This will be of interest to 7D users who have upgraded to FW 2.0.0

See http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1222669

Wow

http://www.canon.com.au/About-Canon/News-Events/News-Press-Releases/Canon-launches-Cinema-EOS-System-flagship-camera?cid=%20scfb120860

http://www.canon.co.nz/About-Canon/News-Events/News-Press-Releases/EF-Cinema-Lenses-for-4K-cameras?cid=scnzfb1208033

I have asked Roel Lammers (Product Business Developer at Canon Svenska AB) about the delivery for the Canon 24-70/2.8L II and he informs me that it will be another delay. The delivery date is now October…

OK. So I have a relatively limited budget.

I'm looking at either a 300 or a 400 prime for shooting soccer and football.

As much as I would love the f/2.8 IS version of either, they are considerably outside my price range.

So my question is this: which would you recommend, oh more-experienced photogs: the 300 f/4 or the 400 f/5.6. We're talking the L in both cases.

And, to make matters more complicated, likely by the time I'm shooting these sports again, I will have a FF body (currently APS-C).

Alright. Have at me!

p.s. Whichever I get I will likely end up using for hockey as well. But I have the 70-200 f/2.8 for that, and that's been perfectly fine.

Ok Im quite confused, I know digital is the new thing and film is kind of almost vintage, but seriously why couldnt they just turn this camera digital?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/194453-USA/Canon_2043A005_EOS_1V_Camera_Body.html
I get the convenience of digital but this 1V film camera sure seems like one hell of a camera! Maybe I am too young and naive about film vs digital or however you want to call it. So is it really just a convenience factor that determines the price and features of the current SLRs because 1V has 45 point AF and can do 10FPS what the hell mr 5D2 or even 5D3 for that matter! I would trade the 5D3's 61 point AF and 6fps for the 1V's 45 point and 10fps, how cool would that be? Or is it more like how long did it take to get where the 1V is vs how long will it take for digital to catch up? I guess its only been 7 years since the 5Dc was announced I suppose its time to look up how long canon had been making auto-focus film cameras!

Hi all,

I recently had the opportunity to try out the 5D3 at Canon's "Photography in the Parks" (Yosemite) and I must say that I really like this camera so much that I'm trying to find a place for it on my Christmas shopping list. While I do shoot different things ranging from landscapes to street photography it looks like macro photography is what I am most passionate about. I currently have a digital rebel XT (8MP) which I use for wildlife and Macro as well as an AE-1 (35mm) which I use for landscape, street and portrait photography.

so here is my question: Since I like to shoot insects up close as possible to MFD and on my rebel XT I noticed that the sharpest images are at F/8 - F/11, would the 5D3 give me better detail resolution than say the 7D or whatever they replace it with? Assuming that I will be shooting at F/11-F/16 which is sometimes required to get as much of the insect inf focus.

I've been reading a few articles regarding DLA and I'm wondering how much of an effect does it have on image quality vs the pixel density of the APS-C camera. apparently the 5D3 has similar pixel density to my current DSLR and DLA of 10.4 where the 7D has a DLA of 6.9

Hey I have a dilemma. I have a 5d3 with the following
24-105
50 1.4
Various speedlites

I take Candids of the kids but I find myself wanting more reach. I rented the 70-200 f4 is and it was pretty nice. I currently can get it for $1100 from a reputable dealer but unsure if that's a good price or if I should hold out to see what else is offered by canon for the fourth quarter. I also want the 24-70 ii but would have to pay of the 70-200 first if I get it. So add focal range or a stop of light with the 24-70 ii or just wait. Any suggestions?

I was following the forum titled” Canon super tele choices!!!” started by zrz2005101. There was really good information there, but I have a slight variation from that post.

I am seriously interested in purchasing a Canon 300mm F2.8 non-is from KEH. A couple of reason that I am considering this particular:
1. I will be using the lens primary for college football and some other outdoor college sports at a smaller college. Since I might also have the opportunity later down the road to also do night time high school sports, is another reason for using the 300mm F2.8.
2. I currently have a 60D and a 7D as my primary camera and a Canon 70-200mm F2.8.
3. The approx. $2600 price tag fits my budget. Keep in mind that the budget is one of the key factors here for me. Being able to charge approx $2600 for a 10+year lens still has me wondering.
4. I am not interested in IS because of the shutter speeds I currently shoot at (and budget).

So my questions are to those that are may have actually used this combination with the older 300mm F2.8 non-is with either a 7D or 60D.
1. Knowing that IQ in the newer IS and IS-II are greater, what is your opinion of the IQ of the older 300mm 2.8 on a 7D and current canon bodies?

2. How about AF speed. Knowing that the focus speed on the newer ones is superior, what is your opinion on how the AF speeds for the older 300mm on a 7D, particularly for college level football?

3. One concern is the lack of part available. I might have to live with that based on my budget. Are there any other concerns with functionality or picture quality that might be known (that I haven’t seen on Google) that should sway me away from this lens?

4. I have seen a few comparisons of the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 OS, but all are against the IS-i or the IS-ii. Does anyone think the newer sigma is superior in AF speed and IQ to the older 300mm F2.8 non-IS?

With all due respect to those that might suggest to get the IS or IS-II, I know I should, but I am working with a budget here and would like opinions on the non-is. Thanks in advanced

Does anybody here use the Canon 35 1.4 with extension tubes? I see the lens has a floating system which is supposed to make it better for closer focusing. I realize a Canon 100 2.8 IS is a much better option for true macro work but for the occasional shot, I'm wondering if this might be a possibility for ring shots with a pleasing background.

With the intention of starting up my own photography business I'm slowly upgrading my gear with that in mind and am having a hard time deciding on lenses.

The initial plan was to upgrade straight from my Rebel XT to a 5D3, but at the time it wasn't yet available and I ruled out the 5D2 because of the AF issue/old technology and knowing that something better was coming along "soon". So in the meantime I decided an intermediate solution would be to upgrade to a second hand "prosumer" SLR, just to get the hang of a camera with "pro" controls and features as well as better IQ. I ended up with a 50D with a battery grip. My current lens lineup is:

• Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 DC -not very happy with neither the IQ nor build.
• Canon 70-200 f/4L -I love this lens. Build quality and IQ is excellent IMHO but with 1.6x crop the reach is a bit much for general use, so it doesn't get much use unfortunately.
• Canon 35 f/2 -I got this in order to replace much of the Sigma 17-70 use, better light-sensitivity and in order to start out with primes. It's OK but not great -noisy focusing, cheap build and feel nor does the IQ blow me away (perhaps I expected a bit more than what could be delivered for the price).

I'll be shooting a little bit of everything: portraits, products/advertising, school/kindergarten group shots, events, real estate etc. and when I get more experienced perhaps weddings.
The 70-200 feels like a keeper, especially when I go FF even though most pros seem to go for the f/2.8 version.
For "general use" I had my eyes set on the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L but have been waiting for much the same reason as the body: knowing that a mark II was about to be released. Now that it has been announced along with the hefty pricetag I'm considering other options:

• Canon 24-105 f/4L IS -seems solid and well built, has a good feel to it and although online reviews differ a lot it seems like a great contender. The IS should be very useful for still-standing subjects in less than perfect lighting.
• Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II -I haven't ruled it out though it'd better be twice as good as the first version for that price!
• Canon 24-70 f/2.8L (first version) -thousands of pros can't all be wrong when using it. When the version II gets released I assume its price will drop drastically, but I'm a little hesitant as I read a lot of people find it a "mediocre" lens despite the "L" designation
• Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS -not an "L" lens, but possibly an intermediate lens until I go FF. Lots of reviews/reader comments say it's essentially a lens with "L-quality" but with a consumer build
• A combination of a zoom and one or two primes

I've ruled out the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC because I've gotten the taste of L lenses and rather want to invest in "keepers" rather than "probably just as good". I understand lots of people will disagree with this view.

My conclusion (if you've read this far ):
I think my money might be best spent if investing in a good zoom for allround/general use and a couple of fast primes. I'm aiming for lots of Speedlite/studio strobe rather than "I don't care for (I don't know how to use) flash", so I probably don't need superfast lenses for everything. I wasn't entirely blown away with the low-light capabilities of shooting at f/2 with my 35mm, but again I was probably expecting it to perform miracles. Even with an f/1.2 or f/1.4 of some sort I assume I'll have to crank up the ISO and/or in combination with a flash.

But which lenses would be good for both crop and FF use? Even when I get the 5D3 (an "entry level FF" (whatever that means) is also rumored, perhaps worth looking into) the 50D will probably be a nice backup body. Still, I'll be losing out on wide-angle with most of those FF-designed lenses but could buy a second hand Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 and sell it when I get the FF, hopefully without any/much loss.
Or... should I go an entirely different route and buy second hand EF-S lenses just for the 50D now, then buy separate L lenses for the FF when I get it?
Sorry for the long post

I've been tossing around the idea of either trading my 50 1.4 for a 50L or instead add a TS-E45 (to be used with my 5DII). I know, very different lenses, different applications. But I think both could work for me. My main interest with these would be control over sharpness/unsharp areas for things or people that are not necessarily too far away. Shooting wide open for the most part would be the objective here (where I see a potential improvement over my 50 1.4 in addition to build quality).

The straightforward thing to do is obviously to go 50L and be happy. But then again, I recently had the joy to play around with one of the old FD tilt shift lenses. I really liked that thing and the results (35mm on a APS-C sensor).

My favorite focal lengths are probably 50 and 135. I have no real longing for the 35L at this point and the 85L is too expensive.

Any thoughts or experiences? How well would the TS double as a macro-like lens?

Given a budget of $1k USD, what new (new as in not used) items would you buy?

If that budget could be stretched to $1.5k (max, no more), what changes?

Looking for "ease of use" (amateur, no prior DSLR experience) and a zoom lens.

I am initially drawn to the T4i with the 18-135 IS STM lens kit and possibly the 40 shorty.

PowerShot?

Thanks.

Hi all,

First time poster here on Canon Rumors (been a canon fan for years and I can't believe I have only just come across this site) anyways....I'm in the market for a super wide lens which will bring me brilliant sharpness, contrast and coloured images. I'm looking for a super wide lens (i've got a 35L as my wide lens).

I've been sniffing around and have come across these lenses.

The Tonika 16-28mm -- can get for 650 Pounds

Pro's
Fast 2.8
Decent IQ - the same as the 16-35mmL but not as good as Nikons version unfortunately

Con's
Can be a bit soft in the corners at lower apertures

The canon 17-40L -- can get for 500 pounds

Pro's
Decent enough IQ - obviously not as good as the Nikkor 16-35mm

Con's
Slow f4 aperture (But doesnt really matter for a super wide since you want everything in focus)

Carl Zeiss 21mm f2.8 -- can get for 1140 pounds

Pro's
Super sharp image, edge to edge even at f2.8
Brilliant colours, contrast and saturation.
Built like a tank

Con's
THE PRICE!!!!

If you are in my position, owning a 5D3 and looking for a special lens that will never disapoint, and will deliver the sharpest results out of all your lenses. Would you flag considering the Canon and Tonkina and go straight for the Carl Zeiss....Or is the difference between the lenses not worth the extra money??

Suggestions will be hugely appreciated.

Hello,

I have a 5D MKIII and 7D
I have switch from Nikon to Canon about a year ago
I would like to know, which camera setting affect the RAW image
When I was using Nikon, on some model, the long exposure noise reduction was clearly affecting not only the JPEG but also RAW image

What about Canon? is there any setting (Noise reduction, color, contrast, sharpness, in camera color filter for monochrome image) that will affect the RAW image?
If so, which one?

Thanks for your help
This is my first post, so I want to say hi to everyone

Vintage port and canon lenses

Hi,

I recently upgraded to a 5D mark 3 and I am shooting my cousin's wedding this Saturday.

I plan on using the 5D3 with my 24-70mm f2.8L and 70-200mm f2.8L lenses.
For flash it will be my 580EX2 with a Lightsphere Universal (cloud).

I don't usually do weddings so any tips or advice guys out there using the 5D3 at weddings can give me?

Use auto ISO? Use aperture priority mode or leave it to post?

Another totally beginner question (it would be nice to have a Beginner's section)

I understand that 16-35 is much more $$$ and the 2.8 lets in twice as much light, also the components used are better and you get 1mm more

Question: would the IQ be so much different if you took the same photo (something like an early evening sunset) with both lens, say at a setting of f5.6, ISO 100, 20mm length, using a tripod and remote release?

Can I assume that the shutter speed of the f2.8 would be half that of the f4? and with a tripod would the IQ be so different?

thanks, still learning

Don't know if this qualifies as a real sport but there was this really fun event in Helsinki on the weekend so I thought I'd show you a few shots. At least there was some seriously demented vehicles rolling down the hill, some had more success than others. ;D

Flaming Slippers

Red Bull Boxcar Race - August 26th, 2012 by K3ntFIN, on Flickr

World's Fastest Barbecue (Race Winner)

Red Bull Boxcar Race - Winner! Grillaillaan! - August 26th, 2012 by K3ntFIN, on Flickr

A lot more can be found in this Events and Shows Flickr group:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/1945336@N23/

Have phun!

Only a few weeks to go now.

http://www.photokina.com/en/photokina/diemesse/termin_oeffnungszeiten/index.php

Engadget just posted this about the A99.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/28/sony-a99-rumored-specs-leak/

What are your thoughts?

24.3-megapixel CMOS Exmor sensor with an ISO range of 100-25,600, 14 bit RAW output and a 1/8000 maximum shutter speed. Other nuggets of interest include a 102 point AF system, full 1080p HD video recording (at 60fps) and a 921k dot LCD.

Hey everyone,

Just purchased a 60D and 15-85 USM today and I have a quick question. When I took the lens out of the box and had look at it I noticed there was a tiny speck of dust inside the front glass sitting on the second set of glass off to one side slightly. This is really annoying but I'm not sure if it is something I should really be worrying about. I bought them online so I'm wondering if it is worth sending the lens back overseas or just ignoring it. What do you all think? Any info would be a great help.

Cheers,

Mark.

How much do you think a combo like that would sell for? That is all the technical information I have on the gear, a Leica m3 paired with a 50mm and 90mm 2.8.

Thoughts? I haven't been able to get any serial numbers and I have tried ebay with no luck really.

Will the .5 year old firmware version 2.1.2 be the last and final official for the EOS 5D Mark II? The camera is still in Canon’s camera lineup and has not been discontinued. Please share your thoughts.

The camera does not support the GPS receiver or update the lens firmware which is mostly needed for the 40mm pancake lens owners.

See the major firmware update for the EOS 7D, may the 5D2 too old to get some items of it?

Help! I'm on vacation and my 5D3 just locked up and won't respond. I removed the battery and tried a different one but nothing is happening!

There are no active lights or error codes when I change batteries. They are fully charged. Last thing I was doing was taking a video.

Any ideas?

Worst timing ever.