mike_jack1

<p>Hi all,<br />We just bought a Pentax K7 for work and are having issues with horizontal banding and the white balance. There is a strong magenta cast over all the images (WB settings have been checked and should be working fine) and there are distinct horizontal lines. We've tried the camera with a few lenses and nothing changes, so it's it seems like it has to be the body. The photos have all been taken at low ISO settings (100 / 200).<br />Any ideas on whats going on or has anyone else had similar problems?</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Thanks for all the responses! All good advice and certainly gives me something to think about - many of these options I hadn't even considered! I've been doing some more thinking about this and this is where I am at now:</p>

<p>Read a bit about the 70-200mm f2.8L IS and would love it to get it, but I need a lens that can shoot in more confined spaces for the time being so this may have to be the next lens option for the future. The next camera body I intend to buy will be a full frame so I'm conscious of getting something that is useful now on a 20D and will still be useful down the track when I upgrade to a 5D mark II. I can't quite afford to get the upgraded camera body at this time so that's not really an option right now for higher ISO performance unfortunately. I'm wary that there are other good 50mm options other than the 1.2L once you've stopped down - so I'm not convinced this is the way to go. I'd rather get something that performs well in low light and then at some point in the near future perhaps buy an additional 50mm f1.4 for use in the mid aperture ranges. Also once I convert to full frame the 50mm loses much of it's portrait potential and from what I'm hearing the 70-200mm f2.8 on a full frame body will be a excellent and more versatile choice when i make the switch over. I could even consider the 135mm f2L or the 85mm f1.2L for a specialized portrait lens down the track, but the focal length of these primes are a bit long for me at this point in time on the smaller sensor.</p>

<p>The problem, for me, with relying to heavily on IS is that a lot of what I shoot is at events I host where artists are painting in low light or wedding and documentary style shots where the subjects will be on the move. I know IS is great for counteracting hand shake, which still has relevance definitely, but I think I'll probably need the faster shutter speeds more often. And as the upgrade to the full frame sensor with better ISO performance is some way off - I'll think probably need to go for a faster lens at this time?</p>

<p>So I'm thinking perhaps the 35mm f1.4 for now and then at some point in the near future I should be able to afford the 50mm f1.4 as a temporary portrait lens on the 20D. Both these lenses will still be useful when I upgrade to full frame - the 35mm would be very useful as an actual 35mm in low light and the 50mm will be good for general street shooting when the light isn't super low. Then I could look into the 70-200mm f2.8L and 135mm f2L or 85mm f1.2L down the track. If I went this way, I would be looking at a future kit that looks like this:</p>

<p>5D Mark II<br>

35mm f1.4L<br>

50mm f1.4<br>

70-200mm f2.8L IS<br>

24 - 105mm f4L IS<br>

(and way in the future) 135mm f2L or the 85mm f1.2L</p>

<p>Think I'm on the right track here?</p>

<p>My kit as it stands now is an (unfortunately outdated) Canon 20D, 24-105mm f4L and a 50mm f1.8 (mark 1). I am looking to start freelancing more and I'm in a position to spend some money on an additional lens. I've found the 24-105 is great for general use but I need a high quality lens to perform in low light conditions at exhibitions & events, indoors, weddings and for documentary orientated photography. If it could double as a useful portrait lens that would be great.</p>

<p>My first thought was to go for an updated 50mm prime - however I have found after all the reviews and information i've read that none of them seem to swing me one way or the other to any particular 50mm lens. At first I was considering the Canon 50mm f1.4 but have since read that this lens doesn't perform well wide open. I then started thinking about the new Sigma 50mm f1.4 due to it's good reviews - except for the focusing issue. The Zeiss, being comparable in price, caught my interest but I also read a few different reviews that mention although it is an excellent lens stopped down, it doesn't perform well wide open either. I've even been toying with the idea of the Canon 50mm f1.2L - but it's so expensive! And again, the reviews I'm reading are not convincing me it's worth the considerable extra dosh.</p>

<p>Considering most of the low-light photography I'm intending to do will be hand held, I've now started thinking about the Canon 35mm f1.4 . I've heard great things and it's a little cheaper than the 50mm.</p>

<p>I am intending to start building my kit further from here, so I am really conscious of making the right long term decision. I know at some point I'll need to get a faster portrait lens than the 24-105 so perhaps down the track I'll look into the 85mm f1.2L . I was thinking that the 35mm f1.4L and 85mm 1.4L would be a awesome combo. However, money doesn't grow on trees and I would look in to buying a new camera body before i purchased a second lens - so whatever I chooce now will be 'it' for some time. So I've been wondering if the 50mm f1.2L was a good mid way compromise between the two lenses here? And is it worth all that extra money in terms of IQ - or should I take another look at the Sigma or Zeiss?</p>

<p>Anyway, I feel a bit oversaturated with all the reviews I've been reading and I'm really struggling to narrow down to the right choice here. Any help or advise would be greaaaaatly appreciated.</p>