catchlight

I own a 5D and a 1DMkII, and believe your decision is a no-brainer: if you are shooting sports, get a 1DMkIII if you can afford it, or a MkII or MkIIN if you want to save some money for a fast prime for shooting boxing.

The 5D is great for static subjects, but can't match a 1Series body for shooting action.

If you think you won't enjoy all the computer work, and setup expense, that comes with switching to digital, stick with film and concentrate on getting the images you want that way.

If you do go digital, consider not printing your own images; use a good lab instead. Monitor callibration and printer maintanance can be an expensive headache.

Adobe Photoshop Elements will do nicely for image processing for less than $100. Adode Lightroom will do a good job for about $200.

Good luck on making the choice that will keep you enjoying photography.

You will need a true macro (flat field) lens for best reproduction of 2D art. Any of Canon's macros would do.

The 5D would work very well for your purposes, as would the 1DsMkII. The 1DMkIII wouldn't be the best choice, since you need a high megapixel count more than a high frame rate.

All of the zooms you mentioned are excellent. Start shooting with one, then see what other focal lengths you need.

For me, how often I use bursts depends on the sport I'm shooting. I agree with Keith that a high frame rate does not replace good anticipation and quick reflexes.

Even at 8.5 fps, getting great sports shots is still a challenge. Being able to "bracket" the key moment in time often makes the difference between a good shot and a great one, or a keeper and a dud.

The fact that a typical burst with a 1DMkII or III only has to be 3 or 4 shots long indicates that frame rate of 3 fps isn't going to help much in most sports. The action moves on too much in 1/3 of a second, and the moment is gone.

I've tried to shoot volleyball, basketball, and ski racing with my 5D and 1DMkII with a different lens on each, and have put the 5D back in the bag after a few shots each time. Three fps is ust too slow.

Re 5D with grip: not much lighter, and the bulk becomes almost the same.

I carry the 5D without grip and the 24-105L IS for travel.

"I shoot everything : landscape, sports, travel photography, still life... "

If you shoot sports a lot and really need to bring home the "moments", the 1D is the better choice by far. For travel, the weight difference favors the 5D.

If I had to give up one of my cameras, the 5D would go, although I would miss it for landscapes and macro.

Sami, I have a 5D and a 1DMkII and they are both great cameras, but they are very different. It will help your decision if you are clear about which you need more: full frame; or 8.5 fps, high customizability, more durability, and weather sealing.

For example, as 3 fps the 5D is pretty average for shooting sports or any other kind of action, but for landscapes, cityscapes, and portraits the 5D delivers 'way more pixels.

On the used/mint market, 1DMkII's are getting down to just over $2000, and the N version is just over $2500. Heck of a lot of camera for the price.

A few suggestions:<p>

<li> As Lennon said above, rent or borrow the best DSLR you can

<li>Use the fastest lens(es) you can--the Canon 50/f1.4 and 85/f1.8 are excellent

<li>Forget zoom lenses--they're too slow for the lighting level in clubs

<li>Shoot only in RAW mode, so you can correct exposure and white balance later on your computer (there's a RAW converter built into Photoshop and Lightroom)

<li>Wear dark clothing (stealth mode), and get as close to the performers as you can so you can fill the frame and not have to crop much

<li>Shoot at the lowest ISO you can (400 or 800 if possible; 1600 if necessary), while maintaining a shutter speed equal to the focal length of your lens (50mm lens, 1/50 sec. shutter speed, etc.)

<li>Brace yourself when shooting to keep the camera as still as possible when tripping the shutter

<li>If the lighting is really dark, ask the band's leader to instruct the lighting tech to put a bit more white light and fewer gels on the stage for at least one number so you can get some shots with decent image quality and no colour cast

<li>If strong gels are used, particularly red ones, you may have to convert your images to black and white to have anything decent<p>

<li>Wait for "the moments" with intensity and strong facial expressions, with no stands, cables, or mics obscuring the performer's face.

<P>Have fun, and please post some results here.

I've owned both, and sold the f4 version, finding the speed and narrower DOF of the faster lens useful in many situations.

I would suggest getting the Canon 1.4X tele-extender at some point, too, so you can capture action at jumps on the far side of the ring. The 2.8 zoom and 1.4X on a monopod would be a great combination for equestrian events.

For your stated purposes I'm not sure why you would need an IS lens. You could save hundreds by getting the non-IS version of the 70-200mm.

Unless you have a big studio, you might find the focal length range of that lens awkwardly long for indoor work with a 1.6X crop camera.

The relatively cheap Canon EF 50mm f1.4 might work well in tandem with the zoom, as would the very cheap 50mm f1.8.

Did the B & G know these people? Did you ask them if they did? How did the two shooters know to be there if someone hadn't asked them to be?

I always say, "Two minutes", when the P & S shooters congregate at the start of the formals, then ask them all to leave so that I can have the undivided attention of the family, wedding party, and couple. That would have solved your problem.

If the woman had persisted after the friends and relatives left, I would have asked the bride or groom who she was and, if necessary, asked them to communicate that you were the exclusive shooter.

I hope you got your payment up front.

I own a 5D and a 1D Mk II, and reach for the latter every time I'm shooting sports action.

The 5D is a splendid camera, but 3 fps is just too slow for fast-moving subjects.

Regarding the weight of 1 Series bodies, there are harness systems (Kinesis, etc.) available that take the weight off your neck or shoulder, and keep the camera secure, handy, and ready to shoot.

For fast action in dusty conditions nothing will match the new Canon 1D Mk III. A mint/used 1D Mk II or Mk IIN will also do the job better than a 1Ds or 5D.

Why? Much faster frame rate, ruggedness, and a sealed body--in a camera that was designed from the ground up to cover sports and other fast action.

Consider a fast L prime lens for indoor work without flash. Even an f2.8 zoom might not always be fast enough. If you prefer a zoom, the 16-35/f2.8L and 24-70/f2.8L are both excellent, and are sealed against dust like your 70-200/2.8L IS. The 1D Mk II and III have a 1.3X crop, so you need to factor that in when choosing a lens.

With the uneven and ugly lighting you will likely encounter indoors, using fill flash will improve your images, as long as it doesn't bother the dogs. I doubt if they will even notice your strobe firing.

Canon's current pro flash is the 580EX, although a mint/used 550EX would do fine and save you money.

For a photographer of static landscapes like Wiggett, film is still a viable option. It can also hold its own for black and white shooting, and color shooting in a studio. <p>

For certain other types of shooting, though, digital offers advantages that film can't match. <p>

For example, digital has the edge for: <br>

<li>news, sports, and anything else with tight deadlines (a digital shooter can caption and postprocess shots on site and e-mail them to a waiting editor minutes after shooting)

<li>sports, airshows and other situations that call for bursts of shots at high frame rates (very expensive to do this with film)

<li>low light situations at concerts, in clubs, on stage without flash (setting a custom white balance or even using auto WB gives much more predictable results than the rigid color biases of various film types)

<li>any location with variable or mixed lighting, or strong colour casts

<li>weddings and other irrepeatable events, where digital shots can be checked and files backed up immediately

<li>travel photography, to avoid the nightmare of getting film safely through security checks, and because multiple backups can be made daily, stored securely, and mailed home.<p>

There's nothing wrong with shooting film, as long as you're not in a hurry, aren't travelling, have lots of light, and can control its qualities.

Good advice in the previous posts. I further suggest that if you are going to bounce a flash at the wedding, be sure the ceiling is not too high, and is white or nearly white.

Also, get a bracket (Stroboframe or other) for the flash so that you can keep the flashhead directly above your lens to avoid harsh shadows where you don't want them.

Take some test shots at the B+B ASAP advance of the wedding. Go to the wedding rehearsal (if any) and shoot some more. Consider using aperture priority to simplify exposure until you have done more indoor shooting.

Good luck!

Wise words from Edsel: minimalist is the way to go.

I took two lenses and a TC: a Canon 100-400mm IS, a 1.4X, and a 24-105mm IS, and never felt the need for anything else. I had a 5D body, and a P+S which my wife and daughter used. Image stabilization worked well for shots of static animals.

The long zoom was just right for 95% of my animal shots. It, or the Nikon equivalent, is the perfect lens for Galapagos shooting without tripod. Even a monopod isn't too useful, because you often want a ground-level shooting angle. Kneepads would be more useful on the rough volcanic rock.

Unless you are on a photographers' tour, a tripod would not be practical (too slow, in others' way, awkward when hopping in and out of Zodiacs). There's usually tons of light, and I shot mainly wide open to blur backgrounds.

You can always bring more lenses, etc., and leave the extras on the boat, just taking what you want ashore each day.

The TT Rotation bag would work very well for hopping in and out of pangas and walking the trails and beaches. I believe it has an integral rain cover which you might need, depending upon the season.

I used Think Tank's modulus belt system there, and it was excellent. Any system that gives you access to gear without taking the bag off and on would be good in the Islands.

If you have time, check out my Galapagos gallery:

www.f8andbethere.ca/galapagos

I'd love to see your shots when you get back. You're in for the experience of a lifetime.

Jim, you may have found an alternative by now, but I bought a used Reggie bracket and think it's terrific. Well worth the $100 price.

Today I'm shooting headshots for the entire cast of a high school musical. No electrical wires, no PC cord, one stand, just seconds to set up--and the results will be excellent. It's also great for fill on outdoor shoots like weddings.

The $150 new price is too high, though. Try a WTB ad on photo.net and Fred Miranda, if you think it's worth $100 or so.

CanCount is the only way I've heard of and used:

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-7893-8309

It costs a small fee, but works very well. Or you could send a RAW image from your camera to someone who owns CanCount and get him/her to run it through their software.

"Can I "over refresh"?"

Only if you stay at the bar too long, Mark.

Seriously, Rob Galbraith tested three strategies for conditioning Nikon EN-4 batteries (AKA Canon NP-E3), and then compared the number of shots the batts could provide. The results are here:

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-4059-4110