Canon 70-200mm F4 L USM replacement

Similar Questions

• Canon lens EF 70-200mm L F4 USM + 2 X L series extender

  Hi, I have a Canon lens EF 70-200mm L F4 USM. Now, I want to buy an extension of series X L 2. Can someone help me by informing that AF can work with EF 70-200mm L USM F4 + 2 X Extender mounted on 650 d device and how much image quality I have to make compromises for the same thing.

  mithun_pal129 wrote:

  Thank you all for your valuable comments. I forgot to mention that my intension of extender to my EF 70-200mm L F4 USM in a telephoto lens for wildlife / birds. But now that I'm your stay in Abu Dhabi, he is not paid a lot of bird / wild life. This is why I don't want to spend a lot on super telephoto, and personally, I don't want to go to cheap Sigma lens. So I wanted to do objective 70-200mm + 2 Expander x 140-400 mm. As I myself feel 1.4 X extender is pretty good, but it will give me up to 280mm. I know that's not very good lens for bird / wild raise photography. But you want to know still is feasible or if I use 2 x Extender to make the 400mm autofocus lens is required for the wild life or manual focus can still operate at F8. I don't have a lot of experience in the photography of wild life that's why I wanted to know things.

  In a Word... N °

  Of a 2 X teleconverter on a 70-200/4 made for a lens of 140-400/8 "effective." Due to the reduction of light reaching the AF sensors, your camera will turn off autofocus. A stronger 2 X also "costs" more loss of quality of the image due to the deterioration.

  It is possible to tape on some of the electronic contacts on the focal length multiplier, so that the camera does not know it is there and always try to auto focus. However, the autofocus will be much slower and will tend to hunt much more.

  In some situations, you may be able to manually update. However, effective f8 makes for a pretty weak sight, most cameras update automatic modern as you do not have some fo the features allowing the development manual, vintage cameras designed for the manual focus had in the past. Some people change to one-third of frosted glass to add functionality to support manual focus (split finder image, micro diaprisms, for example). However this requires careful work to install the screen and the display of different can affect precision measurement of the camera, especially in the incorrect Spot metering.

  Addition of a lower 1.4 X teleconverter makes your lens in effect 112-280mm f5.6, who will still be updated with auto focus and will be much less loss of image quality, but not as much 'reach. If yours is a goal IS, it can reasonably be handholdable. If it is not a goal IS, you will need to watch your shutter speeds than blur carefully, probably should keep to 1/500 or more quickly to avoid the camera. Or use a tripod, as suggested by ebibgs, or at least a monopod. You also need to limit the autofocus on your camera to the central AF point only, I think.

  ebiggs1 wrote:

  On your camera, the 70-200mm f4 is like a 112-320mm f4.  With a converter 1. 4 x, looking at 448mm f5.6 and th elong end.  + 400 mm should be long enough for you to get photos of some birds.  BTW, use a tripod.

  While it is technically correct, citing the "crop camera lens factor" in this way may not help much, can be confusing.

  The original poster has simply a 70-200mm lens which they are accustomed to using on a crop sensor camera. They would now like to double the range of this lens on their camera. Crop sensor lens incorporating conversation factor is very useful when the user goes from frame of film/full to reframe the camera or vice versa. For someone who has never used a film camera or has not used one for many years and is now completely accustomed to how behaves a lens of focal length on their device to harvest, it is a completely moot point.

  But what he's basically saying that while you can add a 2 X, it is probably not a good idea for several reasons. Auto focus will work or not, with a few tips, won't work only weakly. Manual focus will be difficult. And the picture quality might take too big a hit, combining a 2 X with your goal. .

  I have a 70-200/4 IS, 70-200/2.8 IS ("Mark I"), 1. 4 X II and 2 X Teleconverters II. I also have long telephoto lenses, so rarely need to add these zooms teleconverter. However if necessary I would use 1.4 X on one of them. But even if AF still work on the 70-200/2.8 + 2 X combo, I won't use it because of the amount of loss of image quality (the most recent IS of 70 - 200/2.8 Mark II and 2 X Mark III are supposed to work together better, than my older versions of each).

  I use mostly 2 X on 300/2.8 and 500/4 lenses privileged where the image quality is still good. (Note: Yes, on some of my cameras 2 X 500/4 causes AF to stop working, as it would on your f4 lens, so I only use the combo on a limited basis.)

  mithun_pal129... I would say the more you get a 1. 4 X and use it with your goal. See if the image quality is to your expectations. Then work to get closer to your subjects. Or bring them closer to you. Practice the techniques of stalking and to study the behaviors of your subjects to discover ways to get closer. Work in a blind and use bait (food, calls). And start saving for a lens of longer focal length.

  The Canon 1.4 X II and III teleconverters are excellent. All Canon teleconverters have mated before elements that limit the lenses that they physically can be attached, but the 70-200 are among those where this is possible. Teleconverter Kenko is another that I see quite often recommended. They have two different levels of quality: a more expensive "Pro 300" version and a cheaper "MC - 4". These are currently offered in versions "DGX" whose operation is very similar to Canon teleconverters. Old Kenko teleconverters "DG" not "reported" to the camera, the camera didn't know they were there, so try to focus.  In the view of users and tests I've seen, the current Kenko Pro 300 DGX is pretty good overall of the entire image area. The MC - 4 cheaper is actually a little sharper in the Center, but not as strong in the corners and the edges of the image. Tamron and Sigma teleconverters also do, but I have little experience or knowledge of the current versions of the people.

  The wildlife/bird photography is not easy. Since no matter how long a goal that you have, there are times when the subjects are just out of reach and all you can go is to sit back and enjoy the show.

  These photos of small subjects with different, but close to or less than the effective focal length even lenses like your 70-200 mm + a 1. 4 X teleconverter would be on your camera...

  

  

  

  

  ***********
  Alan Myers

  San Jose, California, USA.
  «Market softly and carry a great lens.»
  MATERIAL: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
  FLICKR & REPROGRAPHY

• Canon 18-200mm zoom lens

  I'm new here.  I have a Canon T3i.  Two kit lenses came with it in a bundle... 18-55mm, 55-250mm.  I am considering getting the Canon 18-200mm.  Would be the Canon 18-200mm is a good choice to replace the two lenses, or are there better choices to replace them with and keep the 18-200mm too?

  I wouldn't buy one for several reasons.  The one above all, it is more difficult to zoom, when the zoom range becomes very extreme.  18-200 is a 11 x scope and very ambitious to say the least. Not only in mind but in build quality, too. It will be in the same level of quality that the two glasses, the only advantage is to have just a lens so you.  Is that what you need? The superior advantage of a digital SLR is the possibility of having the right lens for the good work.  This implies usually several different lenses.  So you will be defeated this concept a little!

  I'd rather see you get a different level of lens for example IS the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM Lens.  Directly by replacing your 18-55mm kit lens. Of course, it is in the case where you have does not work for you. But this approach is better built, better optics and a little more quickly the objective that can be very useful.  Don't get me wrong the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens is a very good lens and offers a constant aperture.  A great plus in my book.

  Unfortunately these lens upgrades are expensive and replacing the 55-250mm is going to be even more.

• Blurry pictures of Canon 70-300 mm IS USM

  Recently, I bought a new 70-300 IS of Canon (not the white L). I was clicking famingoes and other waders. Used servo focus and another shot in with a wide aperture aperture priority mode. I was not too impressed by its 300 especially sharpness. Sharpness that I get with my 18-135 STM is much better compared to the 300 especially when cropped. Given that the investment is already made and I can't redeem another lens, also what is the best way out. How can I improve sharpness. What telephoto lens gives the best sharpness. I should send him for a check. It is under warranty. What could be the best option if I were to sell it buy a new one.

  After that I got problems, I read on the net that the sharpness of this lens is not good at all. I wonder why Canon always sell or not done something about it. It doesn't have a reputation to save.

  I take it as a given that you cannot return a new lens for where you bought it.  What is the number of complete, exact model for the lens that you are talking about?

  What camera do you use with the lens?  Some devices have AFMA, Auto Focus Micro adjustment.  Zooms were long to sacrifice the image quality for the convenience of multiple focal lengths, but they got a lot better over the years, especially in the medium price range.

  Several zooms perform better and worse, to certain ranges of their focal lengths.  It is not uncommon that telephoto zooms to, suffer a decline in the quality of the image at the upper end of their range of zoom.  However, you may see pictures of the development.

  If you take pictures handheld, try taking some of a sturdy tripod, just to see if the camera shake is what you see.  Additionally, make sure that the Image stabilization is turned on when handheld using it and do not move the appliance too fast.

  [EDIT]  Can post you a picture of the sample?

• Impossible to find profiles of lens for Canon 35-80mm and 80-200mm (3.6 Lightroom)

  Hello

  
  

  This may seem like a piece of cake to most of you, but I am fairly new to photography, especially things like the optical correction, etc.

  I use Lightroom 3.6 and there is no profile target for these 2 objectives:

  Canon 35-80mm

  Canon 80-200mm

  Anyone know what to do in this case? Do I need to create them somehow (if so - how?) or can I download them (if so - where)?

  Thank you in advance for your help!

  Kind regards

  A.
  

  Profiles for these lenses have been added in later versions. But I don't know because I don't keep track of all the profiles that are added. If you Google Adobe Lens profile Downloader, you will find link to a program provided by Adobe. It will connect you to a Web site where other people have created profiles and are sharing them with others. The Downloader will download and install all of the profiles that you choose.

• Everyone has the circuit main flex fixed on a Canon 5 d?

  Last year I got the circuit main flex repaired on my Canon 5 d. The camera just stopped working and lights at all. I have never learned what was the cause of the failure of the circuit. Is it possible to change a lens without turning off the camera could cause harm?

  The repair was carried out 10 months ago (9/2014) and the same thing happened a couple of days - the camera would not turn.

  I did the usual diagnosis - check the battery power, took the battery and card flash, switching lenses without result. I fear that the same failure in my camera has occurred.

  Does anyone have a similar experience?

  Hello bakerstreet!

  Thanks for posting.

  It is recommended that you turn off the camera before swapping lenses, but it is difficult to say if it is causing the problems here.  I know that sometimes the battery may be the cause if she is exhausted because of his age.  Have you tried another newer battery in the camera?  If the camera feeds not on with another newer battery, so it's something that must be repaired by authorized Service Center.

  To start the repair process, you need to fill out a service request on our Web site.

  Moreover, since the camera is more than a year, you have the opportunity to participate in the Canon loyalty program in place.

  The option of the Canon loyalty program allows you to replace your current phone for a reduced fee, postage.  The original non-functioning camera would be then returned to Canon USA for recycling using a which would be offered prepaid shipping label.

  If you want to participate in this option, please call our sales in the 866-443-8002 Department, seven days a week, from 08:00 to midnight.  Let them know you have worked with online support and the Canon loyalty program.  Be sure to have your serial number of your camera when you call.

• How to share a printer Canon MP 970 with a WinXP Dell laptop and a Dell of Win7 desk top?

  I recently implemented a Dell PC in Win7 professional desk top which is ethernet connected to Verizon FIOS router home. This configuration has replaced a desktop Dell 7 years under Win XP computer. In an adjacent room, I have a Canon MP970 USB printer connected to an old Dell Laptop for six years under Win XP and connected wireless to the router home. I was unable to configure the latest desktop computer Win7 to share Canon printer. Older Dell/WinXP (replaced) desktop has been configured to share the printer Canon with Dell laptop, WinXP and did successfully...

  In the laptop, I selected control panel > printers and faxes > sharing > drivers additional > environment, but can find no list for Win7. My thought is that the laptop must have the appropriate driver that allows it to recognize the request of Win7 Office to share the Canon MP970 printer. Thank you fo all help and advice from the community can offer.

  GrampyH

  Hi GrampyH,

  If you have a printer connected to your computer, you can share it with anyone on the same network. No matter what type of printer you have, as it is installed on your computer and is directly connected with a USB cable or other type of printer cable. The people from that your choice to share the printer will be able to use it to print, as long as they first locate your computer on the network.

  Printers that are directly connected to a network and not connected to a computer are available to anyone on the same network. These printers must have a network port or wireless connection that allows them to connect directly to the network.

  You can read these articles and check if that helps.

  Share a printer: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-in/windows7/share-a-printer

  File and printer sharing: frequently asked questions: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-in/windows7/file-and-printer-sharing-frequently-asked-questions

  Sharing files and printers: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-in/windows/sharing-files-printers-help#sharing-files-and-printers=windows-xp&v1h=win8tab1&v2h=win7tab1&v3h=winvistatab1&v4h=winxptab1

  Let us know if you need assistance with any Windows problem. We will be happy to help you.

• Best upgrade

  I bought a Canon EOS Rebel XTi camera in a package deal a few years back that came with an EFS 18-55mm and EF 75-300 zoom. It was a good setup for me, but what would be the best thing that I could buy to make it better? Something or a combination of things under a cople of hundred dollars. I am a novice.

  "Hundreds of dollars" will not go very far, I fear.

  1 LENS.

  The first thing I would suggest that you consider, especially for landscape photography, is a lens wide angle... But most cost $500 or more. Among these, the Canon EF-S 10-22mm USM is one of the best... but it's also more than you say you want to spend.

  A new and lower price alternative is the new EF-S 10-18mm IS STM Canon has just announced. I haven't used (few people have) because it is not in stock, any where, again... and can be a little difficult to find a little time. This lens seems to be reasonably compact (67 mm filter uses) and will be sold for about $300. Also, the sun visor sold separately (EW - 73) is not quite yet available, but seems to be priced below $ 30. Not sure that I need IS on a lens with short focal lengths... but, Hey, it never hurts to have! STM focus drive must be good, too. Now, none of us have had the chance to use this lens, but taking the cannon in the word with what they say about this, must be very nice.

  Other things that may be in your budget "hundreds of dollars"...

  2 TRIPOD

  If you do not already have one, I would say a good tripod.  But, be careful. Don't go too cheap, too compact nor too light with this, or you will not find the use or by replacing enough fast. One who seems a very good deal for me is the Adorama Flashpoint F1228 kit for about $220 including delivery. It is a clone of tripod Gitzo 'Series 2' journalist, with a fairly standard carbon fiber, but decent looking ball head with quick release. (I use several real Gitzo, which are excellent, but much more expensive, but I also use a lot of heavier cameras and lenses that you).

  I have also heard good things about Dolica tripods, but have no real experience with them. They offer several models of carbon fiber, which is what I would recommend. There are a few other quite affordable brands, but also some that are much more expensive. Just be careful, check out them in person if possible, and try to avoid too light, fragile, and poorly made.

  Purchased on the right, a tripod can be a single purchase. A carbon fiber tripod is a little more expensive, but it is lighter than the tripod in aluminium of the same capacity. In addition, carbon fiber absorbs vibrations small, where the 'rings' metal and reverberates. In addition, the CF is a little nicer to handle hot and cold weather.

  A tripod is a number of things for you and a lot of landscape photographers wouldn't think of shooting without having a. Of course, a tripod stabilizes your shot and allows you to make longer than computer possible exposures of pocket. Another thing that makes tripod is to force you to slow down and examine more carefully the are you will take. This usually results in much nicer pictures. Someone once said do arrows multiple panoramas and a tripod will help well do, too.

  3 LENS HOODS

  If you don't already have them, download the lens hood for your lenses. I believe that the 18-55mm uses a hood EW - 63C and 75-300 uses a hood AND-60. Just get into the habit of using lens hoods. They protect your lenses from the oblique light and physical shocks. I see people shot without condoms all the time... and that makes no sense at all to me. A lens hood is a simple, fast & easy to use and inexpensive accessory that can only help your images. I rarely shoot without having a.

  4 FILTERS

  And, if you don't already have some, a filter or two can be really useful. First of all, I would recommend a circular polarizer of quality. I think that your 18-55mm lens uses 58 mm filters (double check that) and I would say one to fit this lens first, since it is probably the lens you will use for landscape photography. A C - Pol filter will deepen the blue of the sky and make the white clouds "pop." It also intensifies colors by reflections of the cup of the foliage and other surfaces. You can use this control reflections on water and other surfaces, too. It is one of the more widely useful filters, as well as one of the most impossible to reproduce with digital software. I recommend B + W MRC XS - Pro and Kaesemann. Hoya HD, HD2, HMC a SHMC. and Marumi DHG. Among others. You do not want a C - POL on your lens all that time... he cuts one or two stops of light. But you will find it useful several times, once you learn to use it.

  Another type of filter that is popular is a neutral density or ND. These animals are generally gray, come in variable strength and are used to reduce the one of light reaching the sensor, so speeds that shutter slower and more large openings can be used on purpose. You've probably seen these picturesque shots with water mobile search creamy... If a stream, waterfall or ocean suft. Most of these types of shots require a kind of ND filter, when shooting with a digital camera. This is because most of the digital cameras am below ISO 100 or even 200. Some go to ISO 50. This limits the slow shutter speed can be used when shooting in daylight. If you receive this type of filter, you'll want to probably a few different strong points... they come in one, two, three, 5, 8, 10 and even more stop strengths. There is 'variable' (turn to change resistance, similar to a C - Pol), but these tend to give unequal effects and sometimes cause unwanted color shades. Note: ND filters are also often needed for videography, where the limits of frame rates limit the opening which can be used in available light.

  Another type of filter which is historically very popular among landscape photographers is the Neutral Density or ND Grad degree. These are half clear, half gray in different dosages and are used to balance a too bright sky with a foreground of an image, for example. With this type of filter, do not buy the round, screw type. You must be able to position the line of gradation differently for each image, so need to use the rectangular type of the filter, which fits into a special bracket that mounts to the front of the lens, allowing you to rotate and slide the filter if necessary.

  I have a nice set of graduates ND dating of when I shot with the film, but frankly I hardly use them more. Shooting digital, I can now do a better job with post-processing... techniques combining several exhibitions or multi-processing a single RAW file and then recombine the part "correctly exposed" of each. It's much more accurate, precise and controllable was always possible with filters.

  5. THE SOFTWARE

  But this brings us to another thing... If not already done, learn RAW and post-process your images. Canon delivered provided with your camera software is very good, but you might want to look at an all-in-one package with some features, such as Adobe Elements. If so, get a book or two on this issue, too... to help you get up to speed using it quickly and more easily. RAW image files are like a digital negative, of sorts. That's all what the camera captured at the time of exposure, but almost always need little more work so that it becomes an image can be used (JPEG, TIFF, PNG or other). However, a shot in-camera JPEG throws a lot of data and is much less "adjustable" afterwards... then you must get your exposure settings, white balance, etc. right the first time... There are fewer opportunities to change or correct later.

  6 CALIBRATION

  You can also consider calibration of your computer. There are various devices and software for this purpose, but the general idea is that most computer monitors do not give very loyal and almost all colors are much, much too bright. This makes it difficult to work accurately with your images and can lead you to a blumenthals trying to make prints. The secret is the calibration. This doesn't have to be outrageously expensive... and can pay for itself if you do a lot of prints, saving paper and ink or pulled apart if you send your print.

  7. BOOKS & CLASSES

  In general, the book of $18 "Understanding Exposure" by Brian Peterson may be the best money you ever spend on your photography. I highly recommend, regardless of your level of experience, but especially for novices. Buy it. Read. Investigate it. Learn it. Your photography will be much better and you'll get the most out of your equipment.

  There are other good books that you can watch. Some are specific to your camera in particular, guides that will help you make the most out it. Others are specific to a type of material or technical photography. Look for things that most of you are interested in.

  Or, you could take a few classes or seminars... or get involved in a photography club... or sign up for a visit in pictures or safari. This can be a great way to learn and develop your skills and too. May be as good an investment as the train would be.

  I suggest also that put you in place a plan, future gear updated level or additions to work when the budget allows. For example, maybe you don't shoot macro now, but I would like to try your hand at it in the future. It could be any number of things... Justg begin to search for and develop a list of things you want to try or items you want to improve. It may be a simple upgrade. For example, if yours is the kit lens 18-55mm that was originally supplied with the XTi, ago most recent and IS a version improved the EF-S 18 - 55 EF-S 18-55 IS STM. Update "Stepper Motor" of the latter is faster, quieter and more precise. An upgrade even more high-end and, of course, the most expensive would be the lens EF-S 17 - 55 / 2.8 IS USM.

  Don't know how use you it, but there are also a number of improvements since the 75- 300 mm you have. The most affordable is the EF-S 55-250mm, now also with the STM focus drive. There are also several 70- 300 L IS USM is the most award-winning build and image quality. One of the EF 70-200mm lenses would be very nice upgrades, too... These are real 'horse' lenses that you find in bags for cameras in most of the pro shooters. The IS versions of them are stabilized, which may be important for telephoto lenses. The f4 versions are more compact and lighter weight, which might be nice for travel.

  You do not have the funds to one of them now, but someday you might. And if you have a capital plan that you want to add or upgrade in the future, you can prioritize according to your needs and usage and to start working with the eventual upgrade. No plan is set in stone, either. You can always change, if your needs or modification of the options available.

  ***********
  Alan Myers

  San Jose, California, USA.
  «Market softly and carry a great lens.»
  MATERIAL: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
  FLICKR & REPROGRAPHY

• Possibilities of macro?

  Thanks for reading this.
  I like to take pictures of things like insects and small lizards. I found a really cool Mantis yesterday in the garden and took some pictures of it. I used my 70-200 with the 1.4 tc which was pretty good, but I could of course not very close because the limits of depth of focus. I am considering getting the barrel extension tubes: EF 12 II and EF 25 II. What is a good way to go? Here's something that you would use as well as a tc on a 70-200? Or is the wrong type of lens for this kind of work? I also had an initial investigation of the flash macro circular rings. But I am assuming that they would work with my 70-200 cause of large diameter of the front element. He seems to have a lot of options for macro set ups. What kind if the installer should be to make the pretty decent macro shots? I was a big fan of Igor Siwanowicz' work for a very long time.

  See you soon,.
  CG.

  Hello

  As ebiggs says, there are several ways to make macro shots.

  Personally, I use a number of extension tubes (a set of Kenko of 3-36, 20 & 12 mm - more a 25mm cannon and two Canon 12 mm). These are always useful to have, and I wouldn't be without a few in my camera bag, all the time. They are inexpensive and can allow you to get this macro or close-up when you do not have a lens macro with you, or can be used to increase the capabilities of a true macro lens beyond magnification is 1:1 (general) potential, or simply used to get the nearest minimum focus distance with a telephoto lens.

  For example, this was shot with EF 70-200/2.8 IS, Canon 25 mm extension tube and 550EX flash (filling)...

  

  I have been hunting of birds and did not have a macro with my lens.

  For sub image to frame the small Bush * i * (replace the astericks with "t"... the cyber censorship allow me to use the actual name of this bird) as tight as I wanted, I needed to add a 36mm extension tube to an EF 500/4 IS lens, so that the lens to focus more closely...

  

  While they are not necessarily designed for the macro or almost macro work teleconverters (Canon calls Extenders) change the effective focal length of a lens, but leave its closest distance focal length quantity... so will increase the potential of magnification. In order to get the slot kick a little fence lizard, I have had to use time - Canon EF 1. 4 X II and an extension of 25 mm - 300/2.8 IS lens...

  

  More the focal length of your lens, the effect less any given amount of expansion will give. An extension of 25mm changes slightly the magnification and the closest focusing distance of a 300mm lens... But the same amount of extension on a 50mm lens would have dramatic effect.  Next image was shot with 12mm on the EF 50/1.4 lens extension...

  

  Even more extreme, the following was shot with 12mm on an EF 20/2.8 lens extension (I wanted an extra depth of field to keep more detailed background)...

  

  During the filming of the foregoing, the petals of flowers were actually touch the front element of the lens! Can't get much closer than that!

  The macro above or near macro shots were made using lenses "non-macro" that have been made to concentrate more than normally possible, using extension tubes. Those who can work, but there are some advantages to true macro lenses, too. I personally use four in my Canon Kit: Tamron SP AF 60mm f2.0, Canon MP-E 65mm f2.8, Canon 100/2.8 USM (not the L / IS) and Canon 180 / 3.5 L. I also use a Canon TS - E 45/2.8 for big jobs and occasionally a target macro Tamron SP 90/2.5 1:2 vintage, adapted.

  When you force non-macro lens to focus closer than expected, there may be side effects. For example, the shot of the rose bud above has a pretty strong vignetting and softer edges. It's characterisic of the EF 50/1.4 lens when it is done to focus very narrow and more openness is used... It is not necessarily a bad thing. I used the lens with extension deliberately for this one, because I wanted so much vignetting and soften the effects.

  One thing, you don't need to worry with 'real' macro lenses is image quality. In general, they are all very able to make beautiful pictures. It is lower for other features of macro lenses that set apart them from each other.

  Focal length is probably the main consideration. Too short a macro lens can get awfully close to your subjects, which could scare the living creatures, or do you throw an unwanted shadow on the subject or not even you bit or stung! A longer lens gives you more space to work, but a long lens is hard to get a stable shot and makes very very shallow depth of field.

  If I could have only one, I would choose my USM Canon EF 100/2.8 macro lens. It's the best all around for my purposes, on both devices of cultures (like yours, although I use 7Ds) and full frame (5 d MkII). 90 to 105mm gives the reasonable working distance, but it is quite easily portable for quick shots. DOF is still shallow, but manageable enough without resorting to ridiculously small openings where lighting is a problem and optical diffraction robs fine detal of images.

  Here's an example shot with my 180 / 3.5 L, which demonstrates how depth of field thin razor can get with such a long focal length...

  

  Even if it's a fairly large bee, the plan of sharpness is only of a few mm of depth. This was shot near 1:1 on full frame (with a film camera, actually). The lens and the camera are resting on the ground to help keep their constant. Something close to 100mm is much more easily portable, not too big and makes a bit more depth of field.

  There are other features of the Canon EF 100/2.8 USM which make a great macro lens, IMO.

  It's 'internal focus' (IF), which means that it does not grow in length when you focus it close, so don't cut your work remotely (note: 100L, Tamron 60/2 and 180 / 3.5 L are also IF lenses). However, there is no such thing as a free lunch, with optics. In order for the 100/2.8 if it starts raining that some other lenses of similar focal length. And the focus distance actually changes somewhat because it brought closer. I heard max with 1:1 magnification, it is closer to the 70mm lens... but it is not particularly notable in the field of work with the goal.

  100/2.8 USM macro lens on a crop sensor camera, with 550EX flash, pocket...

  

  Version 100/2.8 that I use has player development USM, which gives it an autofocus fast enough for a macro lens. Macro lenses tend to be slower to focus for a few reasons. One is that they must move their items focusing a long, long way to go all the way from infinity to 1:1 magnification. Another is that most precision signals more speed, so use what is called a mechanism of the development of "throw long". In the old days of manual focus, you have to turn the focus ring a lot more away with a target at long range. Short-range lenses were built for speed and could be used for sports photography. By car from the 100mm USM (who are also the EF - S 60 / 2.8, 100 and 180 / 3.5 L) makes more than one lens dual use, more usable for purposes of non-macro. Despite USM, the 180/3.5 L is significantly more slow development and not as useful for the non-macro works.

  I make the distinction between macro and non-macro focus because often the macro shooting focuses more easily manually. I use AF sometimes, but just as often or more often use the development manual method or the other.  But if you want to use as a non-macro, also, moderate telephoto lens it can be enjoyable if it is reasonably fast to the point. Another advantage of USM, it's that you haven't disable AF before substitution manually. (Note: there was a version prior to EF 100/2.8, abandoned years ago, that has no USM).

  For me, one of the most important features of the Canon 100 mm macro lenses is that they may fit with a Ruff of the tripod mounting. The 100/2.8 USM uses tripod ring B (b) and 100L tripod D ring. I'm not aware of any other macro lenses less than 150mm than a being mounted with a ring of tripod and for me, this is a very important feature. A lot of macro photography is made of a tripod or monopod. That is one of the reasons I really don't think that he had to upgrade to the new version IS..., the more it costs much more. In addition, the stabilization is of limited effectiveness when shooting macro... If this can be nice when you use the goal for non-macro purposes (except that I have several other lenses, so do not rely on the macro for dual use that much). The 180 / 3.5 L and most other 150 mm and more macro lenses equipped with a tripod ring.

  Speaking of stabilization, the Canon 100 L uses a hybrid form developed especially for macro, which obviously is one of the most effective. However, the 1:1 mag, it could only be good for one or two stops of assistance. For non-macro photos, the IS could give three or four stops assistance.

  I had the Tamron SP 60/2.0 recently because it is quite small and light, easy to store in my camera bag, when I don't know if I'll take any macro shots or not, have other gear to carry around. The same is true for the Canon EF - S 60/2.8 USM, it is just as compact. I opted for the Tamron for its opening of f2, mainly in order to use the lens for portraits, as well. Both the Canon and the Tamron 60 mm lenses are "cultures only" (all other macros mentioned are capable of FF).  I don't have the images uploaded of him online yet, but have found the quality to be good enough. It is a bit slow focusing... no problem for the macro or portraits, but not a goal I would use for sport and shooting action. I imagine that the Canon with its USM is developed faster.

  

  I used to use the vintage (25-30 years) Tamron 90 mm as my macro "compact" (shown on one of my 7Ds, above)... and he is used to this end but was less useful for portraits. Yet, for a goal which cost me about 60 US $. It's $20 for the lens - like new with hood, 1:1 adapter, caps and a Nikon Adaptall mount - plus $40 for a China Adaptall-EOS mount.  It is slower to work with. Set to manual focus, as well as manual control of the opening, but did a good job (here with the extension tube of 36mm to increase the magnification).

  

  The other lenses I mentioned use are more specialized. The Canon MP-E 65mm macro is a very high magnification, the manual focus lens. The magnification less he can give is 1:1, where most other macro lenses are at their maximum (unless you add extension for them tubes). It goes back to 5 / 1 or 5 X life size, so, essentially, can fill the frame on one of my 7Ds with a grain of rice.  Image made with the MP - E 65mm here is a tiny snail, newly hatched which was smaller than the nail on my pinky, at 2 X magnification...

  

  I must say, I would not recommend the MP-E 65mm as a first macro lens. It will especially be a lens only tripod. Depth of field is incredibly deep. Due to the extension of the objective, it's more small aperture of f16 becomes something like an effective f96 at higher magnification. I'll have to work on the development of techniques of stacking with this lens (and will need something much slower moving than a snail, shoot those!).

  I use the lens 'Tilt Shift' TS - E 45mm especially for close-ups of small product... Shoots of studio on table, like this that was one of hundreds of fact for the customer's Web site...

  

  Magnification with the 45mm alone isn't really the territory of the macro, but it allows a single control in terms of development with the tilt movements, as well as ways to dodge the reflections with the movements of travel. It is the manual focus lens, too. For higher magnfication work, the TS-E 90mm might be a better choice and magnification of two lenses can be increased by using extension tubes.

  As for flash, there are choices with those, too. There are specialized macro flashes or ways to use standard flashes for macro photos.

  I used a Canon MR - 14EX Ringlite for turned snail, above. I mainly only use a ring light with very high magnificatioin shots... to the low mags just light seems flat and 'clinical' for me. As far as I know, the MR-14EX is pretty much dedicated to Canon lenses, since it clips directly on the lens, locking silver that is on the Canon lenses.

  MR-14EX on MP-E 65mm, on 7 d...

  

  More often, especially for 1:1 magnification and more low blows, I use Canon MT - 24EX Twin Lite or a unique and standard flash with some minor changes. The Twin Lite is great, but a package large enough and not very useful for non macro. Also, it is designed to attach on the front of the Canon lenses, but is more flexible because it can be used with a more generic double flash support, too.

  Image of LH: MT-24EX normally mounted. Center: Double Lepp/Stroboframe flash support. Image of HR: MT-24EX on support Lepp.

     

  But do not use a dedicated, macro flash either. Often I will just use a flash unique and standard cord shoes off camera so that I can stand to the side of or above the object...

  

  Note that I put two coats of white qauze bandage on the flash head, maintained by a rubber band. This reduces and diffuse the power of the flash so that it can be used near a small subject. A single flash works surprisingly well, because compared to a small topic, it's like a giant light box in the sky. This Mantis was shot using something similar to the above setup (and EF 100/2.8 USM macro lens)...

  

  Enjoy you shopping!

  Macro is lots of fun... and a lot easier today than it was back in the good/bad old days of film! One of my old rigging...

  

  ***********
  Alan Myers

  San Jose, California, USA.
  «Market softly and carry a great lens.»
  MATERIAL: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
  FLICKR & REPROGRAPHY

• Body of L ' goal and EOS Rebel T3i

  I asked a lot of questions here, haha.
  But I'm here with another question. So, I did a little research on the net about the use of the ' goal with a t3i and quite a few people say that they work well together? So objective L are not recommended for EOS Rebel bodies? Can someone explain this to me please.
  I recently bought the T3i and I want just a good lens. Preference for landscape photos. I'm also a few sports, low light and portrait photos.
  Suggestions for the landscape and all around the lens of photography would be great ():

  For landscape photography people often want to use a lens wide angle. Not always, there is no rule that says you can't use anything else. I say "it's usually the first thing that comes to mind

  One of the best wide angles that you get to use on a T3i is the Canon EF-S 10-22mm USM. It is not an 'L' but it doesn't matter.

  I suspect that what you have said about the use of an L series lens is due to the factor of cropping of your device photo, as has been suggested by several other responses. L - series will work fine on your camera, but all L-series lenses are models 'full frame', by definition. Therefore, none of the L will be particularly wide angle on your camera. So, when people hear 'landscape', they suggest something else that a L-series.

  You have four different purposes: landscape, sport, low light and portrait. The whole point of a DSLR as your T3i is to be able to Exchange lenses, to be able to adjust the camera for use in different situations. So I would say not to try to do it with a lens, but to look more lenses (some of which are Ls), which should ultimately give you better results. For example...

  Wide angle landscape: EF-S 10-22mm.

  Sport: 70-200/4, 70-200 / 4L, 70-200/2.8, 70-200 / 2.8 L IS II, 100-400 L IS, 300/4 L IS.

  Low light: 24/2.8 IS, 28/1.8, IS 35/2, 50/1.4, 50/1.8 II, 85/1.8.

  Portrait (Frank): 50/1.4, 85/1.8.

  Portrait (studio): EF - S 15-85 IS, the EF 28-135 IS, 24-105L, 24-70/4 IS, 24-70 / 2.8 L II.

  Portrait (environment): 20/2.8, 24/2.8 IS, 28/1.8, 35/2 IS.

  Versatile lens 'walk-around': EF-S 15-85 is... or, according to what the other lenses you get, EF - S 17 - 55 / 2.8 IS or EF 28-135 IS, 24-105L IS, 24-70 / 4L IS, 24-70 / 2.8 L II.

  There are many different ways to set up a lens kit. For example, maybe you just like a wide point of view than the 10-22mm for your landscape photography. If so, instead, you can choose the lens EF-S 15-85 mm as wide enough and because it can double as a walkaround lens and can even be useful for some portraits.

  A 'minimum' kit I often hang out with a camera of harvest is: 10-22mm, 28-135 IS, 300/4 IS w / 1. 4 X teleconverter and a Tamron 60/2.0 macro/portrait.

  When I'm shooting, what I do for the most part with crop sensor cameras, I usually wear: 10-22 mm and 24-70/2.8, but my most used lenses are the IS 70-200/2.8 and 300/4 IS. (In some cases I use also 70 - 200/4 IS and 300/2.8 IS).

  For the portrait with a crop sensor camera, my favorite lenses are: 28/1.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and 135/2. Especially the 50mm and 85mm.

  Your camera can use all the EF-S and EF, including all of the L-series lenses. But just because a lens will fit and work does not mean it is the best choice for your application. In some cases buying a full frame capable lens for your camera will be useless... FF lenses can be bigger, heavier and more expensive... but not really give you the best performance, maybe even less. For example, a 16-35 / 2.8 L II is a wonderful goal on a FF camera, but it makes little sense to buy for use on a device of harvest. For less money, you can either get a lens that is really wide (EF-S 10-22mm), or a lens that offers a little wider range of focal lengths and IS (EF-S 17 - 55 / 2.8 IS) has.

  Depth of field in fact is not directly conducted by sizes of sensors of different cameras. What changes in depth of field are: focal length, Aperture and the distance about the goal. If you are looking for the low depth of field (blur a background for a portrait, for example), it takes a large aperture and a longer lens... and more you are close to the material the more shallow depth of field will be. If, however, you want lots of depth of field (for a landscape shot, for example), you want to use a smaller aperture and a shorter focal length... and more you are from the individual (within reasonable limits), will be the deepest depth of field.

  Where full-frame sensor vs cultures comes into force now is that for the same subject, framing with a crop sensor, that we need to stand further away with a given focal length, or if the same shooting distance will use a shorter focal length. In both cases, the result is 'less' depth of field, but it is an indirect result of different sensor size.

  Have fun shopping and learning about your new camera!

  ***********
  Alan Myers

  San Jose, California, USA.
  «Market softly and carry a great lens.»
  MATERIAL: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
  FLICKR & REPROGRAPHY

• DPP4 will correctly process RAW images using a 70 d and Sigma 120-400 mm lens?

  Hi, I would like to buy a used Sigma 120-400 mm lens, as the cost will allow me to upgrade my Canon 300 mm f2.8 L IS lens to the mark 2 version. I also own a Canon 70-200 f4 L IS, Canon macro 100 mm f2.8 L IS, Canon 18-55 mm IS USM, Canon 70 two d cameras and a flash Canon 600 EX - RT. Unfortunately, I can't justify the purchase of a Canon 100-400 mm f4.5/6.6 L IS 11, as well as the upgrade of my 300 mm.

  I could not identify a RAW editor free alternatative of DPP-4, that will actually process RAW images from my 70 d cameras. I do not require the installation of fixed lens of DPP4.

  Jerrin1 wrote:

  Hi, I would like to buy a used Sigma 120-400 mm lens, as the cost will allow me to upgrade my Canon 300 mm f2.8 L IS lens to the mark 2 version. I also own a Canon 70-200 f4 L IS, Canon macro 100 mm f2.8 L IS, Canon 18-55 mm IS USM, Canon 70 two d cameras and a flash Canon 600 EX - RT. Unfortunately, I can't justify the purchase of a Canon 100-400 mm f4.5/6.6 L IS 11, as well as the upgrade of my 300 mm.

  I could not identify a RAW editor free alternatative of DPP-4, that will actually process RAW images from my 70 d cameras. I do not require the installation of fixed lens of DPP4.

  You can always use PLR (3 or 4) as your RAW converter when you use a Sigma lens. You just won't be able to use the digital objective Optimizer (DLO of Canon) on these files. DLO only supports Canon lenses.

  RawTherapee is a free RAW converter that should work with your 70 d, however I would recommend a few stick with DPP, if you do not need a correction of the lens. FWIW, I don't know if RawTherapee has lens correction or not in all cases.

• can u give me a name to the difficulty of the doors that open 2 remoe and insert the tape for es8400

  I have an es8400 door where u insert and remove the video tape is stuck open u can recommend someone my code postal is75067

  Hey jesse!

  Thanks for posting on your ES8400.  Given the age of this model, it is more in the life of service and spare parts are no longer available.  Try looking for a local store that repairs still older video equipment.

  You can also participate in the program of loyalty of cannon instead.  The option of the Canon loyalty program allows you to replace your current phone for a reduced fee, postage.  The original non-functioning camera would be then returned to Canon USA for recycling using a which would be offered prepaid shipping label.

  If you want to participate in this option, please call our sales department at (800) OK CANON (800-652-2666) for seven days a week, from 08:00 to midnight.  Let them know you have worked with online support and the Canon loyalty program.  Be sure to have your serial number of your camera when you call.

• About T3I EF lenses

  I just want to know if my calculations are correct on this point. This is the focal point of equavalent of some privileged lenses EF on the T3i. I multiply by 1.6 x culture right?

  24mm EF would be 38mm
  30mm EF would be 48 mm
  85mm EF would be 136mm

  Is that correct or should I go?

  Kolourl3lind wrote:

  I was wrong. BY EOS, I meant ARE full frame camera and not Cameras EOS Rebel EF-S.

  Also, pass my T3I and 6 d very often when I photograph an event. Photographed it hard when I don't have the same point of view using the same lens wiith each camera.  What I'm trying to do is buy a first decent Wideangle to fit on the T3i. This will allow me use the T3i just for wide angle of shooting at a focal distance and get photos decent quaility compared to 6 J using a zoom lens.

  It's the best configuration, I can think that it's just easier for us my 6 d lenses and switch instead to carry two cameras.

  Well, now it is more clear what you are doing, and you go back between the two formats.

  However, he has very little of primes that are ultra wide on a full frame and still very broad camera on a culture's APS - C sensor. 24mm is a good wide angle on a full frame camera, but only behaves like a slightly large 'normal' when used on a crop sensor camera. I have and use a Canon EF 20 mm... fairly wide on full frame. It's nice, but only a moderately wide lens (32mm FF equivalent) on a sharecropper.

  There are Canon 14 mm (origin and Mark II). And there is a manual focus only Zeiss 15 mm ZE. There are also a few glasses of 17mm. These are quite expensive, however. And, in a culture a 17mm camera sensor is only moderately wide.

  In the past the Tamron and Sigma made 14mm full frame compatible lenses. Those who were of an image quality questionable and abandoned several years ago... so will be available used, if you can find them.

  There is also a 14mm Samyang/Rokinon lens which is full frame compatible and affordable, but the update manual and operation manual only, so more time to work with. It sells for a little over $ 300 and also lie in Bower, dotted, ProOptic, Vivitar and other brand names (Vivitar called 13mm, even if it's the same lens.) This lens has strong "mustache" distortion, but there is software that can correct.

  Another possible consideration, all 14, 15mm and many the 17 mm... and some of the largest of the full frame capable ultra wide angle zoom, too... tend to have front lens elements very strongly convex which allow not the standard to mount vissants filters.

  There are simply not many really wide Prime lenses for crop sensor cameras. And most of the primes and zooms that are wide on FF, are only slightly or moderately wide on culture.

  If you want to use the lens wide angle on the T3i onlycrop sensor, there are a few good zooms you should really consider.

  Canon recently introduced an EF-S 10-18mm IS STM lens which is a real bargain priced at $300 and even less for sale currently. I have not yet used, but have heard a lot of good reports. No, is not as sharp edge on board as others, but it is quite surprisingly good for the price (which is at least $100 less than any other ultra wide-angle zoom... $200 or more at most).

  Canon EF-S 10-22mm USM has been around for a few years, sells for about $650, and in my opinion is one of the best ultrawides to cultures of any manufacturer photo sensor. It is very well fixed, strong side by side with well controlled chromatic aberration, reasonably good quality of construction, able to use the standard 77mm filter and has exceptionally good flare control.

  Sigma offers two versions of 10-20mm and the widest of all in a 8-16 mm. A 10-24 mm Tamron. Tokina has offered the fastest in a 11-16/2.8, but also a 12-24/4, (which are now discontinued, but can still be found). Tokina is currently introducing new models of 11 - 20/2.8 and 12-28/4.

  However, all of the above zooms are 'just culture' (at least on a technical level, see below).

  If you want to use the lens on your T3i and 6 d...

  Canon of nine 11-24 2.8 L / would work fine... but is very expensive (almost $3000).

  Sigma offers a 12-24mm, which is full frame and crop sensor compatible. It is rather expensive and has one important of distortion.

  There are various 16-28mm, 16-35mm, 17-35mm, 17-40mm which are full-frame compatible... tho, all this is just moderately wide on the T3i culture.

  An interesting possiblitity... I can tell you for certain that a Tokina 12-24/4 is a good lens on cameras of the harvest, and that it is partially usable on full frame. I tested it as wide as 17 or 18 mm on my 5DII, until it begins to show the vignetting. I understand the Tokina 11-16/2.8 is usable on FF, too... but only she is put in 16mm. (I haven't used so can't say on the two new models of Tokina.)

  FOR INFO:

  Colloquial for Canon EOS Digital cameras is "APS - C / 1.6 X crop" and "full frame / 1.0 X.

  Or just 'crop sensor', 'culture' or 'cropper' vs 'full frame' or 'FF '.

  Canon lenses are ' EF/full frame compatible' or 'EF-S/APS-C only of cultures '.  Only Canon's EF-S objectives using a variation on the EF mount, designed to not allow lenses to physically join the cameras 'incompatible '.

  There is no "ES" or even "EF" cameras and few people to refers to «Caméras EF - S» That's because the cameras APS - C or crop can use both EF and EF-S objectives... While the cameras full frame can only objective EF of use. Objective EF - S will rise not yet physically on the camera models full frame as your 6 d (nor on the third cannon used to provide format: APS - H or 1.3 X.hich also EF lenses require).

  Home objective third-party manufacturers there are not EF-S-objectives. Sigma, Tokina and Tamron all only use EF mount, regardless. Although they may be possible to mount on a camera full frame, many glasses they offer always are "cultures only"... They do not produce an image circle large enough to cover the entire surface of a full frame sensor, it will strongly vignette. Yet some work partially (as indicated above).

  Canon EF, "Di" of Tamron, Tokina "FX" and "DG" lenses Sigma are all sensor full frame and compatible cultures.

  Canon EF-S, 'Di II' Tamron and Tokina "DX" Sigma "DC" lenses are all cultures only.

  I hope this helps!

  ***********

  Alan Myers
  San Jose, California, USA.
  «Market softly and carry a great lens.»
  MATERIAL: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
  FLICKR & EXPOSUREMANAGER

• Demosaicing intro'd w / LR3.2 sharpening with 7 d. Assistance requested.

  All,

  I hate pixel peeping, but nevertheless, it seems that there is demosaicing implemented in new methods of sharpening that I don't see in the Canon DPP or elsewhere CS3 USM or sharpness.  Pictures to follow, and I can provide if necessary original RAW file.  If I do this wrong comparison, I am open to all comments and corrections.  All images are 100% crops of Center of an image of the 7 d.  No adjustments to exposure, clarity, etc. 200 ISO image, Canon 7 d, Canon 70-200 2.8 IS

  Image 1: No image sharpness applied out of LR - Note the area of two thin bands white sleeve on the left arm of the player under patch - smooth flowing front to rear

  

  Image 2: Above the image but too much cooked with USM - are still sleek

  

  Image 3: Treated with Canon DPP and almost pushed sharpening original RAW file max - always smooth

  

  Image 4: RAW image processed in LR with Amt 40, radius of 0.8, retail 25, masking 20 - note demosaicing (stairsteppng) in this area.  Also appears in the folds on the fix

  

  Image 5: The JPEG above put in CS3 with Smart sharpening minimum applied - worse (as expected)

  

  Image 6: #4 Image into CS3 transfers and minimal USM applied - worsens the condition (as expected)

  

  As I added the images, I don't know the difference between the first three images and the last three are also very clear because they are on my Dell Ultrasharp 24 ", but I assure you they are there.  I tried the lower amounts of sharpening off LR, but the demosaicing is always created.

  Any thoughts, different ways of approach, will etc. are appreciated.

  Jay S.

  The stairs, walk artifacts on edges is a known issue with the new demosaic (2010 process) in LR. There has been several discussions on this. I see it a lot. Typical examples would be grass leaves, small branches, etc. If you care you can get rid of them by downgrading to the 2003 process. After my experience however, images tend to print better even with the aliasing if you blow on crazy size. The blur of the printing process tends to mitigate this. YMMV, however.

• Lens Correction profiles: unable to locate matching profiles automatically

  LR3, I can't load the profiles of correction of auto lens for my Canon lenses, which many should be easily accessible. I used the 24-70L 2.8 USM lens and 50mm 1.4 on a recent session lenses and profiles could not be found. Is there a place to download the profiles of LR3 stocks to activate this option? I'm not interested in doing profiles customized right now otherwise.

  Here's what I see:

  

  

  Thanks for any help.

  From Adobe lens profiles should be installed automatically during the installation of LR, not need to install them separately. You can see the files named

  • Canon EOS - 1Ds Mark III (Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8 L USM) - RAW.lcp
  • Canon EOS - 1Ds Mark III (Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8 L USM) LCP
  • Canon EOS - 1Ds Mark III (Canon EF 50mm f1.4 USM) - RAW.lcp
  • Canon EOS - 1Ds Mark III (Canon EF 50mm f1.4 USM) LCP

  in the folder

  • WinXP:
    C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Local Settings\Application Data\Adobe\CameraRaw\LensProfiles\1.0\Canon
  • WinVista or 7:
    C:\ProgramData\Adobe\CameraRaw\LensProfiles\1.0\Canon
  • Mac:
    Macintosh HD/Library/Application Support/Adobe/CameraRaw/LensProfiles/1.0/Canon

  Here are the profiles provided by Adobe for the lenses you mention. If they are there, something seems to be wrong in LR recognizing your goal. If they don't, try to reinstall LR3.

  Gossweiler beat