david7

Thankyou for the answers and suggestions. Listening to what eveyone

suggested, looking at my needs, and despite what others are using, I

went with the Canon 24-85. Lots of folks I know are using the 28-105,

but that just does not give me a wide enough option. The little bit

more has broken shots before.

<p>

Again, thanks for the help. Keep on shooting.

Please bear with me as I generally do not ask questions like this, but am getting at my wits end. I need to replace my Sigma 28-70 2.8 lens for my Canon EOS system. When I moved to Canon, I could not tell a difference in the image quality. Now i can tell with this lens. I still cannot afford the 28-70 2.8L, but have to do something.

<p>

Having gone digital, I would like something even wider than 28 (like a 24) if possible. I am looking at the Canon 24-85, but am not sure about the reports on it. Others are suggesting the Tonkia 28-70 2.8, but I am not familar with this brand.

<p>

A fixed apature is not an absolute requirement. most of the time when I am using the wide angle, I have to step down several stops to get everyone/everything in focus anyway.

<p>

I am continuing to research the lenses, the reviews by users, and what options are available for me. Any advice or suggestions you can provide would be greatly appreciated.

<p>

Thankyou in advance.

I am getting ready to convert to digital instead of film. As I figure out the changes that will go with it, some I can solve, others require help. This is one of them.

<p>

The digital camera has a focal length multiplier factor of 1.6. This means that the lenses are 1.6 times longer than on a film-based 35mm system. Ok, except for wanting really wide angle, this is fine (Imagine, a 300 2.8 turns into a 480 2.8!).

<p>

Now the questions. Does the FLASH know about this change? If I have a 28mm lens on the camera, will the flash know to set the head for a 45mm lens (think this setting is at 35mm)? Does the camera "tell" the flash the correct "length" or is it something that I have to set manually? BTW, my primary lenses are 28-70 and 70-200.

<p>

flash extenders. Lastly, as my favorite lens is 70-200 for most of my sports, and the high need to use flash for a lot of shooting, are there extenders available for flashes (I use a 540EZ) that can help it narrow the light some? The 540 only goes to a 105, but with the digital, and the 70-200, this just is not going to work well. Any suggestions (besides strobing everything -- not logistically feasable) would be greatly appreciated.

<p>

Thanks

I have never been able to load steel reals. I have tried and tried.

Gave up and went plastic when I bought my own gear. I did see at a

swap meet an attachment piece for steel reals that aided in guiding

the film in. I don't know what they were called. Maybe someone else

can help?

I use the A2 extensively also. I know that I need to get a back up

body also. I would get a used A2. you know the system, and you won't

ahve any problems when yo uhave to pick it up and run. YOu did not

mention what you shoot, but for my sports photography, I don't have

time to think about the camera -- therefor the backup needs to be the

same. You should be able to get a good one for not too much. Esp as

folks start upgrading to the 3.

I am wondering if others have had problems with their off-camera flash set-up and if so, how they work to detect and correct it.

<p>

Let me explain. I use the EOS A2 with the 540EZ mounted on a Pro-T bracket. The Canon TTL cable connects the flash and body. My specialty is shooting action sports, so the camera does get banged around some. What I ahve noticed is, at times, the flash seems to not be working with the camera. The best example I can give is from last weekend where I shot for 4 hours and then thought we were done, so I took the system apart to return home. Discovered there was another 45 minutes of events left, so I re-assembled the system and continued shooting. Now for the kicker. The film from the previous day, and the film from after I reassembled the system, but NOT the bulk of my work, turned out. The bulk of hte work was vastly underexposed, looking like the flash did not work. I do not recall NOT seeing the flash sync symbol during any of this time. I will admit my primary indication is the shutter speed jumps from 180 to 200, and not looking for the lightning rod.

<p>

Previous problems were little things like the cable on the hot shoe was not on all the way or the flash had slid back off the mount some. Unfortunately I do not recall how I noticed there was a problem.

<p>

Have others had this problem? How do you detect it? Or is it simply a matter of having to constantly re-check the system?

<p>

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

<p>

Thanks

Kodak's stuff is at their website. It is also listed on the inside of

the box with the film. Why they different amounts of information with

the grey market vs USA film is beyond me. But everything is on their

web page for their film.

Thanks for the answers. Your thoughts are greatly appreciated. The

reason why I wanted the 35 to >70 was so that I did not have to change

lenses in the middle of the shoot. Esp when the players are running

at me. :)

<p>

I really appreciate the answers on Canon's 28-70. I will work towards

getting this lens. Perhaps experiment with a 1.4TC on it for just a

little longer reach when needed with the wider side.

<p>

Thanks again.

My shooting of sports and weddings have reinforced my love for my Canon 70-200 2.8, and my dislike of my Sigma 28-70 2.8 (too slow autofocus). I am at a point where I am having to debate between a 1.4 TC for the longer sports this summer (rugby and some rodeos) and a 35-135 (or simular range) for weddings and other sports (ie continued bball).

<p>

I looked at Canon's lens, but am disapointed to find that it is not a 2.8 lens. There are a lot of times where I need as much speed as I can get. Others where the shallow DOF is what I need. Therefore, I cannot seem to think of any reason to NOT get a fast lens. I saw Tamron has one that is a 2.8, but do not know anything about it. My experience with the Sigma len's slow autofocus has me concerned about other 3rd party setups. Or maybe the 70-200 is just faster than most.

<p>

Comments and suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

As Homer Simpson says "Doh!" Thanks Bob. I really wish I could

afford a 1N but it will have to wait. Appreciate the help.

I have been shooting my EOS A2 for about a year now and am pretty happy with it. Would like to see a better autofocus system for vertical shooting, but oh well.

<p>

My question relates to the auto drive. I leave it in High mode almost exclusively. I rarely use it for more than a frame or two, but given the sports that I shoot, I need the option. Lately I have not been able to get over 3 fps out of it. At first I thought it was since I was having to flash (540EZ) and it was not able to keep up. But my Quantum Turbo has eliminated that problem (needed it for other reasons). Then thought it was since the battery was starting to get low. Changed it out. No such luck.

<p>

Any ideas? I will be putting a call in to my dealer about this shortly. I hope I don't have to give it up again. I am getting pretty reliant on this thing -- every weekend plus several nights per week. Thanks