geoff_doane

"I never had a camera that stop at a particular frame by reading the roll length. Can you give an example? " Although my earlier Canon EOS film cameras would always give me 25 frames on a nominal 24 frame roll, the EOS 3 (the last, and only one I still sometimes use) will rewind after it takes the 24th frame. It has to do with reading the second row of contacts on the film canister that specify roll length, All the others only read the first row that designated the ISO speed of the film. All of them would rewind after shooting 36 frames on a 36-frame roll. 20 years ago posters on Photo.net would complain bitterly about that fact, convinced that Canon was robbing them of at least two frames on every roll!

I just purchased a new Manfrotto tripod and MHXPRO-BHQ2 XPRO ball head which has a PL200 quick release attachment . The Manfrotto catalog indicates that the PL200 and older RC2 (which is what I have for my existing cameras and lenses) are compatible, but I seem to have a fitment problem. There is a very slight sideways wobble when the old plates are used on the new ball head. The new plate that was included with the ball head is fine. None of the older plates wobble in an old model 200 video head that I also have, so I don't think they are bent or worn. The two plates appear to be the same dimensionally, at least without breaking out the calipers and measuring them. The only obvious different is a small circle, cast in the corner of the RC2 plates. That may prevent the pate from sitting on the corner (the release lock sits underneath this circle when the plate is in place). Has anybody else had this problem? What did you do about it? Thanks for any light you can shine on this.

<p>I shot about 10 rolls of Provia F last year. 6 of them are still in the freezer, waiting for me to expose another 4 before sending them off to Dwayne's in Kansas for processing. Compare that to roughly 7000 digital images last year (between two DSLR bodies).</p> <p>I think I still shoot film partly because of a sense of nostalgia, and there is that feeling of anticipation when the processed slides come back, and I see the images for the first time on the light box. I almost always shoot slides in tandem with digital, so I can do some test exposures with the digital if the lighting is tricky. The film camera is almost always on a tripod too, which probably helps with the composition and overall sharpness.</p>

<p>The plastic bag trick might be necessary if your house is particularly humid, but mine isn't (in the winter time), so I've just left the camera and lenses in the camera bag for a little while to warm up, and never had a problem with condensation.</p> <p>In fact, the only time I have had a condensation problem was in Florida, exiting an air conditioned car and trying to use the camera in that humid environment. Once I discovered the problem, the camera bag stayed in the trunk, where it would be closer to the outside temperature.</p>

<p>Good to hear that you are now satisfied with the purchase.</p> <p>I thought there might be some value in pointing out that just because the camera has started counting at 7000 doesn't mean that the shutter has been fired 7000 times. If this camera was the floor model (sounds like it may have been and was repackaged when you wanted to buy one), it may have had many different cards in it when customers wanted to take test shots and inspect them at home on their own computers. I know I've done this before when evaluating a new body.</p> <p>If the internal count on the body is less than the highest number on the card, the next image will increment the card number by 1, not the internal count. In fact, the internal count then becomes the same as the card's. The only way (that I know of) to prevent this, is to insert the used card and then reformat it, before taking the first exposure.</p> <p>So, if somebody put a card that already had files on it numbered in the 7000s in the camera, fired off a couple shots, and then removed the card, it's quite possible that the camera would appear to start counting in the 7000s when you unpacked it, without having actually taken anywhere near that many shots. However it does mean you don't have a "virgin" camera, and it should have been sold as "demo", open box", or something similar, not "new". </p>

<p>The ONLY advantage a 5D would have over the 7D is the fact that it's full frame, and that might not even be an advantage in some circumstances. I owned both for a short while (until I upgraded to a 5DIII), and I honestly think the 7D outperformed the 5D except in its wide angle capabilities.</p> <p>If I was you, I'd be looking at another (used) 7D as a backup. You already know its quirks and features, so there is no learning curve.</p> <p>Coincidentally (or maybe not), my 7D failed in a similar fashion to yours. The repair cost was still less than half the cost of a used replacement, so I went ahead and had it fixed. The camera repair shop indicated that it wasn't the first one they had seen with this problem (power module, which may explain the dead battery in yours), so it's possible Canon has a bit of an issue here. It came back from Canon Repair with a filthy sensor too, which actually required wet cleaning to remedy.</p>

<p>I used a 5D as my primary camera for about 8 years, before "modernizing" with a 5DIII. The MK III is an improvement in almost all regards except two that stick out for me. I can only get a burst of 7 shots on the newer camera vs. 12 for the original (shooting RAW + small fine jpeg). And the AWB doesn't seem as good on the MK III under less than ideal lighting conditions (dull, overcast daylight). Of course the white balance can be tweaked in post, and I do that for any image that warrants it, but it was a little surprising that Canon got the AWB algorithm right for the 5D, but seemed to drop the ball with the MK III.</p> <p>All in all, those are rather minor complaints. The 5D was a dust magnet, and had no auto cleaning function like the newer cameras. I love the built-in level in the MK III, and the faster burst rate (even if it is shorter) can be handy too. Also, although it's difficult to know for sure without objective testing, I think the focus is more accurate too. </p> <p>I decided to upgrade when I did because I could get a reasonably good deal on a new MK III, and there was still some resale value left in the 5D (unlike the XTi I have sitting at home that's perfectly operational, but worth about as much as most consumer film cameras these days). The guy who bought it was ready to go full frame, and I think he's been happy with the purchase.</p>

<p>My first ( well, actually my wife's first) DSLR was a black original Rebel, bought at a local store here in Halifax, so they certainly were not just imports. Somewhat ironically, she bought it without a lens, and used the silver 24-85 zoom that had been part of the kit with her previous camera, a Canon IX APS.</p>

<p>If you already have a 6D, I think the 7D is the way to go. I had a 5D/30D combination in my camera bag until last fall when I replaced the 30D with a lightly used 7D. The 7 was miles ahead of the 30 (no surprise there), and an improvement even on the 5 in many respects. It certainly can shoot faster, and I <em>think</em> the AF is more accurate (although that is difficult to quantify). The 5D's buffer could only hold 12 RAW/small jpeg files at roughly 3 fps, while I haven't found the limit yet for the 7D. The only downside I can think of for the 7D, besides it not being full frame, is that the files are roughly twice the size of the 5D's.</p> <p>I've since replaced the 5D with a 5D III, so I'm back to having two cameras with a very similar user interface, the same batteries and chargers, and very similar performance. The 5D III is rather pedestrian in the buffer department however, only allowing 8 shots before it runs out of room. That has caught me a few times. The two cameras also seem to treat colour rendition differently under less than full sun conditions (same EV on both bodies). Subjectively, I find I prefer the 7D, although I'm sure the full frame files could be tweaked to obtain similar results.</p> <p>I believe the 6D only uses SD cards, while the 7D only accepts CF. You can't mix them up that way, although that might be a disadvantage if you run out of one type on a long session. Unlike the 5D, the 7D allows you to customize the file name prefix, so you won't get a conflict with the other camera. The 7D also has a very useful built-in level in the viewfinder. Since I started wearing eyeglasses a few years ago, I've had a tough time getting images level, and the level function and grid illumination help a lot with that.</p> <p>And although it's not recommended to take new gear on a "once in a lifetime" trip, that's exactly what I did with the 7D about a week after I bought it. I had an assignment at work that involved spending a bit more than 24 hours on Sable Island, a small spit of sand about 200 miles off shore in the North Atlantic. There isn't much there except shipwrecks and about 400 wild horses. Because we were flying out in a very small plane, we were very constrained with how much equipment we could take. That made the choice to take the 7D (with the built-in flash if I needed it) and just a couple lenses easier. I was also concerned about getting dust on the 5D's sensor early in the trip, and not being able to do anything about it. The 7D has automatic sensor cleaning, which so far seems quite effective.</p> <p>And just in case you ever want to shoot video, the 7D can do that.</p><div></div>