jonathan_gentry

The 70-200 f/4 IS is quite a bit sharper than the 70-200 f/2.8 IS at all zoom ranges. As a matter of fact it is one of the sharpest lenses Canon makes at ALL zoom ranges and even wide open at all zoom ranges.

 

The 2.8 IS and 2.8 non IS are second with the f/4 non IS lagging quite a bit behind in sharpness.

 

The f/4 IS is something special when it comes to sharpness.

The lens to get for wildlife is the 100-400 zoom. At 300-400mm this lens is almost as sharp as the sharpest 300 and 400 prime lenses. Don't believe me check this out:

 

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=327&Camera=9&FLIComp=4&APIComp=1&LensComp=113&CameraComp=9&FLI=0&API=3

I'll put in a vote for the IPF8000. I have it and love working with it. Very fast, holds 700ml ink carts and cuts any paper I put in it. I haven't had any trouble to speak of. It reduced my print times by 5x compared to my old Epson 9600. The black and white is excellent. The price of $3400 with free shipping for a 44" (itsupplies.com) makes it a pretty sick deal. I have no regrets...

Let's work together on this. I just got the PHase One PhotoPhase and having some issues...

I need help with an old Photophase scan back. Please let me know if you can help.

 

-Jonathan

Just a few hours left to bid on my DJ130nr with stand. The printer has

operated flawlessly since I've had it but I'm moving to a larger format printer.

 

The Ebay item number is: 230067478529

 

The direct link is here but you will need to paste the entire link into your

browser:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=013&sspagename=STRK%3AMESE%

3AIT&viewitem=&item=230067478529&rd=1&rd=1

 

If you have any questions just let me know...

 

-Jonathan

Thanks so much. I was trying to figure this out on my own and obviously that was not the best choice. I bought the flash a few months ago but most of my shooting has always been natural light.

 

Thanks so much for the detailed response Sheldon. f/5.6 it is (unless I need deeper depth of field.) So I set that in M mode and any suggestion on shutter? 1/125 sec?

 

Someone also made reference to A-DEP mode. Is this recommended?

Thanks for all your opinions on this.

 

Here's a bit more information...

 

Sheldon: By Diffuser I mean the built in element that swings down over the bulb of the flash. Not Stofen. Am I using the wrong term? Thanks for the great suggestions Sheldon!

 

Camera RAW was set at "Camera Default" purposly to eliminate it as a source of the problem.

 

One problem I have in the P (Program) mode is that I thought it would default the flash as the main light source. That's what I wanted so how do I make it so? Mazza suggested above to go with F8 or F11. Can I adjust to this aperture manually in P mode? I didn't think I could.

 

Should I be shooting the flash in ETTL mode with no adjustments?

 

 

Thanks for all the help guys. I have a wedding coming up for a friend and I really need to get these indoor settings working for me.

 

-Jonathan

Puppyface: I use the 580ex

Eric: My only other lense is the 70-200L. Nothing in the same range.

 

I have shot outside in natural light and found better color with the 70-200L lense when adjusting position to the target to get the same crop. I get better resolution, better color and more contrast with the longer lense. Is that normal? Maybe I just have a bad copy.

puppy face: Thanks for the response. I was on a tripod. I'm not sure about stopping down anymore as I already see movement especially on one of the guys ears (though I probably could have if I had not used the flash diffuser which cuts the amount of light, probably a mistake.) White balance does not seem to correct the issue when I try to adjust in RAW development. I can only think that your on to something with the noise and I should move to 100 or 200 ISO. The colors are just horrible though and adjusting in RAW doesn't seem to help. Could it be my UV filter screwing up my lense? It's a Quantaray.

 

Thanks!

It was on a tripod. I am using the center focus (center red square lights only.) Flash was a Speedlight 580ex with diffuser down about 15-20 ft away.

Guys,

 

I've been having a bad time with my 17-40 f4 L lense. I've compared it to

shots with the 70-200 f4 L and the results seem much worse (for the former.)

 

I am attempting to post a link to an example of a shot that was taken indoors

with a flash at a 100% crop. I would love for you to evaluate the image and

tell me where the problem is. Here are the specs:

 

Canon 20D

1/60 sec

F/5.0

ISO 400

Focal 25mm

Lense 17-40mm L f4

Shot in program mode

Resolution 240

Shot in RAW mode with camera default development in photoshop RAW.

 

Here is the link:

http://www.potomacbass.com/otherimages/17-40f4.jpg

 

Please let me know what to do differently... or if the lense is at fault here.

 

-Jonathan

I'm seeing alot of comments here by 2200 owners that appear to be justifying keeping their printer. The 2200 prints do not really compare to the prints from the R1800 when it comes to printing on glossy paper or luster paper. The R1800 prints are excellent. Matt performance of the R1800 is excellent as well. I don't agree that the 2200 is better at matt paper. I only think the smaller drop size does not show up a difference between the printers as well on matt paper. If there was an advantage of the 2200 over the R1800 it would be that the icc profiles for Matt paper are more mature because of it's age. Give the R1800 some time and more profiles will be availabe. You will probably start hearing that the 1800 is just as good. The printer is faster and will print on canvas if you run it through the rear feed. I select the watercolor paper setting when printing canvas. I'm waiting on more canvas to come in so I can judge the quality. So far I've fed standard artists canvas through just to see if the printer would phisically take such a thick material and it did. Now I'm waiting on real printing canvas papers. I'll keep you posted.

 

-Jonathan

One point to consider is that the 130 has a paper cutter for rolls and the 90 does not. I think the 130 is a much better deal.

Don't forget if you buy the Canon F4L and use it with a 20D you can trump the low F-Stop with 800 or 1600ISO and little grain. My theory has been to save money with the 17-40 F/4L & the 70-200 F/4L and use it with the new 20D at higher ISO's. Especially this would be ok for sports where noise is not as critical.

 

-Jonathan