dave_mitchell5

I use the Sto-Fen Omnibounce and vary the angle of the flash head

from horizontal to vertical with excellent results. Having tried the

pocket bounce I have been happier with the omnibounce.

With the Elan IIE / 540EZ you will not get full functionality of

either unit. I find that the 540EZ / Eos 3 combo biases the flash

exposure towards wide open as opposed to the EOS 1N which uses the A-

TTL ability of the 540EZ and sets apertures accordingly. Basically

your combo gives you a good TTL flash setup, I would suggest either

the 380EX or 550EX for better results.

If you want a motor drive built in then the T-90 is the way to go. It

is the closest camera, technology wise, to the EOS line. Also it is

Canon's only MF body with TTL flash capability. If none of this is

important or useful then you could go with any FD body. Another route

is the FD-EOS adapter for long lenses, it will allow you to use an

EOS body with the lens.

I owned th Tokina 28-70 2.6-2.8 ATX PRO with my A2 and 1N for about 3

years. The lens is one of the best off-brand lenses out there. The

only thing that I found distasteful about it was the fact that it

wouldn't function with the Elan II/IIE. Tokina doesn't pay for the

updated chips from Canon every time a new body is released. They do

retrofit updated chips in lens under warranty. This was the reason I

traded it in on the first 28-70 2.8L I found used. I prefer to have

fully functional lens without returning it to the manufacturer

periodically.

Alex, I found the 20-35's image quality to be under the 20mm and

returned it. The 17-35 IMO is the best option, the range, constant

2.8 and USM are factors along with image quality. I wouldn't use it

for buildings but for waterfalls it is outstanding. I have printed

several slides up to 16x20 and are as happy with the results as I was

with the 20mm.

In reply to the "cop out" crack, do you buy everything you're told to

or do you evaluate products to your own criterior? Personally I would

prefer some input along with personal experience of the product. What

suits me probably doesn't suit everyone else. But if you want a

definitive answer for yourself I woud suggest the Sigma 28-200 and a

Ultrapod, you should be able to obtain some excellent results.

You sould rent the lenses you're interested in and give them a try. I

owned the 20mm and 20-35 3.5-4.5 in the past. Returned the 20-35

after I shot a couple of rolls and sold the 20 for the convenience of

the 17-35. The 20 is an excellent lens, I just liked the versatility

of the 17-35. Image wise the 17-35 @ 20 is close to the 20 prime.

I would suggest you go with the Canon lens, either one. I own the 28-

70 2.8L, it is sharper than the Tokina and handles better. You can't

beat the USM motors Canon uses. One of the reasons I switched from

the Tokina to the Canon is the compatibility issue, the Tokina

wouldn't function correctly with the Elan IIE/II. The mirror would

lock up after the exposure and would release only after pressing the

shutter button again. It is covered under warranty, but how many

times do you want to send your lens in for a updated chip? Not every

time I change bodies. I have seen slides from a 28-135 IS, they are

almost as sharp as the 28-70, but have not shot the lens myself.

I have received no response from the Canon thru my dealer, on this

question. I have checked my meter against my 1N and a spot/incident

meter with no evidence of underexposure. According to one website the

metering diffences are noticable at the metering stage, the author

compared his readings to a companion's readings with a F5. The meter

in my EOS 3 appears to be slightly under, approx. 1/3 stop, from

looking at test slides. In POP PHOTO's test of the EOS 1N it was

noted that the 1N's finr spot meter is 1 stop under, which I was able

to confirm by metering with different patterns. To rectify this I

link the slightly larger spot meter to the focus point. Many comments

I've seen attribute the 3's purported problem to either pilot error

or an preproduction body. If anyone has more info I am interested in

hearing from you.

It's not the differences in exposures, it's the ease with which the

exposures are made and the flexibility of the body. The EOS 1N & 3

are more flexible in configuration than the ELAN II, you can attach

more accessories to tailor the bodies to your own tastes. The 1N & 3

are more rugged in construction and weather sealed. If you want to

use AA's you have 2 options both firm bases to work with as opposed

to the ELAN II's battery pack which allows some movement when on a

tripod. But if you don't want to carry a 2 pound camera body with a

couple of 2-3 pound lenses the ELAN II will save your shoulder and

give you some good flexibility.

I have to agree with the first answer, get the Canon 28-70mm 2.8L it

is tack sharp and the autofocus speed is as quick as the 70-200mm

2.8L. Any third party lens will focus slower than a Canon USM lens,

with the possible exception of the new Sigma HSM lenses. You do have

coverage at 135 with the 70-200 2.8L and if you attach a 1.4x you

will have a zoom range of 98-280mm, still covering 135 and giving

range to 280. The 28-135mm IS is also a good choice. Third party

lenses may not function with Canon's future bodies, ie: Tokina's 28-

70mm 2.6-2.8 did not function with an ELAN IIE, shutter would lock

up. Tokina will fix this problem with a new chip but after warranty

it will cost you. Canon lenses will work with future bodies without

problem.