matthias_meixner2

Hello Yakim,

 

what I have is the following:

 

EOS 350D

 

EF-s 10-22

 

EF-s 18-55

 

EF 20-35

 

EF 28-105

 

EF 100-300

 

EX 380

 

All except 18-55 of ring-type USM

 

I shoot mainly landscape.

Hello all!

 

I am looking to an upgrade to my 28-150 1/3.5-4.5, since it is soft wide open.

Therefore, I went to three different camera stores and asked for

recommendations. And guess what, I got three different answers.

 

The first recommended the 24-70 L over the 24-105 IS, since some customers

claimed that the IS would affect image quality.

 

The second recommended the 24-105 L

 

And the third one said, that both the 24-70 L and the 24-105 L would not be

suitable to be used on my 350D, since they were not optimized for digital

cameras and recommended the 17-85 IS instead.

 

What do you think? Is there a problem with the both L-lenses not be optimized

for digital cameras? Or is this simply bullshit resulting from the marketing

from nikon and other manufacturers, which just do not have full frame cameras

and want to sell their own system?

A DSLR is only part of a system. Its value is about zero without the right set of lenses.

If vignetting is a problem with full frame sensors, there should be a simple solution: The camera should automatically correct it internally using a profile either stored in the lens or in the camera. In the days of large flash memories this should not be a problem.

 

BTW. when stored in the camera, this could support the marketing of the "own" lenses, since Canon would obviously not want to put lens profiles of 3rd party lenses into their camera. Let's see, when they will grab hold of this idea ....

> Mike, merged exposure are of no use for blurring water.

 

That depends on how many images you are willing to stack. If you stack say 100 images, the resulting image should show blurred water.

Now that the new 30D is only a small improvement over the 20D, there is little room for improvement of the 350D from a marketing point of view. They definitely will not rival their 30D with a low cost model which would outperform the 30D.

 

Therefore, within the next 12 months it is unlikely to see a successor of the 350D which would introduce major improvements.

> I deeply dislike the XT for its being so tiny

 

Simple solution: Add a the battery grip. This has some additional advantages:

 

- additional shutter release

 

- you may use two rechargable batteries

 

- you may alkaline batteries for emergency

 

- "professional look" :-)

 

If you don't need one of the special features only found on the 30D, you are probably better off with the XT plus battery grip than with the 20D/30D without additional grip.

One additional point pro UV filter:

 

It is much easier to clean a filter than to clean a lens: Just use soap and running water, which is something you definitely cannot do with your lens.

Could it be that there was some horizontal object in the way close to the lens, e.g. a small branch or wire? At least, you would see the same kind of distortions then.

> It's an advantage to not accept EF-S lenses. A huge one. How one could

> think otherwise is beyond me unless it's simple buyer remorse or bald

> justification.

 

OK, let's look a little bit into the crystal ball:

 

1) EOS 5D + Ef 17-40 + EF 24-105 1:4 L

=> 2500,- EUR + 1000,- EUR + 1000,- EUR

=> +/- 4500,- EUR

 

2) EOS 350D + EF-S 10-22 + EF 17-40 1:4L + EF 24-105

+ new 16 MPixel full frame body in about 3 years (20D class),

+ selling the EOS350D and EF-S 10-22:

=> 800,- EUR + 700,- EUR + 1000,- EUR + 1000,- EUR + 1500,- EUR

- 500,- EUR

=> +/- 4500,- EUR

 

Route 2) will give you a cheaper entry (the 17-40 is superfluous as long as you have got the 10-22 and 24-105) and in 3 years you will have an up to date camera again.

 

Route 1) will give you higher quality right now, but is more expensive at the start and in 3 years you cannot jump to the next generation camera, without exceeding the budget.

 

Bottom line: It is an advantage to carefully consider all alternatives, including EF-S lenses.

Most sources claim that the image quality of the two is on par. Therefore, if you do not need the toucher housing or the additional features, you can save the money and buy better lenses.

I would go for the EOS 350D which gives you more or less the same image quality (I have one). If you want to only carry 2 lenses, my suggestion is:

 

- EF-S 10-22 (for landscape)

- EF 28-135 IS (for the rest)

 

Another interesting combination would be:

- EF-S 10-22

- EF 24-105 L IS (sharper and more robust than the 28-135 IS)

 

I am currently using the following combination:

- EF-S 10-22

- EF 28-105

- EF 100-300

 

The EF-S 10-22 is the only (Canon) option, if you want to have a real wide angle. And I find it much more useful than my EF 100-300, but that is just personal taste.

 

Regarding memory: Higher speed of memory is only relevant when transferring the images to the computer. Therefore, I suggest investing in capacity and not in speed (I have 2x 2GB standard CF modules, which take about 1200 images in total and transferring the images is not an issue).

Since etching precise structures into a surface is nowaday a cheap and well understood process (e.g. for manufacturing chips or TFTs), I think DO has its market in the area of cheap, light, medium quality optics, whereas the top quality end will still belong to conventional optics. Therefore, I would not be astonished to see DO emerging at the low cost end of lenses.

Cameras sample 3 color channels: red, green and blue using filters in front of the sensors. Color correction is performed by amplifying or damping one or more of these 3 channels, which may increase or reduce the noise regarding this channel.

 

Then there is another problem: The characteristics of the filters used does not fit the characteristics of the sensitivity of the receptors in the human eye. Therefore, two colors may look different to a camera although they look the same to a human (e.g. monochromatic yellow light vs. yellow light composed from red and green, depending on the filters used, the monochromatic light may end up looking greenish or orange). Obviously you cannot correct this effect in software.

> Hm. They're all USM, so they shouldn't sound all that much.

 

Yes, that was my first thought, too, when reading the subject :-)

Some colleagues bougt a digital camera in hong kong some years ago (point and shoot) and they thought they had done a good deal. But then at home it turned out, that they would have made a better deal at the shop around the corner in germany. So before you buy something somewhere else inform yourself about the prices at home.

Before you reformat the card, you could try to use a different operating system. For example you could try Knoppix (Linux) which can boot off from a CD, so that you need not install it on your computer.

>The other effect the 5D will have is that I will certainly NOT be investing in any EF-S lens's as its clear the future for canon is FFsensor.

 

I would not like to forego the EF-S 10-22. And you can easily finance it by just waiting some months longer to switch to FF. This brings you wide angle _now_ and will save you quite some money compared to switching to FF as early as possible.

The 20Da basically lacks the IR-filter. That is good if you want to photograph stars that emit in the near infrared and is bad if you want correct colors. So if you do not want to do astrophotography and or IR-photography, then this camera is not really useful for you.

> I'd wait till next week if I were you... then we'll see... who knows,

> maybe you can buy a FF DSLR and use the 17-40 only for all those

> projects of yours...

 

Buying the 10-22 now and waiting 2-3 years to buy a FF DSLR is probably the better strategy. The price of FF DSLRs will most probably drop by much more by this time than what the 10-22 will cost you now. And in 2-3 years you will most probably get a better camera with higher resolution.

IS does not help, if you want to throw the background out of focus or if you want to capture fast movement. So IS cannot be a replacement for a fast lens and vice versa.

You were using aperture priority. That is the using of the flash did not reduce the exposure time to something useful for an effective 80mm Lens (1.6 crop factor). In your case you used the flash as fill in flash and the exposure was dominated by the ambient light using 1/25th seconds for the exposure. I think that is also the reason why some of the posters thought that you did not use flash at all.

 

You can prevent that by switching to 'P' mode.

Photos taken with my EOS 350D are actually sharper than slides taken with my EOS 50E and scanned with my Nikon Coolscan III at 2700dpi, although both ways yield about 8 MPixel.

If you want to shoot wide angle, you probably need the EF-S mount of the 20D (for the EF-S 10-22)

> And it makes the sound of something lose

 

This should be the orientation sensor. At least that's what they say in the documentation of the camera.