I know there are many great lens for portraits, but due to price and other lens I've decided my next purchase will be either the 24-105L f4 or a 100L f2.8 macro.

I guess the decision will mostly come down to whether I value to versatility of the zoom, or the bonus of macro.

But what I wanted to ask on this site, is will there be much difference in the quality of portrait shots, taken at the same focal length, at say f5.6 and above?

Thanks everyone.

Ben

I have decided to upgrade my current kit to a higher spec Canon 7D body. The reason i have chosen this is i want a camera for sports shooting and wildlife photography and the 7D seems to be the best kit in the current non pro range with the highest fps.

I have 2 pondering points...

1. the camera was released in 2009, surely that means there will be an upgrade in 2013....is it worth waiting or buying it now based on its price

2. the camera uses compact flash, now im used to using sd cards. Is CF something that is phasing out or is it a better writing medium for fast transfer?? I see the higher spec canon camera's such as the 1D still use compact flash.


Thanks

I am going FF in October with 5D MKIII
I would like to add the 24-70 f/2.8 MK II. I like the aperture f/2.8 & zoom flexibility in one lens for indoor photography.
However, maybe the 70-200 f/2.8 MK II may be a better option. I don’t have experience on the different ranges (from 24 to 200) on a FF, just the crop (7d) So, I don’t know what I will notice or miss.
I couldn’t check all my files but I would say 1/3 of my photos are between 24-70, 1/3 between 70-200 and 1/3 between 200 to 300mm.
I currently own a 24-105mm for walk around. I really like this zoom for outdoor photography because it is giving me a good range which is important to me.
I currently own a 70-300mm L for sports mainly (with my 7D) but as walk around lens as well (small , not too heavy)
What would you do? 24-70 MK II or 70-200 MK II?


Ps (I will also add the 135mm f/2 to my primes)

I plan on buying 85mm f/1.2 and I'd like to protect that piece of glass by adding a clear filter.

The price difference between the two above mentioned is $30 i.e. EVO is almost double the price of HD.
Do you thing EVO is worth that extra money?

Does anybody use Clear filter on 85mm? I guess IQ will not be impacted, at least not to the bear eye.
And one more not to open a new topic. Those who use 5D III, does 85 focus faster on it than on 5D II?

HI,

When I travel I usually shoot on wide lenses, architecture and landscapes 65% of the time on my 17-40, 20% of the time I shot on 50 1.4 street photography, and in my bag I always have my 70-200 2.8 IS II for just in case, and when I walk all day long, after a while the weight of it starts to annoy me, so can you guys recommend me a tele lens with is pretty sharp over f8.

(Not necessary Canon lens)

Thanks

Let me say I know the Mark 2 is better in every way then the Mark1 but I have to scrape together money for the 6D body let alone a 2K lens. So I'd debating weather I buy the 6D kit or just body and a 24-70mk 1

If it helps people answer... I don't' pixel peep or anything crazy, I'm in the group that if 90% of the population who are not photogs think it looks good then that's all I need.

What do you expect to seein this new lens if it comes out any time soon

This poll is not based on what your line of expertise, this is a wildlife/sports competition.
Pretend you aone going on a wildlife expedition, or to a sports game. You are going to use this lens handheld, with a monopod, a tripod, extenders, etc.
Which would you choose.

My question is clear, sigma has a cheaper 50mm 1.4, that is newer, and made for digital camera, with all it's coatings, and apparently it has a special digital focusing system. But, then there is the 1.2 l, it has about half a stop of luminosity more, which I don't know what difference that makes, and it's an "l" lens.

Please keep in mind that I'm asking which is better in total and in different ways.

This is to fill a gap in my range, (16-35 and 70-200 2.8 is ii), so I'm looking for one that won't fail me

Loving this random streetlight art in here Finland! 8)


If you can't see the picture here's direct link to it:
http://flic.kr/p/dfbCQJ

I'm looking for a compact street shooter with crazy fast auto focus and would like to hear your real-world suggestions.

In my kit today, I have a G11, D60 and a Mamiya 7

With a crazy fast focus on a compact body, there are some of the other filters that will guide me:

-excellent IQ (for the size)
- articulated screen
- sharp lens/sharp lens availability
-SD card
-ability to use an intervalomiter
-Macro
-Short minimum focus on wide/normal
-fixed lens ok
-shirt pocketable
-RAW

Thinking maybe the Sony Rx100, (RX1 if I win in Vegas) don't know enough about the Canon Mirror

I just sent this question to Canon today. What's the general opinion on why Canon hasn't added shutter count to the camera's firmware or EOS Utility?

Hello,
A couple days ago I had to pay $1.59 to a website called eoscount.com to check my shutter count. The website has you accept an add-on for Internet Explorer which could very easily be a virus for all we know. The owner of the site, Sergey Vasilevskiy, may be a fine upstanding programmer for all we know. However, does Canon think this is an acceptable way for customers to get information from their expensive DSLR cameras??? We are risking the security of our computers by going to outside websites for this software. Canon's EOS Utility could very easily provide this information if programmed to. So what is the problem? The only acceptable answer to this is Canon is going to add this functionality to the EOS Utility in the next version. The only reason I can see for Canon not adding this functionality is because they are hiding something. So how does Canon respond to this request that shouldn't even be a request?

Dear all of you,
I am a 7D owner and I am waiting to deal for a new lens, a stadard one like 15-85 ("f/ is not good" bla bla bla) but I need one compact for trips.

Do you think that Canon will develop any new lenses for new APS-C rumored bodies in the near future?
If not I'll make a Christmas present with ol'15-85.

Thanks in advice !

Hey guys, I'm working on some wildlife now, and my 70-200 2.8 is ii and my extenders aren't giving me enough reach.
I found a local photographer wanting to sell his canon 300 2.8 l non-is.

My question is, will using the lens with the extenders even on a monopod case blurry photos?
Sharpness is also important since I'm doing some large prints.
Should I try to negotiate a deal with him, or should I just save up and get the is 1 or 2?

Hi I am thinking of upgrading from 500D to 5D Mark 2 or 3. I would like to know what difference I would expect to get, as in whether it would improve my images considerably. I've been taking photos for quite a few years but my photos always seem to lack that extra punch when compared to other photographers' photos taken with the 5D.

This was discussed a few days ago in a thread that dropped off.)

Desired setup at events where pre-setting flashes is possible:
Two *manual* lights high up in the "back" corners of the space high enough to paint the key areas. Radio triggers. My camera has one on-camera strobe operating in ETTL mode to fill in faces, moments not fully lit by the light coming from the "back". That light I measure in advance so know the fall off and amounts in various places around the room. This fixed lighting might at times be seen as sidelighting as I move back and forth during the event, but as the photographer I KNOW there will always be at least rim lighting. The intention is that this manual lighting will in most cases be brighter than what comes from the camera-mounted strobe as fill light.

OK, I used to do this stuff without ETTL gear. Annual reports, location stuff of all kinds. Parties, too. (fun!)

Flash-forward to current day rigs. I see the complexity of the possible answers: The timing of the flash is different. I am assuming that there will be no HSS, but it might still introduce different delays. And then maybe HSS would be needed if the event were outdoors.

But back to the ETTL issue: Can ETTL just worry about its exposure/distance calculation without allowing the brighter light to freak it out?

I am planning to buy several more modern speedlights either Canon or YongNuo to add to a motley assortment of Vivitar 285's, a Canon 580EX(not v2) and Norman-hulking-mega-Watt-second power pack or two (not used very much these days!) so I can do more events, editorial and help with my existing real estate work. New and old units will end up sometimes in softboxes, umbrellas (yuk but convenient) bouncing off ceilings. You know: the whole weird Mcgyver thing-whatever works.

So, can modern ETTL operate in this kind of mixed strobe environment? Have to all be the same brand while still set for manual and ETTL? Or free-for-all?

Thanks for suggestions...
jonathan7007

I just received my Nikon D600 yesterday. I was expecting tremendous performance from another soon-to-be legendary Nikon/Sony sensor.

Well... I was quite disappointed.

With both cameras at ISO 12,800 and 1/1,600 exposure, with identical lenses (Sigma 85mm f/1.4 for Nikon and for Canon at f/2.8 ), what I get from the RAW data is shown in the attached images cropped at 100%.

This is really stupid, Nikon. I thought that with most of another year of tech gone by, and the legend of Nikon and Sony thrown in, that the D600 would perform better than the 5D Mark III. Boy, was I wrong.

The Canon image looks almost as smooth as butter under identical processing. The Nikon image looks like it came from a pocket camera or something like that.

I am also starting to get very suspicious about DxO Mark. Why do they have results for Nikon in a heartbeat all the time? Why do they measure dynamic range by trying to measure a theoretical definition (black point photo level to white point photon level) rather than trying to measure actual amount of detail in images that are under or over exposed by a certain number of stops?

I am thinking about doing a simple and truly mathematical measurement of image noise now, just to see if maybe I'm not giving the D600 enough credit.

The real thing that matters isn't DR or anything. Once the finite-dimensional subspace of data is fixed (which it is for raw files), the only thing that matters mathematically is signal to noise ratio, which is basically an aggregate of precision and accuracy, the two components of any recording technology, including photography.

Here's my plan, before I do it.

Take two or more successive exposures in RAW at the same settings, and repeat this process to obtain other pairs of image data with various under/normal/over exposure settings and various ISOs.

Then I will measure the actual noise by calculating the difference between identical images. The means of the data will be adjusted to account for a tiny variation in exposure times. Any difference between the images would be purely due to the random variation of noise.

Then I will use the old formula from science for relative error (observed-expected)/expected * 100 and then use the RE to calculate the signal to noise ratio.

And one number is meaningless. DxO Mark loves to give the highest ISO where (in their system of experimentation) the SNR falls below about 80-85%, a "critical point" of image quality.

But with cameras like the 1D X, the SNR barely falls any further for a long, long way.

However, cameras like the 5D Mark II fall off much, much faster after getting to this "critical point" even if their score reported by DxO Mark isn't very much different from the 1D X.

For example (made up numbers):

Camera A:
ISO 1,000 SNR = 90%
ISO 10,000 SNR = 75%

Camera B:
ISO 990 SNR = 90%
ISO 10,000 SNR = 45%

Obviously, camera A is 65% better than camera B, but the way DxO Mark reports things, there would only be a meaningless difference of about 1% of one stop in the "ISO score" of camera A vs. camera B.

So if I get time (tonight is a RARE few hours off for me), I will try to report the results. And I'll be totally unbiased. I use about half Nikon and half Canon equipment, and I have absolutely no grudges or favoritism on either side.

I've been reading strobist blog and decided to start playing with the lights a bit.

My plan is to start with the following configuration:

3 YN568 flashes, (maybe 2 should be enoght for a start)
2 YN622 transmitters,

He recommends using umbrelas to difuse the light, but what I found out was that using softboxes gave you softer light. (which I guess is good in general), so I decided to get softboxes. The only thing is I'm not sure which to buy and what size.
My understanding is the bigger the better, but how big is not too big for a YN flash as a source? I belive thay sholud come with a L-bracket for the flash or maybe buying it separately is a better idea.

Is this one good to start with? http://www.cheetahstand.com/servlet/the-38/Cheetah-Qbox-24/Detail

He also recommends LumoPro compact size stands. Is that a good choice?

Question for the crowd... I am in the process of selling my condo and will be renting. My gear is currently covered under my homeowners policy, but I'm looking to separate it with a separate policy. Anybody have any info on insurance programs for photo gear??? Any guidance would be greatly appreciated!!!

I'm thinking of getting a fisheye for my 7d.

Basically I want to go as wide as possible but without having the heavy vignetting/black circle some fisheye lenses cast in the corners. (I already have a 10-20 for normal wide)

I'm only familiar with the samyang 8mm (which is 167 degrees on canon crop), but the manual-ness is putting me off. What are the best other options that get as close to 180 degrees on canon crop?

I have been using this lens for a few weeks now and I have published some of my thoughts here - not very technical but will show my hands-on experiences shooting an entire documentary wedding with it are:
http://www.markcareyphotography.com/2012/jo-and-karim-canon-ef-24-70mm-f2-8-ii-usm-l-review/

Thank you for reading.

Good evening to all,

Knowing that there's no perfect lens, I am desperate to find an ultra-wide angle or wide angle with a performance excellent or very good in the corners.

Here's what I found with the lenses I had or still have:

(had) 17-40mm L f4.0: Poor in the corners at 24mm and 20mm, but unusable for me becaus it's only f4.0.

(had) 16-35mm L f2.8 mark ii: Very poor in the corners at 24mm and 20mm, at 16mm it was terrible.

(have) 20-35mm L f2.8: Much better than all the previous ones in the corners and at any focal length, but with two probems: the minimum focusing distance is too long, only 50cm; and the lens is very prone to flare.

(had) 24-70mm f2.8: I always found this lens not very sharp at 2.8, and the performance in the corners was not better than 17-40.

Are the 20mm f2.8 or the 24mm f1.4 better? The lens I want doesn't exist? =) I will mostly use it at 24mm or 20mm.

Took these this evening. Feedback welcome.


Boat House by RCARCARCA, on Flickr

EXIF: 5DMkiii, 24-105mm @ 85mm, 1/100sec, f5.6, ISO640


Bridge near the Thames by RCARCARCA, on Flickr

EXIF: as above, except 28mm, 1/40sec


Bridge at the edge of the Thames by RCARCARCA, on Flickr

EXIF: as above, except 1/50sec, 55mm, ISO1000

Thanks

Richard