bob stewart jacksonville

None of these are going to do much to diffuse the flash. The quality of the light is a function of the size of the light source in relation to the distance from the subject. None of these expand the size of the light source enough to make much difference.

Using the omnibounce to bounce the light off an available wall or ceiling can give a pleasing effect, but it mostly comes from the fact that bouncing it off the ceiling expands the effective size of the light source. (it's designed to send part of the flash directly at the subject and part bounced).

In your P.S. about outdoors, none of these are going to make a siginificant difference because you can't bounce the flash

Sigma 500 4.5 new approximately $3200. Sigma 500 4.5 30 days old approximatly $1500. Canon 500 4.5 purchased used approximately $2500. Canon 500 4.5, 30 days older approximately $2500. To me its an easy choice.

Best lens I ever bought was a non IS 600 f/4 for $3750. Been using it for a year and a half, and I'm sure I can still sell it for what I paid for it.

I've owned two Sigma lens, one of which broke pretty quickly. To me when you start talking real money for a super telephoto lens, you have too much invested to trust it to Sigma.

Jim , setting the flash synch speed is the same as setting the shutter speed. it's referring to how fast the shutter speed can be and work with the flash. If the shutter speed is set above the speed at which the flash will synch, the photo will not be evenly illuminated. if your photos are not coming out dark on only part of the frame, you don't have a synch speed problem.The EOS 3 will synch at 1/200 of asecond with a EOS 550EX, and will synch faster than that in high speed synch mode (but with the price of only partial flash output.)

 

with studio lights, high synch speeds should rarely be necessary. Using studio lights, they are going to be your primary source of illumination, and the strobe is going to freeze motion as opposed to the shutter speed. Thus in most studio set ups the shutter speed as long as it is below the maximum synch speed is basically irrelevent. thus if you just set the shutter speed at 1/60th for studio flash work you should be fine.

the canon camera museum is a good source for this sort of information.

If price is a concern, you are not going to find a sharper zoom covering 300mm than the 100-300 5.6L for anything approaching what you can buy that lens for used. The reason you can get it relatively cheap is because of the operational short comings listed above. if you want a relatively cheap sharp zoom the 100-300l is a buy.

If you want a very sharp telephoto lens with a non rotating front element and fast autofocus, you're going to have to step up in price.

why would you want to do this anyway? If you need to change film types, just use the EOS 3, leave the leader out using the custom fiunction, and then when you want to finish that roll, put it back in the EOS 3.

The 630 was a good camera in it's day. Without running down the specs line by line, I'd bet a new Rebel (which also would have the benefit of warranty coverage) would beat it in most respects. With a comparable lens you should be able to get a new rebel for just a few dollars more. I'd buy a rebel, and a 50 1.8.

One other point, incorporating is not a panacea. The above post's point that the owner of a corporation is not personally on the hook for the tort liability of the corporation is generally true. Thus if your corporation has emloyees running the workshop, you as owner of the corporation will not generally be personally liable for the negligence of the corporation's employees. However if you are running the workshop personally, you are still going to be liable for any of your own negligence, regardless of whether you incorporate.

The decision of whether to incorporate is complicated, and has tax implications. You really do need to work with your own attorney, and tax adivisors to determine if it is appropriate. It does have an advantage in limiting liabilty (not eliminating). Hwever, it is absolutely not a substitute for appropriate insurance coverage.

Brien,

I am a lawyer. However, the precise answer to your question will turn on the jurisdiction you are in, and exactly what your doing, so I can't give you legal advice. Two general pieces of advice though: One, go to an attorney that does personal injury defense in the state where you are conducting your workshop, and pay them to craft a release for you. It may cost a few dollars, but it will be money well spent, and is a cost of doing business; Two, talk to your insurance agent, and buy the appropriate insurance. The insurance is actually more important than the release. Anyone can sue you. If there is an accident and you are sued, even if your release is ultimately upheld by a court, and you win, you will still have defense costs that will greatly exceed your revenue from the workshop. When you buy insurance you are not only getting coverage from liability, the insurance company is also agreeing to provide you with a legal defense to any covered claims at the insurance company's expense.

there just isn't a free lunch. Unfortunately for bird photography you really want a long fast lens. If you could get quality bird photos witha 500mm mirror lens, who would pay to buy 500 f/4s and 600 f/4s, and lug them around.

Staying with Nikon, the 80-400 VR would not be a bad choice. It will be a good lense for bird flight photography. It won't give you the reach to take some photos, but with good stalking technique, and some creativity in the type of pictures you take, (e.g. birdscapes, instead of close up poitraits) you can do nicely with this lens.

Howard,

I do bird photography and have a 300 f/4, and a 600 f/4. I think you'll find a 500 f/4 or a 600 f/4 will be much more valuable than one stop of light on the 300 2.8.

It's designed to only break once in the camera body replacement lifecycle. It should break again around the time Canon's next EOS body is released. Mine broke right about the time the EOS 3 came out.

Depends on what your trying to get the image to look like and what the ambient light is like. you are correct that aperture priority may give you some long shutter speeds (the camera is trying to get the background correctly exposed based upon the ambient light) AV, P and M all have their place in flash photography depending on what your trying to accomplish.

I'm going to show my ignorance here. Does the 70-200 IS have mode 2 for panning, like the 300 f/4 IS? If so, it would come in handy for panning shots of your kids running and playing (sharp kid, blurred background) Now is the ability to take better panned shots worth $500? your call.

can't answer for technical compatibilty, but I can tell you the picture quality will be pretty poor. The 24-200 lens is already going to give marginal performance, particularly at the 200mm end. Adding a tc to it will degrade it further. Moreover this combination will not relaiably autofocus, and will even be difficult to manually focus due to the maximum aperture of F/11. Additionally, you'll need fast film, a good tripod, and good long lens technique to deal with camera shake given the very slow maximum aperture. If your purpose is snaphots not to be enlarged, and you're not picky as to quality, you may be ok. If you have higher aspirations, save your money.

Make sure one of the 5 focal points on your A2 is on the subject's eye when you lock the focus. Given limited DOF at a wide aperture for a poitrait, the whole face may not be in completely sharp focus, so it's important to make sure the eye is sharp.

I have an EOS 3 and an A2. I would echo the comments above. Mirror vibration on the EOS3 is not a significant problem. The advantage of better autofocus on the EOS 3 makes it preferable for wildlife, if you can afford the price difference.

If you wonder whether sharp photos can be taken with a telephoto lens on an EOS 3, take a look at this: http://www.photo.net/photo/605343

That was taken with an EOS 3, 600mm f/4 2x tc, and 1.4 tc, with no mirror lockup.

I assume you're shooting in one shot autofocus mode. I believe on your rebel, its going to lock autofocus at the same time it locks exposure, so it may be that the shot is not in focus. Locking the expousure and recomposing will not cause motion blur, assuming that you quit moving and hold the camera still whe you're shooting.

It is significant to note that the IS on 28-135 isn't designed to use for panning (it doesn't have Mode 2, like some of the other Canon IS lenses)

A change in technique for you might to be to use the exposure lock button on the back of the camera, as oppossed to holding down the shutter. This way you should be able to refocus when you recompose while maintaing exposure lock

define "work".

I use an EOS 3, without a power booster, mostly for wildlife and some landscapes. I use it a lot with IS lenses, and large telephotos, and have used it in cold weather. I've never seen a real need for a power booster. Even using the IS a lot, I get at least 10 rolls of film or more before needing to replace the battery. Would I like to have a PB-E2? Yes. Are there a lot of lenses on the wish list ahead of a PB-E2? Most definitely.

As Carl alludes, there is a CF to go down to 11 points. There is also a CF to select two adjoining focusing points. I beleive when you select the CF for two focusing points, that some of the points on the periphery of the "ring of fire" don't light up.

Jamin,

I played around with my 300 f/4 IS last night, and couldn't figure out how to get the lens hood off either. I don't think there is user friendly way to do it. I guarantee if you break the lens hood, Canon will want a boatload for a new one. Going to a good repair shop and paying them $25.00 would probably be a good investment.

ECF definitely needs calibrated. However, I 've tried calibrating mine a number of times, and have never gotten it to the point that I find it sufficiently reliable. (I wear glasses) A number of EOS 3 users will tell you they like ECF and it works well for them, even . It seems to vary from person to person.

Newer Canon IS lenses are tripod compatible, such as the 600 f/4 IS and 500 f/4 IS. On the 300 f/4 IS by contrast, the IS does not work with a tripod.

A big advantage of the Canon 600 f/4 IS is that it allows you to use a little bit lighter tripod. Being the cheapskate I am, I bought a 600 f/4 (no IS) and a Gitzo 1500. With a Wimberly head its rock steady and I don't really miss the IS even with a 2x tc. If your willing to sacrifice your back more than your wallet buy a used non IS and a very sturdy tripod.

The 3 is pretty noisy. I wouldn't shoot a professional golf tournament with it. I haven't found it to be a big problem though. Obviously shutter noise isn't an issue for landscapes. I've never had a problem with my EOS 3 disturbing wildlife. Perhaps if you shoot from a blind it could be an issue.