ryan_pasia

I accept the reality of defects in mass-produced goods. However, as others have pointed out, for a lens costing that much, one would think that Canon's tolerances in the manufacture of this lens would be such that few consumers would feel compelled to submit negative reviews. I've read reviews of other "L" lenses and this one seems to stand out for the quality control issues.

I guess another way to ask my question is, "Are the supposedly inferior copies of this lens so bad that it's plain obvious?". I don't plan to pixel-peep. I just want sharp, contrasty pictures out of the box given ideal conditions.

Hello,

I have been thinking of purchasing this lens as my first "L" lens. However, the quality control issues I've read

about online is making me think twice about purchasing it.

I will be using it to shoot film, with the occasional 8"x11" enlargement. Will having a bad copy make a

significant, obvious difference at that size (ie, softness that my non-techie mom and grandma will notice)?

Thank you all in advance.

Thank you very much for your responses. I'm sad to hear that it's not likely to be economical to have the camera fixed.

Yes, there is film in the body. Actually, that was the reason I brought out the camera since I was halfway through a 36-exp cartridge. All I hear when I depress the shutter button is, well, the shutter doing its business. I don't hear the characteristic whirr of the motor advancing the film after the shutter closes. The film counter does not advance, either.

I now plan to rewind the film back into the cartridge and then load it again. If it fails to advance, then I will know, sadly, that it's the camera.

I appreciate all the help!

R. Pasia

I took out my Elan IIe yesterday after not having used it for a few months. After popping in a fresh battery, I

immediately noticed that the film is not advancing after shooting, even though it is not set for multiple exposures.

1) Is there a setting I might have missed?

2) If the description above suggests the camera is broken, is the Canon Repair Facility in Flushing, NY recommended?

3) How much might the repair cost (rough estimate)?

Many thanks in advance for your inputs.

hello all,

thank you very much for your responses. i'm new to the nyc area and have only recently started paying close attention to how my prints are processed, so my experience in these subtle differences is very limited. i very much appreciate the input, and will definitely look into them.

ryan

hello all,

i just bought a few boxes of fuji reala based on comments and suggestions here.

i have also read here that who does your processing matters a lot. i am

currently using drugstore processing here in nyc, which i believe is done by

www.pephoto.com. i've been shooting kodak 100 and the results, i would say, have

not been consistent with this store (the prints are done on konica-minolta

paper). some of the prints show excellent color saturation, while some are flat

and pale.

i'm beginning to consider spending a $2-$3 more for fuji premium processing. is

the extra cost wothwhile? i read in some archived posts that kodak film works

better with kodak processing, and fuji film with fuji processing. basically, i'm

wondering, since i'm using fuji film, will using fuji processing indeed result

in better prints?

thank you all for the comments.

ryan

hello all,

i'm sorry i'm not able to post the particular picture that brings this quesion

but i'll try my best to describe it.

in a roll that i had developed, one picture shows faint white banding similar to

the one here (http://www.karlgrobl.com/EquipmentReviews/LightLeak.jpg), although

it's closer to the center of the picture and only a third just as long.

none of the other pictures in the roll showed the phenomenon, even another

picture of the same scene seconds later. the roll had exposures in various

lighting conditions--both indoors and outdoors--and the negative of the picture

in question shows the banding as well, which seems to rule out error in processing.

should i consider the banding the result of a light leak? my research on the net

suggests that this could be a sign of imminent shutter failure. is this indeed

the case? if so, how much would shutter replacement cost for the EOS 3?

your inputs are very much appreciated!

ryan

hello all,

thank you for all the thoughtful and detailed responses. they really give me an idea of what to expect and ask for at various price points, especially given my lack of knowledge in the area.

i will certainly look again to this forum for guidance if i come across other concerns!

ryan

hello,

thanks for the responses. i am located in brooklyn, ny so any lab in the NYC area should be ok for me.

i plan to use the scans as an electronic archive/index of sorts and maybe for some photoshop adjusting, so i'm looking for scans that would get me good 8x12 prints.

i raised the question of scanned images to CD from labs as an alternative to buying a dedicated scanner (with its attendant hassles). i plan to stick with film (slide and print) for a few more years, so i'm basically looking for a cost-effective system.

i've read in the archives of this forum good reviews on coolscan V and canoscan. do these recommendations still stand, or have they since been eclipsed in the market, quality-wise, by brands/models?

thank you all again.

ryan

hello all,

i have zero experience in using color slides since i've always used color

negatives. i'm interested in using color slides for the first time, but i have

no idea what is a reasonable cost to have 24 frames processed.

i called pephoto.com (the same ppl who process my prints) and they gave me a

quote of $8.99 for processing, plus $9.99 if i want to have the slides scanned

onto CD.

are these reasonable charges? the cost to scan to CD sounds extravagant, because

getting a photo CD with my prints just adds 99c to the cost of print negatives.

will i be getting my money's worth in terms of the quality of the scanned images?

also, are there other places you can recommend for the processing of ektachromes?

thank you all.

ryan

i would scan keh and ebay for good deals (so far, very thin). unless a seller with excellent feedback with good pics of the lens shows up, i'd probably just go ahead and buy new. i haven't been burned on ebay, but i'm certainly not looking forward to it!

i'm also surprised about paypal's buyer protection only recovering what they could from the seller's account. is this for real? i've read the details quite a few times and i got the distinct impression that it does function as insurance, rather than a payment recovery scheme...

hello all,

thank you very much for the guidance and the enlightened responses.

your inputs have me leaning towards buying new from B&H (and eventually flipping the glass on ebay should i decide to upgrade per advice). i agree that prices hit the roof in the bidding frenzy (50mm 1.4 MK I is an excellent example). after your comments, the difference between a new, gray market 85mm 1.8 and used on ebay shrank even smaller in my head! used lenses also don't have a warranty, as pointed out, so that pretty much seals the deal for me.

ryan

hi all,

i am thinking of purchasing an EF 85mm f/1.8 and i was wondering if it's

worthwhile to buy it from a reputable ebay seller (ie, paypal buyer protection,

100% feedback, >100 feedbacks, etc.).

i ask this question because i read a side-by-side review of 85mm lenses linked

from this forum and the reviewer had some issues with used lenses.

do the savings generally justify the odds of getting a lemon? or should i just

consider getting the glass new from adorama or B&H (esp. since i'm in NYC).

thanks!

ryan

paul,

i was using auto AF (not manual), evaluative metering and metered off the subject (a person in front of a dark granite monument).

which metering mode would have been most appropriate in this situation?

also, how does AF mode factor in?

thanks.

ryan

Giampi,

thanks for the comments and recommendations. i will try them out on my next walkabout...

with regard to the fill flash part--have you any recommendations on which flash unit i should invest in? basically, i wouldn't want to shell out too much on a flash unit that i wouldn't be using too often except for outdoor fill flash and dim indoor shots...

ryan

hello all,

i now have my first set of prints from the used EOS-3 that i got recently, and

the pics with my 50mm f/1.8 are excellent.

i do have a problem with some of the pics that show the pavement. it's always

washed out. it doesn't matter whether it was concrete or asphalt--the pavement

just appears white.

i used kodak gold 100 on my setup, and was using f/2.0 or f/2.8 on Av mode. is

there something i can do to avoid this result? (is it the settings i used? the

film? is there some exposure compensation involved?)

thanks for your inputs!

ryan

i would say my eos-3 is pretty old... the serial number starts with 27--tagged as among those with the problem, according to an old post about this problem also on photo.net...

for off-warranty bodies, how would you get the firmware upgrade, if that is needed?

hello,

this is my first time posting on this forum. incidentally, this site helped me

decide on the purchase of a used EOS-3 recently, which is the subject of this post.

i have read about the underexposure problem of the EOS-3 here on photo.net and,

out of curiosity, i decided to compare the metering of said EOS-3 with an older

ELAN IIe body i have.

i compared the two bodies using a 50mm f/1.8 lens. under relatively dim lights,

using the aperture priority mode on both, the IIe metered the scene with a

shutter speed of 1/10s while the EOS-3 metered the same scene for a shutter

speed of around 1/30s or 1/60s--i think that's a couple of stops!

the difference in metering seems to disappear in bright light.

comments? if, indeed, the EOS-3 is underexposing, where can i get the firmware

upgrade hereabouts in New York City (since it's a used body it's no longer under

warranty)...

any input would be much appreciated!

ryan