nello

About the sigma 500 super... I bought one because I didn't want to shell out the cash for another 550EX. BUT I quickly returned it because it never seemed to listen to ratio

controls set by my Elan 7E. -At least not when I used the "modeling light check" feature. My canon speed-lites, OTOH, do seem to show proper ratios during the modeling light check. That alone was enough to turn me away, as I find the model check feature very crucial to proper light placement and set up. I wanted my model check to be a bit more acurate than what the sigma was giving me.

I would definitely suggest that you stick to canon speedlites and upgrade to the 7E. ECF on the 7E is WAY better than on the IIE and I personally use it for 90% of my shots. (And I even wear my glasses sometimes...) And furthermore you'd get ratio control of speed-lites.

Don't worry about the 420EX auto shut down. It can be annoying but its never really stopped me. But then again, I'm constantly using the model check feature to see if my lights are going to give me what I want. (Thank god for rechargable batteries! I also use a very impressive "smart charger" that manages my batteries. Anyone with a speed-lite should definitely get a rechargeable battery set-up)

And then finally, you could just buy a meter and some studio lights if you must have ratios. It might give you more control than the canon speed-lite system. However, the Canon flash system is very convenient, compact and quick to set up -which is what I like about it. It lets you set up a "mini-studio" say on a moving bus or in an elevator. Its been a complete life-saver for me!

-hope this was helpful and good luck.

I'll agree. The second picture looks underexposed.

To do a test like this, you absolutely have to have the EXACT same lighting. Otherwise, the comparison will likely be considerably flawed.

Here's a new review up on www.photographyreview.com

http://www.photographyreview.com/PRD_144218_3128crx.aspx

This guy really seems to love the new 17-40mm and he likes it better than the sigma 15-30mm alternative and the older canon 16-35mm.

Worth a look.

GET THE 7E!!!

I own the 7E and I thank the heavens and stars for eye control focus! I use it at least 80% of the time! I can't praise ECF enough and I've found it extremely useful! ECF really helps me save time especially when I have to shoot fast.(and btw I also wear glasses!)

And I definitely use it when I'm trying to catch my 2 year old niece as she runs around the house...

Also, ECF definitely helps me get better shots because it frees me up to focus on aperture, shutter speed and composition. This is the real value of ECF! (BTW I also have a A2E and I rarely use the ECF on it because I don't find it quick enough.)

I don't think the money you "save" is worth it in the face of the convenience you could gain. (And It'll be very convenient, Alvaro, if your baby girl bounces around the room like my niece does!)

Alvaro, get the 7E!

Bob,

I imagine people shooting with primes could still benefit from two DSLR camera bodies. I don't shoot digital (yet) but I know that I sometimes use my A2E and my Elan7E together with something like my 24mm and 85mm primes. It makes my life with primes a little easier.

I picked up a 100-300 5.6 L from B&H about a year ago. Considering the price I paid, I think it was a great deal. However, I don't use it as much as I'd like to because of the aperture. Then again, I mostly shoot portraiture, so if I need length my 135 2.8 SF prime will usually fit the bill for me.

I shoot primes, but I was pleasantly surprised with this zoom. Its darn good. And I can vouch that it'll be much better than your 75-300. But again, when compared to other L lenses, the construction isn't the greatest and the mechanics are very outdated. Personally, I find the autofocus to be almost useless. Its superslow and loud!

Also I don't believe that canon ever made a tripod collar for it.

Does anyone know how it compares to the 70-200 f4? Curious...

The 50mm lens does have both manual focus and autofocus capability.

You should go to a camera store and play around with one. Just beware of the advice that the sales people give you. Their advice is usually based on how much money they'll get. But at least you'll be

able to see them for yourself.

I prefer primes, myself, and so I would tell you to go with the 50mm.

However, I think that the 28-105 USM would be a good option as well.

Also, I forgot to add that the macro ability of the sigma 24mm 1.8 DG EX allows a magnification of up to 1:2.7 which is more magnification than all of the others. And that's very impressive, especially considering that the 50mm Canon macro (a lens designed and billed as a true macro lens) does 1:2

But on the flip side:

1)you have to move the lens extremely close to the subject in order to get 1:2.7

2)I'd rather have a 100mm for macro work.

The 50mm f1.8 would be a good choice. I think its listed under $100.00 at B and H.

Another great bargain is the 28mm f2.8 I think its around $150.00

The 35mm f2 is also lots of bang for the buck. Its a little over $200.00

All three are very well respected lenses. The optics on these guys are all simply excellent. Add some hoods, and you're off.

I think you should take your girlfriend outside (preferably in the morning or afternoon which is when daylight tends to be more flattering for portraits.) and try some shots without using the flash. You'll be amazed.

BTW the 420ex is a great flash, but I would advise you to forget about it for now and learn more about what good light is. Good flash technique can be a lot to tackle when you're just learning photography.

I also agree that you're having color balance (temperature) problems due to artificial lighting. The cheapest, and most effective way to fix that is to take that camera outside!

In terms of consumer film, I also prefer fuji to kodak. I also think that 400 is a great speed for you to start out with.

goodluck!

Larry,

Sometimes at night I wake up in a cold sweat, screaming, reaching out my arms as if I could still save her... In my heart I know it just wasn't her time to go.

Ah, the tears, Larry. The Pain.

-Thanks for your words of kindness.

Actually, I bought the sigma 24mm 1.8 not long ago. I really liked it

for the most part. The only major problem I had with it was the size.

Its HUGE! When people saw it (and its petal hood which non-photo people think is curious looking)I found it hard to blend in.

Its also very heavy!

I've dropped it twice. Unfortunately, the second drop killed it. My

A2E flipped out of my bag and landed on the HARD STONE palace walk way at Versailles. The lens didn't fall apart, but the autofocus switch got jammed so that I couldn't switch to manual focus. Then a week later the autofocus died. Also it seems that it doesn't respond

anymore to the camera's aperture settings. Pictures taken after the lens died definitely show the lens not responding to aperture settings

anymore.

By the way, switching from manual focus to autofocus requires a two step process that is occasionally annoying. Manual focus on the sigma, however, is nice and smooth and the focus ring is comfortably very large. Yet, I've been spoiled with USM autofocus on my canon lenses. So I found the autofocus on the sigma to be adequate, but still less than desirable. The canon 24mm 2.8, however, also lacks USM.

Its a very very sharp lens, though. And I mean Tack Sharp. It also has the ability to focus on objects at extremely close distances which allows for some interesting shots.

One might argue why you would even need 1.8 on a 24mm wide angle. Personally, I find the aperture lends the Sigma an approach to creativity. The 1.8 aperture was definitely a selling point for me, and it gave me "artistic" options (and a bright viewfinder). Yet, I have to think a lot of people would find it useless to have 1.8 on a 24mm. (BTW I LOVE shallow depth of field, so I'm biased that way)

Of course, it all boils down to your photographic goals.

Also some might say that its soft at 1.8, but what else do you expect?

I'm also not a landscape photographer. I'm mostly into portraits, so

I don't have extensive knowledge to really critique a wide angle lens. Straight lines do, however, come out being very straight. (a

problem that sometimes gets under my skin with my 28-105 usm at the wide end!) I do also believe that distortion in this lens is extremely well controlled.

The lens comes with a nice well padded green case, and petal type hood. The hood is designed so that you can still put a filter on with

out stacking problems. (i.e. the hood attaches to the lens barrel and not to the filter threads)

-And speaking of filters, the filter size on this lens is huge. So if you want a polarizer, etc. then do your math before you purchase. The price of the sigma may lose its sparkle.

-Also, this lens makes candid photography a bit less candid. Its size

also makes it difficult to squeeze into you backpack when space is limited.

-Lastly, I wish it were built sturdier. I was always scared of dropping it. And then I did drop it... Now, its sitting on my desk

waiting for me to get enough cash to repair it.

So, to summarize, I believe the lens to be a strong performer optically. I use primes for the majority of my work, and the Sigma

does hold up. But there are definite trade offs to consider

in your deciscion between it and the canon 24mm 2.8

Hope this helps.

ps. I use an A2E and Elan7E didn't have compatibility problems, at least with those two canons.

Wow. Are they in the shops now? I didn't know that they were out

yet.

<p>

Hey, John, how do you like it? Is this an upgrade for you? If so,

then what from? And what do you think of the improved eye-focusing?

<p>

I was considering the 7e myself, but I'm still deciding.