affen_kot

when you upgrade to that sub $1000 FF body

in 2011, you can always sell your EF-S lens(es) to a happy 1.6 owner and recoup

quite a bit of the cost. the xt and 17-85 is a fine combo.</p>

<p>for supplemental information: click <a href="http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/canon_questions_eos30d.html" target="_blank">

here</a> , or <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00E9xB" target="_blank">here</a>,

or <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00EAYH" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>

<p></p>

thanks, jim. by the way; does anybody know when i can expect <a href="http://www.leafamerica.com/" target="_blank">leaf's</a>

35-megapixel holga back?

jamie's right about IS not helping to stop action. strike that first option, allan; brain flatulence. cheers.

andrew, it's kind of the yin to digital's yan. it brings the force back into balance, young one. just like my modified hawkeye...<div></div>

do you shoot curling or motorcross? not having any details, here are some possibilities off the top of my head:

 

1. get the 70-200 IS version, or

 

2. a 200mm 1.8, or

 

3. bump up your ISO and noise ninja it later (or try a less expensive fredmiranda plugin).

 

cheers.

<p>"...and don't buy EFs lenses."</p>

<p>with all due respect to denis, this statement would be better rewritten as

"...and don't buy EFs lenses<em> if you're looking to upgrade to FF in

the near future.</em>" if you're going to be in 1.6 bodies for a few years

- and most people will be - there's no particular reason to avoid the EF-S lenses

(compare the MTF charts for the <a href="http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=155&modelid=11156" target="_blank">60mm

2.8 macro</a> and the <a href="http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=153&modelid=7312" target="_blank">135L

</a>for a big reason for choosing an EF-S lens).</p>

<p><a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00E9xB" target="_blank">this

thread from yesterday</a> offers an interesting discussion on the future of

1.6 bodies, where photo.net canon guru <a href="http://bobatkins.photo.net" target="_blank">bob

atkins</a> wrote:</p>

<p><em>1) It will be a long time - 3 years or more - before we see a full frame

sensor camera selling for $2000 </em></p>

<p><em>(2) Canon won't be phasing out the 1.6x sensor in their consumer (Rebel)

line anytime in the forseeable future. </em></p>

<p><em>(3) There are (and will probably always be) more 1.6x bodies out there

than anything else. </em></p>

<p><em>So there's absolutely no danger of EF-S lenses (or the demand for EF-S

lenses) going away within the next, say, 10 years. </em></p>

<p><em>If you fully intend to dump all your 1.6x gear and buy FF gear tomorrow

then buying EF-S lenses now obviously isn't a great idea. </em></p>

<p><em>However I'm pretty sure I'll be using a 1.6x body as my primary body for

the next 3 years, and after that maybe I'll go full frame, but with a 1.6x body

backup. Therefore I have no fear of buying EF-S lenses. If and when I go 100%

FF, there will be enough people out there still shooting with 1.6x cameras that

I will have no problem at all selling my EF-S lenses. </em></p>

<p><em>The sky is not a falling, despite what those chickens are saying...</em></p>

<p>you could also take a look at <a href="http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/canon_questions_eos30d.html" target="_blank">this

webpage</a> at photo.net where bob dispells some of the myths/rumors that mislead

people away from the EF-S line. if you wait until FF is in the same price arena

as the current xt, then you will be waiting for <em>years</em>. get an xt or

20d and start enjoying digital<em> now</em>, knowing that the 1.6 line offers

great image quality, and will be around for quite a while. cheers!</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

just as an aside...looks like the 'camdapter' mentioned above moves the functional tripod socket away from the axis of the lens. might make some difference if someone finds themselves shooting panoramas without a pano head (not in portrait format). cheers.

i bought some third parties on sleazebay.de for about 4 euros a piece, brand spanking new. so far they work the same as the canon ones; i.e., in 6 months of use they haven't damaged my camera, and they're very handy now that the cold weather is upon us, and outdoor battery life is short.

<p>"...I probably won't be able to get a good macro lense at this time..."

</p>

<p>just as a suggestion...i went with the 60mm 2.8 macro, which is a 96mm macro

on the 350D, and 50 bucks less than the 100mm 2.8 macro (in the EU, the 60mm

is about €185 less than the 100mm - after rebate - which is most excellent).

this lens' <a href="http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=155&modelid=11156" target="_blank">MTF</a>

is equal to the <a href="http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=153&modelid=7312" target="_blank">135L's</a>

, and if you're going to be in 1.6 bodies for few years, you'll get your value

out of it. </p>

<p>here are a couple of in depth reviews of the <a href="http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_100_28/index.htm" target="_blank">100mm</a>

and <a href="http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_60_28/index.htm" target="_blank">60mm</a>

macros. both trade punches as far as resolution goes. both are superb.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.unet.univie.ac.at/%7Ea0202519/leftclose.jpg" target="_blank">this</a>

is a tester from about 3 times the minimum focus distance of the 60mm, just

for reference. cheers! </p>

victoria. lots of posters on other forums have mentioned similar vignetting on the 5D; on full frame lenses, with no filters. not sure what to make of it yet, but it's there.

<p>"you'll have a very expensive transmitter..."</p>

<p>which can also control <em>three</em> groups of flashes as opposed to the st-e2's<em>

two</em> groups (handy for when your flash setup expands). the 550ex's IR transmitter

triggers slaves from a longer distance than the st-e2 does. the 550ex allows

flash exposure bracketing to be controlled from the master (the 550), whereas

the st-e2 does not. and, considering one battery change a month, in one year's

time, the total cost of the batteries alone for the st-e2 will be 180 euros;

360 euros if you have it two years (and...well...pay for things in euros).</p>

<p>"or be stuck with head-on flash for ALL your images"</p>

<p>which is why there is a <em>swivel-bounce head</em>, as well as the option

of <em>turning off the flash head</em> (for softening <a href="http://www.shutterbug.net/features/1100sb_using/" target="_blank">on-board

fill flash</a>, many people also recommend the inexpensive <a href="http://www.stofen.com/" target="_blank">omnibounce

</a>diffuser line, or the <a href="http://www.lumiquest.com/" target="_blank">lumiquest

pocket bouncer</a> in situations like open fields or gymnasiums). also, a trick

for portraits is to point the flash head straight up and use the diffuser as

a catch light, which puts nice sparkles in the subject's eyes without adding

any significant head on light as well.</p>

<p><br>

all in all, the st-e2 is a neat little machine. i own one. but for me, i have

to give way to <em>murphy's law</em>. having inter changeable batteries as well

as a backup flash, which acts as a <a href="http://opd.usa.canon.com/html/cameras_speedlite/550ex.html" target="_blank">more

capable master</a>, is invaluable.</p>

<p>bob, here is some more information

from canon's own <a href="http://opd.usa.canon.com/html/cameras_speedlite/ste2.html" target="_blank">st-e2

speedlight information page</a>, illustrating in graph form some of the differences between the 550

and st-e2 as masters in a multi flash setup.</font></p>

<p>cheers!</p>

i have both the 550EX and the ST-E2; it's a pain in the arsk buying 15-euro-a-pop specialty batteries for the ST-E2 every 300/400 shots or so. the batteries are the deal killer, because in the field the ST-E2 doesn't get anywhere near the 1500 or so shots-per-battery that the manual claims. with the 550, you can use normal, rechargeable AA NiMH's. i'd just get a 550EX instead, and then you have a great flash as well. cheers...affen

if you're just "thinking about" a dslr - i.e. you can wait on purchasing - maybe you can bide your time another 4 or 5 months and get a reduced-price 20D after its successor is announced. during the wait, you can use the time for getting more versed on your options. if you need one right now, the 350D with grip is a fine creative tool.

get a 50mm 1.8 and you'll get be able to shoot (in time) pictures that are just as sharp as those from the better L zooms (and you'll have a lot more speed); all for around 75 clams - don't forget the lens hood, though. my 70-200 might be more versatile, but it's not sharper (i use a tripod and cable release for 90 percent of my shots, which are usually posed). after a while, you'll see where your needs lie as far as lenses are concerned, and then you are free to purchase at will, my son. now go forth and proliferate.

no no no, amigos. number one, i am a medical resident, so i do surgeries like gall bladder resections, appendectomies and the like. yeah, i suppose if there was a way to administer general narkose to myself and still remain lucid, i'd have nothing against doing my own appendix should the moment arise (would be sort of an odd angle though). my question about hoods has nothing to do with saving money; i want the 60mm macro, and i was just wondering if the hood was designed with the crop factor in mind. sounds like an odd question, but that's why i lead in my post with "maybe a strange question..." (or whatever the exact wording was). man i wish i could dig up the html file that had my original reasoning. thanks anyway for the comments. cheers...affen

yes, ken; and the lens isn't actually going to go on a digital camera body, but rather a quaker oatmeal cannister fashioned into a pinhole camera using sporks that i stole from wendy's.

 

originally, my post was a lot longer and included my reasoning behind the question; but that would have lead to a discussion about canon's lens naming system and how people reference focal length to mean 'field of view,' blah blah blah. time is short and i have surgeries to prepare for, so the EOS forum got my shortened version, which basically asks 'yes or no?'

 

playing with my canon lens hood designer voodoo doll...affen

is the lens hood for the <a

href="http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?

act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=155&modelid=11156"

target="_blank">60mm

macro</a> designed for the 60mm FOV, or is it actually designed

with the crop factor in mind (i.e., 96mm FOV)? strange question

possibly, but i don't

want to go buy an <a

href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?

O=details_accessories&A=details&Q=&sku=374528&is=REG"

target="_blank">expensive

over-sized OEM lens hood</a> when i can get an equally useless

generic one for

4 euros.

<p>thanks in advance. cheers...affen</p>

i humbly recommend a 420 speedlight and a 50mm 1.8. the 420's focus-assist lamp will make sure that a "nifty thrifty fifty" will nail the focus in low light. total price, around 250 dollars (420 + 50mm). cheers...affen

i live in vienna, duder; and i also do cityscapes in the winter as well. absolutely beautiful city during the christmas season. it will be very cold, and the wind will shear your ears off after a couple of minutes. i highly recommend that you bring a stocking cap or something that covers your ears, as well as thick gloves. i also recommend stopping every few snaps or so to get tanked up on "glumost," the hot seasonal christmas wine that people sell on every streetcorner. being that prague is farther north, it will be a tad colder. don't count on a lot of snow, because for the last couple of years, we didn't get a decent accumulation until after the new year. cheers!

canon was brilliant to come out with the F4 series of lenses, marketing wise. canon reads fred miranda, photo.net, dpreview, and the like (it's free market-research); and has seen the endless threads by weekend warrior photo nerds (affen included) pixel peeping and drooling at the chance to own lenses with red rings on them ("24-105L pictures of my backyard pool," actual dpreview thread last week). the F4 series offers above average-to-great optical quality, but leaves many of us wanting just enough to look for an upgrade (as is the case with my 70-200 F4; sharp as primes, but not half as versatile as i had originally thought...getting ebay'd as i type), whetting our appetites for the 2.8 version or L primes. brilliant. they hook us with the F4's, and reel us into the 2.8's, and before you know it, you could buy a fiat with what you've invested in L primes.

 

J C, i'd recommend the 24-70. the bokeh from 2.8 is a tad better than F4, which will separate your portrait subjects more from their respective backgrounds; as a walkaround lens, the 24-70 will stop motion better than the 24-105 (although IS will be a little more useful on stationary targets); the 24-70 is established and has been run through the gauntlet of amateur and professional application testing; and i like monkey meat. cheers.

if you were a new DLSR buyer, i'd say get the better camera and go with the xt

(<a href="http://photonotes.org/cgi-bin/entry.pl?id=%7CFlashexposurecompensation" target="_blank">FEC</a>

alone is a great reason).

<p>but you already have a 300D; so if you don't do a lot of flash exposures (no

real need for the xt's onboard FEC), the gap between these cameras might not

be worth the upgrade. aside from FEC, there's no one big advantage that the

xt has over the 300D. the camera is only <em>slightly</em> faster, with <em>slightl</em>y

more mp's, etc. i'd say stick with the 300D until next summer, when you can

pick up a 20D for cheap (its replacement is predicted to come out in the spring

of 2006). get yourself some good glass in the meantime.</p>

<p>camera bodies come and go, but good glass might outlive<em><strong> </strong></em>you.

cheers! </p><div></div>

chin up, robert; that's just p.net. you stick your neck out, someone will eventually come by and lop it off.

so i invented those quotes, then? you guys have fun with this thread. ta.

Maybe you guys should take a time out and play some pong, agree to disagree or something, because now it's just going in circles:

 

'FACT: Light fall off is a fact of life of ANY lens, including LF lenses.'

 

...later, same poster...

 

'a Fisheye..that will surely show light fall-off...ooops, it doesn't.'

 

'One with the 24-70L @ 24...again, no fall-off to speak of.'

i should also mention that i sent my rebate materials 'signature-confirmed delivery,' and included a short note mentioning that if the rebate center needed anything resent, i had made duplicate copies of everything.

 

whether or not that contributed to things running smoothly (and quickly as well), who knows. but with all the rebate complaints, it couldn't have hurt.