JohnMWright

<p>My 50D belongs in a museum.</p>

<p>I believe that was taken with the 14-24, which some few Canon users have adapted. It is a great lens but nothing is perfect. Overall I think it is remarkably sharp and detailed.</p>

<p>One assumes you mean the 5D3 vs this D800? Canon's samples are just pre-production in-camera JPGs, there are no raws yet. Too early to judge. </p>

<p>The price will end up being whatever the market will bear.</p>

<p>I would actually (and I did) get the 15-85 for landscapes instead. I like the extra range. Optically it is just as good as the 17-55. For landscapes, you don't need the speed. </p>

<p>Also, if you already have Nikon lenses, stick with Nikon. </p>

<p>From Nikon's site:<br>

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d800/features01.htm</p>

 

<p >Nikon engineers have developed a unique alternative for those seeking the ultimate in definition. The D800E incorporates an optical filter with all the anti-aliasing properties removed in order to facilitate the sharpest images possible.<br /> This is an ideal tool for photographers who can control light, distance and their subjects to the degree where they can mitigate the occurrence of moiré. Aside from the optical filter, all functions and features are the same as on the D800.</p>

<p >Note: The D800E carries an increased possibility that moiré and false color will appear, compared to the D800. IR cut and antireflective coating properties of the optical filter remain the same with both versions.</p>

<p>To test the camera/lens, put it on a solid tripod on a solid surface (not carpet). Aim it at a highly detailed subject, such as a map. Focus manually using live view at 10x magnification. Use a cable release to trip the shutter, while in live view. The results should be fairly sharp, sans sharpening, etc. The point here is to eliminate the equipment as a problem.</p>

<p>Next, try the same but use AF to verify the AF works. It should be close to what you get with live view at 10x, but you might need to try spot AF. </p>

<p>Regarding "any jump up should give you better results, not worse", I agree with Keith. There can be (often is) a learning curve involved.</p>

<p>Either. I prefer the features on my 50D. Marketing hype? No. The 50D is a darn good camera. With the noise reduction in CS5 (ACR) I get very low noise images up to 1600. I've seen some good results at 3200 as well, but haven't experimented enough to say definitely. Newer sensors are better, yet I have beautiful 16x24 images on my walls from it. I'm quite certain I could get 20x30 without much effort.</p>

<p>Actually a polarizer does not reduce reflections from metal... metallic reflections are typically unpolarized. It reduces reflections on water and foliage, and any polarized reflection. It will also darken blue skies and enhance contrast with clouds. The degree of polarization changes with angle and you might notice uneven darkening with wide angle lenses.</p>

<p>If you want more reach than 250, 400 makes more sense than 300 to me.</p>

<p>I'm looking at sling bags for outings where I'll carry a smaller set of lenses (1 or 2), possibly family outings where I would prefer not to set down my backpack and open it (due to either time or urban crowding). The Think Tank Sling-O-Matic 10 looks like the right size. Curious if anyone has any experience with any of the Sling-o-Matics... what do you like or dislike? Is it comfortable over the shoulder?</p>

<p>Stopped down... no brainer... save your money and buy the cheaper one. </p>

<p>Regardless, I'd use the collar for easier verticals and better balance. I assume you mean the L version.</p>

<p>Get to your local store and hold it in your hands yourself. I say that because Nikon bodies tend to not fit my hands well... you should make sure the Canon bodies fit yours.</p>

<p>I always suggest that people get their hands on the various models and see how they feel. That can make a difference. That aside, her budget makes a Rebel with kit zoom an obvious choice to start.</p>

<p>I found the EF-S 15-85 sharp corner to corner at every setting. It will be a great landscape lens. It is roughly equal to 24-135 on full frame. I just wish it was f/4 (at least). </p>

<p>Here is a portrait using the 100mm macro on a crop sensor, at f/2.8. DOF looks thin enough for my taste... http://www.photo.net/photo/14130142 I was about 3-4 feet away.</p>

<p>If you are trigger happy, filling a 16GB card is pretty easy. Get a few of them. And extra batteries.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>This image looks underexposed, which will add noise.</p>

<p>There are lots of variables that can lower image quality.</p>

<p>To test the IQ, you need to use a tripod and a perfectly still subject (a detailed map on the wall is a good subject if you have one). Use ISO 100, live view and manually focus. Use a remote release. With the mirror already up, no vibrations from the camera or the subject and perfect focus, you can tell if there are equipment issues. Vary the ISO up to the highest you use so you can see the change. Make sure the exposure is accurate. If that test looks good, then you might want to test AF as well. If you eliminate the hardware as a problem, then you can look into other factors such as exposure, hand-holding technique, etc.</p>

 

<p>I love doing macro photography and I've researched pretty much every macro lens made, and several no longer made. I don't think you can go wrong with any of them, there really aren't any bad ones out there. It comes down more to your tastes in focal length, and budget. </p>

<p>I'm extremely happy with my Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM macro. One of the things I like most about it is the bokeh. </p>

<p>I did exactly that... bought a new lens (on rebate) on 11/23 and the day before it arrived, saw a bigger discount. I wrote to the vendor and asked for the difference. As the new lens had not even arrived when I saw it, they agreed to discount the lens further.</p>

<p>If you are going to keep the 18-135 and carry it most of the time, then the 24-105 is just a duplication. I'd only consider it if you need the extra stop. But you said you stop down to at least f/5.6... so save your money. I'd put the money towards a different focal length.</p>

<p>I don't know which has better IQ (I don't have the zoom), but using the 1.4x on my 300 f/4 slows the AF down considerably. I'd either get the 400 prime or go for the convenience of the zoom.</p>

<p>Earlier this year I shot some family outing 'snaps' with my 50D in HTP mode. I tried it because we were in bright sun in sparse woods, way out of the DR of the sensor, and wanted to preserve highlights without worrying about a perfect exposure... Anyway, I like experimenting with various software; I later viewed these images in Picasa and they were all underexposed by about 1 stop. DPP displayed them properly exposed of course. I just checked Adobe Bridge and they look properly exposed there too. I'm sure there is more to it than just underexposing the images, but Picasa displayed the HTP images about a stop low.</p>

<p>+20 is pretty extreme. Exchange it. Or return it. And here is why I say that: I have only Canon lenses (4 of them) and haven't needed micro-adjustment with them, except a minor tweak on my macro. When using the macro, I now use liveview at 10x mounted on a tripod, so AF is moot. </p>

<p>Put the 5D2 sensor in a 7D-featured body. That covers most of it. I'd like ECF as well.</p>

<p>The XD-11 is my favorite classic film body. </p>

<p>Since you said "several" XD-11 bodies, I have to ask: does this happen with just one of the bodies or more than one?</p>

<p>Just to be sure... you are in M or A mode right? In S mode that window is blocked if I remember correctly. M should show both aperture and shutter speed on the bottom of the viewfinder (with metered shutter speed on the right side in a column), A shows on the aperture on the bottom. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Did you shoot these from a tripod? Did you use liveview to focus (with at least 5x to be precise)? remote release?</p>