steve_dunn3

Hmm ... lenses often sit in transit and in warehouses and on store

shelves for a while, but since the EOS 3 has been around for quite

some time (hmm - 3.5 years?), it doesn't seem too likely that this is

the case.

<p>

Still, since it doesn't happen with the Canon lens, it still sounds

like a compatibility problem ...

This is a classic symptom of a lens that needs to be rechipped because

it's not compatible with a newer body.

<p>The Sigma certainly seems to be worthy of consideration - see the

article on it at photonotes.org for some more info.</p>

<p>Of the two you mention, the 420EX is the better flash for the Elan

IIe because:</p>

<ul>

<li>It's somewhat more powerful (about 10%)

<li>It has a proper AF assist beam (the AF assist beam on the 380EX

only works if you select the central AF point manually or with ECF;

use either other AF point or let the camera choose and you only get

the body's AF assist beam)

<li>It not only tilts but swivels

</ul>

I don't know what the exact answer in this specific case is, but it's

probably one or both of the following:

<p>

The focal lengths are approximate; lens manufacturers round them to

the closest standard focal length, so it's entirely possible that the

200mm setting on the 28-200 is really 203 or 189 or some other number.

Also, the intermediate markings on a zoom are approximate - where the

200 line is might not be exactly 200.

<p>

Also, focal length is measured at infinity, and often changes as you

focus closer - particularly with internal focus lenses, for reasons I

don't understand but someone with a decent understanding of optics

probably would. If you were focusing on something reasonably close to

you, that could cause the two lenses to shift their focal lengths by

different amounts.

I take it you mean 550EX - there's no 550EZ.

<p>

The 550EX gives you a number of additional capabilities. For what

you're doing, the most important are probably E-TTL flash metering

and flash exposure lock, and high-speed sync might be useful if you

need fill flash for portraits in bright light.

<p>

A-TTL and TTL metering (your current combination offers both,

depending on which mode the body's in) reads light with just a few

large zones. Want to do your flash metering based on the bride's

face? You can't, unless her face fills up a third or so of the frame.

E-TTL uses the same 21-zone metering sensor as evaluative metering,

so it <em>can</em> notice that the bride's dress is unusually

reflective and pay more attention to her face instead if that's where

you put the active focus point. And with flash exposure lock, you can

force the flash system to meter the scene and then recompose, secure

in the knowledge that the flash metering isn't going to be thrown off

by your new composition; you cannot do that at all with the 540EZ.

<p>

Cons? Can't think of any, other than the price tag. The only thing

the 540EZ offers that the 550EX doesn't is A-TTL metering, and it's

hard to find anyone who claims that A-TTL is a must-have.

There are plenty of hyperfocal distance calculators on the Net. It

doesn't depend on the lens - the hyperfocal distance for the 28-70/2.8

at (say) 50mm and f/4 is the same as for the 50/1.4 at f/4 or the

35-350/3.5-5.6 at f/4 and so on.

Doesn't your Web browser include a search function? I pulled up the

EOS FAQ forum and searched for 2000 on that page. The very first hit

was one of the seemingly-daily requests for a manual.

<p>

Putting up a search engine doesn't help. The unmoderated photo.net

forum has one, yet it keeps having the same questions asked over and

over and over and over again. Ditto in the newsgroups - google can

pull up gazillions of examples of the same questions being asked

repeatedly, and do it very quickly, but that doesn't stop people from

posting the same question that someone just posted three days ago.

<p>

Some people will use these tools; many are just too lazy.

I played around with the 70-200/4 mounted on an Elan 7 at a photo show

last fall. I'd describe it as a handling dream - reasonably light,

easy to carry, and well-balanced (like the other guy said, proper

technique is to have your right hand on the body and your left hand

supporting the lens) - plus the fact that the 70-200 doesn't change

length when it zooms and focuses. The EOS 300 is lighter than the

Elan 7 but not so much that it should make this combination unwieldy.

<p>

Go get the 70-200/4 - I'm sure you won't regret it.

<p>For #2, why not get the answer straight from the horse's mouth?

Kodak's data sheet (<a

href="http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/e19

0/e190.shtml">http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/tech

Pubs/e190/e190.shtml</a>) has the official answer on how this film is

to be stored.</p>

EZ is one of the lines of flash units Canon released for the EOS

family of bodies. There's only one still in production (the 540EZ,

which used to be at the top of the product line), but there are a few

older models that are reasonably plentiful on the used market.

<p>

I don't know what the flash you're looking at is, but your

understanding about older flashes and high voltages is generally right

- many older flashes can fry the camera, while many newer flashes are

safe. It wouldn't surprise me if someone somewhere on the Net had put

together a listing of third-party flash units and what their trigger

voltages are ...

They're both good flashes - particularly the 430. Each was Canon's

top-of-the-line shoemount flash unit when it was introduced. There

should not be any compatibility problems. They should still work

unless they were abused; I have a cheapie 20-yr-old flash unit that

still works.

<p>

If you like the price, go for it.

<p>The twin-light lets you set the flash heads at something other than

180 degrees, has greater separation between them, and even lets you

detach them and mount them wherever you want, says <a

href="http://www.usa.canon.com/html/cameras_speedlite/mt24ex.html">htt

p://www.usa.canon.com/html/cameras_speedlite/mt24ex.html</a>.</p>

<p>I've heard - and I don't know if this is absolutely true or just

another of those generalizations you hear on the net - that any Sigma

HSM lens works just fine with any EOS body; it's supposedly only the

non-HSM lenses which tend to have compatibility problems with newer

bodies.</p>

<cite>Does the canon body make a difference in the AF speed</cite>

<p>Absolutely. The two bodies you're using have pretty good AF

systems in them. While the drive motor and the rest of the lens'

design affect AF speed, it's the job of the body's AF system to figure

out what needs to be done to get the image in focus and to direct the

lens to do so.</p>

Some of the cheapie rubber lens hoods are available in wide-angle

models which are designed not to vignette with wide-angle lenses; the

package should say it's designed for (say) a 28mm lens. But usually

these hoods are not as effective as a dedicated petal-shaped hood.

<p>

You'll be OK with your flash unit. I use the 420EX with my 28-135 and

hood and never have a problem.

<citeMy question: how convenient/fast is manual focus point selection

on the non-ECF version of the camera? In other words, am I likely to

lose many valuable shots by not using

the ECF? </cite>

<p>It's reasonably convenient with the arrow keys on the back. Still,

ECF can read where you're looking (according to Canon) 55 ms, and

you'll never get it that quick with the arrow keys. I obviously can't

say for sure whether ECF reads where I'm looking in 55 ms, but it is

certainly quick.</p>

<cite> Furthermore, am I correct in assuming that once the ECF is

turned off on an Elan 7E, manual focus point selection will work

similarly to the Elan 7? </cite>

<p>An Elan 7e with ECF disabled works exactly the same way as an Elan

7.</p>

<cite>does it matter how far the camera is from the

subject?</cite>

<p>Yes and no. Remember that wireless E-TTL signalling is optical,

and has a limited range. The slave must be within the range of the

master and pointed so that it can see the master (or see a reflection

of the master, but just as bouncing a flash reduces its range, so does

bouncing the optical signalling). As long as your slave is within

range, you're OK.</p>

<cite>..and will the ETTL metering work accurately if I bounce the

flash into an umbrella</cite>

<p>It should be fine. E-TTL metering is done using a preflash. The

flash unit emits the preflash at a known intensity; the camera body

measures how much light reflects back from the subject. If you do

something that (for example) cuts the flash intensity by one stop, it

will also cut the preflash intensity by one stop, meaning that E-TTL

will know it needs a higher flash output. It doesn't know <u>why</u>

it needs that intensity - it doesn't know whether the subject is far

away or whether you're bouncing the light or what you're doing; it

just knows how much light to tell the flash to emit in order to get a

"correct" exposure.</p>

Or another possibility: calibrate it a few times when you're set up

for macro work. I don't do macro and I don't have that lens, but I

have found that (for example) calibrating in bright light doesn't do

much for ECF's accuracy in the dark. But calibration, if done on the

same setting #, is cumulative, and calibrating under different

conditions can improve its accuracy; when I took my same calibration

setting into a dark room and ran through the calibration process

again, it magically improved ECf's accuracy in the dark without

hurting its accuracy in the light. Maybe the same would apply for

you.</p>

<cite>'ve come across some .pdf documents on one of Canon's own

websites (must be Canon Europe, I think) which I have printed out.

Again, a detailed table of specs expressly names Auto Exposure

Bracketing among the 'special features' of the EOS 3, EOS 5 and even

EOS 300, but not EOS 30/33 or,

for that matter, EOS 1V</cite>

<p>Both of the cameras not in that list are newer than all of the

cameras in the list; you may simply be looking at old info. Does the

list include, by any chance, the EOS 1N and/or the EOS 50 (the

precedessors of the EOS 1V and EOS 30, respectively)?</p>

There's a button on the back labelled "Function" (or something like

that) which lets you pick what you want to adjust - ISO, red-eye

reduction, beep, flash exposure compensation, auto exposure

bracketing, and one other that's slipped my mind at the moment. You

press the button repeatedly until the appropriate icon shows up on the

LCD display, and then use the main control dial to change the setting.

So for AEB, you press it until the AEB icon appears, then turn the

main control dial. Each step on the dial increases or decreases the

bracketing by 1/2 stop.

<p>

Where did you find a listing that said it lacks AEB? The specs on

Canon's U.S. Web site (<a

href="http://www.usa.canon.com/html/cameras_slr/elan7_specs.html">http

://www.usa.canon.com/html/cameras_slr/elan7_specs.html</a>) list AEB

as a feature of this camera ... but I don't know if other Canon sites

around the world have complete features lists or not.

<cite>Does anyone know of any compatibilty problems b/w the lens and

either one of the cameras?</cite>

<p>The compatibility problems are with third-party lenses; genuine

Canon lenses don't have these problems. The 28-105 will work with any

EOS body from the very first to the very latest.</p>

<p>As for where to buy, most of the camera vendors you'll see

advertising in the backs of magazines have, to be charitable, somewhat

spotty reputations. Your shopping question is answered at <a

href="http://www.photo.net/equipment/where-to-buy">http://www.photo.ne

t/equipment/where-to-buy</a>.</p>

I don't have the 50/1.8, but I do have the 28-105, and did the

traditional newspaper-on-the-wall lens test with it:

<p>

http://www.stevedunn.ca/photos/writings/eflenses.html