alan_bryant1

<p>There are lots of possible causes. It could be<br> - The camera failing,<br> - The memory card failing,<br> - The USB cable failing,<br> - The computer's hard drive failing, or<br> - The computer RAM failing</p> <p>When I personally experienced this it ultimately turned out to be a combination of bad RAM and a bad video card driver. (See http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00ZESQ )</p> <p>First question - is the problem visible when you preview the photo on the camera? If it is, that narrows it down to the camera or memory card.</p>

<p>Here's a 5Ds to 6D comparison of 3200. Roll your mouse over the image to flip between them.</p> <p>http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Noise.aspx?Camera=980&Test=0&ISO=3200&CameraComp=819&TestComp=0&ISOComp=3200</p> <p>The resolution of the 5Ds is much higher, so that image is somewhat larger. You can also compare with the 5Ds image downsized to 5D3 resolution, which is slightly larger than 6D,</p> <p>http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Noise.aspx?Camera=980&Test=1&ISO=3200&CameraComp=819&TestComp=0&ISOComp=3200</p> <p>Short answer: The 5Ds is very similar to the 6D at 3200.</p>

<p>I've used a bunch of USB 3 drives and never torn out a connector...</p> <p>For what it's worth you might want a look at this.</p> <p>http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/06/canon-5ds-teardown</p> <blockquote> <p>Looking into the camera we see a welcome sight. There are robust metal plates and screws holding the port assembly very firmly. Anyone who has had an HDMI or other port pull off the circuit board when a connected cable gets tugged too hard will appreciate this.</p> </blockquote>

<blockquote> <p>Parts of the barrel seem loose.</p> </blockquote> <p>Doesn't the Canon 400/5.6 have a built-in lens hood? That might feel loose. I haven't used it but I'd suspect it locks in the open and closed positions but is loose in between.</p>

<p>Tamron makes a 24-70 f/2.8 with an image stabilizer. I've rented it and I liked it a lot. Might be worth checking out.</p>

<p>Assuming the Tamron is a Canon EF mount, I would expect it to work.</p> <p>However it's possible it won't report the aperture correctly (it might say f/2.8 instead of f/5.6).</p>

<p>I've used the Lightware Z300 case for a 200/2. It's tough and well padded, though not the fastest to get into and out of. It's designed for a 300/2.8, and it fits the 200/2 with the hood in the ready position (but no camera), or with the hood reversed and an extender and camera attached.</p> <p>They make a Z600 which fits a 600/4, so it should work fine for the 500/4, but not with camera attached and the hood out. That would amount to about 24 inches of space; very few bags have that much room.</p>

<p>The STM has a metal mount, better focus ring, quieter focus motor, full-time-manual focus, better AF in video on the newer Canon cameras, closer minimum focus distance, and better lens coatings. At least, it claims all that, I haven't seen any reviews yet. Optically they're apparently identical, except for the coatings.</p> <p>I believe the mk II is being phased out. I can't think of any reason to get it in preference to the STM.</p>

<p>Another relevant quote from LensRentals. I think this is a good assessment of the 200/2.</p> <blockquote> <p>And there’s one telephoto lens on the <em>I’d Buy That</em> list, the 200 f2.0 (your choice of Nikon or Canon) with a set of teleconverters. Because at 200mm and f2.0 out of focus areas aren’t just blurred, they’ve vanished without a trace. Because they make portrait subjects look like cutouts. Because they take teleconverters so well and are excellent 280mm f2.8 or good 400mm f4 lenses with the TCs mounted. Because they’re bulldog-squatty and just look mean. Because all the other kids have 300 f2.8s and we’re not followers, we’re trendsetters. Because it has the best Roger’s Take of any lens. And more than any other reason, because 90% of you who own 70-200 f2.8 lenses shoot all of your shots at 200mm anyway. Are they worth the money? No, of course not. But if you have a photography bucket list, this should be on it. It’s the Porsche of camera lenses. Nobody <em>NEEDS</em> one. Its not about <em>NEEDING</em> one.</p> </blockquote> <p>From http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/01/stuff-i-would-buy-if-i-bought-stuff<br> <br> The TDP review is useful as well - http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-200mm-f-2-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx</p> <p> </p>

<blockquote> <p>Is the 70-300 just not a great lens?</p> </blockquote> <p>There are two Canon 70-300 IS lenses, the L and the non-L. I've rented the L and it is a great lens. The non-L has a reputation as a good lens.<br> <br> There are also assorted Canon 7<strong>5</strong>-300 lenses, non-IS, which are generally not as good as the 55-250 you already have.<br> <br> Personally, with your budget and needs, I'd look at a 70-200 f/4 L IS (if you don't need long telephoto) or a used 100-400 L (the mark I version) or used 70-300 L.</p>

<p>I would go ahead and rent a 70-200/2.8 for the wedding. All of them are heavy lenses, and you might find the weight more than you want to deal with on a regular basis. So, use one for a few days and see what you think. Personally I think it's an excellent wedding lens. I have one (a Canon mk I version) and use it a lot for shooting portraits and theater.</p>

<p>Bob beat me to it again!</p>

<p>I'm pretty sure that's "1.1" (as in 1.1 meters) printed over M *dot* R. What M dot R means I'm not sure, though I'd guess the M is Macro. The focus distance of 0.9 you measured is consistent with that, since you measured from the front of the lens, (ie you measured the working distance) but focus distances printed on the lens are measured from the focus plane (roughly the back of the camera).</p> <p>The 1:45 is probably 1:4.5, which is to say, it's an f/4.5 lens.</p>

<p>I believe the differences between the Mk I and Mk II teleconvertors are fairly minimal. The Mk II has some weather sealing added. Optically I think they're identical.</p> <p>Most people find Canon's "lens cap" to be suitable for storage but just too big and clumsy to be much use in the field, so you might want to budget for replacing that as well.</p>

<p>It did finally finish. I'm not sure how long it took, I wasn't here when it finished. It seems to be working ok. I checked and there are actually 153,000 images in the catalog; apparently I shoot a lot of pictures.</p>

<p>I'm upgrading from LR4. It's taken 45 minutes so far, and the progress bar hasn't moved in the last 40. It says it's "Preparing new searchable data." It's a fast i7 and the software, OS and catalog are on an SSD. Task manager reveals it's doing basically nothing, not running the disk or the CPU.</p> <p>Just wondering if this is typical.</p> <p>There are maybe 50k images in it, most of them currently offline. I kinda suspect it's trying, and retrying, and retrying, and retrying, to reach images on a network server that is not available.</p>

<p>A positive review from the-digital-picture.</p> <p>http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-15-30mm-f-2.8-Di-VC-USD-Lens.aspx</p>

<p>The focus point lights aren't on the mirror, they're on the focus screen.</p> <p>I don't think the 600D has an interchangeable focus screen. It might need a trip back to Canon to get fixed. Can you see anything wonky about the screen? Don't touch it - like the mirror, it's quite delicate.</p>

<p>I shoot a lot of theater, which has similar light. Other than practice, the main thing that would help is a faster lens. There are many to choose from, but the Canon 50mm f/1.8 is the easiest to recommend because it's quite good and very affordable.</p> <p>However, practice will help even more than a fast lens. Sometimes you can get access to rehearsals to take photos there, though the light might be different at performances. Exposure is tricky in a club setting, which often has very bright lights against a black background, so play with metering modes to see what works for you. You might have to get good at dialing in exposure compensations.</p>

<p>(Incidentally, anyone thinking of buying one might want to wait for the M3 to be available. While the M2 is a relatively modest upgrade vs. the M, the M3 appears to be a whole new animal - a better grip, an exposure compensation dial, an articulated screen, a (very tiny) built-in flash are new features. It's supposed to be available in April, though it won't be sold in all markets.)</p>

<p>A few months ago I got an M2 via eBay from Japan, and so far I'm loving the thing.</p> <p>I've used a couple different 32 Gb cards in it and they both work fine.</p> <p>The battery life is somewhat limited. I think that's mainly because the camera is in live view all the time, so it's running the display and the sensor, unlike a DSLR which is generally operated through the optical viewfinder and draws very little power except when you're actually taking pictures. It does help to turn the M off when you're not using it; though that's a new habit for me - I never turn off my DSLR.</p> <p>I've used several EF lenses on it. The easiest I've found is the 24-105/4 L, which isn't too big, and has a reasonably useful zoom range that pairs well with the EF-M 11-22mm. (The 11-22 is a very nice lens, but like the M2 it's only available in Japan). I've also used a Sigma 150mm macro, which is pretty tricky to use, since it isn't stabilized the image is very jittery and AF has trouble locking. MF worked well though.</p><div></div>

<p>Ok... I've shot with a flash and a fisheye lens by bouncing the flash off the wall behind me. It works well if the walls and ceiling are white. In a darker or larger room you could do it with a reflector. But getting enough light to use HSS mode might be difficult.</p>

<p>The built-in 430 EX II diffuser is supposed to be good for a 14mm spread, so it ought to work for 20mm.</p> <p>Are you sure you're not just seeing vignetting from the very wide angle lens? At f/2.8 there will be a lot of vignetting in the corners. It will be reduced as you stop down but it won't ever entirely go away.</p> <p>If that's not the cause you could bounce the flash off something to get it more diffused. That will cost you some light output though, which is already strained in HSS mode.</p>

<p>A good option for reducing camera noise is a "camera muzzle". You can get them at Adorama. I have one that I use for shooting theater. It significantly reduces the noise, though it doesn't eliminate it.</p> <p>http://www.adorama.com/als.MVC/nspc/revisedProduct?sku=CZM</p>

<p>If you only need the lens for the vacation, you might rent one. A couple weeks rental on these lenses is much cheaper than buying.</p>