JohnMWright

<p>You were shooting JPG when it worked?</p>

<p>Which version of PS? My guess is... the version of ACR you have is too old for the new camera and can't read the new raw format. If your PS is new enough, you probably just need to update to the latest ACR. I don't have LR but I imagine the issue would be the same. If your version of PS is too old, you won't be able to update ACR without buying a new copy of PS.</p>

<p>In the meanwhile, you can use Canon's DPP to read the raw files and then transfer them to PS for editing.</p>

<p>I would buy the 500mm for the weight difference. Someday, when my wife won't kill me, maybe I will. </p>

<p>But my tripod is more than good enough. I bought a Gitzo 3530, and shortened the centerpost. There are several variations on the 35xx models, so you are sure to find one that suits your height. If I manage to survive buying a 500mm, I will also get the Wimberley v2 head. </p>

<p>For BIF you might look into a shoulder stock.</p>

<p>Actually you only have one liver and it's vital. Consider giving up a kidney instead. ;-)</p>

<p>I own the Canon 100mm USM (non L) macro and it is superb, but for insects I'd go longer. I'd look at the 180mm options. I doubt you'll go wrong with any brand.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>All Canon EF and EF-S (which you likely don't have yet, coming from film) lenses will work fine on the 50D.</p>

<p>17mm on the 50D is equivalent to 27mm on your 7n. My 17-40 serves as a normal zoom on the 50D. </p>

<p>If you like the field of view you get with your film camera, why not look for a used 5D (mark 1)? As a full frame camera it will have the same field of view you are used to, and it is still an excellent camera.</p>

<p>Thanks again. I've got a few places to look but more tips are always welcome.</p>

<p>Yes, melanistic is the proper term as I understand it. Thanks for all the tips. More spots are always good to know about.</p>

<p>Not in the camera. You'll have to use a photo editor to crop them to the dimensions you need.</p>

<p>Thank you Evan and Loren.</p>

<p>I live in the Washington DC metro area, and I've seen several black squirrels on my way to work in Virginia. They are always on the side of busy streets. I'd like to photograph them in a more natural setting. Does anyone know of a local park where they can be found?</p>

<p>I've read they originated in Canada, and were brought to the National Zoo and some escaped, but I have yet to spot any at the zoo itself.</p>

<p>I learned about diffraction years ago when I used film. I studied it in Optics courses; it is an interesting phenomenon. I've long since forgotten most of the math. </p>

<p>But having read about it, I was curious just how "bad" it was... and I've done my own "real world" tests with my macro lenses with various cameras, including 35mm film, a 20D, and a 50D. I felt no different about the images between the various cameras. I'm happy to stop down to f/16 with any of them, and more cautious about using f/22. Focus, composition, light and holding the camera steady are far bigger concerns than diffraction.</p>

<p>I would encourage anyone who questions it to test it themselves. The images posted by the OP match my own experience. In the real world, just use the aperture you want to use and don't worry about it.</p>

<p>I'd sit tight on the money until I had a need. You have a good range of lenses already. </p>

<p>The main reason in my mind is more wide angle lens choices. It really depends on what you want to shoot.</p>

<p>Can you get the tripod closer to the table? Can you put one leg on top of the table (horizontal, not extended) while two extend to the ground? I'm not quite sure I have visualized this setup well, but you should not need to invert the centerpost.</p>

<p>If you need to go low, get a tripod that can go low. Inverting them is no fun at all. Consider cutting the centerpost to size. </p>

<p>My Gitzo 3530 can spread out flat, each leg can be set independently, and I can remove the centerpost entirely. I also cut the post to a reasonable length... it gives me about 4" of travel which is enough to make adjustments without getting in the way or giving up stability. It usually goes low enough without having to remove the centerpost (but I still have that option). I also use a strong arca-swiss compatible ballhead (Kirk BH-1), and I'm about to get a tripod collar for my 100mm macro. The pistol grips I've seen are not very strong and are unbalanced when tilted. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>3 lenses... that's rough! Since you love manual focus, I'd look hard at the Zeiss ZE. It has the electronics so you avoid the inconvenience of stopped-down metering. <br>

Another thought: the Nikon 55mm f/2.8 AIS micro. It might be too slow for your needs but it is very well built. You can find them used fairly easily.</p>

<p>Scott,</p>

<p>That is disappointing since the GP specs on their website state 25 lbs at any angle, up to a 400mm f/4. My Kirk BH-1 is rock solid with my 400 f/4 (currently my largest lens). </p>

<p>Scott,</p>

<p>What is different about the Acratechs? Those slots look ordinary to me... The GP models I mean...</p>

<p>Kirk BH-1<br>

RRS BH-55<br>

Markins<br>

Arca Swiss Z1<br>

The Acratech models with a drop slot should also work.<br>

For the 600mm... I'd get the full sized Wimberley gimbal.</p>

<p>According to this page, http://www.cameraquest.com/frames/4saleReos.htm, you don't want to try your two listed wides...<br>

<strong>R Lenses Which will NOT work: Strangely enough not all Leica R lenses protrude in identical ways into camera bodies. The following Leica R lenses are reported to have mirror clearance issues with most if not all adapted EOS cameras: 15/3.5, 16/2.8, 19/2.8 Second Version, 21/4 Mirror Lock Up Version, 35/1.4, 35-70/2.8, 80-200/4.5 First Version. The 24/2.8 and 28-70/3.5-4.5 (2nd version) will not work on the EOS 5D because the rear element protective guard hits the mirror. The 21-35/3.5 Aspherical and 28-90/2.8-4.5 Aspherical is reported not to work on the 1Ds Mk II. Keep in mind there are minor design changes during a lens' lifetime (most of which are not reported by manufacturers), and so the changes are unknown to the public. The first time you mount any adapted lens to any adapted camera, it only makes prudent sense to carefully check mirror clearance. The Canon 5D has a larger than normal EOS mirror, so take extra care mounting lenses. This list is not represented as complete. If you find other Leica R mount lenses which will not mount safely on the EOS adapters, let me know and I will add to this list. </strong></p>

 

<p>Given the budget and the lens assortment, I'd either get a 50D or a used 5D mark I. </p>

<p>Given the studio portraits and the 85mm... I'd lean toward the 5D.</p>

<p>The people I know who switched to FF and sold their EF-S lenses all made back a reasonable amount of money, and 1.6 crops show no sign of going away... shouldn't be a worry. Just buy what you need.</p>

<p>Have you tried the lens on a tripod pointed at a static subject? </p>

<p>Most of the extenders I'm aware of are meant for longer focal lengths. The front elements of the extenders protrude outward, which works with telephotos but not shorter focal lengths. I haven't seen the 24mm ts/e II but I doubt it would work. You'll also lose a lot of that wonderful quality even if you find one that works.</p>

<p>Could you crop? A 1.6x crop on the 5D2 still yields 8mpix. </p>

 

<p>Suggested reading for anyone looking for a tripod and head: http://www.bythom.com/support.htm</p>

<p>A friend has used both. Both are good systems, both are expensive. Stick with what you have or you are throwing more money away for no visible result.</p>