joseph_dickerson

<p>Scott,<br> Put your money into the lenses, buy the best you can manage, then go shopping for the body.<br> Also, ignore the advice about image stabilization and moving boats...that's a good example of when IS is most beneficial!<br> There are some very good used lenses that can be had relatively inexpensively if you shop around a bit. One that would be a great fit for your purpose is the EF 100-400 f/4-5.6L. The new one is very pricey, and as many have said sharper, but the original was no slouch. There apparently was some variation from unit to unit so make sure you can return the lens if it proves to be less than stellar. I've had two over the years and both were excellent.<br> My first place to shop for used stuff is KEH but even Ebay is OK the seller has good feedback and a liberal, at least two weeks, return policy.<br> Are you a sailor? Have you raced? Knowing the rules and strategies of sail boat racing would be critical to getting marketable images. Speaking of which, spend at least as much time learning to market your work as you spend on learning how to shoot it. The greatest images are valueless if you don't know how to market them. Think in terms of finding multiple markets for every image and they will pay for themselves. Taking a small business class at the local community college wouldn't be a bad idea before you invest a lot in gear.<br> JD</p>

<p>As James mentions, the 40mm STM is a very good lens, but on a crop sensor body the 24mm STM might make more sense as a walk around lens. <br> You might want to rent either the 24mm or the 40mm (or both for that matter) and try them out. I think your assessment of the 50mm f/1.8 is correct. Not as nice a lens and, for your purposes, a bit too long in my opinion.<br> I went a slightly different route and got the EF 28mm f/2.8 IS. More expensive and slightly larger but better in every category if the focal length works for you.<br> JD</p>

<p>Another happy user of the M-645 to EOS adapter. I actually have two, one from Mirex that offers tilt and shift movements and one from Fotodiox. Both work a treat on all my EOS bodies including the M-3, no issues whatsoever.<br> BTW, you can use them in either <em>Av</em> or <em>manual</em> mode, but as mentioned by Derek aperture selection and focusing obviously remain manual. If you have M-645 lenses then it's a worthwhile investment, otherwise, probably not.<br> As for RB-67 lenses, I think the available focal lengths, the physical size and weight, and the hassles of coupling to the RB shutter would make it too problematic. <br> But, YMMV.<br> JD</p>

<p>Mark, there is also an EF 100mm f/2.8 USM lens. I have the original 100 f/2.8 and just got a used 100 f/2.8 USM (KEH Bargain...looks Ex+ to me!) for the internal focus feature. I haven't noticed a huge difference in image quality, but I haven't tested extensively yet either, but handling/focusing is much nicer. I do know it's definitely sharper than the EF-S 60mm macro that I have. The USM focuses faster than the non-L 100mm and the internal focus makes focus stacking much easier. I have no experience with the L version of this focal length although I would expect it to be at least some better in most departments.<br> Years ago I had the Tamron 90mm macro, very sharp lens but my repair guy saw more of it than I did. Current Tamron may be a different story.<br> JD</p>

<p>Consider the Horseman VHR or VH. VHR will have a rangefinder and the VH does not.<br> JD</p>

<p>If indeed you are competent to tackle the repairs yourself then I'd say that you got a good deal. This is assuming you can in fact get it working to your satisfaction. I used to buy bicycles that others turned down because I was/am a reasonably decent bike mechanic so I can appreciate your approach.<br> I'd still give the seller some very negative feedback as he obviously as you suggest didn't check the lens as thoroughly as he should have, or worse, did and sold it knowing it had issues.<br> But again, in your circumstances you should feel pretty good about things. <br> JD</p>

<p>I agree with Criag...no one could possibly consider a lens with those issue to be anything close to "mint minus".<br> Just read any description of "mint" or "mint minus" you can find, no way it should/could be applied to the dog that you bought.<br> I'd also return it but as soon as I received a refund I'd post some really negative feedback.<br> The last thing the community needs is a seller, hopefully not a shop, with those kind of morals.<br> Good luck, <br> JD</p>

<p>I have that lens although I don't shoot with a 645 any more. I'm using it on my EOS DSLRs with a lens adapter...works a treat.<br> A couple of things to consider though. First, the lens is huge, a lot bigger than the standard 55mm wide angle. Also, make sure that you have the right to return the lens as they have a common issue that may or may not be present in the one you're contemplating. The shift movement, no tilt by the way, is activated by a knob the "screws" the lens into the position you need and this movement takes place in a dove tail groove. On some lenses that have seen a lot of use the dove tail groove gets worn and there will be some slop. My lens exhibits this problem but it's not too bad. I understand it can be tightened up but I haven't looked into having mine serviced as yet. <br> At least on my lens it doesn't seem to affect the images any. But if the lens you're looking at has this problem you at least should get a better price.<br> As far as a straight wide angle goes, unless you really need the shift, I'd suggest the 55mm or a late 45mm. I had an early 45mm and it wasn't particularly great. My 55mm, latest version, is outstanding.<br> JD</p>

<p>You might also check listing at KEH. Really good people to deal with, very conservative rating system and great customer service.<br> I have bought lenses that KEH rated as "Bargain" that anyone else would have rated Excellent or perhaps even higher. I have been buying from them for decades and have only had one or two problems, which were promptly resolved to my complete satisfaction.<br> JD</p>

<p>Almost any of the inexpensive Technika type lens boards on Ebay will fit the Shen Hao. And you're correct about the size. You need a number 0 (zero) board.<br /> You might also want to pick up an adjustable spanner. Using two screw drivers on the jam nut is a recipe for dinging up your lens.<br /> JD</p>

<p>I used +6 diopter reading glasses...worked a treat.<br> JD</p>

<p>Don't overlook the EF 70-300L. It's pricier than the lenses that have been suggested, but longer with incredible image quality. While it's not a light-weight lens, it's quite compact. I replaced my EF 70-200 f/4L IS with it and am delighted with it in every way.<br> JD</p>

<p>In my admittedly limited experience buying from from Japan...returning items can be a major hassle, especially from the US.<br /> I have had mostly good luck, but the one item I had to return never showed up in Japan, or so I'm told. Needless to say, I didn't get a refund.<br /> Not sure I'd take a chance on a pricey, not to mention, heavy, item especially when there are plenty of them available from the likes of KEH. Assuming you're in the US of course.<br> A quick check shows that I was mistaken, KEH doesn't show any Mamiya 7s in stock. A couple of sixes but no sevens. So perhaps they're not as easy to find as I thought. Doesn't change my feelings about buying from Japan though. Good luck with the search.<br> Ebay ratings are your friend...be sure and check them carefully.<br> JD</p>

<p>Are you aware that the collar that surrounds the shutter button is a lock? I forget which dot indicates locked/unlocked but it'll be easy to figure out if that is indeed the problem.<br> JD</p>

<p>One source of information is: </p> <h1 id="description">Canon 7D Auto Focus problem acknowledgement & resolution.</h1> <p>They distributed a petition at one point, not sure of the date, and collected some 587 signatures of people having the same issue as I am.<br> But...my camera is back from Canon, they improved the performance, I did the hard start as described on the above site, and it improved even more, the camera is now useable.<br> My only question, and the reason for this post was...is this is a permanent fix or will the problem likely re-appear in the near or long term.<br> JD</p>

<p>A quick Google search for <em>7D focus issue</em> will turn up plenty of information. Also, Darwin Wiggett did a review when the camera was released and finally gave up on it when he was unable to get sharp images with any lens.<br> The problem with my camera seems to have been sneaking up on me. It reached the point where the focus is totally off. The camera is, as you suggest, long out of warrantee but as a 30+ year member of Canon CPS I have no qualms about sending gear in to Canon for repair. They're quick, and usually nail it first time. They billed $175 for the repair, a lot cheaper than replacing the thing and the camera is in transit to me and hopefully is repaired.<br> When the issue first surfaced Canon did seem to be in denial about it, I'm hoping that's no longer the case.<br> I'm just trying to find out from others who have had this problem if the repair is usually a permanent one.<br> The fact that no one has piped up yet who has experienced, or for that matter even heard of the issue, makes me think it was a limited to a batch of early cameras.</p> <p>JD </p>

<p>The focus issue, unfortunately, is a well-documented problem with the 7D. Certainly only a small percentage of bodies display it, you're lucky if yours is among those that don't, but it's a real issue with some cameras. I was an early adopter of the 7D and it may only be the earlier batches that exhibited this malfunction.<br> I have several friends with 7Ds that were purchased about the same time as mine that have had no issues, but that's not been the case with my 7D body. I do know how to operate the camera, and have never had anything similar with any of my other cameras.<br> I appreciate you taking the time to respond but my reason for starting the thread was to see if those who had also experienced the problem had been successful in having it resolved. Hopefully, someone who has actually experienced this frustrating problem will have an answer for me.<br> JD</p>

<p>Hi All, <br> Has anyone successfully had the notorious 7D focus issue corrected? Either by Canon repair or by using the "hard start" approach?<br> Did your fix "take hold"? That is to say, was it a permanent repair, or did the camera slip back into its old ways?<br> I'm sure I don't have to tell you why I'm asking...<br> JD</p>

<p>Just a thought...if the landscape workshop is film based great, get a better MF camera. But if it's going to be digital based then shooting film will probably be a hinderance.<br> Check with the instructor(s) and see which they'd prefer you to have, both may be an option. Many workshops will even provide a suggested gear list to help students decide what to bring.<br> Again, if it's film based, and very few are today, then you're right to consider something more versatile than the Yashica.<br> The instructor(s) will be happy to help you decide what's appropriate as it will help you have a better workshop experience.<br> JD</p>

<p>As Henry states, the Polaroid back for the P67 system is/was a semi-permanent modification so those who used them almost always dedicated a body to the Polaroid back.<br> BTW, if the film you found is out of date Polaroid be advised that it doesn't age well. Many mistakenly would freeze it to extend its life, but this actually ruins the film as the chemicals will crystalize when frozen.<br> So, basically your Polaroid back is a (hopefully) cheap paper weight.<br> JD</p>

<p>I'm doing the same thing it sounds like you want to do, but using Mamiya Sekor medium format (645) lenses with a Mirex tilt/shift adapter. No issues with focusing, plenty of image circle, good movement range, and very sharp images. The Mirex is pricey new but I found a used one with a 55mm Mamiya lens on Ebay.<br> Currently using the 55mm, 45mm, and the 50mm shift lens. The 45mm I have is the older (C not N) version and is the only one that's not stellar. Some day I'll pick up a 35mm Mamiya Sekor but haven't gotten around to it yet.<br> I also tried the 80mm Mamiya Sekor but sold it as I already have the Canon 90 T/S. <br> I've been told that the 24mm Mamiya Sekor will work, and also that it won't so I'm not sure, but then there's the Canon 24mm T/S so I didn't see the need to try it for myself.<br> JD</p>

<p>Like you, I prefer manual focusing when shooting macro. I have never felt the need to upgrade from the original EF 100mm macro. It's plenty sharp on either crop or FF, and with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 focus "pops" in and out very accurately.<br> I haven't shop prices but $150 doesn't sound bad at all for one in mint condition.<br> JD</p>

<p>You can adapt the P67 lenses to DSLRs, or Pentax 645 cameras. Other than that I think you're out of luck.<br> With the cost of used medium format lenses these days I wouldn't worry about it. Find the body you feel comfortable with and buy its native lenses.<br> I'm using Mamiya 645 lenses on my EOS cameras with a Mirex tilt/shift adapter. The adapter was pricey but the lenses have been dirt cheap so far.<br> Do you already have some P67 glass that you want to use? Some of the early P67 lenses were not all that exciting, so they might not be worth it depending on what you have. If you're sold on P67 glass, just get a P67II body. It's the last version, and is one hell of a camera. Far superior to the older bodies. And yes, I did shoot P67 for several years and had P67 MLU and P67II bodies with lots of glass, new and old.<br> JD</p>

<p>Not possible. RZ shutters are built into the lenses. This is not the case with P67 lenses, with one exception.<br> I've never heard of any adapter or modification that would allow what you propose.<br> JD</p>

<p>Just confirming what has been said previously. When I was shooting P67 I somehow wound up with both versions of the 200. There was no comparison, the new one was sharper with much better contrast.<br> Did the same with the 300 with the same results by the way.<br> JD</p>