robert_edelman1

The camera was not purchased recently and has bee out of factory warranty. It is under the repai warranty for the next two months.

I have a Sony A7 mark 2 that had the sensor go out of position and lock up the camera. The sensor began to get stuck out of position. At first, just turning the camera off, then back on, would reset the sensor position. Then, that method stopped working, and I had to gently bang the camera against my hand to realign the sensor. The problem became progressively worse, until the camera locked up. I sent the camera in to the authorized Sony repair facility. For $300 they replaced the "cushions". No other information given. When I received the camera from the repair facility, the sensor locked up again, but I was able to reset the camera by turning it off, then on. When I tried out the sensor clean function, the camera vibrates more and makes more noise than a brand new A7 mark 2 that I compared it to. I returned the camera to the repair facility, but it was returned with the messsage that it tested OK. The camera only has 6000 exposures on it. I am afraid that the camera was not completely repaired, and that it will fail again, after the 90 day repair warranty has expired. Do any of you kind people have an idea about what is wrong with this camera? Thank you!

<p>I have the Zeiss FE 35 mm f2.8 that I use with an A7. I am quite pleased with this lens. It is small and light, and is well made. The images are sharp and have excellent contrast and resolution. I highly recommend this lens.<br>

I also have the FE 28-70 mm "kit" lens. It is significantly larger than the 35 mm, but obviously the focal length range is versatile and convenient, and this lens has optical stabilization. This lens is also well made. It is overall not as sharp as the 35 mm lens, but it does a decent job if you watch the aperture. I think the reviews show it at its sharpest in the f 5.6 - f 11.0 range. </p>

<p>I am trying out a Sony NEX F3. It is less than 4 weeks old, but close to the time when I either keep it or return it. I have been using a Transcend 32 gB card, brand new. I formatted the card in the camera before using the camera. All had been working well, but today when I went to review images that were on the card, the camera gave a message that there were no images on the card. I took the card out a put it into a Kodak brand card reader, and plugged that into my Windows XP computer. There was no problem reading the card. I copied the files onto my computer, and then properly turned off the card reader and removed the reader with the card. I reinstalled the card in the Sony, and it still would not recognize any files. I then reformatted the card in the camera and took some more photos. The camera now recognized the new images. Considering that the card could be read on the computer but not on the camera, I am assuming that this is a problem with the camera. Has anyone else had this problem? Is the camera defective? Thanks.</p>

<p>I purchased a Canon-refurbished 5D mark 1 a few years ago. It was in like-new condition, and did not develop any problems. The only way that you could tell that it was refurbished was that it came in a white box. It had all of the accessories (battery, charger, cords, software discs), but you should check to be sure that all of the accessories are included if you decide to buy a factory refurbished camera. I later purchased a factory refurbished Sureshot SD980 IS. It also was in like-new condition, came with all of the accessories, and has not developed any problems. I obviously have no problem with Canon factory refurbished. As far as a third party extended warranty is concerned, that would depend on the cost and terms of the warranty, and the reputation of the third party. I think that if the camera does not develop a problem within 90 days, then it is not likely to develop a problem within one year.</p>

<p>Have you looked at the EF 200 mm 2.8L II? I really like mine. You can probably buy a good used one for under $600. I know that you posted a question regarding manual 200 mm lenses, but I think so highly of this lens that I could not resist mentioning this lens.</p>

<p>Having have the backs of not one but 2 5D cameras damaged, I figure it will cost in the vicinity of $400.00, plus or minus $75.00. Unless the camera has been used a lot, there is a good possibility that it will be cost effective to have it repaired. Good luck.</p>

<p>Thanks for the correction, Craig. The aperture of the EF 50 mm macro is f2.5, one-third faster than f2.8. My bad.<br /> Another consideration is that the newer version of the EF 50 mm macro lens has one more diaphragm blade (6 blades) than the earlier version (5 blades). According to Ken Rockwell, who has a review of the lens, the newer version is a better choice than the earlier version, which dates back to 1987. I understand that Ken Rockwell is a somewhat controversial personality, but the review is worth reading if someone is shopping for the lens.</p>

<p>The 5D mark I is a good camera. Compare the view finders of the 5D and the 7D. I am not sure, but the 5D might have a larger viewfinder as it has a larger mirror box. This may or may not make a difference. Of course, the 5D does not have live view. If you do get a 5D, watch out for the mirror assembly. The mirrors come off and will be repaired by Canon for free. You just don't want one to let loose on vacation or at an important event. The mirror on a used one might have already been updated. Or, you might check to see if Canon will update the mirror assembly before it fails (that's a good question). </p>

<p>Do not forget the Canon 50 mm f2.8 macro. It is small, light, less expensive than all but the EF 50 mm f1.8, and is optically excellent. It does not have ultrasonic focusing, so the focusing is a little bit noisy, but not terrible. The focus mechanism might actually be more reliable than that of the f1.4 model. The focus speed and accuracy on the f2.8 is very good on my 5D mark I. The lens does not have the fastest aperture, but it does offer macro capability. I also agree that the EF 50 mm f1.4 is a very good lens. However, even though the EF lens has a similar design to the older FD 50 mm f.14 lens, I have found that the FD version for some reason results in more pleasing photos. I think that it is a little more sharp and has a better color balance and contrast. I once shot some film on my Canon FD 50 mm f1.4 and compared it to film shot of the same subjects with a Contax and the Zeiss 50 mm f1.7 with T* coating. My observation was that the Canon FD was every bit as good as the Zeiss. It's too bad that the Canon FD can't work well on the EOS mount cameras.</p>

<p>Thanks, Puppy. As you are somewhat of a guru on this forum, perhaps you could enlighten us as to why Canon Europe is ahead of Canon USA on its DPP software?</p>

<p>I checked before I first posted this. Canon's USA website only has v.3.8.1 (unless I am missing the newer version). Canon Europe has v.3.9.2.</p>

<p>On a November 4 post in this forum, it was mentioned that the latest version of DPP (v.3.9.2) has been available from the Canon Europe website. I have two questions. First, does anyone know why the US website does not have the update when it is available on the European website? Second, will there be any software conflicts if a user in the United States installs the newest version from the European website? I figure that there will not be any problems, but I thought that I would be cautious and ask before installing the update.</p>

<p>It gives new meaning to the Toy Camera genre.</p>

<p>I had a Tamron 28-75 mm and used it on the 5D. It is a good lens, exhibiting excellent image quality (if you get a good sample), well built, light and relatively compact. It works well with the 5D. I sold it and bought a 24-105 L because I wanted the additional range (the image stabilization is also nice at times). But optically the Tamron was as good as the 24-105 L.</p>

<p>I have an Elan IIe, and the eye-controlled focus works well on it. But it has only three focus points. A friend has an Elan 7e, which has seven focus points, and the ECF does not work for him at all. I did work for me, however. The ECF works off of reflections from the eye. I suppose that some people have eyes that reflect in a manner better suited to the ECF system than others. Canon did give you the option of buying a camera model with or without ECF. (My friend did not check the ECF before he purchased his Elan 7e. He just assumed that it would work for everyone.)</p>

<p>I still find uses for my Canon 10D. It's a great camera. I mount it to microscopes (with a Nikon-EOS adapter). I still use it work for documentation. I use it for backup, for example, every time I drop a Canon 5D and have to send it in for repair, or when a mirror falls off ;) . The viewfinder is generous, better than some of its successors. And it is much more quiet than the 5D. It is a well balanced camera to hold. It is well made, and its initial purchase price reflected that. Yes, the LCD appears "quaint" compared to the newer cameras, and there is a small lag on startup. It does not do high ISO as well as the newer cameras. But it is great for students. Some people have even converted 10Ds, as well as other older cameras, for infrared. <br>

Yes, I prefer to use a Canon 5D Mark I (also known as the 5D Classic) for most of my photography. The 5D is also entering the "older" camera category, but it is still such a good camera for my uses that I prefer to spend my money on other things, such as lighting setups, rather than spend a bunch of money on the latest camera that will soon enough become an "older" camera and will correspondingly depreciate.<br>

As is so often stated in the forums, just because the newer technology cameras may do things better, that doesn't make a good older camera take any worse photos than it did when it was new.</p>

<p>Another vote for DPP. I don't have a huge workflow and I don't do a lot of manipulation. It's a very good RAW converter, and it is easy to fix lens aberrations and light falloff. Canon adds more with each version. Yes, it is not Photoshop or one of the other excellent programs, but I feel that it is a good basic program. If you are not doing a lot of manipulation or effects, it does the job. And of course, it's free with the camera. What do you have to lose?</p>

<p>I can understand that RAW files might not be read. DPP will not read RAW files from my S70. But the jpeg format is universal, and should be recognized. This planned obsolescence in the software industry upsets me. They are so cavalier about not supporting older equipment. They got away with murder with the Y2K fiasco, and this I think was a major factor to encouraged them to continue this practice. It is arrogance.<br>

Now that I have had my little rant, I hope that someone can direct you to a patch to fix your problem. Good luck!</p>

<p>Don't forget to check out the Tamrac and Lowepro bags. They are well made and are often less money than some of the other brands. I agree that Kata and ThinkTank are also good. Kata, as you probably know, make bags other than their 3-n-1 series which may be more rugged. I, too, am in awe of your wife's strength and fortitude to be able to carry all of that equipment.</p>

<p>I would definitely take the 24-105. The others are optional. </p>

<p>Is a pop-up flash convenient sometimes? In my opinion, yes. After all, they are always on the camera. Is it essential to have one, or is not having one a deal-breaker? Not for me. At work, I take close-up photos of peoples' faces, in particular their eyelids, with a 10D and EF 100 mm 2.8 macro using the pop-up flash, and I get satisfactory results. For my 5D I did not want to carry my 550EX around all of the time, so I purchased a Sunpack RD2000, which works well. Although it is not controlled through the camera, it is E-TTL II compatible, and it is simple to use. The Canon 270EX also looks to be a nice flash. Either of these flashes put out more light than do pop-up flashes, and they also articulate for bounce flash. The ability to control a second Speedlight through the pop-up flash on the 7D is convenient, and saves some money in regard to not having to buy a second Speedlight to use as the primary flash, or the ST-2e wireless controller. But if you are already going through the trouble of carrying one rather large flash to be used as a slave (or secondary flash, to be pc about the terminology), it's not that big of a deal to also carry the second flash or the wireless controller. The greatest advantage of a pop-up flash is convenience, and the Sunpack RD2000 and Canon 270EX are both small enough to be conveniently available, tucked away in a pocket or in a small area of a camera bag. Although the pop-up flashes can be handy, I really don't miss one very much on my 5D.</p>

<p>I owned one for several years and used it on a 5D. It is an excellent lens, relatively small and light. I had no problems with it. Rarely, and only in dark environments, the autofocus would hunt a little. When the lens was first introduced, some examples were reported to be sharper than others, but I think that Tamron addressed that problem. Still, it is best if you can try out the particular lens that you wish to purchase, or have a right to return it if it isn't sharp. I sold my Tamron a few months ago to help fund the purchase of a Canon 24-105 L. I decided that I wanted to have a little more reach on the focal length range, especially on the telephoto end. Otherwise, I would have kept the Tamron. But in terms of image quality and mechanical integrity, I would recommend the Tamron. It optically is a good lens, with good sharpness, contrast, color balance, and background blur. It is relatively compact and light, and is about one-third the cost of the 24-70 L or 24-105 L lenses. I believe that it also comes with a hood and a 6 year warranty.</p>

<p>You don't have to go the stopped-down metering route with Zeiss. The Zeiss ZE 50 mm f1.4 does everything that an EOS lens does, except it does not autofocus. The lens will work with the focus confirmation light in the viewfinder, however. And of course there is no image stabilization. Voigtlander announced a 58 mm f1.4 based on a Topcon design in the EOS mount, but it hasn't appeared yet in the US. This lens has received good reviews. Stephen Gandy's cameraquest.com sells Voigtlander lenses, and seems to be the first to get the new lenses in the US, before B&H and Adorama, who also sell Voigtlander lenses. The Voigtlander probably will cost less than the Zeiss, and might perform just as well. Note that the Zeiss ZE and Voigtlander lenses are all manufactured by Cosina in Japan. They all apparently have excellent build quality. </p>

<p>I sometimes use a circular polarizer with a 17-40 L. You do have to be careful for uneven polarization of the sky, especially the wider the focal length. Sometimes the polarizer needs to be set for no or minimal effect to avoid this problem. The polarizer is effective for other uses such as eliminating glare off of water or leaves, and to reduce reflections off of glass. A spilt neutral density filter can help to reduce the exposure differential in a landscape scene, without causing the sky to appear irregular in its saturation. That large 82 mm filter can also be used with inexpensive step-down rings for any other lenses that have smaller front elements, eliminating the need to purchase other polarizer filters.</p>