OPK

<p>why on the Earth you want to pay for another software if you already have everything needed in Photoshop CS and Bridge. I see no point in such attitude.<br>

I used to work with NX2 but now I stuck with ACR in CS3 and Bridge. this is more than sufficient workflow.</p>

<p>something like that. 2.8 at 1/2000th, 4 at 1/4000th....so effective aperture is f4 at full shutterspeed</p>

<p>I mean, due to shutter construction, this camera allows wide open shooting at max 1/1000th</p>

<p>on 27th page of Fuji X100 manual states information which makes this camera completely useless for me. It will be unable to shot wide open on short shutterspeed :((((</p>

<p>every picture from big matrix could look soft at 100% screen enlargment - no matter what the lens is.<br>

the effect vanish when you'll make print in desired size. remember, that big matrix require more sharpness in post.<br>

if you try this lens on 6MPix or even 12 you'll see it sharper:) (but only at the screen)</p>

<p>this setup doesn't work. just 32-bit up to XP i suppose</p>

<p>Terry,</p>

<p>50D can behave strangely. I had similar problem, no matter what lens. this camera is very sensitive. any tiny handshake can produce unsharp images. despite it is a great gear I sold it and bought EOS 1D - no problems anymore.</p>

<p>maybe your lens is faulty and need alignement? If you can't take sharp picture on f 5.6 then you should ASAP go to your seller or Canon service.</p>

<p>50mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.8 which gives respectively 75 and 127mm</p>

<p>take both cameras in hand and make decision....rest is just a marketing blah.</p>

<p>D300 would be sufficient I think.... the one issue you guys didn't speak is D700 weight. it feels much heavier than D3 body - if it works for you, just get it. if not, take a lighter body</p>

<p>I've tried EOS with different old manual lenses. Only way is to meter on max aperture on a lens and then lock exposure switching aperture ring on desirable value</p>

<p>sure, you can calibrate as you wish.....but what if one time AF indicate properly and another completely wrong?<br>

turns out that AF point in viewpoint is much smaller than actual focus area - that causes many misleadings, especially when AF is not properly calibrated.<br>

you can see couple of my examples. both cases AF pointed on a lips<br>

so, problem was solved several posts earlier. solution is clear and obvious.</p>

<p>Rob,</p>

<p>problem was solved with a help from Elliot. AF was misaligned and its just strange and funny for me that a manufacturer is unable to produced a properly worked gear. Now I know what to do with probably next Canon body in a case of unsharp pictures........service. It's something new for me. I just thought that camera for xxxx $ should work.</p>

<p>thank you Elliot for your answer. It gives a simple solution. next time I'll send body to Canon and just ask for alignment.</p>

<p>I'm sorry, is it a forum paid by Canon? and no threads on problems with theirs products are welcome?<br>

>>> Brett: do you can think wider than your brand. It doesn't matter at all. I made several sessions with rented 5D and everything was ok. I understand that you already have a tack sharp version of 50D.....</p>

<p>here is an example without PP (totally no sharpening) RAW default from ACR.</p>

<p>it is sharp as it should be. AF was directed at lips too....but possibility to take such a properly sharpen shot was like a 3 to 10. almost 70% was rubbish. each time AF indicator confirmated sharpness.</p><div></div>

<p>thanks for helpful responses....some of them was, but other pointed to human factor. for over 15 years had over 10 different cameras (canon too). some of them have up to this time, and I love them.</p>

<p>shutter speed 1/200 is not a long time to remove position from correct focus to out of focus. especially at this aperture on 50mm.</p>

<p>the store who bought 50D was the same who sold me it before - they buy from me used cameras....so, there was no dead racoon.</p>

<p>on this (and other) forums is many threads on inaccuracy in 50D and I went suspisious. Its just a camera, not a spaceship. I just wonder how companies droping a ball.......Is it so hard to control quality? especially nowadays, when PRO cameras are three times as expensive as 20 years ago. AF isn't a new technology - they invented it in early eighties!</p>

<p>look on that 100% crop. AF point was set on a lips....<br /> ....and look on a neck</p>

<p>f 5, 1/200 iso200</p><div></div>

<p>I have a tons of sharp pictures. I work as a photographer on several bodies.... It never happened to me with Nikon cameras and one example of rented 5D mark II. so....human factor could be put aside.<br /> don't you think is a some kind of quality control. maybe my 50D was just faulty?<br>

I heard xxD has AF much worse in a accuracy than xD bodies.</p>

<p>My 50D produced most of the time unsharp pictures. probably was the AF issue - something like misfocus issue...<br>

I know there is AF microadjustment but for me sounds like a company's joke. It's not a rocket science make a properly worked auto focus.<br>

so, I had to sold it. did you get similar problem? I really liked that camera but now I'm concern their overall quality. Do other Canon products has similar issues? I'm thinking now on 5D mark II but what will be if that product would have same problem?</p>

<p>p.s<br>

I'm familliar with all the postproduction stuff in PS, DPP and Lightroom.</p>

<p>I've made similar statement these days with 50D body. no matter what lens is on camera - there's a big amount of misfocused pictures. only way to get in focus is switch each lens to manual and ignore AF points confirmation just rely on your eye....</p>

<p>nowadays all cameras are very similar in terms functions and possibilities...besides sensor and chip differences there's another one - form factor. if would companys do's every camera in same form factor but differ in functions........no one's would ever buy expensive one because higher MPix, frame rate, focuc points etc.</p>

<p>for a good picture all you need is 4-8Mpix, aperture, shutter speed and exp compensation. but many of us buy more profi camera just because it feels properly in hand (not like a toy).</p>

<p>....and authorities in camera companys already know that.</p>

<p>- what's so amazing about that picture in strictly photographic terms?<br /> this thread is not on THIS picture in photo terms...</p>

<p>- what's so amazing about that picture that couldn't be achieved with a Canon lens?<br /> sure it could, but for a couple of hundreds $ - not for a 30$ like in this case</p>

<p>yeah, that's a EMF M42 > EOS adapter you can find on fleabay. I'm just strictly amazed with a new possibilities...<br>

you can try such a trick even with a manual Zuiko, Pentax and some other lenses:) isn't it wonderful?</p>

<p>just as a result of an exploration...</p><div></div>