mark_davies1

<p>I know that I was asking just recently about the Nex 7 <a href="../digital-camera-forum/00aToe">http://www.photo.net/digital-camera-forum/00aToe</a>, but my wife has pointed me in the direction of the Olympus OMD-E5. My Q is about the speed of the E5 with the MMF3 adapter and the Zuiko 12 - 60 2.8 - 4.0 or the 50 - 200 2.8 - 3.5 lens? <br>

Has anyone had personal experience of this? I am about to (not ditch) sell my 40D and 24 - 105, give my wife the 70-200 F4. L IS, and get the Oly OMD E5, the Lumix 7 - 14 F4, 12-60 and the 50-200, with the MMF3, 1.4 converter. That is a big change. Just want to have as much info as I can get before spending a few thou.<br>

In particular, the speed of the AF and the bokeh from the 12-60.<br>

Thks, Mark</p>

<p>Gents, thanks heaps for your input. I think I am still leaning towards the Nex7. Following the input above from Michael and Stephen I have looked at the feedback from users on the Oly EP-3 and the DX1. Both have great feedback written about them but I am used to a viewfinder. Also, they both have 4/3 sensors whereas I favour the APS-C of the Nex 7. And as also mentioned, the Leica is great but money seems to have an influence there! And as David has just mentioned, there are a bundle of small super older leica lenses that will not break the bank and have super quality and a small footprint. Another I am looking at is the Oly Om-D E-M5. Yes it has the 4/3 sensor but other features seem good and it also is a small footprint camera. So, again thanks for the input. Mark</p>

<table width="590" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">

<tbody>

<tr>

<td colspan="2" height="16"><img src="http://a.img-dpreview.com/resources/images/one.gif" alt="" width="100" height="14" /></td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td colspan="2">

 

 

<p >Whilst I have a Canon 40D and a couple of L lenses that are capable of good street photog, they are quite in the face and I hanker for the ability to take photos street wise - known as street photography. So something insignificant, with a fast response in terms of pressing button and having picture captured would be nice. (I also have a Canon G9 but the shutter lag time is not good. I have been thinking about the Sony Nex7 with the standard 18 - 55 lens. Would there be other digital cameras/lenses that would have similar response characteristics and sensor capabilities that would be as responsive but have a better lens selection? Thanks, Mark</p>

 

 

</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

<p>I phones don't work well in washing machines either! Strange! Mark</p>

<p>Thanks for the responses folk, I was not really expecting one. I am aware the EVF is of good quality but coming from years of film photog (EOS3) then EOS 40D both with 70-200 2.8 and now with 24-105 L IS the EVF is un-natural to the eyes. I want to get the Nex7 for a holiday and it will be much lighter to carry and draw less attention than the big Canon glass. So, I will look for the Oly and Pana OVF's.<br>

Many Thanks again, Mark</p>

<p>Hi Folk,<br /> Does anyone know if there is an OVF that is a shoe type for another brand could work on the Nex 7? E.G. a viewfinder for a Nikon, or a Leica etc.<br /> thanks, Mark<br>

Sirry, silly question. Please ignore it. Ta, Mark</p>

<p>Thanks heaps for the responses gents. Much appreciated. I will have a look at the various options of the models you have indicated. I understand the suggestion about the pre-focus but I have found it is difficult when you don't have the camera to the eye, some eyecatching moment is just occuring and you have to lift and shoot all in one action. I am also aware that this is not always the case but as street phogs would know, the quicker on the draw the better the chance of re-living the moment.<br>

Kind regards, Mark</p>

<p>Hi Folk, Whilst I have good Canon gear, there are many instances where I would like to not look like a big lens person and take spontaneous shots with a small camera. I have a G9 and used my daughter's G12 but neither have a fast response from pressing button to taking shot.<br>

Could anyone suggest a good compact with a fast shutter response with a reasonable to good lens in terms of speed and pixels.<br>

Thanks,<br>

Mark</p>

<p>Sorry Scott. It must have slipped past the gray matter. In Oz we call it a "senior's moment". Thanks. I did look it up but did not realise at that time it showed the extenders although there they were in plain view to see. Thanks. again. Mark</p>

<p>Thanks Brian, very informative. I did not know they compared the lenses with the extenders attached. Now I do. Appreciated. Mark</p>

<p>Thanks Linda, did you ever use the 100-400 canon lens? Try it out? If so, how would you compare it to the70-200 with 2x canon converter or the 300 f4L with the 1.4 converter?<br>

Ta much,<br>

Mark</p>

<p>Thanks for the replies folk. Philip, thanks for your input. My 70-200 is very sharp so I may just get away with the 2x without too much degradation.<br>

Linda, what lens do you use now for your wildlife shots. I have looked at your site and the birds in particular would beed at least 400 to get those shots. How may lenses do you carrfy with you.<br>

thanks and regards to all,<br>

Mark</p>

<p>Thanks for the link Scott. I have had a look and found it very interesting. The clarity of the lens without extender at F4 is remarkable and slowly drops off at higher apertures. I would have thought it kept it at least until F8. Still a fantastic result though.<br>

A bit of an explanation! I have the 24-105 F4 LIS and the 70-200 F4 Lis and am looking for longer capability for in the field, but do not really want to lose the capabilty of the clarity of the 70-200 and would prefer not to carry a third lens. I am in the throes of purchasing a 7D to replace my 40D hopefully also to get more resolution. I have previously owned the 100-400 and found that bulky. I have previously owned the first version of the 70-200 2.8 LIS and discarded that as the weight was getting on the heavy side after a day or two trecking. So, hence the attempt to get an extender that will get the distance and resolution without breaking the back.<br>

Many thanks again for your comments, suggestions and observations.<br>

Mark</p>

<p>Silly, Silly, Silly me. I refer to it with my wife and I as the 200 F4. It is the 70 - 200 F4LIS. My appologies for the confustion.<br>

Thanks Brian, I will consider that. The auto focus could be of assistance.<br>

Kind regards for the error spotting Bob.<br>

Mark</p>

<p>Hi Folk, Does anyone have experience with the 200 f4 L IS with the new Canon 2x Mk III extender. I am aware there will not be autofocus but I am interested in IQ only.<br>

Many thanks,<br>

Mark</p>

<p>Dear Santa Canon, Christmas is coming up and I was wondering if you can bring me the new Canon camera. It would be hopefully based upon the 5D MkII but only a bit different.<br>

First, I don't want to alter the pixies, there are plenty of pixies in the current model and they are generally okay. They do tend to get a bit noisy when they go faster so if they can be quietened down that would be great.<br>

Second, could the focusing AF thingy be improved to be a bit better. I don't really need it to be like the 7D but if all 9 focusing points could be cross type with 2.8 lenses that would be yummy.<br>

Third, I don't really need the movie thing so that can go but if instead you could squeeze two digic IV processors on it, or even a digic V, so the frame rate could be increased to 8 or fps that would be super.<br>

Finally, if the rear viewing screen could be articulated (made so it can swing up and down and sideways that would be very usefull. If this cannot be done, that would be okay as long as the others were able to be acheived. Especially keeping those noisy pixies quiet.<br>

Everything else on the camera is great.<br>

I know this is probably not in your baily wick, I would have to send this to the Canon lens Santa but if you could ask him to upgrade the 100 - 400 L IS to a constant f4 and with the new IS mode (4 stops instead of two) I am sure I could put some extra hay out for the reindeers.<br>

There may be others here that would like to add some features, so don't go away in a hurry. Please stay to see what they want.<br>

Best wishes for your holiday after Christmas.<br>

Mark</p>

<p>Why don't they make it black so it doesn't stand out in a crowd? And I hope it has 77mm filters so I don't have to buy more. Will it have RAW capability?</p>

<p>What's wrong with grain anyway? I know it does not suit every photo but in some circumstances it is great. If you are looking for the old time look, then grain is the way to go. Just as a bit of vinguetting is good also, if it suits the purpose. Remember the old Zeiss folding bellows 120 cameras. The look of a picture from those were quite remarkable, slight sepia toning from age (that can now be added with a bit of chem istry) and voila! a pickie of which to be proud.<br>

Now, where is my Pentax 67II? Bother, I sold it. Same as the mamiya 7II. My question to Jon is how the heck do you get away with pointing that RB67 weapon at people in NYC without having it hit over your head? Here, in Oz land, if you point even a relatively small Canon 24 - 105 at someone you are likely to get some rude words at the least, the person of the shot would duck, everyone would see you coming for miles and there would be nothing to shoot.<br>

Lovely pictures tho. Mark</p>

<p>I saw an ad for a new 7D for only $898. Now it is a bit more than the $800 plus there will be freight. But with that camera, (and some money from housekeeping to pay for it) I would be such a fantastic photographer (not that I am now but the 7D will make me one!) that all I would have to do is take photos and sell them for fortunes to pay back the housekeeping. Trouble is, that with my existing 24-105L IS and the 70 - 200 F4L IS I would rather go for the 5D MkII but that is not just over $800. Hmmmmmm, house keeping would be much thinner for a long time and so would I!. Maybe stick with the 450D for a while.<br>

Hot water!<br>

What is wrong with a dip in the local creek with a bottle of wine, a bar of soap and a friend? You will soon get warm and have the opportunity for some nice photos.</p>

<p>Many thanks to all. I fess up that I did not read the manual about flash settings because I wrongly assumed the camera would detect the flash, and set the correct exposure aperture to suit the setting I had selected: if I had set the aperture then it would set the speed, if I had set the speed it would set the aperture. I had better stop assuming and get back to reading.<br>

Thanks for the usefull links also.<br>

Kind regards, Mark</p>

<p>Take an EOS 40D, ISO on 800, Canon 100 f2.8 L IS Macro lens. Evening, almost dark but you can see the texture of a large moth (size of moth about 75mm - 3 inches), tripod. Select zero exposure compensation, use Canon 580 EX II speedlite. Distance from front element to moth approx 450mm or 1ft 6in.<br>

On program mode "P" the offered exposure is 60th Sec @ f2.8. If I select AV and f16 to get some depth of field so all of moth is in focus, then time given is about3 min. If I select TV and try for some realistic time of 1/2 sec, then I am offered f2.8 with no depth of field.<br>

I have had similar experiences with the EOS 630, the EOS 3, the EOS 33, EOS 450 and prior to that the EOS400. For some reason that I am unaware, and am hopefull you will be able to assit, I do not seem to be able to get a flash exposure on a selective mode (AV, TV) that seems to correspond in any way to that on "P".<br>

Can you please advise what I am doing wrong or what am I missing, and how do I get a decent depth of field with the 40D, 580 EX II and the 100 f2.8 macro from a distance of 450mm.<br>

Many thanks,<br>

Mark</p>

<p>Many thanks Gents, it looks as the glass will give the better result. I will go that way and try out the vaious options: 300 f4LIS with a 1.4TC, 400 f5.6L, 100-400. Again, thanks for the input. Mark</p>

<p>Folk, Thanks greatly for the fantastic response. I will try to explain better.<br>

First, It was not meant to be a trick question, I was going from memory and thought there was a 400 5.6 L IS. Sorry.<br>

To elaborate, I like photos of both birds and people. But, for the sake of the question and I hope it is not to "simple" an example: If I take a photo of either, person, bird (car, plane, apple) from a distance and it fills say one quarter of my frame on the 40D, when I wish to enlarge it to a certain size, there becomes a point when it loses its clarity. Ignoring the walk closer to it option, as birds and people may not wish a large lens to be that close to them apart from the person holding the camera, and cars may be further away than you wish, and I have not seen too many aircraft flying at 100 feet so I can take their picture, then the options left are to have a higher resolution image, so when cropping the part of the image I want, and printing to the size I want, I get a good image.<br>

I am not making a profit from photography: I am retired and like to capture photos of various genre and occasionally exhibit in local venues.<br>

But, by the feel of the answers, it would appear the 100-400 is the solution unles the 5DMkII would give a significantly better performance than the 40D. Yes it is more expensive than the 100-400. But I could trade the 40D if going the 5DMkII way but would buy outright the 100 - 400 if going that way. It may make the cost closer. How about the comparison.</p>

<p>Thanks, Mark</p>

 

<p>Hi Folk, I have a 40D and the 70 - 200 F4 L IS.<br>

If I wanted to obtain a larger, sharp, printed image of an object, in this case say a bird some distance away, would it be better to get another lens, e.g. 400 5.6 L IS or another body E.g. 50D, 5D Mk II?.<br>

Regards,<br>

Mark</p>

Hi Mark U, Sorry. I appeared to have been wasting your time. I always read manual with units in hand before putting

them on Camera! I should have tried that. There was no mention in the manuals (That I could see) that they will

shoot a small delay when pressing the test/pilot light. That is the answer.

Many thanks, Next time i will do a bit more research prior to posting a Q. Mark