ed_baumeister

<p>I just put a 2x on my 24mm TS-E. It fits and works.</p>

Nikon was however the champion in handing out bags at Photokina. A small fleet of young women were giving them away -- empty -- as you left the Messe/Deutz train station, some 300 meters from the expo hall. Other companies' bag dispensers were stationed closer to the building. Canon had a special window for brochure dispensation. With the Internet, however, there was very little new information at Photokina, brochures or no brochures. You've seen it all before. You could touch, You could talk to a company employee. You could eat a € 13 steak (vegetables extra at €3.50 each legume). But Photokina isn't much of a consumer show, although I suspect most of the tens of thousands there were consumers. It still seems to function as a medieval-style trade fair. In the basement were the Chinese lens-makers and the Indian software-vendors. Watch that space. If Nikon got its camera start imitating Contax, what will the Chinese imitate to get theirs? Will these forums 10 years from now be debating which Chinese camera system is the best?

I just counted: Of the 124 Vietnam pictures I have with my agent, 24 were taken with the 70-200mm (2.8 non IS). So, just over 20 percent. A second body as a backup is not a bad idea when it's a trip hard (or expensive) to recreate. It seems the three lenses and two bodies you've chosen is not an overload -- although, you'll be carrying it, not me. I took a 1D2 and a 10D in 2005, with a 17-35L, 28-70L, and the 70-200 mentioned. I went overland Saigon to Hanoi in two weeks. Important is storage and backup, At the time, I burned CDs in duplicate, but now I would take, as I do on all my trips, two of the smaller USB-powered portable hard drives in 250GB versions. You should find people friendly and cooperative. More than 70 percent of the population is under 30, so they have no memory of You-Know-What-War.

Canon Europe has extended the warranties from one to two years on the EOS 1D and

1Ds Mark III bodies. (I searched to see if this had been posted, but found

nothing). The Galbraith page had something on this and added that Canon USA has

no plan to follow Europe's lead. From the Canon Europe web site:

 

"The EOS-1Ds Mark III and EOS-1D Mark III cameras are Canonﾒs benchmark for

absolute quality and professional performance. To express our pride in our

flagship products, weﾒre making you this attractive offer.

 

"For a limited time only, Canon is offering in addition to its standard warranty

a one-year extended warranty absolutely free. This gives you a total warranty

period of two years from date of purchase.

 

"The offer is valid on all purchases made before 31 December 2008. So, whether

you already own the EOS-1Ds Mark III or EOS-1D Mark III for a little while, or

just bought it, you will benefit from the one-year extended warranty.

 

"The deadline for registration is 31 January 2009."

We Americans seem to regard low prices as a birthright. That said, the pricing of internationally traded products like Canon gear is, well, interesting. The Canon 1Ds Mark III is made, as far as I know, in just one factory in Japan. Yet it fetches very different prices depending on where it is sent.

 

At the very reputable Objectif Bastille in Paris, it goes for ?7,590, which means around $12,000 at the consumer rate of exchange (the newspapers report a trading rate).

 

At the equally well regarded Calumet in London, the 1Ds III goes for ?4,798.99 or about $9,800.

 

At B&H in New York City, the same camera is $7,999. That does not include, of course, New York City sales tax, which brings the U.S. price up by nearly $700. But if you order from, say, Massachusetts or California, you do not pay that tax, only $50 for UPS shipping. Or you can buy at Amazon for the same price and Amazon will pay the shipping.

 

The walk-up Paris-New York air fare this week is $1,900, no Saturday night stay. No wonder those planes are crowded.

I left DPP for Photoshop when I discovered that DPP rips out the metadata I enter (using Adobe Bridge) in the field. I enter caption information (and keywords if I have the time) in bulk at the end of the shooting day, but all that work disappeared once DPP had done its conversion. Unsurprisingly, the Adobe software keeps it all. I am sure Canon has had 250-300 new versions of DPP since I gave up on it 10 or so months ago, so I am not sure the present release eliminates the metadata.

Chuck Westfall, who works for Canon USA, averred on the Digital Journalist that the focusing systems of the 1D III and the 1Ds III were different, and that the 1Ds would therefore not suffer the same problem as the 1D. This was, I think, in the January issue of the Digital Journalist, but I cannot tonight call up the column from the web site. I wouldn't call for personnel changes until I were a paid-up victim of a problem. Not odd for British journalism to be unaware of, or unwilling to quote, a claim like Westfall's which would deflate such a good story.

The same happened to me, but when I was on the road. So without my Photoshop disk, I downloaded the trial version of the software from Adobe. Interestingly, all you can download is the Extended version. I uninstalled Photoshop (I did NOT de-activate it) and re-installed using the trial download. I forget whether or not I needed my serial number, but I had written it down, finding it in the software before I uninstalled. But it worked, and the process even preserved EXIF templates I'd made in the failed Bridge. You can get help from Adobe online by creating a "case" I think they call it, but the first response is mechanical and refers you to the "knowledge base" but not necessarily to a useful place, but you can persist.

Thanks for your stab at it, Barry. Everything else on the desktop is normal. Web pictures are normal. My own Jpegs, called up with native Windows software, are fine. The same Jpegs, called up in Photoshop, are as I posted. It seems to be a problem within Photoshop, or so think I, but I can't figure the way out.

Excellent question, Godfey. Thanks. Here's a screen shot of the settings.<div></div>

I decided this afternoon to calibrate my monitor, using Spyder 3 Elite. Once I

did that, all the images I call up in Photoshop look like the attached. This is

not an inverted (negative) image. If you invert it it get's weirder still. I

have uninstalled the Spyder software and reinstalled Photoshop. This phenomenon

isn't seen when I open a Tiff or Jpeg with Microsoft resident software.<div></div>

Photo District News, a U.S. publication, has information on the 1D III focusing

problem at http://www.pdnpulse.com/2007/07/canon-mark-iii-.html

The end to DPP may be Photoshop CS3. Adobe has borrowed or imitated features of DPP, like click white-balance. And unlike DPP, CS3 doesn't strip out metadata you have dutifully entered on raw files. I switched from CS2 to DPP 3.0 for quality and operability reasons. Now I've switched to CS3 for the same reasons. CS3 permits more control in conversion, permitting even cloning out of dust spots before conversion.

In my experience, Canon's DPP is a better converter of RAW files -- especially in white balancing. But you can only go so far with DPP, and after conversion, I recommend Photoshop.

Some years ago, when I lived in London, The Economist magazine did a story about high prices in the U.K., and noted that some retailers considered the place "Treasure Island" for the prices they could get.

 

But, you Brits are in the European Union, and there are Internet sellers of reputation on the Continent. One is New York Camera in Germany (that's its name -- no translation).

 

For example, the EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS sells for GBP 1,247.99 at Jessops in the U.K. In euros, at today's rate, that's Euro 1,857.71. The same lens goes for Euro 1,598 at New York Camera in Germany. How much can shipping be? There's another German reseller in Aix-la-Chapelle/Aachen as well.

 

When I lived in London, a young Frenchman in a Nicolas (French) wine store there, discovering I wasn't British, said to me: "In France, when the train she does not come, we burn down the train station. In England, when the trains she does not come, the English, they look at their feet, they look at the sky. Tell me, what is wrong with the English."

 

I moved to France.

I bought a 2GB SD card for some fieldwork I'm now doing with my EOS 1D Mark

II. When I transferred the pictures from the card to the laptop, only 170

images were there with images. There were file numbers for the subsequent raw

and jpeg pictures, but no images. So I bought another 2GB SD card and got only

125 images before it turned to the file numbers only. I'd had no such problem

with 1 GB SD cards. Both cards were formatted in the camera. Anyone had such a

problem? Many thanks.

You can't be too careful. Bob Atkins gave good advice about scammers here. But on his own web site is an ad for a very cheap EOS 5D. The ad belongs to Royal Camera, slammed in resellerratings.com and warned about on Atkins's own web site.

The 50mm f/1.4 is extremely useful. There are zillions of opinions about it, but the results speak pretty loudly. Attached is a little over half a fame of a shot made at night at an outdoor café in Vienna. ISO 640, 1/60, f/1.6. (I didn't see her love bite until I opened the shot in Photoshop. Apologies if it offends.)<div></div>

In Amazon's list of things supplied, the lens hood is absent. Shortly after that, a hood is offered. I cannot determine from the web site whether it comes with the lens or not.

 

Interesting to see that Amazon has its partisans. (For books, as an anglophone in France, I am one, too.)

 

Amazon has managed to insinuate itself onto many photo web sites. My only point was that it's worth thinking about where one buys things.

 

I bought my copy of the 16-35 at B&H when I was here in New York in May. I paid a nearly 9 per cent state/city sales tax (VAT) on top of the list price. My daughter here has my old 17-35, and with it she is out-shooting me. There may be a lesson in that.

 

The "box-shifters," as the big anonymous stores are called in the UK, where I used to live, may often have the lowest price. But if the Amazons of the world displace the specialty shops, there will be a consequence. At my age, I see this as negative, but at your age, your mileage may vary.

Being in America for a funeral, I couldn't help taking the opportunity to

sniff around the World's Bargain Basement. At the same time, I read advice

from Philip Greenspun on this site that since cameras are now essentially

boxes ro store of ones and twos, Amazon was the best place to buy Canon gear,

like the EF 16-35L f/2.8. Click on his advice and you are taken directly to

the Amazon web site.

 

I yield to no man (woman) in my admiration for Amazon, and I am a frequent

customer. But in selling the 16-35, Amazon seems to have borrowed a practice

from those guys from Brooklyn who used to give you a low-ball price for

something, but if you wanted, in this case, say, the lens hood, that was

extra. Indeed, the lens hood seems to be extra at Amazon.

 

That's curious to me because of all the L-series lenses I have bought, some 10

in all, the lens hood has been included -- in a sealed box with the lens. I

assume that's the way Canon ships them from the factory. If you buy the 16-35

from Amazon, do they REMOVE it from your shipment?

 

Also, Amazon seems to be a bit higher for this lens than the old standby B&H

in New York. Herewith today's pricing, in US dollars:

 

Amazon

 

Lens 1406.15

Hood 31.49

Shipping 3.99*

 

TOTAL 1441.63

 

B & H

 

Lens 1359.95

Hood -included-

Shipping 14.85

 

TOTAL 1389.65

 

* To give Amazon every benefit of the doubt, this is the price for you if you

have joined Amazon Prime at USD 79 a year. It will be higher if you haven't

joined, depending on how quickly you want it.

 

Amazon also sells the 16-35 in France, where I live, but the lens alone is

1694.25 euros, about USD 2174.38. The hood there is also extra (31.32 euros,

or USD 40.19).

 

Of course, sales tax rules can alter the prices (New York and New Jersey

collect each other's,so if you're buying in New Jersey . . . .) And on and on,

I suppose.

 

Amazon is clearly reputable, but in this case not cheapest and with a curious

practice for a seller of Canon professional equipment, no?

Underexposure yields highly variable results in digital, in my experience with the Canon 10-D and 1D Mark II. Try converting from raw with Canon's DPP v. 2x. Obviously, the system knows more than I do about underexposure, but DPP seems to deal with it best.

After trying the various RAW converters, I find, for me, Canon's DPP v.2.1.1.4

gives the right quality/workflow ratio. In the field, I transfer the contents

of my storage media to my laptop, then enter, using Adobe Bridge, the various

user-generated metadata -- title, author, description, keywords, copyright,

contact. When I used Bridge to convert, all that data was still there when the

images opened in Photoshop CS2, saving enormous amounts of time. But now that I

convert using DPP, all my entered metadata is, when I open in Photoshop,

shazam, gone, along with much of the camera-generated date (like lens name).

When I go back to Bridge, it's all still there. I can find no setting on DPP to

correct that, and in the Help file the world metadata doesn't exist. Anyone

else have this problem?

Canon itself has a repair facility in Vienna, reachable on the tram to Baden from the Ringstrasse. Shops in Vienna, as they are everywhere, seem to be either shrinking or disappearing. My favorite shop off Mariahilfestrasse has merged with the digital graphics outfit next door.

 

Canon GMBH

Zetschegasse 11

A-1230 Wien

Austria

 

Telephone

+43 1 66146 0

 

Fax

+43 1 66146 222

 

Email

info@canon.at

 

Website

www.canon.at

Many thanks to all for the help.

Shooting last night with my 1D Mark II, I switched to the SD card

after filling the CF card. I filled the SD card, and chimping

indicated everything was fine. But when I downloaded them, I

discovered that nearly half of the images on the SD card could not

be opened, not by Windows, not by Adobe Bridge or Photoshop. I tried

different methods of downloading, on different computers even, but

still the same problem. Popped into the camera, the card reveals the

images the computers cannot open. The card is a new (first use) San

Disk 2 GB card, not formatted beforehand. Any ideas?