margo_brooder1

<p>Thank you, Bob! I appreciate your help.<br>

I just magnified the images on the 7D screen, and they look fine. So, perhaps the picture files are ok after all. That's a relief.<br>

I used a new card reader--perhaps that is the issue. I'll get another one tomorrow, as well as a new CF card.<br>

Sarah, I may have used too high a shutter speed, but I didn't use flash. That strange cast to the picture just somehow happened in the download process--the original photo doesn't look like that. Weird, huh? Thanks for the idea, though (I have made that shutter speed/flash mistake plenty of times!).<br>

All the best, and thank you both again.<br>

Margo</p>

<p>Here is a sample:<br>

http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?user_id=6424222<br>

Thank you again!</p>

<p>Hi,<br /> I just downloaded some photos onto two Mac computers and, while the photos look fine in my 7D LCD screen, on the Macs they are discolored and have strange banding and split-screen effects. <br /> Could it be a corrupt memory card? (This one is a Transcend 32 gb, bought around Oct. 2012.) Or, god forbid, an issue with my new, used 7D?<br /><br /> I'd so appreciate any input. <br /> Thank you very much.<br /> Margo</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hi Natalya,</p>

<p>Sorry I'm late to this discussion--you probably already had to keep or return your Sigma 35 1.4. But, you asked originally if it's worth trying the Canon 35L.<br>

It is.<br>

I bought one a couple weeks ago, and so far it's amazing. I find it adds a luminous quality to every-day pictures that would could seem flat with a lesser lens (given that I am still a novice photographer).<br>

But, I'm nervous about spending so much money on it ($1229)--and have wondered if I should return it for the Sigma, given the good reviews the Sigma is getting. Any thoughts on that?!<br>

Thanks,<br>

Margo</p>

<p>Thank you all very much for your responses. You're so nice to help me out. <br>

Marcus, you make a good point about shooting with smaller aperture to increase DOF. Maybe my photos have been mushy because I've been using too large an aperture.<br>

Harry, you are totally right about the tricky white balance in the gym. Thank you for the suggestion about custom WB. I'll start practicing. And thank you for the lens suggestions.<br>

Alan, thanks for the 70-300L recommendation. It sure would be nice to have the extra reach for soccer, and people seem to like that lens.<br>

Philip, I appreciate your detailed thoughts on indoor shooting, and 70-200 f/4 IS and 2.8. Ideally, I'd like to get both lenses. A 1.4 TC might get me close to 300mm, then.<br>

JDM--very good point about "grittier" shots being fine for sports. I didn't know that. Thank you.<br>

Eric and John, my little one in sports now is 8. The soccer field was not so big this year; but the kids will be on bigger fields this coming fall--which is why I am trying to get prepared now.<br>

The 135 has been great for gymnastics in a poorly lit gym. But, I've just shot during practices, where I can get reasonably close--no meets yet. I use the 135 at f/2.0 and ISO 1600. It seems to focus faster than my 50mm f/1.8, for some reason, and the images look better to me.<br>

But, for soccer, the 135 seems way too short. That's where I really need a longer lens. Swim meets start next week, so I'm not sure what focal length will work best, and precisely how the light will be (meets go from about 5:30 till as late as 10:00!). After I figure that out next week, I'll make a final decision on what to buy.<br>

John, thank you for sharing your experiences. You make good points about fps. And, I have exactly the same thoughts as you on camera bodies. I would love a 7D, but may compromise on 50D or 60D.<br>

Again, thank you all for sharing your experiences and advice. I don't want to buy the wrong thing! So, I really appreciate your help.<br>

Margo</p>

<p>I need a longer lens, and a camera that shoots more frames per second, for my kids' sports. I shoot soccer outdoors, gymnastics indoors and will soon shoot swim meets in evening light.<br>

I have a T1i, a 50mm 1.8 and 135 2.0L lenses. <br>

I was thinking of getting a used 40D or 50D (both about 6 fps versus 3 plus for T1i). Or, would a 7D make a big difference because of improved fps, ISO and autofocus? I'd rather spend mostly on lenses, if possible. <br>

Should I get:<br>

-- a 200mm f/2.8L prime (lighter, more discreet, cheaper, but much less versatile)?<br>

--70-200 f/2.8L (versatile but heavy, cheaper than IS version)?<br>

--70-200 f/2.8L IS or IS Mark II. Is the Mark II noticeably better than the Mark I? Any difference in how they'll hold resale value? (I like the idea of IS, so I can handhold a lens for uses other than sports.)<br>

--70-200 f/4L IS (lighter, cheaper, good walk-around lens, but perhaps too slow for evening swimming and indoor gymnastics?)<br>

Whatever I buy, I want the long lens with the best resale value for craigslist, so I can easily get my money out of it when my children are finished with sports. (Resale value also helps justify this big purchase to my husband!)<br>

I would really appreciate any advice. <br>

Thank you so much.<br>

Margo</p>

<p>Victor,<br>

Your post made me feel better: I had a 24-105 that I loved shooting with, but IQ did not look sharp to me. I compared it with a 28-135 and a 17-85 that I borrowed and saw no difference. I thought I was nuts!<br>

I probably should have had the 24-105 calibrated, but I sold it.<br>

Thanks for your post.<br>

Margo</p>

<p>I just purchased this lens used for $230 (by the way, would anyone mind telling me if that is a good price?), and so far I find it sharper at times in the center than a 24-105L that I may sell. The distortion at the wide end of the 17-85 is spectacular, but for my purposes, it does not matter much. There is also visible light falloff at the corners, but I care most about center sharpness, and in my tests the lens has done very well at that. I have not particularly noticed the softness at the long end yet, but I am a novice. The IS seems excellent.<br>

I was just looking for an inexpensive, wide-angle zoom lens to learn on, and I am happy so far with the 17-85. I want to buy a Canon 135mm f/2.0 someday, so I would put the proceeds of the 24-105mm toward that.<br>

All the best,<br>

Margo</p>