phyliss_crowe

<p>Thank you, Peter. I'll shortly have the 28-135 kit lens to compare it to. If it's not a match, I could either sell the Sigma, and put the money toward a long lens that will work or just keep it and use it on a film camera.</p>

<p>Thanks for your info!</p>

<p>Nevermind.</p>

<p><a href="http://metku.net/index.html?sect=view&n=1&path=mods/efs/index_eng">http://metku.net/index.html?sect=view&n=1&path=mods/efs/index_eng</a></p>

<p>Not EVEN going to DO this to my lens, but at least I got my question answered.</p>

<p>Whole lens</p><div></div>

<p>I have just acquired an excellent condition Sigma APO 70-300 for Canon. I think this must be their EF mount?<br /><br />Sigma says this lens won't work on a 7D because parts are no longer available. <br /><br />The EF-S mount pictured on Wikipedia, which is claimed to function on the 7D, looks identical to my Sigma's mount. Same number, arrangement, and shape of chips on both mounts. Has anyone tried the original EF mount on an EF-S mount Canon? I don't have a Canon camera on hand.<br /><br />If it will not function as-is on a 7D, is there an adapter for "old Canon to new Canon" that would let it function like the M42-to-Canon adapters do?<br /><br />Thanks for your help!</p><div></div>

<p>Oh, joy. Rapture. Well, I've done it to a teleconverter, I guess I can handle this, too. So long as I don't run the screwdriver through my finger like I did then.</p>

<p>I've read good things about this lens, found some exceptionally nice samples of what it can do at flickr, this one has a 30-day money back guarantee, and I got it for a song so hopefully I can fix it right so someone will find a very nice surprise in his stocking this holiday.</p>

<p>Thank you very much for the link, Robin!</p>

<p>The dreaded Ricoh pin? </p>

<p>If so, how much trouble will it be to disable / remove it for use on a Pentax DSLR?</p><div></div>

<p>I won't say it. I will NOT say it.</p>

<p>Okay! I'll say it!</p>

<p>Cand-ied Cameras.</p>

<p>MAKE IT STOP!</p>

<p>Another question. Are there any issues using a digital teleconverter with any of the 50mm lenses I have now besides no auto focus?</p>

<p>Les:<br>

I really like what your Pentax M macro produces. Right now, I have my eye on a couple of Pentax-A 50mm macros at eBay and considering a PK 100mm macro.</p>

<p>Matt:<br>

You answered my pending question about macro teleconverters and IQ very nicely! It does give me another option as we have a lovely sample of a Pentax-M 50mm/1.4 (8 blades!), a Super-Multi-Coated Tak 55/1.8, and a Super-Multi-Coated Tak 50/1.4.</p>

<p>Bulent:<br>

Thank you for bringing up Sigma. My son has 4 Sigma AF APO zooms and loves them to death, yet I never looked into whether Sigma produces relatively current primes of any kind. Found a couple of the 70mm macros on eBay. Ouch, for the time being, at least.</p>

<p>However, I ran across a Sigma EX DG 50/2.8 macro that fits my budget. Anyone have experience with that one? How does it compare to the Pentax-A, other than the Pentax is 1:2 and this Sigma is 1:1, yes?</p>

<p>Wow. Very impressive photos and lens! I think I WILL treat myself to that one!</p>

<p>Thanks for the tips on the books, too. Always great stocking stuffers. And the link to Hin Man. I read his blog religiously, and enjoy it immensely. </p>

<p>Thanks to everyone for the help! I've made my decision now! One Tamron 90mm for me, one Pentax-A 50/2.8 macro for the kid! I knew I could count on ya'll!</p>

<p>Ive got a set of those around here somewhere, but I didn't do too well with them.</p>

<p>Anyone have any experience with the Pentax-A Macro 50mm f2.8? I know it's 1:2 rather than 1;1, but I think it would suffice.</p>

<p>Oh, he has a K20D right now, but a K7 is on his short list.</p>

<p>Michael:<br>

Mostly posed still life, like food, miniature toy figures, etc. No critters on the list at this time.</p>

<p>Steve:<br>

$250 doesn't sound bad, but this is for my son, who isn't devoted to macro just yet so I can't get too crazy. He just wants to try it to see if he likes it. 90mm to 100mm would be my preference because I do want to do lots of macro so I'll check that out. Thanks for the tip!</p>

<p>Which is better optically - Pentax K mount 50mm f/4 or the SMC Takumar 50 f/4? Or something else in a 50mm? I'm not averse to good "off" brands. Just bought an M42 55mm f1.8 Sears that I am WELL pleased with.</p>

<p>Love to go 100mm but those are WAY out of my budget at this time. </p>

<p>We thank you for your support...</p>

<p>Exactly the same thing / symptoms happened to my K100D last week just after I cleaned the sensor - the same way I've cleaned it 3 times before, with a Dust Aid Platinum wand. Did everything you did and was about to give up and send it to Pentax, even though it's got only 7100 shutter actuations on it and has been treated like fine porcelain china since I got it. </p>

<p>Then I bought a brand new set of lithiums, popped them in, checked all my settings, they were where they had been before I cleaned the sensor, and IT WORKED! </p>

<p>I had checked the top LCD with the older batteries and they read Full, but it turns out they were not. I put them back in today to check them, not knowing for sure that's what had gone wrong. They still read Full, but after about 10 photos in the sunlight, the camera again wouldn't trip the shutter. Checked the top LCD. Batteries read 3/4 drained. Changed back to the new batteries. All is well.</p>

<p>As I said, shutter actuation count is akin to the odometer on a vehicle. At 100,000 to 150,000 miles, a motor vehicle is most likely to start experiencing major (costly) mechanical issues. Consumers shopping for a used vehicle have the right under state and federal law to know before they purchase a given vehicle how close it is to that point. Thus it’s illegal to screw with odometers. Most DSLRs shutters are touted by most manufacturers to be expected to last up to around 100,000 actuations before they start to experience major (costly) issues. Now, what other purpose could shutter actuation count possibly have?</p>

<p>Further, if a dealer lists what appears in every way to be a brand spanking new camera and all that originally came with it but you don’t ask if it is, they don’t volunteer the information, and you buy it only to find out the truth later, that dealer has violated state and federal consumer protection laws. Shutter actuation count freely obtainable by consumers would certainly prevent that from happening – customer doesn’t get screwed, dealer doesn’t get busted.</p>

<p>Canon doesn’t necessarily have to fear running afoul of consumer protection laws in that respect since they aren’t in the business of <strong>selling</strong> used cameras. They (and Nikon in some models, so it seems) have nonetheless devised a way to make money off of them.</p>

<p><a href="../canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00T95d?start=0">http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00T95d?start=0</a></p>

<p>Since you don't list your specific city in Texas and do mail out your slide film, I suggest you just google "(city name) Texas film processing" and pick any South Texas city - Austin, San Antonio, etc. There are several dedicated photography shops in both cities still doing film processing. </p>

<p>A little further north, there's Padgitt's in Waco, which has been in business over 100 years. I can personally recommend them. They regularly process a ton of film for professionals so they know what they're doing and they do it right.</p>

<p>All the labs I was able to pull up seem to be competitively priced with the one-hour labs. Many offer quick turnaround, say they use dip and dunk rather than the roller used by most one-hour photo labs, and have mailers for your use. No doubt, they've all moved to offering your photos on CD rather than hard copy prints if that's what you prefer,. I do because the whole order is cheaper, it's a snap to upload your photos to your computer affording one of the advantages of digital, and you still get your negatives so you can pick and choose specific photos you may want a lab to print from them rather than paying to have all your photos printed, including any not-so-good ones.</p>

<p>Good luck!</p>

<p>Shutter actuation count is the same as mileage on a car. At a certain rigorously tested point, certain parts are known to have experienced problems, even complete failure. Knowing that information has a huge influence on a consumer’s decision to negotiate a purchase or to walk away. It allows consumers to factor the cost of future replacement/repairs into the final purchase price. Thus IMO, consumers have the absolute right to know that information; otherwise, it could easily be construed as at least bordering on fraud. Concealing it had better raise suspicions as to why they’ve decided it’s none of your business. Would you buy a used car with a broken or no odometer?</p>

<p>The life of a DSLR is not infinite, but because people can now employ “machine gun” photo taking, they don’t realize there is a definite limit. Especially not when you can still find 30-40 year old and older film cameras chugging away flawlessly. Why should a DSLR be any different? They’re both cameras, right?</p>

<p>Personally, I have absolutely no use for a company that rather than respect their customer base by doing whatever it can to instill faith and loyalty in their customers and their brand by being upfront and open about every aspect of their products, it would rather play “gotcha games” by devising ways to sneak through the back door and into consumers’ pockets. Most of the other camera manufacturers have chosen NOT to keep purchasers in the dark by hiding that information. Why hasn’t Canon also made it available WITHOUT COST? Can you say “planned obsolesence”?</p>

<p>And one more from last night</p>

<p>Sorry. Didn't use macro for Jesse. Just the butterfly.</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks, Luke. My friend read your review, and the VC is definitely one she has put on her list for future serious consideration once she finishes school, which will be in about 18 months. So it's a very viable contender. She'll be upgrading to a more advanced Canon camera at that time, too, so the combination should be great.<br>

<br /><br />In the meantime, I did find something that will work for her experimentation phase. A Quantaray (I heard that.) 70-300 Tele-Macro AF LD, 62mm filter size. Which means it's a rebadged Tamron from what I've been able to gather. <br>

<br /><br />Quantaray - well, if "rebadged" means what everything says it does - Ritz simply slapped their house brand name on a Tamron lens, then I had to ask myself, "What's the beef? If it's the same lens, well, a rose by any other name, right?"<br>

<br /><br />Anyway, this one was originally purchased new from Ritz in 2007 and rarely used by a college student in his photo classes on both a film and a digital Canon; has all the original paperwork, box, and inserts in new condition, PLUS a UV haze filter and a circular polarizer, both still boxed and like new. For $51, I couldn't walk away from it. And if she doesn't like it, the seller will give us a full refund. Can't argue with that!<br>

<br /><br />I have that same lens in Pentax mount, which is going up for sale because I replaced it with a newer model APO Sigma, and when using the Q in "Macro Mode" on my K100D last evening, it actually did rather well, for what I'm capable of doing anyway. Shot a very busy Swallowtail in a breeze, but I got him reasonably sharp (haven't spent much time with the lens so haven't quite figured out its sweet spots) and no purple fringing anywhere. (UV filter employed). I did have to adjust the brightness and contrast a bit, though, because it was overcast here.<br>

<br /><br />So I think it will work fine for her present needs. <br>

<br /><br />Appreciate all the input, guys!</p><div></div>

<p>"di" means "digitally integrated", and according to a 2003 Shutterbug article, those work equally well on film cameras. They were designed to try to correct some of the problems inherent in digital cameras of the time. LD means low dispersion glass. The Tamron I originally asked about is not "DI" but is "LD".</p>

<p>Thanks everybody for your help! I do want to throw in one more for comparison since it seems to fall in the same $100-or-less price range:</p>

<p>Canon Ultrasonic EF 75-300 f:4-5.6 (metal mount)</p>

<p>Between this Canon, the Tamron, and a Sigma 70-300 APO Macro Super (I believe all three are late 1990s to early 2000s?), which is the best bang for the buck?<br /></p>

<p>Thanks, Barnaby and James! </p>

<p>My friend has the 18-55 kit lens and was recently required to purchase a 50mm for a class project so she opted for the Canon 50mm 1.8 James referenced - right at $100- , and that's all she has for lenses thus far. No long focal lengths at all for either camera. No word yet on how she likes the 50mm, but no complaints registered either!</p>

<p>She has a very clean copy of a Nikon SB-15 flash (looking to upgrade that), a tripod, a couple umbrellas, and a reflector or two so she's somewhat fixed for that at least as a student. She just wants to try a long zoom to see if she'd like "expanding" her photography horizons, so to speak.</p>

<p>So, James, is it my understanding from your post that this Tamron may not function on her DSLR Rebel? The lens does have the contacts, but it's not the "di" model.</p>

<p>What's a fair price for a gently used copy with original caps and hood, all in good working order?</p>

<p>Thanks again!</p>

<p>Am still looking for a good starter zoom in this range for my college friend. The two Sigmas I had asked about in another recent thread got away from me - the older one no loss there; the other I probably shoulda bid a bit more on. Oh, well.</p>

<p>So, for a student on a very tight budget experimenting to find her photographic niche, etc., how about the <strong>Tamron AF 70-300 f4-5.6 LD macro</strong>? She knows she wants to do still life. But she doesn't want to limit herself to just that. No sports, etc., but who knows what else she might find enjoyable?</p>

<p>She also has a film Rebel she uses for B&W.</p>

<p>Thoughts, please?</p>

<p>What should a clean used copy go for on the street?<br>

<br>

Thanks in advance!</p>

<p>Okay. I have a Canon AE-1 Program so I know a little about FD mount lenses but not so much the EF mounts. I've got the APO version of this Sigma in Pentax mount, and it's pretty nice. Just wish it was a little faster.</p>

<p>What would you recommend as an inexpensive alternate to the Sigma DL?</p>

<p><a href="http://tinyurl.com/2fea9hj">http://tinyurl.com/2fea9hj</a><br />(The one like this I'm looking at I don't think is the Macro Super. Just straight DL)<br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.dyxum.com/images/Lenses/342/342_1.jpg">http://www.dyxum.com/images/Lenses/342/342_1.jpg</a><br />(the one like this I'm looking at is not the APO flavor; otherwise, it's identical.)<br /><br />My friend - the semi-broke photography student - has both a Rebel SLR film camera she uses mainly for B&W photography and a Rebel X series DSLR. She just wants to see if this focal length suits her so getting the better Sigma in this focal length is not relevant nor is a Canon branded equivalent in the budget at this time.<br /><br />Will either of these work correctly on <strong>both</strong> of her cameras? i.e., No ERR messages and all that on the DSLR?<br /><br />Thanks for your input.<br /><br /></p>