hung_james_wasson

My apologies, Kristin, the program mode icon I was thinking of

depicts a person with a star over their shoulder, not a crescent moon

(I should have looked at a camera instead of relying on faulty

memory)! In any case, is that the program mode you were using for

your night/dark scenes?

Myer,

<p>

I don't mean to be a pain, and I certainly don't mind being

corrected. However, it still sounds like you are describing center-

weighted metering rather than partial. The center five focusing

points would constitute more like 50% than 10% of the frame.

<p>

The Canon USA website Elan7/7E Specs

(http://www.usa.canon.com/camcambin/cameras/35mm/slr/elan7_specs.html)

has this to say about metering: "TTL max. aperture with a 35-zone

silicon photocell. Three metering modes available: (1) Evaluative (2)

10% partial metering linkable to the focus point by Custom Function

control (3) Center-weighted average metering."

<p>

"10% Partial metering linkable to the focus point" has got to mean

that the 10% area can be assigned to any of the focus points. It's

not that I don't believe your quoting of the manual. Perhaps it's

classic Japanese-English mistranslation? :-)

Jim,

<p>

The the various T-mounts should all be designed to maintain the same

focal distance from the film plane, regardless of the 35mm body the

adapter is for. This being the case, you should get identical image

size & shape on your negative. This of course assumes that the

manufacturer actually pays attention to such small details as

consistancy. The build quality of the lens may give some indication?

It sounds like a fun lens - and at that focal length, who needs AF?!

<p>

Have fun :-)

Kristin,

<p>

I concur with Jim. You say you are "taking pictures at night using

the automatic setting and flash" -- I assuming you are using the full

program mode that has an icon depicting a person and a crescent moon.

That would be the mode that Jim refers to. You would want to use the

icon of the person running, or the green box (Full Program mode, non-

shiftable). "P" will also work for you (Full Program, shiftable) but

you would have to remember to manually raise the flash (are you using

the built in flash or a shoe mounted one?). Are we correct in this? I

look forward to your response.

Steven,

<p>

The Camera Equipment forum community (to which I'm recently

initiated) is happy to help! :-)

<p>

Good luck with your photographic journeys. Please stop back with new

problems to tackle, and to impart the knowledge you gain to others as

well. This is a great forum to add to your favorites, and most

everyone here is eager to help. ;-)

<p>

You should also try the Canon EOS FAQ Forum. It is a discussion group

formulated specifically to help EOS users.

<p>

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a.tcl?topic=Canon%20EOS%20FAQ%

20forum

>One feature I miss the most is the 1.5 stop compensation (most

>useful for backlit objects). While it is fixed on the AE-1 (1.5

>stop), it is turned on by the press of a button and turned of by

>merely releasing (normal sequence of events) the button. I am a bit

> concerned that the reason an on/off switch is required on the

>Elan7e is that people were inadvertantly turning the knob. By the

>same token it must be consciously turned off. I imagine this is a

>setting that is used most for photos under very spcific

>circumstances (backlit). Why would they make compensation act like a

>permanent (semi-parmanent) setting? It is great on the AE-1. I can

>imagine photographing a backlit subject, turning on compensation 1-2

>stops, and then fogetting to turn it back off.

<p>

Yes, forgetting to turn off exposure compensation is a danger that

you must be aware of. The reason the camera is not designed so that

you must press a button every time you want compensation is the basic

assumption that you will be taking a series of photographs all

dealing with the same lighting situation. For example snow scenes,

where you may want 1.5 to 2 stops compensation every time. The other

reason it is done this way on the Elan 7 � this camera is considered

to be at the level of serious amateurs moving up to pros (& some pros

use it for a light weight backup) and all of the pro cameras are

designed with exposure compensation in this manner. The assumption is

that a professional (or someone learning to be one) will be more

aware of his/her camera settings and how to adjust them as the scene

dictates. If you are looking for a down and dirty �one shot� method

of controlling exposure value, utilize the AE Lock/F Lock button on

the back of the camera. It�s the one with the asterisk (*). It will

lock focus on whichever point you selected, and will lock the

exposure reading of the metering mode you have selected. If using

Partial, it will lock on 10% around the AF zone selected. Push & hold

the button with the target to be exposed for in the AF zone, then

recompose the scene to you desire and fully depress the shutter

button. When you release the AE Lock/F Lock button, control goes back

to the camera.

<p>

>Rod if Partial and Function 8 really works that would solve the

>problem. What happens if I set to Partial and Function 8 (on), have

>Eye Control on, and then focus on the far left or right? How will

>Exposure be set if Partial does not read the far outside focusing

>points?

<p>

Does it say in your manual that Partial only works in the central

area? It was my understanding that the computer adjusted Partial

metering to be around any focus point. The system is well able to

read all of the 35 evaluative metering zones (& indeed does when left

in Evaluative metering mode) � when set to Partial, it just chooses

to ignore a large subset or give them reduced importance to the

exposure calculation.

<p>

> Does this mean that using Partial and Custom Function 8 (on) causes

>the metering to be more of a spot by moving to the focusing point?

>Or possibly does this mean the center- weighted metering shifts

>toward the focusing point but remains the same size? Any more ideas?

>Is all this documented anywhere other than in the regular manual?

<p>

I�m a little confused here. The Elan 7 has 3 metering modes:

Evaluative, 10% Partial & Center Weighted. Center Weighted is just

that. It stays in the center of the viewfinder like it always has.

Partial metering selects value from whichever one of the 7 AF points

you�ve chosen, the value coming from an circle consisting of

approximately 10% of the viewfinder area. In ECF it moves to where

you look. Otherwise it moves to where you assign it with the command

dial or the cool new AF point selector arrows within the command dial.

<p>

You can buy books concerning your Elan 7 that is more informative and

laid out to teach you all of the features of the camera and their

uses. The manual is just meant to instruct you on the cameras

features and how to activate them � it isn�t designed as a tutorial

on their use. Magic Lantern is one such publisher of tutorial books

on cameras. If they don�t have one on the Elan 7 yet, the will soon.

I�ve not used any of the guides personally, so I can�t give you my

opinion on them.

Thierry,

<p>

You say that your shooting habits have not changed. By this, I assume

that the weather has not become drastically colder either. Cold temps

drastically reduce battery life. You are being sure to use alkaline

batteries rather than mercury, yes? I would recommend cleaning the

battery contacts, and the ones in the battery housing with a rubber

eraser (such as on the end of a pencil). All batteries emit a slight

gas discharge when in use, and can coat the terminals and reduce

effective voltage. Make sure the camera is set to "L" for Lock when

not in use. Carry a spare set of batteries. If the problem persists,

then you must have some internal short & the camera will have to be

serviced.

Steve,

<p>

You may very well be correct about the link referring to the older

Canon D6000/Kodak DCS560. However there have been a great deal of

rumors flying about regarding an upcoming "pro" level 6MP EOS digital

to compete against Nikon's D1. Fuji, Pentax & a few others have also

made rumblings about 6MP cameras. I'd be really suprised if Canon did

not make an official announcement of a release date within the year.

>From the many posts I've read, I understand that primes are

>unbeatable.

<p>

This is a matter of hot contention � you�ll often see discussions on

whether the slight image quality gain on a prime lens is worth the

inconvenience of not being able to compose your shot without running

back & forth or switching prime lenses. On the high quality lens end

of things (yes, the L series) the more balanced reviews give a slight

nod to primes for image sharpness & contrast.

<p>

>followed by a couple of strategic primes and a teleconverter. Since

>this is a (budding) hobby and not a profession, I can't justify

>buying an L series zoom.

<p>

I took this as a rather strange statement, as one quality L series

zoom might run you $1500 US � but depending on the focal length & f-

stop speed of the prime lenses you are wanting to add to your

collection, you could be spending several thousand dollars! A new

50mm f/1.8 will run you $80 US, but a Macro 50mm $295, a Macro 100mm

$600, a Macro 180mm $1375, a 200mm f/2.8 $700 (f/1.8 $3900!), 300mm

f/2.8 $4650, 400mm f/2.8 IS $7500, 600mm f/4 IS $8650 � even an 85mm

f/1.8 will run you $390! So before you plan on gathering a nice

collection of primes, consider what your needs are, what they are

likely to be, and whether a nice L series zoom would actually fit

your needs & budget better.

Just what kind of photography are you interested in? The answer to

that will more truly dictate what kind of lens(es) you should acquire.

<p>

>I have my eyes upon the Canon 24-85, the Tamron 24-135, and the

>Tokina 24-200 (Notice I like a wide bottom end?).

<p>

I�ve owned the 24-85mm USM zoom for quite some time, and very much in

enjoy it � especially compared to its lower priced cousins. Some

reports put it down with excessive barrel distortion at the low end.

I don�t tend to spend too much time taking pictures of grids, brick

walls, or Venetian blinds � so I haven�t noticed the problem. It does

have an odd-ball lens filter size. I�ve decided to get a larger

circular polarizer filter for it (i.e. 77mm) and use a step-down ring

to fit. Then I could use the polarizer on the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS that

I will purchase (as soon as I inherit money, rob a bank, whatever).

<p>

>The prevailing opinion I've read here is that the Canon lenses are

>a better bet, but I can't help but drool over the longer reach of

>the other brands.

<p>

You must weigh cost, convenience, & acceptable lens quality. You

should also try all 3 lenses on your camera, noting the balance,

focusing speed, noise, configuration, etc. Then you should by the

lens that you like best.

<p>

>Am I wasting my time deliberating over "consumer grade" zooms in the

>first place?

<p>

No. You get what you can afford. Just remember to be satisfied with

whatever you get that exists.

<p>

>If so, I'll just get the super-duper Tokina and enjoy it until the

>honeymoon's over and I sober up.

<p>

Sounds like you�ve already kinda made up your mind.

<p>

>But if my goals are feasible, which zoom would combine with a couple

>of primes to make a respectable arsenal?

<p>

It just depends on what kind of photography you do.

<p>

>I suppose I could always get a 24 2.8 and combine it with a more

>standard zoom, but I'm looking ahead to digital SLRs and they tend

>to already multiply the focal length (24mm = 38mm on the Canon D30).

<p>

You�ll be looking for quite some time, before you see a Canon EOS

digital down at the consumer price points!

Jim,

<p>

You were right when you thought that you'd be stirring up a hornet's

nest! :-)

<p>

Gary,

<p>

The A2/A2e (EOS 5) is still around becuase good photographers such as

yourself keep it in demand, it sits at the right price point (now in

contention with the Elan 7), and it is a good design. One must admit

however that it is getting a bit long in the tooth, and could do with

an update -- no?

<p>

The fact that it has a brighter viewfinder, higher top shutter speed,

PC flash socket, and slightly better low light AF make for a hard

choice between it and the Elan 7.

George,

<p>

I have the big brother to this drive (the 1 GB). You say that the G1

is reporting 0 Kb used. Have you looked at the microdrive via a PC? I

assume that your Microdrive came with a PC Card adapter just as mine

did. Are you not using a PC to manage and store your images? As long

as you don't do any actions that cause information to be written

(including creating new folders, optimizing the drive, adding files)

to the Microdrive you will be fine.

<p>

What I'm suggesting is that perhaps your G1 interface with the

Microdrive is out of sync, but the images still exist. If you find

folders &/or files on the drive, move or copy them over to the PC's

hard drive. You could then reformat the Microdrive and put it back

into the G1.

<p>

If the worst has happened, and the files on the Microdrive have been

deleted by the G1 or your PC -- all is not lost. What generally

happens is that the directory information is deleted, but the files

actually remain until written over by other files. You may be able to

recover some or all of them using a program like Norton Disk Doctor,

which can search for erased files and "unerase" them. The program may

ask for help in determining the file extension to assign the

recovered files (jpg, tiff, raw, etc.) -- don't worry if you get it

wrong, you can simply rename the file extension later.

<p>

Baring that, you'd have to do what Isaac suggests and go with a

professional data recovery outfit.

<p>

Good luck, and do let us know what transpires!

<p>

PS Isaac, I hope you had a good flight! :-)

Tim,

<p>

In response to your question about whether Canon will stop producing

35mm film bodies because of digital � I�d say it�s an

unequivocal �Absolutely not!� At least, not for many, many years to

come.

<p>

Although digital cameras in general, and digital SLR�s in particular,

are increasing in sophistication they still have a very long way to

go to even come close to replacing film. Even then, I�d see the slow

phasing out of smallest negative sizes to largest. APS will fall,

then 35mm (except for us die-hard enthusiasts), 2 ¼ x 2 ¼ �. Can you

imagine a 5 x7 or 8 x 12 CCD or CMOS sensor?

<p>

What digital has going for it is: Convenience. The ability to

directly port images to your computer (with no lag for processing,

like film) and edit it in PhotoShop, then send it off to a bureau or

print it on your personal color printer.

<p>

What it lacks is:

<p>

1. Resolution (even the 6 MP cameras coming don�t come close to fine

films)

2. Dynamic range (may match slide films, but doesn�t yet come close

to print films)

3. Capacity (high capacity digital media, like IBM�s 1 GB Microdrive

cost upwards of $500 US � for just one CF II module. If you�re

traveling in the bush, you could carry a whole lot of rolls of film,

but likely can�t afford a whole lot of CF modules).

4. Print quality (even though color printers are getting nicer all

the time, prints on photographic paper from slides or negatives still

rule -- especially when it comes to large size prints).

<p>

I�m sure there�s more pros & cons, but that should do for a quick run-

down.

Argh, choosing optics based on their looks?!? I'm mortified!

Hmmm...on the other hand, I do lust after those pretty white

ones...perhaps I should keep my mouth shut! :-)

<p>

Sam, In all seriousness - I've only heard good about this lens, and

am sure that you will be pleased.

<p>

PS The double posting - I also sent Bob Atkins an e-mail. I know he's

still involved & active - he replied to my thread about TC's a short

while back. He is the one with site authority to delete threads,

though. My my post to him bounces, I'll try to track down a different

e-mail address for him.

Puppy Face,

<p>

Thanks for the clarification! It sounds to me like the most important

decision making factor, Sam, is the purchase price of the two

versions before you! :-)

Puppy Face,

<p>

An EOS 5N such as you describe sounds like a dream camera. Then

again, the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM was a long standing dream that

has become reality. Maybe there's hope for such an ideal body yet. A

film body specifically designed to accept a digital back would rock!

It could automatically lock open the shutter, disable motor drive,

etc. Even more ideal, the film back could be a full frame CCD or CMOS

sensor (while we're dreaming & all)!

<p>

At this point -- and perhaps more likely -- I'd really love to see an

updated 3, i.e. an EOS-3N. If it were able to incorporate all of the

advancements of the 7E (faster & more precise ECF, diopter

adjustment, Focus point selector arrows within the command dial,

etc.) while maintaining it's own very unique capabilities (AF with up

to f/8 lenses, 7 cross type sensors, fastest AF of all EOS bodies) --

then I'd just skip the Ellan 7E and save up. Before I wake up, let's

add features from the EOS-1v, like EOS Link Software & more custom

functions! And why not bring back the integrated near IF emmitter

(can be disabled via custom function, of course)? And give it a super

user-friendly LCD interface like Minolta's Maxxim 7! Man, I'm just

getting warmed up! I'd better quit while I'm ahead. :-)

I'm glad to see real units becoming available so quickly. Hopefully,

the retail shelves will get some soon!

<p>

BTW -- Isn't it rather an abuse of eBay purpose/policy, to have an

bid item that you can't really bid for, and is only there for a

commercial annoucement? Kinda takes the fun out of an auction site,

I'd think.

Sam,

<p>

As far as I've heard, the two lenses are identical optically. The Mk

II is only a slight change -- primarily the new finish you noted, I

believe a wider focusing ring, and all Mk II's have a 7 bladed

aperture diaphram (whereas the older Mk I's have a 5 bladed design &

newer Mk I's have the 7).

<p>

I would not worry too much about which factory your lens comes out

of, when it comes from a major lens maker such as Canon. These

companies are very interested in keeping up their reputation for

quality, and all companies (whether they are based in Japan, USA, or

elsewhere) are relocating to China/Taiwan/Vietnam/etc. to reduce

labor costs. I'm sure that if they had ISO 9002 (et al) ratings

before the move that they will make sure to maintain the same quality

assurance ratings. As far as the glass goes, I think it is still

being manufactured in Japan -- it's just final lens assembly &

perhaps some parts that are being done in Taiwan.

<p>

The 28-105 USM is well regarded at its price point. I'm sure that

you'd be happy with either one. I'm not sure how you'd figure out if

the Mk I you are looking at has 5 or 7 blades, short of taking it out

of the box -- if it's even important to you (the 7 bladed diaphram

should be better for portraits).

Sam, it looks like you posted twice by mistake. Is it possible to

delete a post? Maybe that question should be posed to Bob Atkins, our

knowledgeable & friendly site moderator.

Yes, that is quite a blast of questions! I have some of my own. What

are you looking to do with this new lens that you can't do with your

zoom? 28mm is considered by most users to be wide angle! :-) [The

range of the zoom below 50mm are all "wide angle" focal lengths.] Are

you needing wider focal length? Faster apertures? Higher optical

and/or build quality? Are you looking for a better zoom, or a fixed

focal length lens?

<p>

You obviously have web access (or is it e-mail only?) For

specifications, start with the Canon lens section of the Canon

website. Then try third party makers if you can't find what you are

looking for. Sigma, Tamron & Tokina all have their own websites to

provide information on their products.

<p>

For pricing & purchase availablity, the online mail-orer houses such

as B&H Photo (www.bhphoto.com) or CameraWorld (www.cameraworld.com)

would give you both. The prices will have to be converted to your

country's currency, as they are in US dollars.

Myer,

<p>

It is indeed likely something very simple. It is very possible to

have your own digits get in the way of pop-up flash. I'd suggest that

when you hold the camera vertically, you are cupping the zoom in you

left had with your thumb sticking up (and partially obscuring the

flash tube). Hold the camera in your hand, in vertical framing, with

the flash up and I believe you will see what I mean. I'm always

getting on my sister-in-law about this -- she's even worse because

she rests the lens on her left thumb, with her four fingers sticking

straight up and completely obscuring the flash! :-o

<p>

The slight darkening you are seeing on the bottom/right edge of the

film is also very likely your lens partially obscuring the flash

pattern. I have the same problem when using my 24-85mm USM past about

40mm with the built-in flash. Check your lens when zooming -- some

(like my 24-85) will stick way forward at certain focal lengths. That

action, along with increased lens barrel diameter, add up to lens

shadowing with the pop-up flash. With some experimentation, you will

learn at which focal lengths each lens you own might be a problem for

you. Lens hoods will definitely make matters worse!

<p>

No, the built in flash is not completely useless. It's amazingly

convenient when compared to bulky shoe mounted flashes -- but

convenience was definitely the primary design consideration. The

engineers couldn't design a bulky, telescoping flash unit that would

detract from the sleek styling of modern cameras, it couldn�t be too

powerfully without sucking the camera batteries dry, etc. The flash

is designed primarily for use with small prime lenses or a compact

zoom like the EF 28-90. It has a narrow lens barrel, and doesn�t

stick out very far. The flash does not cover lenses wider than 28mm

(so I have light fall-off at the edges when using my 24-85mm at it�s

widest settings). Some reports say the flashes can�t really cover the

full 28mm specified either.

<p>

When used properly, the flash can be very effective � especially for

daytime fill flash. It absolutely is not meant to take the place of

shoe mounted flashes (like the 420EX or 550EX). Not only are they far

more powerful, and use their own batteries, but their tall position

makes it nearly impossible for finger or lens shadowing to occur (OK,

OK, if you have a 500 f/2.8L your going to want to take the flash off

camera)! The EX flashes also give you near infra-red focus assist (a

big plus, even if you plan to use existing light only when you take

your shot), and the 550EX can cover out to 17mm with it�s built in

retractable diffuser. Their disadvantage is added cost, and bulk �

which leads many people not to have them when they suddenly find the

need for a flash (hence the pop-up flash was born).

<p>

I hope that I have solved your mystery! :-)

I have heard that there is a significant flare problem with the lens

when pointed toward bright lights. With light behind you, the lens

is incredibly sharp. The flare correction may take quite a while

yet, which is why Canon has not put out more information about this

lens.

<p>

Warren Jacobi

E:mail wjacobi@dcmdi.dcma.mil

<p>

Warren, Thank you for your e-mail. I also clipped & pasted it to the

400mm f/4 DO IS thread, so that it could be shared with everybody.

What you said makes perfect sense to me, with all of those added

planes & angles to factor in. I would love to see test photos taken

with a DO lens in various lighting conditions.

In response to the Leica lovers postings...

<p>

The Leica R6.2 is going for $1895 to $1995 in the USA, which equates

to 89,160R to 93,865R -- body only. The Leica R3 body only, used,

goes for about $695 US, which equates to $32,700R. A used 50mm

Summilux f/1.4 is over $400 US, which is over 18,000R

<p>

If you look at 5th sentence of the post, Vivek has only 25,000R to

spend -- for body, lenses, filters, flash, etc. $350 CAD still comes

out to 10,720R for body only -- leaving Vivek 14,280R with which to

buy Leica lenses, compatible flash, et al (and that's if by some

miracle he finds a fully functional R3 at that price in his country).

<p>

The Leica/Leitz/German optics are truly renowned for good reason, and

the R3 & R6 bodies manufactured by Minolta (to Leica specifications)

are very nice. But it all comes at a price that does not truly fit

the constraints of the poster's situation. Please do not let your

devotion to a truly fine camera optics maker blind you to the

requirements of others seeking advice. Or am I mistaken, and you were

actually offering up your kits to Vivek for 25,000 Rupee (including

shipping)? :-)

<p>

Vivek, the advice of the other posters are quite sound. A new or high

quality used 35mm body from one of the major brands should do very

well for a first camera. Sticking with the same manufacturer label is

usually nice � but not always within budget constraints. Most

importantly, take your time, educate yourself with the help of

friendly and non-pushy salesmen, fellow students, and/or instructors.

Don�t bring money with you on the first visit. Handle the cameras you

are considering & even perhaps run some film through them. Get used

to the various control layouts, and pick the one that most appeals to

you. Something else to consider is how easily & inexpensively a

camera can be repaired in your country. Very rare or very expensive

cameras may cause you grief in the future.

Ah, the F1...I remember positively drooling over that camera when it

was released! The ruggedness, interchangeable viewfinders & screens,

the handling. I use to stop by the local pro shop twice a month just

to hold one in my hands. I should look into finding one, as a solid

cornerstone to my collection! Isaac, you are right. That thing was

absolutely cutting edge when it came out, and Canon really played it

up. I still remember the ads with engineering grids and lists and

lists of specs. That camera is probably solely responsible for making

me the photographic technophile I am today! It does my heart good to

know that these tanks are still out there, capturing images even

after all of these years! ;-)

<p>

As much as I love modern photographic technology, with its

electronically controlled shutters, aperatures, exposures, etc. --

I've got to say that there's something magic about a well engineered

mechanical marvel that can still function without a battery. We gave

all of that up for our EOS bodies, there being no point in having

manual film advance and shutter trip when aperature control &

shutterspeed control depend on electrical current. Thankfully, modern

35mm cameras seem amazingly reliable, and carrying a spare set of

batteries isn't too difficult.

<p>

* Isaac, my appologies for getting off subject -- and thank you for

posting a question that has led to passionate & interesting exchanges

of viewpoints!

Your brother is going from a manual focus AE1 to an AutoFocus Elan 7.

Why is your concern AF in low light? Is it due to lack of split

focusing screen on most AF bodies? How much low light photography

does your brother do?

<p>

I only ask this to place the capabilities of the Elan 7 into

perspective. If low light AF is a priority, and a fast lens + AF

assist on the 420EX is not sufficient, then you must simply settle on

a different body. Keep in mind that 1 EV change is a one stop

difference. Get a cheap & fast prime lens (like a 50mm f/1.8) for use

in such situations & it'll more than make up the difference of 1 EV +

the 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS (as far as autofocusing is concerned. You

might get lower shutterspeeds while hand-holding with the IS).

<p>

It comes down to whether the positive features of the Elan 7 are

worth the disadvantages, bearing in mind that there no perfect

solutions.

Speaking of masking, does anyone know if the 35mm EOS cameras

actually mask off the 35mm negative, or if they just have guide

markers in the viewfinder? If they do mask, is there a selector

switch to move back & forth between panoramic & full frame modes --

or do you have to shoot the entire roll in one mode, open the back

and add/remove the mask?