ed_avis2

<p>Some actually like the harsh pentagonal bokeh of the older 50/1.8 lenses...</p> <p>I too would like to see Canon release a real competitor for the Zeiss 50/2 Makro-Planar, which is a great lens in every way except for lack of autofocus. I remember seeing some news of recent Canon patents filed which showed a 50/2.8 macro lens design.</p>

<p>I guess you could just take a series of shots at f/8, f/11, f/16 and pick the best one...</p>

<p>Hmm, possible; the EF 50/1.8 doesn't say 'CANON LENS MADE IN JAPAN' as many others do....</p>

<p>The 20-35 L is a good lens. Stop it down to f/5.6 and it will perform fine. I have both this one and the 17-35 L. I did a highly non-scientific comparison and couldn't find a clear winner in image quality between the two, though of course the newer lens has a better zoom range and USM.</p>

<p>The 6D is now sold as a kit with the 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 STM lens.</p>

<p>Canon UK's policy is that once a model is no longer on their supported list, they will refuse to do anything with it. The stated reason is that if they accidentally broke it further while investigating they'd be unable to make good the damage. This is true even if the camera is already entirely broken.<br> <br />The 1DIIN was on their support list until recently - sad to hear it has dropped off. A third party repairer should be able to Frankenstein together a working camera using the shutter from another one. Canon can supply a list of approved repair centres (for all that 'approved' means very much when the body is out of warranty). By the way, I have a 1DII (not N) I might sell (based in London).</p>

<p>There is the Voigtländer branded 40mm f/2 pancake lens which weighs 200g. You mentioned that you prefer zoom lenses, which makes sense, but pick any two: fast, light, zoom.</p>

<p>The 5Ds has a new 1.6 crop mode so you can use it just like a 20-megapixel 7D-style camera. I don't see why having a pair of 6D and 7D2 would be better, except to have a spare camera to hand.</p>

<p>Ed Mika makes a range of adaptors or lens conversions that don't require an extra optical element. Only certain FD lenses can be adapted - typically telephoto ones that can focus past infinity, so have a bit of wiggle room to be shortened by two millimetres.</p>

<p>With 50 megapixels it may become more practical to de-fish and still end up with an image roughly as sharp as a 20 megapixel rectilinear one. Assuming that your fisheye lens can resolve that detail, of course...</p>

<p>I can add a 'me too' to those warning that both the 50/1.8 and 50/1.4 lenses are fragile. The 1.4 autofocus can become stiff and seize up after a year or two.</p> <p>If you want a 50mm lens, and very fast apertures are not important, consider the Sigma 50/2.8 macro or Canon 50/2.5 'compact macro'. The autofocus motor on these is noisy and a bit slow - but it *works*. They are optically very good and do macro as a bonus (1:1 for the Sigma, 1:2 for the Canon).</p> <p>If you like manual focusing you may also consider the Zeiss 50/1.4, which is excellent from f/2 onwards and can sometimes be picked up cheaply, or the Zeiss 50/2, which is hard to fault optically but a bit more difficult to get hold of at a bargain price. Both have smooth manual focus with a fairly long throw and distance scale, although the 50/2's focus throw gives more space to very short distances (it does macro to 1:2 magnification).</p>

<p>I guess they'll sell a separate Wifi unit as they do for the 1D X?</p>

<p>If you need high ISO, which gives better results? A 5D3 at ISO 3200 or the 5Ds at ISO 3200, then scaled down in post-processing to the same resolution? It is not clear what is meant when previews say that the high-ISO performance is "worse" than the earlier model. Worse on a pixel-for-pixel basis (which is not really fair), or worse even allowing for the noise-cancelling effect of scaling down an image?</p>

<p>There is a firmware hack available for the 5D3 which expands dynamic range greatly by using a different ISO sensitivity for alternate lines of the image: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2072671812/</p> <p>Clearly that same code won't work on the new 5Ds but it would be interesting to see if Canon have tried something similar. With 50 megapixels of resolution, you could use different ISO for alternate lines, then combine each 2x2 square of pixels into a single output pixel and still have a 12 megapixel output image but with very wide dynamic range. (Or with more clever postprocessing you can make a 50 megapixel output image too.)</p>

<p>You might like the 40mm or 24mm pancake lenses, which are cheap and good. The 40mm would be a kind of replacement for your 50mm - so perhaps the 24mm pancake is the one to consider.</p>

<p>With the lenses you have, for the first time a 5D will let you take a reasonably wide angle photograph (using the 28mm Olympus lens for example).</p> <p>There is no need for anything more expensive - many of the lenses you have will give sharp and contrasty images when stopped down to f/8. The fix-focal ones should be good at wider apertures too.</p>

<p>Chris O., do you mean that the usual exposure compensation of -1/3 or -2/3 stop for full-manual lenses is no longer needed when using the Ee-S screen?<br> I am surprised to hear you use it with the 400mm f/5.6 lens but I guess it really depends on the amount of light... if it is too dark to use a f/5.6 lens with the Ee-S focusing screen then it is also too dark to get a usable shutter speed, right?</p>

<p>David S, I do not suggest manually focusing on a moving subject but manually focusing on a fixed point and then hoping that the swimmer's head pops up there. You can't focus on the swimmer's head, whether manually or automatically, because it is underwater a lot of the time.</p>

<p>You will not get better low-light performance than the 6D. (except perhaps with the top-of-range 1D X, but even then it is probably about even.) A 1D Mark II is a non-starter for the high ISO speeds that you need, although it is in many ways a good camera still for outdoor work.<br> <br />I think your only option is to manually focus to where you think the swimmer's head is going to appear.</p>

<p>The batteries for the old 1D series are indeed annoying. I will say that the 1Ds Mark II has much better battery life than the original 1Ds (but may be out of budget for the original poster, unless you happen to spot a bargain). The 1D Mark II seems okay too, but the higher frame rate means it burns through batteries quicker.</p>

<p>I would not assume that a 1Ds has been "well used". Many have lived a sheltered life in a studio, or even as a backup studio camera with very little use at all. Similarly, the 5D can have problems such as a dirty sensor (anecdotally, it seems more prone to this than the 1Ds) but you shouldn't assume they will all be like that.</p> <p>The 1Ds does have a better viewfinder than the 5D and better autofocus. (Neither body has Live View.) Image quality is basically the same between the two, I believe. The size and weight difference is a subjective matter. I would look out for either model on sale locally and try it out before buying. If you are considering a 1D II or 1D IIN, handling one of these will give you a good idea of what the 1Ds is like and vice versa. (The main differences being the slower frame rate of the 1Ds and the better screen on the 1D II N.)</p>

<p>As far as I know any Sigma DC lens will *mount* on a full frame body without the need for any teleconverter. You just don't get an image circle that covers the whole sensor. But the circle may sometimes be large enough to cover the smaller 1.3x crop sensor, particularly when stopped down a bit. Usually a zoom lens such as your 10-20 will have a larger circle at the longer focal length.</p> <p>Here are some examples of using a different Sigma DC lens, the 18-35, on a full frame body: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Comparisons/Sigma-18-35mm-f-1.8-DC-HSM-Lens.aspx#FULLFRAME<br> <br />I would expect that the 10-20 is probably a bit worse than that (since making a really big image circle at 10mm focal length is difficult, and would make for an expensive lens) but it might be usable at 20mm.</p>

<p>Hiqh quality doesn't have to mean expensive... try the Canon 40mm pancake lens for example. Or any of Canon's 100mm lenses. Or indeed, some of the cheap but good fixed-focal lenses made by Sigma.</p>

<p>There's also the new 24-105 STM which looks like a good buy.</p>

<p>Do also consider getting the Mark III teleconverter with your existing lens. Supposedly it is much improved over the old 2x and designed to work with the new 70-200 lens you have.</p>