james_slanger1

<p>Head over to:<br /><a href="http://www.speedliting.com/how-to/">www.speedliting.com/how-to/</a><br />And scroll down to the post on "<a title="Permanent Link: Deciding How To Start With Off-Camera Speedliting — Part One" rel="bookmark" href="http://speedliting.com/how-to/how-to-start-off-camera-flash-part-1/">Deciding How To Start With Off-Camera Speedliting — Part One</a>"<br>

This is a newer site focusing on Canon flashes.<br>

<br />/jim</p>

<p>Another vote for HP5</p>

<p>Thanks. I wasn't trying to rush you at all. I just wanted to avoid clogging your e-mail with un-necessary resubmissions. </p>

<p>-Jim</p>

<p>I used the 'Contact Us' feature last week and haven't received a response beyond the auto-reply. I know Josh and the others are busy professionals and I'm not in a huge hurry but I'd like to make sure this issue gets addressed. The canned response says: So if you send an email at 6:00pm on a Friday evening, you may not see a response for a couple of days. But rest assured that we will respond to you..</p>

<p>Any suggestions for how long "a couple of days" usually is?<br /> <br /></p>

<p>Check out:<br>

http://www.lensplay.com/lenses/index.html</p>

<p>Paul - Isn't the 24mm F1.4 an L series lens? I'm not tied to L, or I guess even Canon, as the Sigma 30 1.4 has been on my radar since the beginning.</p>

<p>In addition to helping with this specific purchase, my motivation for posting was to learn about the classic, or magical as I've been calling them, lenses. Before Len's response, I never knew about the holy trinity of Canon primes.</p>

<p>Well, both the 35 1.4 and the 24 1.4L II will be arriving soon for a week-long tryout. </p>

<p>The IS on the 17-55 works wonders in many situations, but it still bags me with active subjects. I try to keep the ISO at 600 or slower, so turning it up is an option, but I haven't been happy with the shadow noise of my 50D at 800 and above. I definitely have more to learn about digital post-production. </p>

<p>With the new advanced flashes I'm realizing that strobes can be an artistic tool and not a necessary evil. Still, there are those times when they are too disruptive, even when dialed way back.</p>

<p>The subtleties of my personal style - blurred background, highly selective depth-of-field, and large shadow regions - are subtlely better with a FF sensor, so I'll go that route eventually. The 50D is about the largest camera my fiance is comfortable with so we'd be keeping that body, and a 5Dmkii plus fast prime is too rich for us right now. </p>

<p>Thanks again for all your responses, I'm not in a huge rush right now and want to make sure all the options have been explored.</p>

<p>Thanks for all of the responses so far. </p>

<p>I only moved to DSLR this summer shortly before a once in a lifetime trip through the sunny Mediterranean. My knowledge of the current glass was limited but the kit I ended up with worked well, thanks to the insight of people here. Here's the previous discussion for those interested: http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00TbQK</p>

<p>Now that I'm back in not-so-sunny Chicago the magician 4" behind the camera is missing those few extra stops. I'm not getting the best pictures I know I can. I'm happy with the number of hand-held shots that turn out with the 85 1.8 but it's often too long indoors. The 17-55 is great but even with me improving my hand-holding technique and noise-reduction skills, I still feel 2.8 is too small for the pictures I want to take. </p>

<p>I think I should rent the 24L as well.</p>

<p>Tommy- you're probably right, which is something you suggested in my previous thread. The 50D and zooms were the right choice for this summer and it's hard to imagine trading up so soon.</p>

 

<p>I'm researching a new fast prime lens purchase and want to make sure I'm not missing any hidden gems.<br>

I tend to shoot available light candids and lean towards the wide-normal lenses mostly wide open or stopped-down a few stops. Currently I've got the 10-22, 17-55 2.8, and 85 1.8, and while I love each of them I'm missing the fast shorter primes I used when shooting film.<br>

I'll be renting a 35 1.4 next week and most people agree it's one of those lenses that have a little magic to them. I'd like to hear what you feel are some of the other 'magic' lenses in the wide to normal range? For me the magic is in the color, contrast, and bokeh more than tack sharpness, but don't let my opinions limit you. <br>

Thanks.<br>

/jim</p>

<p>Thanks again to those of you who provided valuable responses to my earlier post about how best to transistion to a DSLR from my AE-1s (ie I had no EF lenses). I ended up getting a 50D (refurbished) with three lenses: EF-S 17-55mm, EF-S 10-22mm, and the EF 85 1.8. Aside from the usual UV, extra battery etc, I picked up a 77mm CPL filter to use on the zooms. After trying a number of bags I chose Kata's 3N1-20. I can fit the camera, all three lenses, and my Sekonic L-558 in the main compartment all accessable from the quickdraw posistion. Currently the charger and filter cases are in there as well, but not quickly reachable. I'm rigging my monopod to hang off of the non-quickdraw side with some velcro. Overall I'm happy with the way I've got the system arrainged. The lens hoods arrived today and I haven't figured out how best to get the 10-22 hood in there. <br /> In addition, I picked up the Mountainsmith Quickfire S witch can hold the body with one lens attatched. I figured this is what I'll use when I just want to go with the 17-55mm and travel light. <br /> I'm loving the camera itself. I'm still getting familiar with the different metering modes. I'd like the spot to be a bit tighter - hence the 558 - but otherwise I'm very happy. Having mostly shot HP-5 I'm still getting a feel for how I"ll want to deal with digital highlights. Having the RGB and Y histograms on the review has been great. <br /> Now it's just a matter of making sure that the photographs comes from my experiencing the situations and not letting the newness of the camera get in the way, of the photographs or the vacation. /deepish-thought-of-the-day<br /> Thanks again for all your input.</p>

<p>/jim</p>

<p> </p>

<p>The 24-105 looks like a good lens, but it's out of stock right now. The 17-55 is well-reviewed plus with the 1.6 crop factor it covers the same ground I'm used to with my Tamron 28-70 on my AE-1. I might still pick up the 85 1.8 which would give me a nice lower light lens equivalent to roughly the longest length I normally use. Using the 10-22 will help confirm a future purchase of the 16-35 L.</p>

<p>OK, after thinking more about my needs, shooting style, and upcoming trip, I'm going to pull the trigger on option 1 (40D w/ 10-22, 17-55). When I think long and hard about my budget, 4100$ for the 5D2 and 16-35, plus another 6-700$ for a prime and extra batteries, CF cards, filters etc, it's just more than I want to spend right now. <br>

I am thinking of spending an extra 250$ and getting a refurbished 50D. Total from Adorama with filters and extra battery is only 5$ more than the 5DmkII body alone.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Tommy thanks for the heads-up on the primes not having IS. I'm still trying to get up to speed on the current lenses.</p>

<p>Thanks for all the responses so far, keep them coming!<br>

T1i vs 40D - The rear thumb wheel, veiwfinder, build quality, and size turned my away from the rebel. The 40D and 5D both feel very natural in my hand.<br>

I really feel having a wider 2.8 option is a necessity for the way I shoot. <br>

Ken- are you happy without IS on your EF 85 1.8? No issue with shake when handheld?</p>

 

<p>Well, it's time for me to move into a DSLR. After reading many posts and handling six camera bodies (T1i, 50D, 5DmkII, D300, D700, and D90) I've come up with the following loose options and am hoping for some opinions from those who have gone before me.<br>

1. A used 40D with the 10-22mm and 17-55mm EF-S<br>

2. A used 40D with the 16-35 L II and a longer prime, probably in the 50-100 range.<br>

3. 5DmkII with the 16-35 and something else? prime 50-1xx? zoom?<br>

My previous photography experience is mostly with Canon AE-1Ps plus a few fun odds'n'ends - Russian Leica knock-offs, an old folding Zeiss Ikon MF etc. My only digital is the SD700 IS which I've enjoyed using for what it is good for, mostly P&S, though I did get the underwater housing and have taken it SCUBA diving a few times. <br>

I carry one AE-1 loaded with b&w and one with color, usually 400 ISO, slower if I know there will plenty of light. Glass is usually Canon 50 f/1.4, 50 f/1.2, or 28 f/2.8. When I carry a zoom it's usually my Tamron 28-70 which I've used more for it's macro function. Sometimes I'll bring an 80-200.<br>

I love available light, narrow depth-of-field, and tend towards the normal-wider end of the spectrum. I like my 28mm but have always wanted something wider.<br>

My style tends towards closer-focused details, candids, and intimate photojournalistic, with the caveat that I'm an active rock-climber and would like something that can do justice to some of the landscapes that I've come across.<br>

The motivation for the jump to DSLR is two-fold. The long-term motivation is that I no longer have easy access to a film darkroom. In the near-term, I've got a trip of a lifetime two week cruise through the Mediterranean coming up and the thought of carrying a ton of film along with the chance of it getting cooked or damaged by an over zelous airport security person got me thinking now might be the time to take the plunge.<br>

Back to cameras.<br>

My thought on option 1 was that those two EF-S lenses offer the best quality for the range I like but with the travel convenience of zooms - not always having the time to move physically to frame the shot. The downside of course is that when I get a full-frame body (which I will) the lenses won't work.<br>

Option 2 get me a fast lens that I can see using for the bulk of my shooting after going to a FF body.<br>

Option 3 is really just to get the body that I want to start with, but it would beging to limit the second lens somewhat budget-wise. The 5DmkII's better sealing might come in handy in the great outdoors. Also, from what I've read, the 21mp come in handy when printing large, which is a plus for the landscapes, but I usually print most of everything else 16x20" or smaller and am not sure what the benefit would be at that point. I do know from the digital prints I've done that I really dislike digital noise (a cross-over from being an audio engineer)<br>

So, for those of you that made it through my rambling, what do you think I should do? I'm open to any an all opinions at this point.<br>

Thanks.</p>

<p> </p>

Thanks for all the quick responses! This will just be something to keep spills/smells contained and won't be soaking in chemicals, so acrylic is sounding like it should work. I was just worried about some formulation I may try down the road reacting in a really dangerous way.

Short version:

 

How well (specifically) does Plexiglas resist photo chemicals?

 

Longer version:

 

I'm getting into pyro (PMK) film processing but am using a shared

bathroom as a workspace. My idea is to build a 'glove box' out of

Plexiglas. Roughly a 28"x24"x24" box. Hinged and gasketed with a

water supply hose on top. Fan driven exhaust (dryer hose) leading

outside and filtered air intake (maybe passive maybe fan driven).

Two arm holes with long chemical gloves attached and a drain hose in

the bottom running directly into the toilet.

 

I've seen a few references here that say Plexiglas isn't very

chemical resistant. I've also seen a few posts where people have

built slot and drum processors out of Plexiglas with no problems

(about chemicals anyway). Should I worry about coating the inside

with expoxy/sealent?

 

On http://fins.actwin.com/diy/acrylic.html, an aquarium DIY FAQ, I

found this:

 

'Grease, oil or tar can be removed with hexane or kerosene. Solvent

residue should be removed by washing immediately.

 

Do Not Use window cleaning sprays, scouring compounds, acetone,

gasoline, benzene, carbon tetrachloride or lacquer thinner.'

 

Also, at http://www.thekrib.com/TankHardware/plex.html, I found the

chemical name for plexi if it helps: Poly Methyl Meth Acrilate

 

Any (knowledgeable) info on how acrylic reacts to various photo

chemicals (not just PMK) would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Jim