geoff_doane

In theory, DOF should be more pronounced with FF, but I can't say that I've ever noticed it. I started out on a 300D, and then moved to a 5D about two years ago. The biggest difference was the viewfinder. It's much bigger and brighter, and just so much more of a pleasure to use. Even the lowly Drebel is a pretty decent camera. The newer bodies are just easier and more enjoyable to use. Most of us will not be pushing the technology to its limits in everyday shooting.

The 300D was my first digital camera, and after shooting mid-line EOS film cameras for a few years, I found the metering and lack of custom functions somewhat limiting. My workaround was to shoot in manual exposure mode, take a test shot, check the histogram for proper exposure, and make changes as needed. For the type of shooting I was doing (mostly outdoors), this worked pretty well, and it's a technique I still use with the 5D.

 

Once the 300D wasn't my primary camera, I installed the Russian firmware hack, and was able to use flash compensation, which improved the results with flash photography. It's still usually necessary to take a test shot though, to see what's going to happen. Unfortunately, the firmware hack still doesn't enable the custom functions, so I'm stuck with focus activation on the shutter button.

The 5D only has a 12-shot buffer (when shooting RAW + small fine jpeg), so I don't see that as much of a penalty.

I've been using a 5D for almost 2 years, so here are some observations. The histogram is a great tool. Learn how to read it. I came from shooting chromes (and still do), and the transistion was quite straight forward. Having a spare battery ready to go is a good idea, particularly this time of year (it's -14C here this morning).

 

Make sure your computer is up to the job. More than a gig of RAM is almost mandatory, and think carefully about how you will store and organize images. My approach has been to have two internal HDs, and an external USB HD for storage, which is kept separately from the computer. A HD can fail at any time, so images are always on two and often three HDs before the CF card from the camera is reformatted. CDs and DVDs don't seem like a practical backup to me, longevity issues aside.

 

My usual practice is to shoot RAW + small fine jpeg. This only takes marginally more space, but gives me a quick reference that can fill the computer screen, without having to wait for DPP to decode the RAW file. I'm still using Photoshop Elements that was bundled with my old Drebel for editing, so I don't think it's necessary to jump into full blown Photoshop right away.

 

Have fun. It's a great camera, even if Canon hasn't updated it yet.

That sounds exactly like what happens if you have the custom function for mirror lockup enabled, and the camera is in timer/remote mode. The quick fix is to use a "dummy" mode, which disables all the custom functions. Telling us what model camera you're using might prompt a more precise answer than mine.

It sounds like another variation on this scam:

 

http://srforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/255468/27675/0///1522/#msg_255468

 

Best to stay away. Far away.

"I've also noticed that the highlight priority mode does work to help prevent blowing out highlights, but also reduces dynamic range. "

 

I wonder if this has something to do with the unimpressive results?

 

AFAIK, highlight priority mode works by underexposing the RAW file, and then making up the difference in post (either when it processes the jpeg, or when DPP converts the RAW file). This process has to increase noise somewhat, which would show up as decreased dynamic range (as you noticed).

 

I realize it's still early days, but have you tried comparing the two cameras on an even playing field (same settings, no special features)?

 

OTOH, it is possible that something about your new camera is hosed.

"Thanks, all. I would have figured that dust on the sensor would look like dust on film. Must be out of focus dust."

 

Strickly speaking, the dust is on the anti-aliasing filter, not the sensor. That's why it is out of focus. It will be sharper (and more annoying) if you take the picture with a smaller aperture. I suspect this has something to do with the depth of focus around the sensor, but someone else will have to explain exactly what is going on.

I wouldn't agree that the only operation you can do to a RAW file is white balance. The overall level can certainly be adjusted, and on the 5D this is no different than setting an intermediate ISO value (like 125 or 160).

 

Having said that, in a situation like this, with fairly static lighting, I'd take a couple test shots in manual mode, and adjust the exposure until I got the sky quite close to the top of the histogram, and then worry about fixing the exact exposure in post processing.

 

At this time of day (sunrise), the sky will be the brightest element in the scene (except for the hot air burners). In your first example, at least the sun is shining on the balloon, so the contrast shouldn't be too high. In the other example, it looks like the sun wasn't up yet, and you probably would blow out the sky in order to get a good exposure on the balloon itself. Then it's time for a honkin' big flash!

If you have a vertical grip, you do get a second button, but it works the same as the first one. If you use your second finger for the shutter, you can change shutter speed with you index finger, or aperture with your thumb (in Manual mode), but it is a bit tricky. The idea is interesting, and I've thought more than once that I'd like to change a lot of settings in a hurry. On the older film cameras, I could do that by having one setting in Av mode and then the other in Manual. That still didn't change things like focus mode, and I had to change film to change ISO.

 

On my 5D, the last position on the command dial allows you to store a second set of shooting parameters (I forget what the name of the function is). It's not quite as fast as switching to a second shutter button, but it's still pretty convenient. I wouldn't mind seeing the idiot modes replaced with several of these user programmable buttons.

Well, I think I have a solution but it's a bit of a kludge.

 

Simply changing the time on the computer won't work, because that resets the seconds. But I can change between time zones, and the seconds keep rolling. I set the computer clock to the next time zone to the west, and I get the correct time for the 5D. Moving back to my time zone, I can set the 300D correctly.

 

I tried comparing the time stamp on two jpegs, taken at exactly the same time. The 5D shows a time 2 seconds later, but that may have something to do with the time it takes to process the image rather than the setting of its internal clock.

 

The problem may be daylight savings time related. If I uncheck the automatic DST box in Windows XP, the correct time is transfered to the 5D. I'll have to try this again, once we're back on standard time.

There isn't a time zone setting, at least not like I've seen on camcorders. I might expect a problem if I tried to set the time during the period between the old and new change-to-DST dates this spring, but that's not the case now.

 

Both cameras are set to display date as YYYY-MM-DD, and so is the computer.

 

The reason for syncing both bodies to the computer is so that when shooting with both, the resulting images can be organized chronologically. For instance, I might have a wide zoom on the 5D and a longer lens on the 300D, when shooting a sporting event. When I collect all the images together, it would be nice to know positively in which order they were taken. If they were synced to the same computer, their internal clocks should be stable enough that I could do that. The time on the computer doesn't even have to be all that accurate, but the two bodies need to indicate the same time.

I was attempting to sync the time on my 5D and 300D bodies tonight using

Zoombrowser. The operation appears to go smoothly with the 5D, but when I

check the time on the body, or reconnect to the computer, it's fast by exactly

an hour. Using the same procedure with the 300D doesn't present any problems.

 

I can manually roll back the hours on the 5D, but this also resets the seconds,

meaning the two cameras are still not in sync.

 

There don't seem to be any settings for DST (the obvious explanation) on the

camera body or in Zoombrowser. BTW, I'm using XP Home on the computer.

 

Any ideas?

In Manual Mode, there is no auto exposure, so there's nothing automatic to lock.

 

Meter the area you want to expose for, adjust exposure, and then leave it alone. You're trying to outsmart the camera. I find it very convenient, but then I use manual mode most of the time.

What is the point of this though, besides giving a customer what they [think they] want?

 

You're not adding any new information. And you're not doing anything that probably couldn't be done more competently by the professional who's going to use your image in a final product.

 

I AM interested in hearing a professional's opinion about this, if anyone would care to offer one. I do understand why they don't want sharpened images, since this depends of final reproduced size. It's also pretty difficult to undo overenthusiastic sharpening afterwards.

My understanding is that the L and H settings (and intermediate ISO settings on the 5D) don't do anything that you couldn't do to RAW files in post with DPP. There may be some advantage if you want jpeg right out of the camera, but not if you're shooting in RAW and then post processing. In fact with L, there's a possibility that you will clip highlights before the levels are lowered for jpeg processing, thereby losing high level information.

When I bought an original Drebel in late 2004, Photoshop Elements came bundled with it. They don't seem to be doing that any more, but AFAIK, all the new Canon bodies do include Canon's own RAW converter, so you don't need another program to do that. I'm still using that same copy of Elements with the 5D. It does everything I need it to (for now).

 

The 300D and 400D (and likely the 350D too) will also work with your IR remote. If you can get past the tiny size of the 400D, that might be a practical alternative to the 20D. It offers custom functions similar to those offered by the Elan II.

 

And don't replace the Elan, hang onto it. It's not worth anything anyway, and you may decide you still want to shoot film from time to time (or not).

 

Look into an external USB hard drive (or two) for storage. You don't want your images sitting on just one drive, because sooner or later it will crash. With two external drives, you can keep one at another location in case your computer catches on fire or gets caught in a flood. External drives are now a better value than CDs, on a $/MB basis.

"I normally do this in the dark, just to ensure there is no light getting in. Maybe a bit anal."

 

Yeah, it is being a bit anal. I routinely reloaded film in my EOS 5 (Imported A2E) and Elan II, without adding an extra frame, and had no double exposures. The IR perforation sensor is remarkably precise when advancing the film, although it would overlap/leave space when loading film between the two different bodies. The orange mark doesn't really have any bearing on the accuracy. The camera is counting perforations in the edge of the film. As long as the perforations at the top edge of the film are not past the sensor when you load it, it will be fine. I also just put the lens cap on (and switched to MF or used CF4) when advancing the film and never saw a light leak. I did set the aperture and shutter speed to the least sensitive settings the first couple times, until I blew a real picture by forgetting to reset them.

 

Try an intentional double exposure, just to see how precise the registration is. It may open up some possibilities for some creative double exposure photography. For instance you could shoot a roll of full moons, in different positions in the frame, rewind, reload, and then shoot some nightime scenic shots without the moon. (Or maybe it will just be another well worn cliché.)

 

Geoff

There's an old minolta XD-11 and 50/1.7 and 135/2.8 lenses that is reserved for "high risk" situations like sea kayaking. It's been a few years since I ran any film through it, but the meter and shutter still work.

 

For EOS film bodies, I still have all three that I bought over the past ten years, starting with an Elan II, then an EOS 5, and finally a used 10s. The 5 has a bum dial, and even though it works, is practically valueless. Unless someone wants a film camera with an intervalometer, the 10s is pretty much worthless too. I still use the Elan II for shooting slides, although some of the segments in the viewfinder display don't light up any more. The DSLR is great for figuring out the exposure if there's any question.

 

I have a few rolls of Kodak Gold 100 in the freezer, but the main film is Provia 100F.

 

There are also a couple EF lenses that have quit autofocusing, but otherwise work fine. Maybe they will be mounted on one of the retired bodies and given to someone who can't afford a camera.

I've owned a 5D for a bit over a year, and find I need to clean the sensor every few weeks. Once you get over the initial trepidation, it's not that difficult. I'm pretty sure the dust gets in there when I change lenses, not from just having the camera in a dusty environment.

 

It's mostly a problem when shooting at small apertures, not a situation I would expect to encounter in an (indoor) arena.

I shot slides for years (and still do, alongside digital), and for my money, "sunny 16" does work. There are a couple things to look out for: it has to be at least an hour after sunrise or before sunset, and there can't large expanses of reflective material (like snow) between the camera and the subject. I still use "sunny 16" as a starting point for digital (if it is actually sunny), fire a test shot, and check the histogram. I can't think of a situation where that hasn't worked.

 

If you're shooting into the sun, or trying for a "glint" or silhouette, then all bets are off, but for a standard, sunlit exposure, it works for me.

It has been speculated that the EF lenses are cabable of at least 1/6 stop resolution, because many EOS cameras can work in either 1/3 or 1/2 stop increments.

 

If you post process RAW images with DPP, you can "adjust" the exposure in 1/6 stop increments, although you're obviously not changing the actual lens aperture.

 

I wonder if the lens is capable of precision down to 1/64 stop anyway, even in nominal 1/6 stop steps?

Henry's (or any other Toronto store) will also charge you a combined 14% federal and provincial sales tax. You may be able to get that back if you're leaving the country, but you'll have to jump through hoops to get it.

 

Some Canon items are more competative than others when comparing between Canada and B&H. The 17-40 was very close once exchange was figured in, while the 5D cost considerably more. You will also need to figure the ease of servicing an item into the cost. Returning an item to B&H from another country for warranty work will quickly wipe out any savings. (Canada Customs would probably like to collect the GST a second time!)

 

International shipping from B&H also seems a bit pricey. I ordered a 50/2.5 lens and brick of film almost two weeks ago. I paid U$26 postage (first class), and I still haven't seen the stuff here. When it does arrive, Canada Post will ding me a $5 handling fee, and then 14% HST on the converted total (but not the postage). It sure adds up, but nobody here in town will stock that lens, and the film is a fraction of the price it would be here.

 

I wouldn't be swayed about the "loyalty" or "patriotic" arguments that sales clerks might toss around. I'm perfectly happy to pay a (modest) premium if I'm getting some sort of service in return, like handling the goods before I buy, or even trying out lenses or bodies in the field before I make a purchase decision. But for film or non-stock items, I have no qualms about logging onto the B&H web site.

 

In the OP's case, unless New York will refund sales tax to out of state residents, you'd best have it shipped to New Jersey, and pick it up there. I expect you'll have to pay VAT or whatever when you bring it back to Sweden anyway, so I don't think there's anything unethical about avoiding NY taxes.

 

Geoff

Make sure you actually handle the XTi before you buy. It's tiny, especially compared to an A2E. My wife apprciates the size, but it's awkward for me.

 

For ultra-wides, I played with a Sigma 10-20 zoom a few days ago. It has a good feel, and from what I could tell, sharpness was comparable to the Canon 10-22. In the end, I wound up with the 17-40 after all, since I want to be able to use it for the 5D, and also for film.

While you're waiting for an affordable FF digital, maybe you should pick up a used dRebel or XT just to get your feet wet in the digital pond. When you do step up to a FF, you should already have a digital workflow established, and you can be producing top quality pictures right from the start.

 

I would argue that current full frame digital is not inferior to film. It has a different look (no grain), but none of the vagaries that come with film (lack of ISO choices, flatness issues). What rarely gets mentioned is that a FF camera will have a larger and brighter viewfinder than the crop bodies. My 5D has a nicer viewfinder than my Elan II (which I still use along side the 5D for shooting slides). Part of this is due to not having a built-in flash, which leaves more room for the pentaprism, so it may be a long time before we see a FF camera with built in flash.

 

At the very least, you can probably get a used or old stock 5D for under $2K in two years' time, assuming things continue at their present pace.