bill_morrow1

<p>Ditto Puppy response. Changed to the 50 when I sold the 20. Don't try this on 7 however</p>

<p>I have one and love it. The only things that fallen out are terrific pictures.</p>

<p>Thanks guys. I think a more precise comparison is in order rather than just finder.<br>

Setting same f-stops, etc. Diopter semed to make most difference however.<br>

Appreciate the responses.</p>

<p>It seems that my L70-200 is less sharp on 50D than on 5D, in the VIEWFINDER. Disregard MP and<br>

all that. S 55-250, formatted of course for the C sensor, seems sharper...in the VIEWFINDER...at the<br>

same mm, than the L...on the 50. The question I guess would be, will an S lens be sharper on a C<br>

format camera....than the better grade L lens, formatted FF. Doesn't seem logical, but that's what<br>

it appears. Anybody have a thought or two, besides a trip to the eye doctor.</p>

<p>I have the one Greg sent link for (B&H). Works well with 40D/50D</p>

<p>Have both. The older one from film days of course. I really must say I am impressed<br>

with the 250. One's first thought might be....well it's not as heavy as the other, so it must<br>

not be as good. I have a 70-200 2.8L, to which I am not comparing exactly, but the<br>

250's sharpness is surprisingly close.</p>

<p>I have the 18-250 (non-VR) and the 18-270 VR (vibration r....something). I do know the<br>

vibration --we'll call it resistance--is like Canon's IS (Image Stabilization). THAT part is<br>

worth the 270 alone, and the extra 20 mm doesn't hurt either. Both are great lenses<br>

for the money, and allow only having to lug around one lens. When you get up at the<br>

270 end, I think VR is very worthwhile. I have L lenses, but this one is with me all the time.<br>

If I know in advance I'll need a 17-40 let's say, great. But sometimes things come up<br>

right there....right then. I'd go for the 270 myself, but the 250 probably cost less. </p>

<p>Well, I just got a 50mm f<strong>1.4</strong>--and have not been totally impressed with the auto-focus<br>

speed. It get's there--yes, but not as quickly as other Canon and Tamron lenses I own.<br>

No arguement with quality...just focus speed seems slow.</p>

<p>I don't know which adapter this is, but generally the output voltage, measured with a voltmeter, with NO LOAD, is higher than the nameplate value. Nominal 12 might be 17 volts for example. The correct battery will load the adapter, to bring the adapter output to slightly over the battery voltage. An example would be a 12.6 volt car battery. To force the current back into the plates, the charging circuit typically puts out 13.8 volts. If this helps any....</p>

<p>I have to agree with every item from Matthijs. The only one I have no personal experience with is the DO mentioned, but each of the others is excellent. I have personally landed on using the Tamron 18-270. It gives me that wide view you really need with a crop camera, but also provides the room to move in should you see something deserving a closer view. It is a very good lens. I love the 70-200 L, but again--70 is a tad too tight for a lot of vacation shots. When I'm traveling I notice what camera a person may be using, and I recently saw quite a few Tamron lenses on both Canon and Nikons. Their verson of IS by the way, works very well. </p>

<p>Is the 40D UDMA capable? I know the 50D is; not sure about the 40.</p>

<p>I take pictures from Canon 40D, and for convenience load them into Picasa 3. No problems until<br>

recently when--even with no card to load from--the program keeps loading from itself. I can't<br>

get out of it. Only thing different recently is I downloaded Lexar Image Recovery 3 software<br>

because I lost some pictures. That did the job. I don't know if that is even relevant.</p>

<p>I still keep it on around for one reason only. It will give you <strong>ALL</strong> EXIF data that is there. Other<br>

programs--which are far superior, I think, for edit and storing--do not. Most will tell you, you shot<br>

at 100mm for instance. FVU will tell you the make and model you actually used. If you have several lens<br>

with the same mm, that is sometimes helpful. Previous contributor was right--they should be on the<br>

disk that came with the camera. And there are a lot of versions too--one update for practically each camera model change.</p>

<p>I couldn't add much more than the above, but if you're over 50--and you probably are not--<br>

then that extra large LCD on the back is a great help. I too have had the 10D, 20D--<br>

didn't bother with the 30, but still have and use both the 40 and 50D. 70-200 F4 IS<br>

is a dream. I rarely use the 70-300. Just a quick 2 cents worth.</p>

<p>Thanks Jim. I went by local camera store here in Tucson yesterday, and the fellow there<br>

in whom I have a fair degree of confidence, went on and on about how good the VR was.<br>

He's a true Canon person, and he thought it worked as well, and possibly better than IS.<br>

I have L lens. This would be for vacations; walkaround, etc--where I don't want to be<br>

carrying or trying to change a lens outside.</p>

<p>Previous posts indicate focus speed is slow on the 270. Slower than the 18-250? And how does<br>

the VR compare to IS with regard to overall performance. Some report "noises" in the VR operation,<br>

but I'm more interested in how well the VR works. Any feedback is appreciated. Thanks</p>

<p>Thanks David, I did buy a Hoya 1 later and it does work quite well. The mayo cap worked too, but getting that stuff off the lens...well.....</p>

<p>Since on the subject of polarizers--not necessarily vignetting though. I have a Canon,<br>

which does NOT allow for the placement of a lens cap thereon between shots. Oh yes<br>

a rubber slip-over works, but the original Canon cap has nothing for the cap catches<br>

to grab onto. I'm sure the reason for this has some sound basis, it's just that I can't<br>

figure out what it is. Any thoughts are appreciated.</p>

<p>Bob....Looked again--under a magnifying glass--and it pretty surely is a G, unless the<br>

6 on their numbering machine is a little off.</p>

<p>B</p>

<p>I use the 18-250 for just what you descibe, and am considering trading up to the 18-270--<br>

not for the extra 20mm, but the IS, or Tamron's version thereof. It's not a flat 2.8at the high end, but outside in the sun it works very nicely</p>

<p>Thanks everyone. The actual number ENGRAVED (not ink-stamped) is 4000381G.<br>

That sure looks like a serial number and not a date code. It's not an L series<br>

obviously--therefor I gather it would be regarded as a "consumer" lens. My guess was<br>

1996, and Rainer T's post would seem to confirm that. Thanks once again.</p>

<p>I've found several posts with date coding info on EOS lenses. <br>

Typically, letter-digit-digit-letter format, indicating year, factory etc. I have a<br>

75-300 USM IS lens with a numerical serial number, followed at the end by the letter G.<br>

Would this G indicate 1992 as the year of manufacture (from the previous coding format)?<br>

Thanks in advance if anyone knows.</p>

<p>I spoke with a Canon rep once at the Consumer Electronic Show in LV. I needed a wider<br>

view lens. Now this was before they came out with a second generation 16-35, but he<br>

told me at the time to buy the 17-40. The general feeling at the time was, the picture<br>

quality from the latter was superior. Now perhaps that fostered a generation 2 16-35, I don't know. <br>

Just relating the conversation. I've been very happy with the 17-40. If I need more on a crop camera, I'll use the 10-22. That won't work on a 5D if you happen to have one,<br>

but my personal view of 17 on FF is, that it doesn't portray the scene very well. For example, my standard SUV appears in the image like a stretch limo. For what it's worth.</p>

<p>Thanks for the feedback. I do realize better build quality, etc. I was ammused at the comment regarding video. I wouldn't use it either frankly, any more than I use Live View.<br>

I had a 5D (1) actually, and sold it. I did like the FF, but there were some other things on it<br>

that I did not <br>

The 1D reads very well in the reviews. Perhaps a weekend rental is the ticket. By the way, it's good to see someone else is as attached to their T90 as I am.<br>

Thanks all.....</p>

<p> What are advantages of the 1D over the 5D. It seems that the 10 fps would be<br>

a biggy and for sports. The 5D is FF, twice the megapixels, greater<br>

ISO range. It almost seems like the camera upgrade of choice from crop, if one were to wish.<br>

1Ds position in the food chain is obvious, and they are certainly selling enough 1D units to justify<br>

their existance. I'd just like to know what I'm missing. <br>

Thanks</p>