lamoine_einspahr

<p>Is it possible you did not press the shutter button to half staff long enough to allow the IS gyro to reach working speed, BEFORE you tripped the trigger?</p>

I have two 28-135IS lenses and both are completely satisfactory at F8. The second came with the 40D. I shoot in some larger halls and find that my old ex550 will light them good enough for this lens. My son has a 24-70L, but is too soft at anything wider that F2.8. I also have a 100-400L IS. The main thrust of my post however is that if you have NOT yet chosen a camera body, that you give serious thought to restricting your choice to one that has the digic lll processor, or higher if it takes that long. Reason, I had the Rebel, Xti and now a 40D. The Rebel was too slow starting up and the shutter was slow. The Xti had a fast startup and quick shutter, but I did not like the image renditions. The 40D does it all right. Color is superior, focus and IS snap into operation instantly. I can only wonder what Canon can do to improve that camera body for anything like the same money. I liked the Rebel images even at 6.3 mpixels. I did not like the images from the Xti and the body was too small for my hands and the images after a number so shots would all acquire a decided left tilt. The 40D has more "handle" and I absolutely love the camera. My next lens will be a 70-200L F2.8, but only after a length of time gathering funds.

Thanks guys. I believe the consensus to be 1/3 under standard and 1/3 over as the most used AEB. That is what I

have been using and thought it was not enough, yet 2/3 bracket seemed excessive. A secondary thought comes to

mind. In the Menu mode, does setting the camera to 1/2 stop instead of 1/3 set the metering to only 1/2 stops as

well? I actually have three digitals now. the Rebel, XTi and a new 40D. I plan on giving the Rebel to my youngest

son. He has been using my old A1. I find my copy of the XTi a noisy image camera. As to Bob's question about

noise, this is my best explanation. While the XTi's JPG algorithm is very good, it produces exceptionally noisy

RAW files. I decode them with Photoshop CS2 and using the latest Canon DDP does no better. Using the CS2

luminance smoothing and color noise reduction features softens the image too much for my taste. I must use Noise

Ninja for all XTi RAW files at 400 and above. 1600 ISO produces very poor images. I had thought about asking

Canon to look at it, but it works all right in JPG so I leave it alone. The 40D is everything my copy of the XTi

is not. The images are super fine textured and the metering is the best I have known, and that does not even

mention the other fine features. For instance, focusing is instant and the IS on both lenses snap into lock

almost instantly, far faster than either the Rebel or Xti. I will continue to use the XTi on the shorter lenses

and in the JPG mode where it is a super camera.

Thanks for the responses! I appreciated it.

I have tried several different setting on AEB.

Pure question for YOU. What is YOUR opinion of the amount of offset of F stop that seems to work best for YOU? I

shoot raw with the REBEL, but when using the XTI I use JPG because of excessive noise with the XTI. So the

question then becomes which works best with BOTH modes RAW and JPG? I don't use AEB generally, but when shooting

images I may not be able to repeat at least soon, I do use AEB. Give me your best results, maybe different rates

for shadows and backlighting etc.

Thanks.

I have both the 300D and the 400D. The main reason for the upgrade was the faster startup time and the super fast shutter release time. I missed so many good swan,Eagle, and sand hill crane photos with the 300D. A very good side benefit is the larger back screen, dust removal, and a very fast write to card speed. Much, much faster than the 300D. I liked the 400D's fast shutter, fast card write, and the dust removal. The down side is a noisier image especially in RAW, a few hot pixels, and a small body that makes my hands cramp on long bird shoots with the 100-400L IS attached. I don't carry a tripod. My images tend to lean left and require Photoshop straightening. Advice would be to wait a few months and try the XSi to see if the Digic3 and live view would be of significant help. My first objections without handling one would be the SD card, and size.

Thanks guys, for the rapid response. I had been in contact with Canon on the Canon Consumer (lenses) page. They sent a nice reply with addresses and phone numbers. My question to you learned people was for a personal experience on THIS side of the corporate wall for which of the two provides a better returned product. I have tried cleaning the contacts. I also downloaded and installed the 1.1.1 version firmware in the XTi in case of a hidden problem. Nothing. Both Rebels have mirror eyepieces and too small eyepiece views for my old eyesight to manually focus. But, that is why I abandoned my pair of A1's. I have a angle finder C, but find it too clunky for practical use on the Rebel viewfinders. The images that are now blurred are out of focus and are not camera movement one way or another. Many images do not show a point of focus in front of or behind the subject. I find that amazing. I have a tripod and use it on fixed objects like the moon, Andromeda, and a few landscape images. I have been SO PROUD of the efficiency of the IS system in that 100-400 lens. So I usually don't set up the Manfrotto for anything more than 1/25 second, even at 400mm. I miss a few, but not many. I will wait another day for a personal experience and then will make a choice and send it in for a great repair-adjustment....I hope.

Help from the forum on these questions would be appreciated.

I have a 100-400L IS that will no longer reach sharp focus. I have a Rebel, XTi,

and an EOS 3 and none of the three will find a sharp focus with the 100-400. It

started failing during the last 8 months of 2007. Before then it was a fantastic

lens and produce terrific images. It produced razor sharp images with super

contrast. That is nearly all gone now. After I first noticed the problem, it

became worse at an increasing speed.

I have numerous image examples, but would be a waste of time as the problem is

so obvious I can tell that on my own.

The focus seems to be worse the longer the shot from the camera.

It is NOT a front or back focus problem.

It may have been used for 2500 to 3000 images.

It has NEVER been dropped or treated roughly. The interior is clean and the

glass clear.

I need to send it to Canon for repair.

I live in Nebraska.

I consider myself to be an advanced amateur.

Can anyone tell me of the BEST Canon service center for L lenses, and the

address to send it to as well as any experience you may have with lens

repair-adjustment. A phone number would be nice as well if possible.

Any help would appreciated. I want to get it sent in and hope to get it back

before the eclipse....if possible. But I really just want my lens back like it

was a year or so ago.

Although I have an EOS 3 and have moved up to digital, I still have 2 A1's and a number of lenses. I have both the old and new versions of the old format F1.4 lens. Both are best at F5.6 and equal at F4 than at F8 Both are super lenses and both will produce better photos that the F1.4 I have for the EOS 3 and the digitals. the latter has blue fringing, barrel distortion and is not anything near sharp above F2. I also have a EOS version of the F1.8 and until it's auto focus failed, produced better images than the new F1.4. If you have good eyes and can use the split screen on the A1, you will find it a very good camera. My eyes have passed those years by and I now depend on the excellent auto focus of the EOS cameras. I yearn for a "super" F1.4 for low light use.

I do not have a 24-105mm but I am the proud owner of a 28-135 IS Canon lens. I have used it on an EOS3, Rebel, and now an XTi. I can tell you that my particular copy of this lens is visibly much sharper and has a more pleasing contrast than my sons 24-70L. No need for specialized equipment to test the difference in this case. Of course his 24-70 is a weak copy and mine may be a better copy. It is a bit weak at the larger apertures. Shoot at F8 and it is a winner.

Test the lens, for back focus, then try the other, test for back focus and then make your decision. perhaps your camera has a back focus problem. That failing has ruined a lot of images for amateur photographers. My view is that if your lens is not faulty, there is no need to spend 700 bucks more for the 24-104. The short end may help, but 700 could go a long way towards buying a fixed focus 24 etc.

I also was afraid they may not be available on the web site in complete form. I was able to use the updated DPP files from the Rebel to decode and send images to Photoshop CS2, but I would still like to have those disks or the files they contain. Thanks everybody, I will continue searching for them here and My son will in Georgia as well. They don't have legs of course.

I received a new Canon XTi from my son and family during Christmas, and in the

process of driving home from Georgia, I cannot find the disks. Does anyone know

the exact files I need to download from the Canon site. There are no PC windows

files on the XTi site, only Mac files. There are files on the other cameras

sites, such as the 30D and 5D. I would like to have the exact files that came

with the camera. The XTi is great and the fast startup and shutter release are

great improvements from the Rebel. I still have the Rebel and I still like it.

Since I am replacing and formating a disk on my photography computer, I want to

load new files. I would rather not reload the files from the Rebel.

I have read and been told that the 3-4 and 5 thousand dollar glass is just fine wide open. It is my personal experience that my 100-400L IS is much better at F8, but still usuable at F5.6, but I try not to shoot there. My son's 24-70L is not a good lens at all. It is seriously not any better at F8 than my 28-135 IS. It is severely hampered at F2.8. The images are worse than soft. I know, there are many who claim otherwise. I have seen it and I have used it on my two cameras, an EOS 3 and a 300D and he has on his two cameras, a 300d and a 20d. Poor results from all 4 cameras. His 70-200 L IS is a fine lens at all F stops. Only a smidgen better at F8 than F2.8. So there you have it. Choose your lens carefully.

I think it will be a 24x24mm square format with an incredible amount of pixels with noise free images to 3200ISO. As an old lover of my Rolliflex EVS with a measly 3.5 Tessar, I yearn for a similar choice in a digital Canon. Just think of the sweet center point of Canon lenses impacting this new sensor format.

I have owned a 100-400L IS for 3 years. I have the opposite problem with the push-pull. I snug up the clamp a bit for storage, and when I get into some fast action, I cannot change the zoom fast enough. When set to the loose position, it is easy to use in fast action. It is the best lens I own and the images continue to astound me both in resolution and contrast. When I read of distractors complaining of soft images I wonder what they are comparing it to. I have never had a problem with it sliding open when the clamp is adjusted properly. My best advice is to buy from a store that will allow you to test for image quality and allow you to exchange if your lens does not exhibit the image quality I described. I have had the "poor copy" problem with another Canon lens. Luckily, I received a good quality Canon lens the second time around.

Thanks, I will bear that in mind. I was fearful that RAW had its own adjustments made by the 300D in addition to any I use in CS.

Thanks Lamoine

Does a RAW image specific to a 300D have any sharpness, contrast, etc

adjustments to the image as a JPG does when using parameter one? Does using

parameter one affect RAW images at all? If not, what adjustment in photoshop CS

equals parameter one? I may have to revert to JPG for card space on an upcoming

trip. I want to understand the differences.

Lamoine

I checked after posting, sorry, but this one photo was shot with 800th of second and boosted out of RAW to gain exposure. The Camera was on Manual and I experimented with faster shutter speeds and trying to get the flash to carry the load, but not enough light. I used the high speed focal plane flash mode. It was obviously daylight and too much ambient light to depend totally on flash, by experiment. I tried TV, AV, and P modes. Manual produced the best images. I've seen some very nice hummer photos, and I would like to produce my own. Pride you know. A second EX550 would only gain one stop. I believe I may need two or three stops to get what I want. The starting shutter speed is my start. The Rebel is a GREAT camera, but anything more than 400 ISO is too noisy.

Lamoine

I was using a Rebel, 100-400LIS on a Bogen tripod with IS off at F5.6,

and a EX550 strobe. I can not freeze the wings or get a sharp enough

photo to satisfy. 640th of second was the fastest shutter I could use

Not enought light was the culprit, but for the next effort, I would

like help. What shutter speed will provide stop action on a hovering

hummigbird? With that knowledge to start with I can determine if I

have or can get the neccessary equpment, lighting or lenses.

Thanks!

Lamoine<div></div>

Bob Atkins is correct in claiming that film will outresolve the sensors available, at least for the present. My view is this. When film processing is tossed into the mix, especially the processing available to the hinderlands, the comparision fades. My lowly Rebel produces very nice images and when printed are still very good. My EOS 3 with the same lenses and using a variety of film material, negative, positive, and several different brands, emulsions, and ISO's within those brands, and the processing available here in the center of the nation does not match the Rebel's images. Images that were printed from a CD burned from images processed from RAW in Photoshop CS. Ignoring the cost of film and processing, I still prefer the Rebel over the "3", although I yearn for a better "light box" like a 20D or a 5D. I do not print super large prints and if the images scanned on a Nikon V scanner and seen on my 21 inch monitor are anywhere near correct, the film is too grainy to do it either.

I believe the key is the processing of the film. My Rebel produces much more satisfying images than the 4 by 6's my local photoshop cranks out on those quickie machines. If you are able to pay for premium processing, and are close enough so the professional film does not spoil before it gets there, you may well find film has more detail in both the dark areas and and the light areas. I particularly like the color tones the Rebel produces. I do not have to carry several types of film to suit the subject. Such as greens, reds and especially skin tones and the contrast problems with blacks and whites at weddings. RAW give you complete control over the processing. Take a photo of the moon some evening with your trusty film camera and long lens and do the same with a digital and compare finished images.

You are a fortunate man indeed. And you were smart to get one where you could test first. I am sure there are good copies of that lens somewhere, but I know of one that is not and they would not trade it for another. For all of you comtemplating that lens, be SURE to sample first.

For Erin and Ken, I have news for you. All Canon gear is not up to the standard we old time users were used to. Those sharpshooters you mentioned are likely fed prime equipment by Canon through their pro program. I can talk about poor quality 24-70L lenses. My 28-135IS is a much superior lens than my son's 20-70L. Both contrast and resolution are lacking with resolution absolutely dreadful. The only advantage he has is the F2.8 opening, but with that blurry an image who would use it? This holier than thou approach by some denigrating those with a problem with quality is beneath the dignity of a group who love photography and the search for the perfect image These are people willing to spend big bucks to achieve that goal. Receiving second grade gear for those big bucks is unacceptable. Anytime, anyplace!

I like my 100-400L IS. It suits me just fine. I use it my EOS 3 and my 300D Rebel. I don't like the push-pull zoom because of the dust ingestion. Canon does not offer this lens any other way. The image I am sending was taken in Denver after a thunderstorm with rain-small hail. It was taken in Manual mode at 125 and F11 IS and handheld. Focus is quick and accurate. I have taken many different phases of the moon and it is not difficult to obtain photos like this. Wildlife images are super as well. Would a 5000 dollar lens do better. Sure, very likely. This lens suits me just fine since I do not have 5000 dollars to tie up in a lens. My advice is to buy where you can try and return if you get a bad copy. My son had that experience with a 24-70L F2.8. Try before you commit your money.<div></div>

Following the large sensor, small sensor debate below can anyone tell

me this. What is the number of pixels or photosites per square mm, in

both the full frame top of line Canon and the 1.6 crop Rebel or 20D? I

have read that the top Canon surpasses the MTF ability of all the

lenses available. If so, what would the pixel density have to be to

equal that in the small sensor cameras, or does it? Lastly, does

anyone think there will be anytime soon the same total information

captured on a full frame EOD 1Ds Mark II will fit on a small sensor?

Should it, and where would we store the files? Are we in the twice the

horsepower at the rear wheels or the better whiskey, younger women,

more money race? Frankly, I love my Rebel.

Thanks for the direct number to Jamesburg. I will pass it along to my son. The lenses were compared at F 8 according to the exif reading in Photoshop CS. My son is preparing a CD with comparative images to send along. The exif data should give good data. I am from south central Nebraska and have NO good sources for gear within 100 miles. So most is mail order. My son is big city GA. and has bought both locally and mail order. All are still under warranty, except my EOS 3, 28-135IS, and 100-400L IS. I hope he can get this problem resolved.