Am using the Tamron VC version right now, and it's pretty good. Anyone know of a Canon 28-300 replacement that is less $ and doesn't break your back?

8) anyone say Nikon killer...

Hi all, I am new to this forum but have been lurking daily for several months now. Just having fun like everyone else, and figured I'd join the fun even though I am no professional.

Just to get things straight, I am a video guy, not photography. Not sure how much we are welcomed here but heck, these cameras are great affordable video tools.

That being said, I had a few questions and thoughts about the new 5Diii (or whatever it'll be) concerning it's new video functions. Obviously no one knows but I've read a lot of expectations and I figured getting some feedback from you guys could enlighten me.

60fps in 1080p
I know this is something a big bunch of videographers are impatiently awaiting. For myself this would be the number one feature that would make me pre-order a new body without much more convincing. But here's my thinking... If Canon hasn't introduced the 60-1080 in the 1DX, and not even in the C300 which is a new and much more expensive video-dedicated camera, why is anyone expecting it in the 5Diii? Isn't it even a little stupid to hope for?

Improved Low Light Performance
Obviously I think that is probably a sure thing, everyone seems to agree on that.

Manual Sound Recording and Audio Meters?
I guess after seeing those new photos with the mic Port we could expect more integrated audio options.

1080 HDMI output when recording?
That is something else that I am much looking forward to getting in a new body. I use a lilliput monitor and getting that 480p preview does work, but it disapoints.

Focus Assist
Just throwijg it out there... Something that would be cool to see in DSLRs. Nkt expecting it though.


What do you think? Anything else we can expect?

Hello,

I was wondering if anyone knew any more information on the 590ex? I thought it was supposed to debut today...

This probably seems like a strange question to begin with, but...can anyone tell me what the difference is between "good" autofocus and "bad" autofocus?

While waiting for the 5D3, I've done lots of reading and poring over potential specs etc, and one thing that always crops up is talk of improved AF over the supposedly bad AF in the 5D2, and comparisons with the supposedly good AF in the 7D. Never having shot with either, I can only speculate based on my experiences with my lowly 1000D.

In using the 1000D, like many people I set the centre AF point and then when shooting I focus, then recompose, then release the shutter. Most of the time it seems to work fine, so I'm wondering what specifically it was about the 5D2's AF that was "bad". Surely it was better than that of the 1000D - so what factors exactly are we talking about when comparing the AF of these high-level models?

cheers,
Ian

:-\

I work for a big camera shop in Canada and Our rep Canon CONFIRMED to us today that its a rebel series thats is gonna be announce On friday March 2, 2012... probably T4-i

Something else he didnt want to tell me will be announcing in the next 2 month

Sorry For party stoping!

Possibly a full-frame geared more towards video and perhaps have the same sensor as the 1DX, but without all bells and whistles for stills?

I hate to ask, as it has probably been beaten to death all over the world, but I need to know. My 5dII does fairly well, and based on my needs seldom pushes for TOO much of an increase. However, if they are using a sensor very close in MP size, it seems they are just following the approach by Nikon in the D3s revision.

I would expect images at 25,600 to rival 6400 on current 5d. Two stops is asking a lot, but I really think after 4 years of technology development this would be possible--even at 22MP.

If there is merely a clear one-stop advantage, I don't see a worthwhile reason to upgrade if AF is unimportant. Maybe low ISO/Shadow noise improvements could warrant a reason. As they always say, the proof is in the pudding. The more I look at the D800, which on paper appears to be wonderful at its price, the more I believe it will be noisier than a bunch of bad kids on Saturday morning. And that is a major reason NOT to jump ship!! At least for me, it is.

I read a rebuttal recently online concerning the validity of ISO noise comparisons between Canon and Nikon cameras, it was a comparison of the Canon 7D versus the Nikon D7000, but for the life of me I cannot find it again. But one apparently knowledgeable person said that the native or 'base' ISO setting on the Canon is 100 whilst it is 200 for Nikon, then the Digic or Expeed chips boost the light sensitivity with software/algorithms etc.

Is this true? ???

If so, then are most of the Nikon vs Canon comparisons (let's face it all are based on ISO performance) flawed? Or if there is a full stop difference in base ISO settings then we should adjust when making comparisons e.g. compare Canon with f5.6 vs Nikon at f4.0, or alternatively Canon camera+lens combo photo @ ISO 400 vs similar Nikon package @ ISO 800 and so on. Or am I just talking nonsense and is there a difference between captured noise and process-generated noise?

The EF 24-70 2.8L. I'm speechless. And to think I lived with the Sigma 17-70 for the last 2 years. And lived with sub standard IQ. I'm in heaven.

Hello all,

Last night I finally pulled the trigger on a new 7D (and only 14 minutes before the Adorama discount ended, for a final price of 1,399 body only). As far as my regular shooting is concerned, it is majority (say 85%) aviation, with birds/wildlife covering the other 15% or so. As such, my lens "array" consists of the 100-400mm, the 400 5.6, and then some kit lenses inherited from my Xsi from a while back. While I've already identified what will likely be my replacement for the 18-55 kit lens, I had a couple of questions for people who have used the 7D with either the 100-400, or the 400 5.6.

What were your general impressions? I've heard some people say that the AF literally does not work with the 100-400, and I've heard people say that it is perfectly fine. Same goes with the 400 5.6. I am coming from a 50D, albeit a fairly problematic one, and would consider that my baseline as far as AF performance, etc is concerned. I've had many people tell me that I may need to sell the 100-400 and pick up something like the new 70-300L or a 70-200 to get acceptable IQ, in your experience, is this the case?

I'd greatly appreciate any input y'all could give me. I look forward to the new body getting here soon




HV

OK, I have some questions for folks...

I've followed the discussions on MP's and was wondering. If an image is framed the same and the print size is, say 8 x 10, and the image is not cropped, what is the advantage of high MP's versus not so high MP's. Or put another way when do the image MP's exceed the printer's ability to take advantage them? I've been taught that 300ppi is about the limit of printers (at least the one's I can access) so 8 x 10 x (300 x 300) = 7.2 MP.

I must be missing something, but I don't know what it is :-\

Yes, I am a rookie!!

Will you still buy something? What I mean by that, I currently have about 2,400 set aside for the new camera and should be able to fully pay it off sometime in April but if there is no Full Frame camera announced I'm thinking I'll pick up the 34L and start building back up my camera fund.
I don't need a new body, and I've been planning to go FF for quite some time now but the nerd in me won't let me get a nearly 4 year old camera with the new one being so close.

So, if there's no 5D3 this week what, if anything, will you pick up to appease your burning pockets?

My wife just told me to quit wasting time because the new 5D isn't even coming (CR 0.001) :

Besides, you're not even a photographer! (CR 2) :'(

AND, you're definitely not getting one anyway! (CR5)

So I currently have an aging Canon XSi that I use for sports photography. Don't get me wrong, coupled with my 70-200 f/2.8 L II, I get great photos primarily because of the lens. There are times though that the slow framerate, especially in RAW, makes me miss certain moments that I want to take pictures of during the sports. And thus I am considering getting a 7D. But, should I wait for Canon to update with a 7D Mk II / 8D ? Does anyone know if that is going to happen anytime soon? I have a 7D kit sitting in my Adorama cart with the S1234567 coupon code... just waiting for my "Submit Order" to happen... I just want to make sure that I will not regret it when Canon announces a new replacement in only a few months time. I am looking to get a new camera body within the next few months, before summer.

[size=12pt]Leaving this forum as the central place to continue these discussions, I wanted to introduce you to a supplemental place that targets specifically the EOS 5D Mark III that will launch this Friday, focusing on its video functionality for filmmakers. This is built upon the success of several other communities, including most recently the Cinema EOS C300 at http://cinema-eos.info, that integrate video samples with social media feeds.

http://canonhd.info (join the group at Vimeo)
http://facebook.com/eos5DmkIII (like the Page at Facebook)
http://twitter.com/eos5DmkIII (follow the feed at Twitter)

Looking forward to sharing more information and actual working samples when this product drops![/size]

Would you Pre-Order Canon 5D Mark III on the announcement day base on the current specs.?

Specs

22mp
61pt AF
100% VF
3.2″ LCD
Dual CF/SD Card Slots
Price: Around $3500 USD

Hey everybody!

So hear is the the choice I have to make before the rebates end on 3/2. I have all but decided on the widely loved 70-200 f2.8 IS II. I appreciate the cost and weight as an issue, but after shooting with it for a couple of weeks on loan from a very generous friend ;D, I have learned to love it despite these issues.

I will be using this on a 5d II as a candid portrait lens (both indoors and outdoor) and as a general outdoor zoom lens. I like it for its wide aperture and great bokeh when zoomed to 200mm.

My only concern is that sometimes the f/2.8 is not quite fast enough for indoor available light shots. (I use the 35 L f/1.4 right now but it is to wide for certain portraits)

My last argument against /alternative to the 2.8 II would be that for the same cost $$, I could buy the 135 f2 L + the 70-200 f/4 IS L. This would give me a smaller more portable general outdoor zoom, (albeit with less background blur and less capable when combined with TCs), and I would gain a faster f/2 135 mm lens for indoor / available light portraits.

I realize all three lens are great and I have read the numerous posts on them. I am more curious to know your thought on the one option vs the other and any pros and cons.

As always, I love this community and thank everyone for your responses in advance!

Cheers!

Hey all,

just curious as to how many of you on here have your own website/on-line gallery? I know there are sites such as flickr which offer free hosting of images and galleries which is all fine and dandy.

however, I've always wanted to be able to get my portfolio on-line and allow me the ability to customise appearances and so forth, to make it more, me.

I don't really have the web building skills required to code such things, so was just curious if anyone out there knew of ways to do things.

cheers

Out for a day of shooting on a hike in the mountains I find myself turning the power switch off and on frequently. I may have a location for a planned shot or two, but a lot of my pics are spontaneous....like when a moose walks out on the trail or a pretty flower catches my eye. Would it be better to just leave the power switch in the on position for the entire day, or is it advised to turn the camera off when it might be 30 minutes until the next picture?

With the 5D III rumored to come in over $3k and the 5D II dropping to$2K, it seems like Canon will have a big hole in its lineup. Unless a new 7D is quite a pop. Any ideas? I almost think I might rather go for a 5D II. Although the pictures make the III look a bit smaller (read lighter). I like to take long hikes, so lighter is better.

I own a 5D and like it.

A friend of mine has a T2i, and I was trying to explain to him how a FF sensor has less noise etc… we then conducted a test. I shot the same framing on ISO 3200.

Both Cameras had a 50mm f1.8mk.ii snapped on. (however the T2i had a Canon calibrated one on it): For some reason I had my EV set at +2, not sure how much it affected the noise level. (Maybe I need to re-take the test)

Both were shot in RAW; converted in LR4 with standard settings, no PP except cropping.

From the results… it seems both Sensors seem to show similar or comparable levels of noise. The AWB is a bit off but that should not affect Noise grain…

What do you guys think?

B&H is promising to show off the 1DX in their event space on March 12.

According to their website: Ashley McLaughlin from Canon joins us with the brand new Canon IDX DSLR camera. Be the first to take a look at the newest Canon camera and learn about all its amazing features. Ashley will show you the ins and outs of this brand new camera and how it will enhance your shooting. Ashley will follow up with a live model shoot using this new camera, demonstrating how to capture that high fashion moment. Attendees will have the chance to see first have the quality images produced with this camera. Your high fashion beauty shots will never be the same after seeing them from the new “It” camera. .

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/eventDetails.jsp/KW/ES0212/id/1210//url]



[url=http://www.headshotsnyc.com]Actor Headshots NYC | Gotham Family Photos | NY Wedding Photos

Hello everybody,

I'm going on a business trip to Shanghai, China in May (my first time anywhere in Asia), so I'd like to go with the best equipment I can afford.

I own a 60D and the following lenses
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 VC
Canon 50 f/1.4
Canon 70-200 f/4.0

While I'm extremely happy with my two Canon lenses, the Tamron is just ok (especially after I bought the prime and made the mistake of comparing!)

So I was planning to rent a "normal range zoom" lens for the trip and I can't decide between the following three:
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L
Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS

The 17-55 is a perfect replacement for the Tamron, and according to several reviews the IQ is excellent.
The other two sacrifice the wide end (which I can compensate for by creating multi-picture panoramas) but they are both supposed to be excellent lenses and also:
a) the 24-70 bridges nicely the range all the way up to my 70-200
b) the 24-105 sacrifices some light as well, but its range makes it a very tempting choice for a walk around lens, which is what I'm missing the most.

and I guess I'll be doing mostly street photography, some landscapes/architecture and maybe some museums.

So, what do you suggest?

thanks,
Anthony

so do you think anything is going to be announced today or is it just going to be Friday?