daniel_capan

<p>I thought of updating the thread in case someone else is in a similar situation.<br>

I took the lens to Canon Service at the Mississauga location where I stayed for maybe 5 minutes for filling in a form and dropping the lens. It was a weekday around 12-1 pm. I got my lens back after almost a month though they initially said that I would have to wait only 2 weeks. Apparently they were waiting for some parts from Japan (3rd lens group) that needed to be replaced. As for the repair, so far so good, hope I won't have any problems in the future. I have also decided on a polarizer. I got the b+w 77mm xs-pro kaesemann CP.<br>

Thank you all for your advice!</p>

<p>Thank you all for the advice! I called Canon Service today and they mentioned some steps I should take before sending it in (like cleaning the contacts, set the camera to P mode, clear custom settings...). The lady on the phone said that if they cannot replicate the problem they most likely won't do anything. She also adviced me to send both the camera and the lens in if I decide to do so. I will try to go there in person (they have a location where one can do that) because I think I stand a better chance of convincing someone to take a look at it than if I mail it in. As for the filter I haven't made up my mind yet, but there's no rush. I appreciate you taking the time to answer my questions.</p>

<p>Hi,<br>

About a month ago I had an ERROR 01 - faulty communication between the lens (EF 24-105mm) and the camera (5D Mk2). It happend to me pretty often within maybe 2 weeks. I checked the contacts on both camera and lens and everything looked fine. I was convinced that the lens had a problem since I found reports online of other people experiencig the same issue. Being lazy though I haven't sent it right away and kept shooting (at varoius apertures) and it's been a month with no issues.<br>

Question1: Since my warranty expires in August this year, should I send it to Canon just in case? Is there a risk in opening it and making it worst in case ther's actually nothing wrong with it?<br>

Question2 - unrelated to the Error. I am lookin into a 77mm polarizer. Should I go for the slim version or at 24mm I am fine with a regular one?<br>

Thank you !</p>

<p>This is taken at the Butterfly Conservatory in Niagara Falls, Ontario. I rented a Canon 100m L macro lens for this trip. I really liked the lens.</p><div></div>

<p>Thanks Dan :). I haven't thought about cropping the tree but now that you mentioned it I will try and see how it looks like.</p>

<p>Canon 350D @85mm F5.6, 1/125, ISO400.</p><div></div>

<p>Thank you very much for your suggestions. I will try to respond to some of them:</p>

<p>The first half was indeed a rant to support my conclusion that Canon will have to introduce video AF as well.</p>

<p>I've invested in good quality lens (17-85 IS, 70-300 IS, 50 mm 1.8) and even built a small studio in my basement and hence I am not planning on switching brands. I may consider buying a dedicated video camera even though this is what I was trying to avoid.</p>

<p>Nathan, I am buying a camera for its photo capabilities first and video second. It’s just that the cameras I am considering (either the 7D or the 60D) both meet my photographic needs. They don’t meet the video one. I thought that since I am upgrading anyway and the cameras I am looking at also have HD video, why spend ~1000$ on another one.</p>

<p>Well, it's not really 'Rebels' but first entry DSLRs. It just sounded better :).<br />Here are some thoughts first on marketing with the mention I know nothing about it (never studied it). I don't know which market brings Canon/Nikon (C/N) more money - the point and shoot or the DSLR but what I am sure of is that when it comes to revenue per client the DSLR part wins hands down. So then the more people switch from point & shoot to DSLR the more bucks for C/N (allow me not to add more slashes here for Sony, Olympus etc). Making people buy DSLRs not only brings more revenue but also brand loyalty. With no study to back this up I still think I am not far from the truth. Of course there are exceptions. People's first DSLR is most likely an entry level one, like the Rebel in Canon's case. (not counting the SLR owners that move to DSLR.. I am talking about moving from p&s to dslr) Some may see an improvement, some not, some may get excited about it, start reading on these forums about lenses, filters & stuff and sooner or later feel the need for more equipment, updated bodies etc. Once hooked it's difficult to let go or switch from one manufacturer to another. I know this because I've been there and I am there still.</p>

<p>I am looking to upgrade my Rebel XT to something better. I was also thinking of buying an HD camera. Now that both can be found into one single device I have more reasons to upgrade. There is one problem though and that's why I am still on the sidelines: video autofocus. I read that the professionals only use manual focus, that if you plan the shot manual focus is so much better and so on. Well, my main subject is going to be my 1 year old daughter which is very active and unpredictable and things will get worse (from a video pint of view only). And since I am not looking at shooting hours of video but just a few minutes of her doing some stuff I think a DSLR would be enough IF it had autofocus.</p>

<p>So Nikon just released D3100 which is said to have video AF. I haven't seen any reviews yet on this particular feature but I think Nikon is a serious brand that would not advertise something that doesn't properly work in most situations. Assuming it will work fine this puts Canon into a difficult position because in order to keep recruiting Rebel users (that later might turn into buyers of more expensive stuff) they will have to match this feature or even (hopefully) improve it. BUT as someone else said it here before there is a problem... because they would rather not make a DSLR as easy to use as a HD consumer camcorder and with a better video output for about the same price (cannibalism).</p>

<p>I have been shooting with the XT for 5 years now. It still works fine. So I am waiting to see how this plays out because the next camera I am going to buy should last for another 5 years at least and have all I need in it.</p>

<p>Am I making sense here ?</p>

<p>P.S Sorry for the long post and thank you for reading/responding.</p>

<p>...and staying in Toronto this picture is from Roger Waters' The Wall concert on Wednesday. Shot with Rebel XT, 50mm 1.8 @ 2.8, 1/30 ISO 400</p><div></div>

<p>I see that people mostly complain about the features of the 60D. I find Bob Atkins' review fair. The 60D is supposed to be something between the T2i and 7D and this is what it is. Don't forget the price is also somewhere in between. I want to upgrade from my Rebel XT and I have been looking at both T2i and 7d leaning lately towards the latter. Since one of the reasons of upgrading is HD video I was hoping for improved AF properties. Nikon seems to be ahead in that regard.</p>

<p>As suggested I posted below the kit I bought a year ago and still works fine. I am currently happy with it:</p>

<p>http://cgi.ebay.ca/FLASH-STROBE-MONOLIGHT-800WS-400x2-SOFTBOX-STAND-PKG-/360292533622?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have a home based studio in the basement. Well, living in TH my basement is just a room about 14 by 20 so it's not big. I have a similar set up as Alan, only that my paper rolls are wider. I definitely feel the need for more space in all 3 dimensions. As lighting I have the kind of kit Gerry refers to as 'crap in the waiting'. I have been using it for a year and I am still waiting. I bought it on ebay, it's made in China and I knew I was taking a risk buying it but I couldn't afford a brand name kit. My kit has 2 strobes + accessories (softbox, stands etc). Recently I bought a radio trigger to be able to use my 430 EX as a third light; again no brand name. It works, but of course no E-TTL.</p>

<p>Hi,<br />I bought a kit from ebay for 520 $ around a year ago. It hasn't dissapointed me yet. I think the radio transmitter was optional and I had to pay extra. Adding a background paper, support, the wireless trigger increases the cost. So you may consider cheaper alternatives like the second link below. It seems that I did not do a proper research when I bought mine :)<br />Here it is. The seller is called studio-98.<br /><a href="http://cgi.ebay.ca/FLASH-STROBE-MONOLIGHT-800WS-400x2-SOFTBOX-STAND-PKG-/360282332127?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item53e2801bdf">http://cgi.ebay.ca/FLASH-STROBE-MONOLIGHT-800WS-400x2-SOFTBOX-STAND-PKG-/360282332127?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item53e2801bdf</a><br />A simple search on ebay and I found out this one as well<br /><a href="http://cgi.ebay.ca/750W-STROBE-STUDIO-FLASH-TRIGGER-LIGHT-LIGTHING-KIT-NEW-/350349832238?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_2&hash=item51927a302e">http://cgi.ebay.ca/750W-STROBE-STUDIO-FLASH-TRIGGER-LIGHT-LIGTHING-KIT-NEW-/350349832238?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_2&hash=item51927a302e</a></p>

<p>I was about to ask a similar question. I too am looking at buying a T2i or 7D mostly because of their HD video capabilities. I currently own a Rebel XT and either of the 2 above would be an upgrade. I was leaning toward the 7D but after reading Bob Atkin's review I'm not sure if the 7D is worth the extra $ for me.<br>

<br />In response to the previous comment, initially I also thought that shooting stills will be enough for my newborn daughter( 11 months now). I even bought some lighting equipment and set up a small studio in my basement. However, now that she's grown I want to film her as well. Some memories can't be recorded as stills and I find the Ipod nano's video quality poor (the only video recording device in the house). I do enjoy the photographs I have taken during the 11 months but I also enjoy the small videos (2-3 min max). I just wish they were of a much better quality.</p>

<p>My comment is off subject as I don't know much about equipment. I am actually an amateur / hobbiest photographer and that is why I'm going to phrase this as a question and not a critique. I was looking at your flickr studio photography album and noticed that most of the photos have the subject's shadow on the background. Is that the correct way to do it ? When taking shots of my little daughter in my studio basement I try not to have any shadows on the background; I personally find them distracting.</p>

<p>Hi Matt,<br />Thank you for your time,<br />I was shooting right to JPEG (no RAW file) , using the FLASH setting on the white balance and sRGB. I haven't done any display calibration. However, the picture looks different on the same display when using different programs to open it. I initially thought the reason might be the tungsteen lights that were on, but the problem seems to be in the display not the actual colour of the picture. To support this conclusion was something I read on this forum as well ... someone was saying that the flash light is more powerfull than that of the light bulb that the latter doesn't actually matter (something like F8 to F5).</p>

<p>Hi everyone and thank you for reading this. Not sure if this is the right forum but here is the story:<br>

I recently purchased some studio lights so I am new to this. I took a shot of my daughter using a white background and overexposed it so that it actually comes out white. The problem is: the background looks yellowish in photoshop or windows picture viewer but white in internet explorer and printed. In Photoshop 7 if I click on the background, the RGB values are all 255 which means white, right ? but I see it yellow and the difference is really noticeable if I put the same picture side by side opened in photoshop and internet explorer. I did not have this problem before upgrading to Windows 7 .. if that helps :)<br>

Thanks a lot !</p>