tuan_tran

<p>If Canon sells the 500mm f5.6 for $2000 and they can sell 5 of those lens for every one 500mm f4 sold, they can do it. We just need to convince them by sending them a petition. I know one thing, $9000 for f4 is way out of reach for the majority of us individuals.</p>

<p>I agree with Ian. Portrait is just an artistic representation of a person. This should not mean that it's just a photo of a body/person but can include some kind of environment describing that person.</p>

<p>Anyway, the price difference between 50 f1.4 and 35mm f1.4 is huge. How about 35mm f2 and 50mm f1.4?</p>

This is so easy to prove! Take two pieces of metal (aluminum or steel) or plastic (polycarbonate, carbon graphite). Paint one black and paint one white. Leave it out in the sun and take a measurement every 15 minutes. I wonder which will be hotter?

The sound of the F1-n is loud but is very short and solid sounding. On the 3, it's loud and the sound seems to resonate. If you're shooting wildlife, they don't care since a lot of them are used to people taking pictures of them. If you are shooting an opera or something similar, then people will give you the stare. I always try and use quiet mode on my Mark II and a lot of the time, prefer to use my 10D which is pretty darn quiet.

1. 400mm L f4 - I don't want DO. DO lenses cost too much. Would be nice if this lens is $3000. With a 1.4X Converter, it would be a sweet for wild-life.

2. 150 - 600mm f5.6 L - Remember this lens in an FD version? Needs to be cheap. I think the FD version was pretty pricey.

 

 

Can't Canon come up with better process to make lenses cheaper, yet performs the same?

Yes, it has more noise on my 1D Mk II and I stopped using DPP.

 

I also don't like the fact that DPP doesn't have the cc filters.

 

I also don't like the fact that DPP sharpening is when you convert.

 

No sharpening in both apps for 1 Series mean no sharpening.

Nikon is dictated by Sony since Sony makes all of their sensor except for the D2H/D2Hs and that's it. Until Nikon make sensor for the D50, D70, D70s and the next D100, they will always lag behind.

 

Has anyone ever worked with someone outside their company? Difficult most of the time.

--That math is not a very useful guide - besides, it implies that a 300D sensor costs the whole price of the camera.

 

I was assuming the bodies of the 1D and 1Ds are about the same in price. When you hold these constant and equal, it makes sense to me. The body of the 1D <> (not equal) 300D and the sensor of the 300D is several times less than the 1D.

Easy math guys assuming that the cost of both bodies are about the same in price.

 

1Ds: Body + 3 * Sensor = $8000

1D: Body + Sensor = $4500

 

or

 

1Ds: Body = $8000 - 3 * Sensor

1D: Body = $4500 - Sensor

 

Substiting one for the other,

 

$4500 - Sensor = $8000 - 3 * Sensor

 

3 * Sensor - Sensor = $8000 - $4500

 

2 * Sensor = $3500

 

Sensor = $3500 / 2 or $1750

 

So

 

1Ds: 3 * ($1750) = $5250 for the sensor

1D: $1750 for the sensor

2.8 IS is way too slow. I would use the 1.8 at either 1.8 or 2. Lighting really sucks at boxing/kick boxing events.

You can easily test it out if you have access to any third party lenses that you are interested.

 

E-TTL works by metering of the focus point. So you should choose a focus point, focus an object with that focus point, and shift the camera to the left or right. The focus point should point to some distance subject. Take the picture and if it is correctly exposed, then it is putting into account the distance. If it is not, then it is probably just metering off the focus point which is pointing at some object beside the intended, focused object.

I forgot to add that I have the following bags:

LowePro Reporter 500

LowePro Pro Mag 2

LowePro Trekker Classic II

Tamrac Expedition 5

 

I can move the dividers around but when I do that, it takes more than half the bag which sucks. Also, not many bags out there can accomodate the length of the 70-200 or 100-400. Some backpacks like the Trekker Classic can accomodate these lenses but that sucker is pretty darn big. My problem mostly lies with handbag style bags.

Hi All,

 

How do people actually carry their lens hoods in their gadget bag?

I mean lens hood such as the 70-200 IS, 100-400 IS and 24-70L?

Hoods on those lenses are pretty big. It seems like a lot of the

bags out their holds lenses and that's it. If you put the hood on

the lens, it no longer fit in the slot.

 

Any advice on configuration or bags or better yet, pictures are

appreciated.

 

Note that I don't usually carry the 70-200IS and 100-400IS together

but I usually carry one of those + 24-70L, 16-35L and a couple of

primes depending on the occasion.

 

Thanks

Higher ISO are getting better but Canon is also adding more pixels and adding more pixels somewhat hinders the noise reduction process.

 

Why not find ways to make 2.8 lenses cheaper?

 

I think the answer is that the faster lenses are bought by pros and majority of pros will always use the faster lenses because of the DOF and focusing speed.

I am sorry for not being clearer. What I mean is that for the same f-stop and same image magnification, ie full head shot with both the 85mm and 200mm, you will get similar DOF. This also means that the distance (camera to subject) to achieve this would be different for the 85mm vs 200mm. Exceptions do exists like very close focusing distance, extreme aperture like f32, f1. You can play with DOF calculator and see what the exceptions are but in general, you will see that they are about the same.

Isn't same magnification would produce similar DOF? For example, to fill the frame with the 200mm, one would shoot at 20 feet or so. With the 85mm, you would need to be at 7 feet or so. As you know, the closer the subject is to the camera, the less DOF. I think you mean for the same distance, ie 20 feet, the 200mm will produce less DOF.

Let me take back my statement. If you are using Wireless, then yes, your ST-E2 or 550EX will send out some IR info for the slaves. You will need a "Pro-Sync" system instead. Have your prosync transmitter hook up to your PC-Sync and the receiver to your monolight. The Pro-Sync system uses coded pulse IR that only work with other Pro-Sync. This works for me. If you don't use any wireless, then the regular digital peanut slave would work.

Have your monolight sync cord hookup to a Wein "Digital" slave. This slave will ignore the preflash and you're set. You can just buy a cheapy "Digital" peanut for $35. This will work for you!

I have used all three. The 28-70 and the 28-135 are very similar at the same f-stop and focal length in color, contrast and sharpness. The 24-70 is not as good as the two. I ended up buying the 24-70L because it was sharper than all three at all focal lengths except f8 and beyond and much, much sharper wide open than either EX lenses. Sharpness wise all lenses performed similar at 70mm at f4.5 and beyond.

I don't see why we can't have the new 1D and an EOS 3D.

 

1D = 8 Megapixels, 8 fps, 25 frames buffer, lower noise at ISO 1600 and 3200, $4000

 

3D = 6.3 Megapixels, 6fps, 25 frames buffer, lower noise at ISO 1600 and 3200, 45 focus points, $3000

 

later in the year, new 10D = 6.3 Megapixels lower noise at ISO 1600 and 3200, $1200

 

With this, photographers have many choices, Canon still makes a lot of money and they still can compete with Nikon. Canon can still compete with Nikon because for $200 less, you get more pixels, a little slower fps and a smaller buffer. For $800 more, you get twice the pixels, same fps and slightly smaller buffer but with both cameras, you get lower noise at higher ISO.

Has anyone ever thought that for a 24-70L, you can buy a Canon 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm and a Tamron 28-70f2.8? I basically bought the 24-70L because it was convenient.

I have the 24-70L and my cousin has the 24-85. We compared it side by side wide open and the 24-85 holds up very well except at the 24mm end. For 11x14, I doubt anyone can detect the differences if stopped down. We compared the two using a 10D so it might be different with FF or 35mm.

The 135mm f2.8 SF is not USM. It has the same type of motor (AFD) as the 35mm f2, 80-200f2.8L, 50 f2.5 Macro, and some others. It is 1 stop slower than the 135 f2 L or 100 f2. It is not as sharp as either of those two lenses but who cares if you are buying a soft focus lens. On a 10D, it might be too long as a portrait lens. The 100f2 is good wide open but the other two might not be so you are basically losing more than several stops with the others.

If you're using the 17-40 on a 10D, then it is fine. Also, the 550EX is half a stop more powerful. Bump up the ISO and you're fine. If you decide that you need to buy an external battery pack from Canon, then you'll need to buy the 550EX. Then again, third party's battery pack can work with the 420EX. If you do need the wide angle, buy a lumiquest pocket bouncer. That will give you the extra wide coverage.

I agree that the photographer is what makes a good picture and not the equipment but only to a certain extent and under certain conditions. Try getting narrow DOF with a 28-200. Pretty hard. Try getting church shots without a flash with a 28-200. Doable but the result might not be optimum. Try blowing up 8x10, 11x14, etc. for some shots. You never know which shots will be asked by the client to be blown up that large. Some clients may not see the difference but if you get a couple who do, you might lose future businesses.

 

As a professional, we should be using the proper tools for the work we do. In my mind, using only a 28-200 for a wedding is not the proper tool.