b.j._porter

I would still work the digital angle if you can. I haven't done it too often, but the scanned version of pictures I've had done off my Elan IIe to date have not compared well with the direct images taken off the 300D. I used to get my film scanned all the time before the 300D and had not done it for a while. I think I have been spoiled.

I a roll of Fuji NPS 160 then took the film to a local high quality photo shop. I had them scan it at the same time.

The prints were beautiful, stunning color, sharp as a razor. The scanned images were...disappointing. I spent an hour or two playing with my own scanner trying to get a better result. It was nothing at all like I captured off the 300D in terms of sharpness and clarity of the scanned image.

In the attached picture, while it's options I need to take some windex to my scanner bed, it is not so apparent just how much clarity ws lost in the scanning process. My daughter is is very sharp focus in the prints, you can see all the flyaway hairs quite clearly. In the scan, well I think mine came out better than the phot labs, but I still was not happy with the end result.<div></div>

I tend to do a "Football Carry" on the lens when I've got the 70-200IS on the 300D.

I am less concerned about the lens actually ripping right off the camera than I am about inducing some sort of subtle warp or bend into the mount that is not immediately obvious.

My $.02...I have this combo. I don't love the 2X.

Getting the shot with the 2X is better than not getting the shot at all.

That being said, there is a noticeable softness with this combo, especially at the extreme end. I've seen instances where cropping the basic lens looks better than a soft & more zoomed in version with the 2X.

Non photographer's don't necessarily notice it, but I do. My friend with a 29' sailboat was thrilled I could give him a picture I took over a mile away, but I personally thought it was blurry and fuzzy. I would not have given to to anyone but a good friend...

So I really, really avoid the extender unless I have to use it. Shooting a fleet of Optimist dinghies 1/4 mile offshore, there really is no choice at this point if I want a reasonable picture. But I am not viewing this as my long term 400mm solution; for now it works but suboptimally.<div></div>

I've had my 24-70L for a couple of weeks now too, I'm having great fun with it.

<br><br><br>

<IMG src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/2529503-lg.jpg">

There are limits to post processing. For example, when increasing the explosure digitally, eventually the picture gets to grainy and detail is lost. Darkening overexposures it happens much faster, since you seem to have less detail (lower contrasts) with the initial image.

You've get your best "cleaned" exposure if you start with a good exposure and work from there. Hence the use of AEB when you are iffy on the correct settings.

Strange experince you had with B&H. I've bought two expensive lenses, a Digital Rebel, and some othe rmiscellaneous equipment ovevrr the last six months. I've never received a phone call, or had a hassle. Everything shipped quickly, and went smoothly.

Example, late last Sunday I placed an order for a 24-70 2.8L, a U/V filter and a remote. I selected two day air, since I wanted to make sure all was in for this weekend's festivities. The only "problem" was that the lens showed up at 10:30 am on Tuesday, a day earlier than expected, so I wasn't home to sign for it. Not a problem in my book really, the UPS pickup is 10 minutes from my house.

Same thing with the other stuff; ground shipping and the products are there in three days, etc. - they turn orders around fast.

Are you looking to buy something, rent something, or just pull something out of your bag of existing lenses?

If it's buy, what's your budget? What do you own already?

I just bought a Bogen 676B Digi Monopod for $34.95 at B&H Photo. Lightweight, seems to work fine.

No head involved there (I don't know about other monos). It doesn't seem logical that a monopod would take a head, since it is not terribly stable to begin with. I suppose unless you are trying to turn the camera sideways, which could be difficult.

I just placed an order for my first L series IS lens, the 70-200 F2.8L

IS. Very exciting, I can't wait for it to arrive, but I have yet

another question.

Do the IS lenses suck substantially more battery power from the body?

Any idea how much momre rapidly I will wear out the batteries? Or is

the IS a lower power draw than I am anticipating?

I'd been considering a battery grip for my camera (300D) anyway,

partially to help balance the weight of the lens and also to give me

more life. But I am wondering as I start using this new lens

extensively (which I imagine I will, since it is by far the best lens

I will have) will I NEED to have the extra batttery life?

I have not seen this with mine at all either. Sounds like your particular body has issues.

The onee thing about the camera that annoys me is operator error. The powerdown is fairly quick, much faster than my Elan IIe, and I always forget about it. So I go and frame a shot and press the trigger and...nothing. For about 3 seconds. Operator error though; I have to remember to push the button as I am bringing the camera to my face, something that is not ingrained behavior yet.

The mounting ring appears to be metal, but it screws into the body, which is pretty much plastic. Weakest link and all that...if the ring doesn't bend but pulls out from the plastic it seems that the end result would still be unhappy.

Chest strap may be a workable alternative to take a little weight off the body.

In the next couple of weeks I will be ordering a 70-200/2.8L IS lens.

From what I gather it's fairly hefty (3.2# w/o collar, 3.5# with)

compared to the lenses I've been using to date. I will be using it on

my Elan IIe and Digital Rebel bodies.

It seems kinds of like a dumb one, but here is my question: How

exactly do you hoof this thing around when it's on the camera? With

my current lenses it's easy enough with the neck strap, my heaviest

lens isn't all that bad. But I am a little concerned about the 3.5

pound monster on the plastic mount on the 300D. I know to support the

lens while shooting so as not to torque the lens mount, but what about

when moving around or using your hands for something else? Will

having the lens hanging off the body which is hanging off my neck do

bad things to my equipment like I think it will?

I'm thinking if you are shooting somewhere where you move about a bit;

outdoors or at the zoo for example. Moving a couple of hundred yards

from the zebras to the cheetahs, do people take the lens off? Or find

some way to have a strap attached to the lens so it's weight is on

your neck instead of hanging off the body? Or just carry the lens

around like a football under your arm when you're not shooting?

This is just a logistical issue which has been puzzling me; I'd rather

NOT learn the answer the hard way...

You might try and find a "leads group" in your area. This is a group of business people in different fields that meet periodically (say weekly, for lunch or breakfast) and share information and leads about things that they come across and can not use. You know, the commercial printer that finds out his client is moving so he tells the realtor in the group, etc.

One group I belonged to had an informal subgroup we referred to as the "Wedding Cartel" - a DJ/music guy, a florist, a caterer, etc. etc. Get in a group like that and you will hear about a lot more weddings as soon as they are announced.

It sounds like you have no body at all at this point, is that correct?

With no body, you can't just throw away the body question - picking a "family" for your camera means you are choosing the mount/compatiblity for future lens purchases as well, so you can't run out and buy an old Pentax body and expect to use Canon L lenses directly.

Canon makes a number of SLR bodies for film and digital. Generally the more you're spending the more "features" you have, but this is not always the case. Some times you have more program modes, or better metering built in, higher shutter speeds. Differences also include contruction - i.e. the Digital Rebel has a plastic body, the 10D is metal and more rugged. 10D supports ISO 3200, longer bursts, etc. It's also about $500 more.

Try looking at B&H's site, and the Canon site, for info on the production models. B&H may provide less technical info and slick marketing, but you'll be able to get a feel at least from the prices so you can tell a $200 body from a $5,000 one. Don't get too excited by e-bay and pay more than B&H or Adorama list it new.

Finally, even though I am pretty much a beginner myself I do tend to agree with the statement that it is 1) The photographer 2) the lens then distant 3) the body. If you have the skill to take a decent picture in the first place, you can take just as nice or poor of a picture on an Elan IIe with decent glass as you can on a more expensive and newer body. The body just has to make sure it get's the settings right and the image recorded correctly.

OK...stupid question #2 then follows naturally - how do I know which settings are "right" or how to tweak them?

The Photoshop CS version is frankly what I remember seeing that night, not the fiery reds of the Canon FVU version.

Recently I acquired Photoshop CS and used the RAW plugin to open some

images. I noticed right off that there was a HUGE difference in the

colors on some shots between the images as opened in the Canon File

Viewer utility versus Photoshop CS.

The same image file, opened side by side in the two tools shows a

marked difference in color saturation, so much so that they do not

really appear to be the same exposure.

Although I am quite savvy and comfortable with computers, I am new to

Photoshop, and have only been using the Canon File Viewer since

receiving it with my DRebel in December, so it is entirely possible

this is a user error somehow.

But with the Cannon ZoomBrowser software, I select the raw imange,

then "Process Raw Images". Simply using File/Open in Photoshop on the

same file nets a very different looking image. Doing simple Saves to

a high quality JPEG nets very differnt results.

I will try to post samples of the two in replies here.<div></div>

I'm probably a littlee fuzzy on this, since I'm pretty new. But my understanding was that the crop factor changed your field of view to the narrowness of equivalent focal length. No additional magnification of zooming was provided, just less area of the image got captured.

So the comment about not needing a TC indoors doesn't make sense - if you're not on the sidelines, you will still be far away. You need to be able to zoom closer still, but the captured imagee will effectively have less area at the same zoom setting for that lens if it was on a 35mm body. So the TC would still be needed for more closeup shots, but the amount of zooming to frame it properly would differ from 35mm.

Am I missing something here? I have some of the same TC questions for a soon to be purchased lens too...

So what you're saying Jim is that getting my first "L" lens will be the start of another addictive and expensive habit? Like I need another one...carbon fiber racing sails are worse than lenses.

The type of boat photography I would be doing is more closeup (for boats), shots of boats during buoy races mostly. Both mid sized boats in the 25'-45' range, and junior sailors in small dinghies (7-12'). In other case I would be on a boat "parked" near one of the rounding marks or the start, that's where most of the interesting stuff happens.

From a IS/motion perspective, there could potentially be a lot of motion going on; I'm not sure of the viability of using a tripod on the pitching deck of a boat. Most likely when taking pictures of OPB (Other People's Boats) I'll be in a smaller, bouncier powerboat too.

Thanks for the input; it's looking like the 70-200 IS and a TC still makes the most sense.

Sometime in the next few months I will be purchasing a new telephoto.

My old Quantarry 70-300 no longer works reliably with the new Digital

Rebel (although it is still fine with the Elan IIe), and I have

somehow convinced my wife that an IS L-glass lens is the way do go.

Also an extension tube is in the cards for this lens.

Primary photographic uses are/will be pictures of my children,

portraits, candid photos, racing sailboats (from the water), and some

time in the future nature/animal things & travel landscapes. We are

planning some serious travel in a few years, and I am looking for

something to help me document that. Taking pictures while ON a moving

boat (albeit sail) will be a frequent occurance now, so IS has a huge

appeal. Also zoom vs. prime here is probably a must, because it can

be difficult to reposition a boat to frame your shot...

Other lenses in my bag include the EF-S 18-55 kit lens, EF 50mm 1.8 Mk

II, and an EF 28-80 f/3.5-5.6 USM (I am not counting the Quantarray

70-300 f/4-5.6 here, since it produces Err 99's too often to use).

I was originally leaning towards the 70-200 f/2.8 IS lens and the 2x

extender, and still am. My question is, should I consider slower, but

apparently more versatile 28-300 instead? I do have reasonable wide

angle coverage, albeit with a consumer lens, not an L. It would not

be outside of the realm of possibliity to acquire an L wide angle lens

in the future.

Has anyone actually gotten their hands on the 28-300 yet and taken a

few pictures? Any guesses if the "selling price" of $2500 will equate

to a street price around the same as the 70-200?

I've had no problems with any EF lenses, but my Quantarray 75-300 zoom is frequently a problem. This lens has no problems on my Elan IIe body. I have not tried cleaning contacts yet; having read about that today it will be my next step.

I would not consider it problematic to the camera per se, but more of an issue with using an older, non Canon EF lens with the newer body.

A newer Canon zom is in the works...