I've recently become the sports photographer for my school and I am interested in finding a good blog or website that I could upload the photos of games that I photograph. I'm looking for something free to upload to and would also like to be able to have a custom URL to some extent (e.g. customname.website.com). I'd also like to be able to make an album/page for each game I photograph. I originally was planning on using Flickr but the fact it limits you to 200 photos isn't going to work out for me.


Thanks for your help!

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

All taken on the River Thames this afternoon:


2Y2A0895.jpg by RCARCARCA, on Flickr

EXIF: 5DMkiii, 70-300DO at 300mm, 1/1250 sec, f11.0, 800 ISO


2Y2A0888.jpg by RCARCARCA, on Flickr

EXIF: 5DMkiii, 70-300DO at 300mm, 1/1250, f7.1, 800 ISO


2Y2A0922.jpg by RCARCARCA, on Flickr

EXIF: As above except f10.0


2Y2A0918.jpg by RCARCARCA, on Flickr

EXIF: As above

Egyptian goose:


2Y2A0814.jpg by RCARCARCA, on Flickr

EXIF: As above except 275mm, f16.0

Swans:


2Y2A0944.jpg by RCARCARCA, on Flickr

EXIF: As above except 185mm, f11.0


2Y2A0954.jpg by RCARCARCA, on Flickr

EXIF: As above except 110mm, f10.0

Richard

Canon 5D Mark II + Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN4Z-VBS8sk

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

This isn't technically a macro shot, but I think it's in the spirit of macro photography. Sometimes, you just get lucky.


CDB? by Rick.Scheibner, on Flickr

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.

Canon 5D Mark II + Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM

Z innej Perspektywy: Auschwitz-Birkenau

The guy doesn't want to share his techniques, and we'll grant him his wishes. Any links to resources that give a tutorial to achieve that 16:9, cinematic feel to street photos?

TIA

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!

The 18.12 from Paddington:


Paddington by RCARCARCA, on Flickr

The sun through the windowed arch at the end of the platform was glorious.

EXIF: 5Dmkiii, 24 - 105mm at 105mm, 1/30 sec, f9.0, ISO1000.

Also at Paddington, but in the underground:


Paddington by RCARCARCA, on Flickr

EXIF: 5Dmkiii, 24 - 105mm at 24mm, 1/5 sec, f22.0, ISO5000.

I guess I should probably have opened the aperture up a bit, but you don't have long to think as the train moves off and you have a connection upstairs...

Richard