peter_langfelder

<p>Do you have any other lenses? Are they also stiff when mounted on the camera? That would point to either the camera or the lens as the culprit.<br>

Looking at my 50mm lens of the same type, there are screws that presumably hold the mount to the rest of the lens plus a couple smaller pins/screws that go in the radial direction. Check that they are all tight (you will need a small Phillips screwdriver. Other than that and a remote possibility that you might have slightly bent the mount (did the lens fall on its mount recently?) it can only be a problem with the camera mount.<br>

For what it's worth though, I seem to remember that my 50mm fit somewhat tightly on my (former) EOS 3, without any ill effects.</p>

<p>A direct comparison is described in an <a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml">old article on the Luminous Landscape</a>.</p>

<p>The main reason why f/1 lenses are difficult to make is that the lower the aperture number, the further from the optical axis the light travels through the lens, and the stronger the various aberations become, irrespective of format. That's why even best f/1.4 SLR lenses aren't that great at 1.4 or 2, compared to their performance at f/4 or f/5.6. To make an f/1 lens requires a complex design (unless you are happy with low image quality at f/1) and that's expensive no matter what the format. Also, often times (as was apparently the case with Canon's 50mm f/1 and to some degree with the 50mm f/1.2), passable image quality wide open and good image quality when stopped down do not go hand in hand and the lens designers have to make a compromise.</p>

<p>I use a 6-stop B+W filter, sometimes in conjunction with a polarizer. I usually hold a lens cap close to the viewfinder for the duration of the exposure, but the few times I forgot to this on the first exposure and did it on a second one I haven't seen any difference in the photos. It is possible that in extreme situations (if the viewfinder faces the sun and very strong light enters while you take a photo of a dark cave with your filter on and aperture f/22) there could be enough light leaking in through the viewfinder to cause a problem.</p>

<p>Stephen, have you looked at vuescan? You don't have to read reports, you can download a trial and see for yourself.</p>

<p>I only have speculation to offer. The Smear Away liquid may not absorb into the orange pads properly and perhaps gets dislodged onto the sensor in droplets that may leave some residue.<br>

I have two complaints about the green pads: first, the edge is not flat (the corners are longer than the middle, i.e. corners are protruding) so the middle looses contact with sensor before I reach the end. Second, they tend to leave a lot of loose fibers and other crud (!) that requires cleaning with a brush afterwards. The manual even says so ("for complete cleaning, optionally use dust brush after using the swab" or something to that effect - WTH? For $3 a pop?). It usually takes me a few applications of the brush to clean up the dust after cleaning with the green swabs. </p>

<p>As previous posters have indicated, the 400D, as most other hundreds-series EOS cameras, have a particular problem focusing large-aperture lenses in low light. In my experience it doesn't matter much which lens you use (I have 35/2, 50/1.8, 100/2). It helps if you use the center focusing point exclusively, because it is more sensitive and possibly more precise than the peripheral points. The midrange bodies are somewhat better, although my 5D is far from perfect as well. You may want to try finding a used EOS 40D, or borrow one for one night to try it out. The professional 1D series would work better, but they may be out of your reach, even used. Technique is very important as well because of the super-narrow DOF.</p>

<p>Just to set the record straight... that's a Polish site, in Polish.</p>

<p>I have the original 200mm f/2.8 and never even use the limiter switch. AF (with 5D and previously with EOS-3) is more than fast enough for me.</p>

<p>I use avidemux. It allows me to downsize the videos so I can actually watch them :) I'm not sure about the rotation though.</p>

<p>Good luck waiting. I wouldn't read too much into these price movements - the US Dollar appreciated by roughly 5% against the Japanese Yen since November, and 5% of 1300 is 65.</p>

<p>The 580EX has a little pull-up white bounce card behind the flash head. If you're getting too much power from the flash head, point it up and pull the card out. It will bounce just a bit of light onto your subject.</p>

<p>If you're happy with their performance on slide film, I see no reason why you should be unhappy with them on a digital camera, looking at a print of the same size. If you start pixel-peeping, you will likely notice some blur around the edges, but again, prints should be no worse (in fact, in my experience are much better, but that may come down to my scanning) than from film.</p>

<p>Right now I would take a hard look at the 15-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. Very good range for general landscape photography, and (according to reviews) very good image quality. Only you can tell whether you need super-wide angles covered by the 10-xx lenses, or whether the 15mm is wide enough. I personally don't use anything wider than 24mm on full frame for landscapes, and I find it challenging to get good photos even with the 24mm. My 35mm and 50mm lenses get much more use.</p>

<p>Here's another suggestion - instead of speding $1000 on 70-200 f/4 IS, consider the latest model 70-300 4-5.6 USM IS, costs about $500 and is also quite good, plus a bit smaller and lighter. If you don't use the telephoto range that much, it may be a better choice. Just make sure you get this model - there's a bunch of other 70 and 75-300 lenses that are cheaper and not nearly as good.</p>

<p>Memory cards have been known to survive full washing machine cycles and extended swims in the ocean, so it is not likely that the humidity damaged the card. It is possible the humidity damaged the camera... as others said, try to read the card through a card-reader.</p>

<p>Yakim, new versions of various softwarte are often only available on new Linux releases. Sometimes that's arbitrary, but sometimes a new software version requires new libraries/functionality that is not available on the older system. You can try to install 0.16 on your system, but you may run into missing dependencies and what is called "dependency Hell" that will force you to upgrade pretty much everything on your system. In that case it may be better to upgrade to the new Ubuntu distribution.</p>

<p>Bill, you may want to try the Visible Dust pads and cleaning fluids. In my experience they don't leave streaking, although they sometimes do leave loose dust particles that can be picked up with a dry sensor brush. My experience with the Visible Dust products isn't entirely positive, but after a few tries and repeated cleanings they did get the sensor clean.</p>

<p>Sorry, no experience with 7D so my advice may be be limited usefulness... For batch processing, use dcraw. dcraw -e will extract the camera-generated thubmnails from the raw files. ufraw 0.16 should work as is it is based on a newer version of dcraw than 0.15. Other programs you may want to try are digikam and rawstudio, although rawstudio's colors from my 5D images look weird. I believe they are all based on dcraw.</p>

<p>No experience with formal studio portraits, but having been taking pictures of friends' babies for awhile now I can perhaps offer some advice. As others said, well rested, fed, and comfortable is most important. Give the kid something to play with (or have the parents bring some of their toys). My experience is also that they will want to play with your "toys" rather than their own - one nearly-year old loved the my Canon lens cap :). Have the parents cooperate by making the baby smile and look up in the right direction.</p>

<p>A few suggestion. If you can't hold the 70-200 or the 85/1.2L, get a lighter lens - 85/1.8, 100/2, 135/2.8 plus 90-100mm macros from third party manufacturers - all excellent lenses, all under 1lb. A second alternative is to get a 70-200/2.8 IS or a 70-200/4 IS lens, the IS will help you immensely with handholding. The 70-200/4 IS weighs only about 1.5 lbs. The 7D and 50/1.2L is probably the most expensive solution, and the field of view will only be comparable to a 80mm lens on full format - may be a bit short for tight head and shoulders portratits. I doubt the 7D+50/1.2 will be better than a full frame camera with a 85/1.8.</p>

<p>Roughly speaking, 24/1.4 on the 7D will behave like a 38mm f/2.2 lens on full frame. In this light you may want to think twice whether you want to invest into a 24/1.4, or get a 5D with 35mm f/2 for about the same money.</p>

<p>Hello, a question for people with detailed knowledge of the 550EX's internals. I just realized the manual mode (M) on my old 550EX does not work - no matter what flash power I set, the flash always fires on full power (on a 5D, G6, and an old fully manual Yashica SLR). The flash works perfectly well in ETTL (except perhaps at very short distances where it tends to overexpose, but maybe that's a design limitation). Any ideas what is wrong and which part (or circuit board) needs to be checked and/or changed? I have already fixed two minor problems with the flash and am fairly confident with taking it apart, changing parts, and putting it back together. I'd rather do it myself than go through the hassle of getting it to the Canon service center and having to pay a fat flat fee for the repair. Thanks in advance for all suggestions.</p>

<p>My understanding is that linear polarizers are more effective than circular ones, but the optics (prism, meter, AF system) of a modern (D)SLR means the metering and AF may not work and even the viewfinder may go dark, so a linear polarizer is not practical. However, does live view (or, for landscapes, using manual focus and taking test pictures until the histogram looks right) change this equation? Anyone tried it? Thanks in advance for all answers.</p>

<p>Your question should really be which combo is better: 7D with 10-22 or 5D with 17-40? I think the lens will be the primary factor deciding the image quality. According to photozone reviews, the 17-40 has much higher distortion on the 5D than the 10-22 on 7D. That may be a problem for architecture. The resolution figures aren't really comparable, but I suspect that in the center the higher resolution of the 7D may confer a small advantage, while in the corners the both camera will likely outresolve the respective lens and so it's down to which lens is better - to make a decision, you would need to take some test pictures and compare the resulting prints. if you plan to upgrade to a new full frame body sometime in the not-too-distant future, the 5D + 17-40 would be the logical choice.</p>