barry_passaris

let's try that link again...

http://www.visual-vacations.com/Photography/focus-recompose_sucks.htm

Hi all,

I read the article below via another forum, and wanted some feedback

on this issue with Canon EOS equipment. This is the method I use to

focus but I have come across the same problem as the article

suggests, but not only at wide apertures.

Just wanted your thoughts on how you focus using AF.

FWIW, I use a Canon 1ds Mk1.

Cheers.

http://www.visual-vacations.com/Photography/focus

recompose_sucks.htm

Just wondering whether anyone is using this film, which is rated at

ISO 50, at a higher ISO?

This used to be my favourite film before switching to digital and I

am starting to use film again. Cannot handhold at ISO 50 so I'm

seeking acceptable results at ISO 100 or higher.

Any examples?

Thanks in advance.

Another vote for the 3.

Smaller and lighter than either 1n or 1v and you can find one used dirt cheap, considering the quality of this camera.

I just bought one for $325 on ebay in perfect condition. A bargain!

Thank you all for your comments. Very interesting and unexpected feedback. The Converter sounds like more trouble than it's worth.

Perhaps the simpler strategy is to take the plunge and purchase an affordable Field Camera. The Horseman 45FA looks great (though I haven't checked prices!). I would ask about people's opinions about this choice but a new post is probably needed for your comments.

Hi All,

I have Canon 35mm digital equipment (1Ds Mk1 body) but I am

interested in 'serious' landscape photography and want to experiment

with large format techniques. Has anyone used the Horseman

Converters which can be used on 35mm cameras?

http://www.horsemanusa.com/vcc.html

Is it worth purchasing such equipment for the convenience of digital

with camera movements? I will be printing up to 16x20. Secondly, any

comments on the quality of lenses which are compatible with this

converter? Can I assume better than Canon lenses (which I consider

poor for landscape)?

Thanks in advance for all comments and help.

Excuse my ignorance, but what are focusing rails?

I have this lens and the tripod collar. I have found the collar large and cumbersome to use but I haven't ventured into macro photography seriously. I use this lens as one of my street lenses. As sharp as L series lenses...one of Canon's best ever lenses. You'll love it.

Thanks for your responses. Very thought provoking and sound advice by all of you.

I realise this issue of camera/lens weight and steadiness is very subjective and of course also shutter speed dependent. But I get the impression that handholding the 135mm is possible and may be less hit and miss than with my 200mm.

Cheers everyone.

One more prime question...

I currently own the 200mm f2.8 and before that the 70-200mmf4. The

problem with both these lenses is that I have had difficulty

handholding either without camera shake occurring, with the lenses

either being too heavy or too long to balance. This is especially

the case when shooting verticals and upwards (think architecture

mainly). I use a 1Ds (Mk1) which doesn't help in terms of weight.

So I'm searching for an alternative longer than 100mm. Is the

135mmf2 the answer? From the specs it is both physically shorter

than the 200mm and slightly less heavy. It is also shorter than my

100mm macro which I use as a normal lens and can handhold.

I know this lens is super optically but handheld? (No, I don't use a

tripod..ever!)

Any suggestions?

Thanks.

Dave,

Don't give away your astro-travel secrets! I don't. I'm currently using the 60mp 6Ds which is scheduled for release in 2012!

Chiswick, reviews agree with you. The non-L primes, in particular the 24mm and 35mm, are less sharp than their L equivalents on a full-frame digital

http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/24mm/index.htm

Thanks for the advice. I'll probably be upgrading to CS2 in the next month or so. I have heard good things about PT Lens also.

Thanks to everyone for your comments.

Barry

Chiswick,

Is there software which corrects issues such as barrel distortion etc. which does not involve cropping the image?

Not cropping is crucial to the way I shoot so edge sharpness and distortion of any kind is an issue and needs to be minimised.

Any recommendations on software appreciated.

Thanks.

Thanks for your feedback. I know these lenses are great performers but the crucial issue is whether they perform well on a full-frame digital.

My L zooms also are great but produce more barrel/pincushion distortion on my IDS than on my EOS 3. So it is not so much an L lens issue but whether these lenses can cope with full-frame/resolution of the IDs.

Any other thoughts?

I'm interested in purchasing these 2 lenses which are rated highly

in almost every review. I'm concerned though that they won't perform

as well on a full-frame digital, particularly as they are not L

lenses.

Can any users comment on this combination, in terms of sharpness in

particular (both centre and edge) at f8-f11, as well as general

contrast etc.

Thanks.

Hi all,

I have a colour image for which I've created 3 different

masks/channels.

I want to convert the image to B&W but to use different Calculations

settings for each mask. So, for instance I want one mask to have

more of the Blue Channel as part of the grayscale conversion and a

blending option of Colour Burn, whilst another mask to have more of

the red channel and the blending option Soft Light etc.

How do I go about doing this so that in the end I have one B&W image

but with different Calculations settings for each of the 3

selections?

Thanks in advance.

Wow! What a wealth of information.

You people really know your cameras. There are alot of cameras here that I had never heard of. This discussion has really helped with my options to perhaps pick up something on ebay.

Thanks to you all for your comments. Great!

I'm seeking a small camera for street photos.

Interchangeable or fixed lens is not important.

My main concerns are small, silent, lens quality and metering.

I was hoping to pick up an older camera (either Rangefinder or SLR

type) on the cheap but it seems all these cheaper cameras are

limited in metering. I want to avoid using a light meter for this

type of work but still have manual control.

Any suggestions? Budget up to $150 US maximum.

I'm seeking the best quality optics for the 24-35mm range to be used

on a full-frame digital, shooting at f16.

Which shall it be? The 24-70, 16-35 or the combo 24f2.8 and 35f2?

Sharpness and minimal distortion are a priority.

Any opinions on the 3 choices?

Which type of ink setup (and RIP) are people using to produce decent

sepia tone matte prints on the Epson 2200? Is a RIP required for

this purpose? If so, which one?

I will be using Epson Enhanced Matte or Hahnemuhle rag paper for

printing. Archival quality is a must. I will be using this printer

soley for this purpose.

Thanks everyone for your responses...all very positive,as I imagined judging from previous links on this lens.

Thanks for your link Puppy face..love the photos.. I note though they are all shot horizontally...looks like vertical shots may require tripod use with this lens..especially as I photograph a lot of buildings and have the camera balanced at an upward angle..impossible to shoot verticals this way with the 70-200 f4..much too long.

I'm considering the purchase of the 200mm f2.8 lens and was

interested in anyone's comments on picture quality, using it with a

full-frame digital, as I will be using it on a 1Ds, possibly also

with a 1.4TC.

I already have a 70-200f4 which I don't like as it is very

conspicuous for street photography. Also the zoom quality at 200mm

is not great.

Is the 200mm more comfortable to hand hold in comparison to this

zoom? (which is physically way too long). Any comments on this lens

and combination which may deter me from purchasing?

Thanks in advance.

Barry