mark_james

<p>Just a thought - Supposedly the 105VR is very average at normal distances, but really comes into its own at macro distances.<br>

See <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/07/imatest-macro-results-with-apologies-to-the-nikon-105-vr-micro">this at Lensrentals.com</a>.</p>

<p>I'm not a pro and don't need the absolute fastest card available. For the last decade I periodically upgrade by buying 1-2 year old "pro" cards. That way I get a lifetime warranty and decent technology. Lately I'm using the 32Gb 133x card from Kingston. The one drawback is slow download speed when the card is full (but that usually only happens when I shoot a bunch of video). I'm using the Kingston cards with the 7D.</p>

<p>Kerry, good point about location. It was in my back yard in Hampton, Virginia.<br>

Randy, thanks for the ID.</p>

 

<p>Photographed this a number of years ago and want to use it with a caption. Not terribly beautiful, but interesting textures. Anyway, any help you can provide with identification, or pointers to a community that might be able to help, would be appreciated.<br>

Regards, <br>

Mark</p><div></div>

<p>I sold my 5D for the 7D -- never looked back. I use the 17-40 and the 24-105, with a 70-200 for longer stuff. The 7D beats the 5D for me in every respect. </p>

<p>Fast speeds are not needed for recording (the manual has the speed requirement, but I don't have it handy). I'm thinking that is is less than quoted above.<br>

However, getting 16 or 32 GB of data off of the card can be time consuming. A fast card may be helpful for that...</p>

 

<p>If you use ACR you will need to set the preference for the previous DNG version.</p>

 

<p>OK. As soon as I read Omega's response it was clear. Just had to break my old mental model.<br>

Thanks,<br>

Mark</p>

<p>I have a new 7D (f/w 1.09; received about a week ago). I also have a 5D and XTi. On the 7D, as on the 5D and XTi, when I press the AF point selection button I expect to be able to manually select and set a single focus point that remains in effect until I press the AF point selection button again. Expected to use the multi-controller and/or quick control dial to select the point. What I get is nothing. The AF point selection button itself is functional because Magnify works fine. AF point selection in combination with the M-Fn button switches AF mode fine, and those work fine. In single point AF mode I can select the single point as expected with the multi-controller and/or quick control dial. I can't seem to set it to use a single point all the time (for instance, force it to use only the center point). </p>

<p>Am I missing something? Has the functionality changed? Since the buttons are functional I'd think it is a firmware "feature" rather than hardware problems. I have reset the camera to clear all functions with no help. Just hoping that I don't have to send it back -- that there's something I missed.</p>

<p>Thanks,</p>

<p>Mark</p>

 

I agree that this can be difficult. Communication, honesty, and respect, are at the heart of the solution for me. I'm a serious amateur and I've traveled to Germany and Greece with my wife. I married late, so I was pretty set in my ways. Similar for my wife. I always felt that I was holding us back, but she was supportive to a point. I guess for me, I had to be honest about the importance of what I was shooting and clear with my wife as well as myself about my goals. Sometimes I realized the shots would ultimately go nowhere and move on, but sometimes I had to ask for more time.

 

It's also worthwhile to ask if this is really a vacation, working vacation, or just work. Are you going to pay for the vacation for the trip with photos and a magazine article? If so, there's clear value in getting the shot. On the other hand, if it's a vacation, the G10 sounds like a great idea (sure beats 20 lbs of equipment!).

 

Good Luck!

For low light: 5D for lower noise.

 

For macro: live view might be really nice; have not tried it. The 40D also gives greater

lens to subject distance for a given focal length (not to be underestimated at high

magnification)

 

For landscape: depends.

 

First, I think it really depends on how big you want to print. My RebelXT does really well at

11x14 or 11x17 hanging on the wall at reasonable viewing distances. On the other hand,

it's 8MP definitely suffer compared to the 5D at those sizes squinting up close. So, do

you squint up close, or do you hang prints on the wall with glass in front of them? How

big do you print? Etc.

 

Second, don't underestimate the benefit of added DOF you get from the shorter focal

length lens (assuming you shoot from the same location with a wider lens). I can live with

the diffraction effects on the 5D at f/16 if it means a bit more DOF, but the smaller pixels

of the RebelXT show significant softening from diffraction at f/16. The 40D will be even

worse in this regard. On the other hand, greater DOF at the shorter focal length means

you don't stop down as much for the same DOF. This guy:

http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/ReviewInfo.html ran some tests and concluded that there

was greater sharpness throughout the frame by using the 1.5x subframe camera (D2x vs

1DsMII). Of course, as MP increase, the benefit decreases because diffraction degrades

the image at lower aperture (thus, Nikon moved to FF).

 

I have 5D and RebelXT.

... about selective focus and depth of field. The pixel pitch of he 400D

will challenge whatever lenses you end up with much more so than the 5D. (For instance,

your 10D and the 5D have aout the same pixel pitch, so the 28-105 will have about the

same sharpness on the 5D as it has on the 10D. Of course, it will be worse in the

corrneres because of full frame.) This will be especially true at shallow depth of field,

where very few lenses do well. For equivalent DOF the 400D will require a larger aperture

and thus will be softer because it will be further away from the sweet spot and because it

has a higher pixel pitch. What this means is (as many others said), if you commit to a

system for the long term, buy the abolute best glass you can afford at the time (even if it

only means one great portrait lens now), and build a system carefully piece by piece.

Tomorrow's cameras will push your system even harder.

 

On the other hand, a great photographer will make the most of whatever equipment is

available by playing to the strengths and minimizing the weaknesses. That said, I'd get

the 5D and a fast 85 mm portrait lens and use the 28-105 for everything else until I could

afford to add somthing better. I rather like FF.

Something I didn't see above is that the two cameras you mentioned place somewhat

different demands on the leses used. The 30D has smaller pixels, and thus needs sharper

glass to maximize image quality. But, when using lenses designed for full frame it uses

the

center of the frame, so it uses the "sweet spot" of the lens. This generally gives better

uniformity across the resulting image. The 5D has larger pixels than the 30D, but they are

spread out over a larger area, which really taxes lenses at the edge of the frame. All of

this

is dependent on how you use the camera and lenses. I suspect you already know that if

the lenses are used at

f22, then sharpness will be about equally bad for any lens because of diffraction.

Thanks John. Yes, it was a crude attempt at comparing equivalent print sizes. I often print 11x17 and like to occasionally go larger. Thus the choice to use equivalent FOV and up-rez the RebelXT. Trevis, I realized afterwards that I had set default parameters on the 5D and lowest sharpening on the Rebel XT. I would have to redo the test properly with raw rather than JPEG to satisfy most people here. I'll see what I can do with the little time available. Daniel: As you point out,the 24-70/2.8 is probably significantly shaper than the 28-105/3.5-4.5 when testing with resolution charts and X Pan B&W film (or similar very high resolution film). But the pixel size for the 5D is not particularly high (compare for instance to the Nikon D2X or D200). To some of the others: The test was at 50 mm and f8. There are many other variables that I did not test. No doubt the best possible glass will improve many characteristics of the image (contrast, color, detail, just to name a few). I am still convinced that there is a world of difference between the cameras for my purposes. I also believe that if I only had the 28-105 and couldn't afford both a 5D and 24-105, my ability to print big would not be hampered significantly by the 28-105 on the 5D. Said another way, I would rather shoot with a 5D and 28-105 than the Rebel XT and 24-70. YMMV.

Go for the 5D with whatever glass you have (that fits the sensor, of course). See my post

above. The difference in total information/data (5D more total pixels, but with lower

resolution than the 350D) is overwelmingly more important than an incremental change in

lens. Said another way, I am convinced you will get significantly more detail with a

medium quality lens on the 5D than with a top quality lens on the 350D. Put a top quality

lens on the 5D later if funds are limited now to increase the detail/quality a bit more.

Then again, if we're not out there shooting it's all moot!

Stupid title -- stupid post... Maybe. With a bit of caution and optimism I bought the 5D

and 24-105 IS. I have a Digital RebelXT and various rediculously expensive lenses. Like

many, I checked the sharpness of the 24-105 IS against my 24-70/2.8, which I consider

sharp. I was nit picking over this little difference vs that little difference. Then I tried my

28-105/3.5-4.5. At f8 is was surprisingly close to the other two with the 5D. Before I

packed up I tried all three on the Digital RebelXT. I adjusted the zoom for the same field

of view and upres'd the RebelXT image to the same resolution as the 5D. Wow! All this

worry about putting the best possible glass on a camera is, for me, a moot point. It's all

about the sensor and all the rest is in the fuzz. The 5D had a world more detail. Maybe

my 24-105 is a bit less sharp than my 24-70, but I don't care, because the whole setup

has so much more detail than the RebelXT as to be in, well, yes, a different league. No

more resolution/sharpness tests. I'm just going to shooooot.

The G5 is obviously the way to go, but cost is a factor for you. The powerbook is "old" G4

technology. It was unclear about your current setup, but if you have a G4 tower, consider

a Sonnet or PowerLogix processor upgrade for a few hundred dollars. Then wait for an

Intel based portable in the next couple years. My G4 "AGP" model (originally 400 MHz) is

now a dual 800. For my purposes it handles 8MP files at 16 bits/channel acceptably well

in Photoshop CS. How it handles the 5D and how it would handle CS2 is TBD. I am

considering a dual 1.6GHz processor upgrade as a stopgap until the Intel processors are

out.

The Canon lens is optically excellent, but autofocus is notoriously bad -- to the point of effectively being a manual focus lens. The focus limiter helps, but not that much. That said, I rarely use it in situations where autofocus is useful to me (I always use manual focus for macro work), so I don't really notice the problem. Sorry I couldn't really answer your question, especially if you already knew this tidbit of info.

Oxbow is nice, but Shwabacher's was more productive for me. Walk upstream on the path beside the river to the right of the parking lot. There's a number of nice views -- loads of variety in close proximity.

I have the 3021 Pro and like it, so the 3001 gets my vote (unless you would like a taller model). I'm 5'8" and have situations where I wish for a taller model (on hills, especially). The new clamp tightens at the top and bottom to lock the extension tube more securely than the old design. I sometimes miss the spiked feet, and the aftermarket ones are no substitute. I wanted covers on the legs, so I went to my local bicycle shop for handlebar tape to wrap the legs. One package is enough if you are careful and only want 6-8" wrapped, otherwise get two packages. The tape has adhesive on the back to keep it in place, and I used black electrical tape to finish it at the ends.

 

Regards,