have completely missed the point.

Just purchased an EF 24-70 f/4L IS and ran it through Reikan FoCal on my 5d Mark II to get an AFMA setting. 24mm came in at +10 while 70mm came in at -2. This is the largest discrepancy between wide and tele of any of my lenses. I'm planning on parking it at 0 for the best result, but was wondering if this might indicate a problem with the lens. Anyone have similar results with a 24-70 f/4L?

Today I've had the oppertunity to try the new 200-400/4 IS with the 1.4x converter

I've never tried any longer lens than the 70-200/2.8 II IS, so it was quite amazing to have the oppertunity to try this one out. The place had quite bad lightning aswell so I had to use ISO 12.800 on the 5d3, but the images looked very nice.
I really like the fact that I could switch on the 1.4 so easily and the lens felt very "light" (as far as I could tell).. but very well built!

I've attached a picture of me trying it out with the 5d3 here. Have some more pictures on my phone. Have to bring my own 5d3 tomorrow to try it some more!

There is a lot of 'what do you think I should buy' topics, and grouping them together would be really nice. Toss on top of that doing a sticky FAQ on what needs to be a part of these recommendation requests. Things that are constantly asked - what do you have, what do you shoot, what's your budget - those tidbits. Lens discussions shouldn't be mixed into rumors.

Thoughts?

Many of you know that I recently acquired a Canon 6D, and I have been asked by multiple posters both in the forum and by email to give my reasons why I made the decision I did. I have wasted far too much time doing just that today ;D

Here is the link to my website where I shared my findings: http://www.dustinabbott.net/2013/02/why-i-chose-a-canon-eos-6d-over-a-5d-mkiii/

Also, if any of you are interested in adapting old M42 lens to the new 6D, here are my findings with my little kit of vintage glass: http://www.dustinabbott.net/2013/02/the-new-canon-eos-6d-and-classic-m42-lens/

Disclaimer: I have no intention of starting a flame war. I believe that the 5D MK3 is overall the better camera and I intend to upgrade my MK2 to a MK3 down the road. I came to the conclusions that I share for myself and felt those conclusions and hands on experiences might help others making a similar type decision.

Hey All,

I'm new to the forums here, so greetings. Ive enjoyed the discussions here quite a bit and wanted to toss this question out to the group.

I was able to pick up a 5D Mark II + 24-105 bundle when Fry's was clearing them out ($2100).

To this point, I shoot crop (T4i, 17-55), and I do have some lenses that are compatible with FF, so lenses are not a factor. I shoot family, kids, street/photojounalism, and a bit of landscape. No birding, no high speed sports. I post-process in Lightroom.

However, I'm grappling with the debate of whether to 1) keep the 5D II as an introduction to FF, or 2) return it and go 6D, OR 3) return it, wait a while, and then go 5D III.

I understand the spec differences between all three bodies, and the capabilities and limitations of all.

What are your thoughts? Will the 5DII provide an IQ experience different from my T4i? (notwithstanding focal differences, which I understand).

Would you, in this situation, be disappointed in the limitations of the 5DII?

Is the cost of investment in the 5DII at this time better leveraged with the 6D/5D III?

Thanks for reading. I'm well within my return period, so I just want ensure I'm making the most rational decisions of whether to keep or change my strategy.

Hey guys and gals,

I am one of those who doesn't really like the attention that my 70-200 2.8L IS II can bring. I got creative with some gaffer's tape and fixed my "problem"!

I know I may receive some flak from those who would see this as the equivalent of a putting bumper sticker on a Ferrari, but for me, I suits my needs quite well and I'm quite happy with how it turned out!

Folks,
Greetings,
As we all know the dynamic range of 5D MK III is not better than its counterpart Nikon D800. I was wondering if this deficiency could be addressed by using single shot HDR for batch processing. Has anyone tried HDR batch process to improve dynamic range, what would be good software for this purpose or any other comments. Thanks in advance.
Raj