Ken Katz

The APS film frame is about 58% the size (based on square mm) of FF 35mm film and the cameras where not that much smaller, so I really never saw the point of this format. Loading 35mm film in a modern auto-focus film SLR is highly automated, reliable and easy to do and rewind is automatic. Besides, no one is going to restart APS film camera manufacturing and no one (certainly not Fuji or Kodak) will restart APS film manufacturing.

There is an instant rebate available for this new lens from all the major retailers (B&H, Adorama, Amazon, ect). I just ordered one from B&H and its listed as a new item that will be sent when available. While I would have preferred the Oly 25mm f1.8 because its smaller, I thought that for $99 its a no brainer.

It would seem to me that all those lenses would be appropriate to bring to Yosemite. I think the 50mm would be somewhat better to cover the range between your 2 zooms but since the 40mm and 50mm lenses weigh almost nothing, take them both if you want. If you like your WA zoom for landscapes, the 24 f2.8 may also not be essential, but again it doesn't weigh much. When I used a Canon FF camera, the 17-40L + 70-200F4IS + 50mm was my standard kit and it worked well.

My E-M5 is over 2 1/2 years old and I have never had that issue. I only have Oly lenses, but that really should not make a difference. If its returnable, I would recommend doing that and getting another copy. I would also recommend updating the firmware to 2.0 if that is not already done. I don't think it will fix that problem but its worth it just to get the small AF point option (vs the big squares on the original camera) and 100 ISO capability. Check to see if any of your lenses need a firmware update, perhaps to improve compatibility with Oly cameras.

For a pocketable camera I would likely choose one with a much larger sensor, like the 1" sensor used in the Sony RX100 series and the Canon PowerShot "X" series. They are certainly more expensive and somewhat larger than the S120, though most of them are still pocketable. A number of the cameras described above are reviewed and compared here: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0692551582/2015-roundup-advanced-zoom-compacts

The low light AF performance of my Olympus E-M5 on static (non moving) subjects is very good and that mirrorless camera was introduced almost 4 years ago. The AF performance on the current generation of top end mirrorless cameras is even better. With respect to Sony FF "E" mount cameras, you will need to make sure that the lenses you will want are currently available and when you add it all up, see if the weight savings of that system, compared with a Nikon DSLR, is worth switching.

While I am sure the lenses will be optical and mechanical jewels, the 24-90 weighs 40 oz compared to about 28 oz for a Canon 24-70 f2.8II. Comparing 90mm at f4 vs 70mm at f2.8 I am not sure why I would have expected this lens to be as big and as heavy as it is. So just the camera and 1 midrange zoom weighs 4 /12 pounds, which is not exactly going to be kind to my arthritic vertebra but those with a good strong back and shoulder (and thick wallet and/or $13K of available credit limit), may reach another conclusion.

It must be announced since DPreview has the preview loaded on the front page. It's a BIG camera and weighs about as much as a typical FF DSLR. While I am sure the image quality will be excellent as will be the optics, at a stated price of $12,400 for body and the "kit" 24-90mm zoom its too rich for me and not likely to be a common sight under most Christmas trees (or Hanukka bushes)

"if it is worthwhile buying yet another camera" Only you can answer that question, but generally, a new camera will not make you a better photographer or take more memorable photos. What a new camera can do is provide you with a wider shooting envelope and provide you with better technical quality across a wider spectrum of shooting conditions. Comparing my E-M5 to my E-PL2, the E-M5 has significantly improved high ISO and dynamic range performance (2+ stops at least), much more effective IBIS, much faster AF and handling, and a good EVF. Newer OMD's have improvements in all of these areas and additional features such as focus peaking, which could be helpful when using adapted lenses.

looks like a really clean copy. Given the small size of the adapter, I assume this lens is a Leica screw mount (not an M42 mount). I picked up a really cheap Super Takumar 135mm f3.5 and a M43 adapter and have tested it around the house though I use an Oly 40-150 in the field because it weighs almost nothing and has AF. If you can activate the IBIS during focusing and framing, it really helps stabilize the image in the viewfinder. Don't know if an E-PL3 can do that but my Em-5 has that option. Would love to see some images from that lens.

It would help to know: what focal length is a "moderate zoom", what do you consider "fast", and how much money does "inexpensive" mean to you?

I think people should be free to us whatever equipment or media they choose and I only really care about the results. That being said, except for the last image (from his hotel room), I didn't find any other of the images published in the article interesting or appealing in any way.

The 5DS and 7DII have the same pixel size so that an image taken with a 5DS and cropped to match the field of view of a 7DII will have about 20MP remaining (same as the 7DII). According to Canon the noise performance (per pixel) of both cameras are about the same, so I can't imagine that a 5DS image cropped to an APSC field of view will be of better quality than a 7DII image when taken with the same lens. Someone else can do the math, but a 50mm image on a 5DS when cropped to match a 200mm image on a 7DII will not have a whole lot of pixels.

As per the OP, the reason why he was asked to put away his camera: "one of the people running the festival approached me and asked that I put my camera away as she was donating her time and had been promised exclusivity" So the reason provided by venue was not related to professional equipment or a general prohibition on photography, but (as I described above), just because of the pro photographer's suspicion that the OP may try to sell some photos of the event. Perhaps the venue also had a restriction on professional equipment, but that is not what was told to the OP, and as such, I too would have been embarrassed and upset if that had happened to me in that way. Don't know if he was singled out, but perhaps the "pro" photographer would have been less intimidated by a black 70-300mm.

I guess if the venue had an explicit rules regarding (a) taking photos intended for sale (which you were not), or (b) using "professional" equipment (which your 100-400L would likely fall into that definition), or © restrictions on all photography (which was clearly not enforced if there were such restriction), and you were restricted solely due to the pro photographer's suspicion that you may violate rule (a), I would think you have the right to be upset by this incident. Given the number of non professional photographers today who own and carry very professional looking equipment, I think you were unfairly singled out. Perhaps next time you should stick with consumer grade equipment and try to look like you barely know how to use it. A few years ago I was restricted from bring in my highly "professional" looking Olympus E-PL2 and tiny consumer grade zoom to a concert at Bethel Woods NY while folks right next to me where happily shooting with their superzoom compacts which all had far greater reach than my 40-150mm zoom.

It seems that either shutter priority or manual (with auto ISO as Craig suggested) should give you what you want. Unless the ISO needs to go lower or higher than what you have set as the auto range, I would not expect any exposure warnings in your viewfinder. If you want to have the camera set the minimum shutter speed to the reciprocal of the focal length using aperture priority (within the limits of your auto ISO setting and available light), then you would need to use a native E mount lens so that the camera knows what focal length you set.

I find my Olympus 12-40mm simply an excellent lens. Its sharp wide open, corner to corner and across the zoom range. It is as sharp or sharper than my 12 f2, 17 f1.8 and almost as sharp as the 45 f1.8. Best standard zoom I ever used, but a bit large and heavy for m43.

I have successfully used on camera bounce flash in very large rooms with difficult ceiling structures (dark, uneven, etc.), and using some primitive equipment like film, with a fixed ISO setting. As described above, Its not flash to subject distance that counts but the distance from the flash to ceiling and back down to your subject, plus a plain white ceiling will generally eat another 2 stops of light. Suggestions for the future are: Use a higher ISO, like 1600 (gains 2 stops of light from ISO 400), F2.8 instead of F4 (gain another stop of light), check exposure and increase ISO if not sufficient, and finally, wait until the flash has completely recycled (pilot light goes from green to red on Canon speedlights). This may take 6+ seconds but you will need every bit of flash power available. If recycling times get much longer than that it is time to change your batteries.

What Brett said. Eneloops would have helped as would simply swapping out the batteries for a fresh set of alkalines. Using M mode on the camera and ETTL on the flash was correct for shooting indoors, but when you moved to a much larger room both the distance from flash to subject, less flash reflectivity (due to the large room), and weakening batteries probably caused your problem. Also, a Canon flash reaches full power when the pilot light changes from green to red (not exactly intuitive), so that if you shot when green, the flash was not fully recycled and did not have full power available. Shooting at a wider aperture and higher ISO would have definitely helped stretch available battery power and quicken the recycle times. Zooms are fine to use with flash and zooming has no impact on this issue. Shooting at the same distance, ISO and aperture with a prime would have resulted in the same problem.

As suggested above, definitely clean the contacts on both camera lens (don't let any dirt fall into camera). Sounds like the lens is probably fried which is unfortunate given your photo class. If you have another lens to try and can definitely isolate the problem to the promaster then all you need to do is replace the lens. If not you may want to consider a new lens and camera. Good news is that all canon film cameras sell used really cheap. Best of luck

The difference between the T5i and T5 is summarized here (assuming the link holds up) http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras?pageKeyCode=65&category=0901e0248006113c&compare=0901e0248082124c&compare=0901e02480b0661d Main difference seems to be a more advanced AF system in the T5i and higher ISO capabilities, though it is likely that both cameras have substantially the same sensor so image quality should be the same. For the AF system alone I would go for the T5i. I would recommend upgrading your standard zoom to either the 18-55 IS or 18-55 IS STM, since Canon kit zooms have significantly improved since you bought the XTi. I absolutely agree with Rob on not getting any 75-300 bundled lens. The Canon EF70-300 IS or Tamron 70-300 VR lenses are significantly better, but that would depend on specifically which 70-200 USM lens you own. If its an "L" lens (white colored barrel) it doesn't make to replace it with any of the above options. Shooting birds requires all the optical reach you can afford or be willing to carry, so renting a 100-400 is a good idea, though it's a large/heavy lens, and a 2 week rental (fully insured) will be about $160. Never used a Superzoom like an 18-270. They are convenient but optically compromised when compared with using 2 lenses covering the same range. A better standard zoom like the Canon 15-85 is a good option, but not inexpensive. Best of luck.

Given the reasons outlined above, its seems like a lot of unnecessary brain damage trying to adapt most FD lenses to an EOS camera, especially since in your previous post, just a few days ago, you seemed to really like your EF50mm f1.8II. If you want to try an adapted lens, most Pentax screw mount or old Nikon F mount lenses work OK since they have a longer flange to film distance than EOS.

The total DOF at 70mm @f2.8 @ 5 feet is about the same as 105mm @ f4 @ 7 feet. While the subject image size should be similar, I would anticipate that the 105mm image, given it's narrower field of view, will have more apparent background separation. I don't really see any optical or mechanical advantage of the Sigma 24-105 vs Canon, but the Sigma weighs about 8 ounces more, and in fact, is even heavier than the Tamron f2.8 lens you are looking at. The advantages and disadvantages of either lens has been well covered above, so I really don't have anything to add. Can't imagine that you won't be satisfied with either lens.

I find a 70-200F4 to be a very useful lens to have since it can isolate and simplify a composition and is useful for both cityscapes and landscapes. I would not describe an f1.4 lens as a gimmick, since for many having a lens that lets in 8x the light of an f4 lens and provides significant isolation when shot wide open is a useful tool to have.

It takes precision to accurately focus an M43 45mm f1.8 lens, and after using 2 Canon film SLRs (including an EOS 3), 2 Canon DSLRS, and 2 mirrorless cameras I have a reasonably good sense of what fast AF is like. An M43 sensor at 225 sq MM is not all that small, especially compared with Canon Crop sensors at just 330 sq MM.