1) What will I get next?

2) What do I eventually want to get?  In the end there should be some limit to what I buy?

In terms of what to buy next, I have had several thoughts given my budget.  I have already decided to pickup the Canon TS-E 17mm once our kitchen remodel is finished.  The question is what else to purchase.

Option 1

Canon 200mm F4 Hybrid IS Macro – This is only a rumor of course.  However given Canon’s press release about a hybrid IS coming out in a lens before the end of the year this is a very possible reality.

I am very torn about this one.  Recently I sold my Canon 180mm macro because I just could not get dependable results out of it.  I do not know what it truly was, but while I can get consistent results from the MP-E 65, I found that the sharpness on the 180L was lacking.  I suspect this new macro would not have this issue.

Canon 85mm 1.2L

This is one incredible lens, but my main worry is how much I will use it.  I would mainly use it for shots of my kids.  It would certainly allow me to sell my Canon 50mm 1.4 that I hardly ever use.

Canon TS-E 24 II

At first it seemed silly to buy this together with the TS-E 17mm.  However, they make an incredible combo.  While the TS-E 17mm has the width, the TS-E 24mm has the advantage that it accepts filters and has more shift.  For real estate, the TS-E 17mm is the best for interiors, while the TS-E 24mm is better suited to exteriors.

Buy nothing and save for the 600mm

This is my dream lens, but it doesn’t seem very logical to put everything into this lens right now.  Besides, at the end of next year they’ll probably announce a replacement.

And the answer is…

Tentatively I have decided to go with buying the TS-E 24mm II along with the TS-E 17mm.  The combination will not only be a killer combination for real estate, they also will be great landscape and travel lenses.

I may change my mind if Canon releases the 200mm F4 Hybrid IS macro – depending on the specs.  However I’m more likely to still buy the TS-E 24mm and put my real estate sales towards buying the 200mm macro next year.

All of the other lenses for which there are rumors seems less interesting.

New Canon fisheye(s)

There are several rumors that new fisheyes will be released.  I have long debated purchasing a fisheye.  Certainly the shots are interesting and you can do some great things in it, but the main worry is whether it would regularly make the final cut for the bag?  I can only fit so much into the bag and I’m more likely to take the tilt shifts than a fisheye.

Canon 24-70 2.8 IS

I have not and do not intend to buy a 24-70 lens.  It has nothing to do with the image stabilization.  That focal length just doesn’t work for me.

Canon 24-105 2.8 IS

This is far more intriguing and I would certainly be tempted.  If such a lens existed, I would probably purchase it eventually despite its size.  That focal length would work well for me and it would be a great vacation lens.  If they could pull this off, it may even push my 16-35 II out of my bag sometimes – given that I would have the TS-E 17 already.  However, I would be unlikely to buy this immediately.  I would want to know that they truly pulled it off and right now the TS-E 24 is more important to me.

Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II

This lens definitely makes sense for Canon.  It is a flagship lens and though the current one is great it could use an update.  As for me, I’m perfectly happy with my 70-200 F4 IS due to its small size and see no reason to purchase a 2.8 version.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Lately I have taken the attitude that I will not waste my time with the microstock sites.  I take the shots that I like to take, and later on figure out if something may sell.  This works out the best for me, as I do not feel pressured to take particular shots that I would not have taken other than to sell them.  When these shots are not accepted or are accepted and do not sell, I have wasted my time.  However, if I take the shots I like in the first place, my time is never wasted.

I went through my shots and found a bit over forty that looked stock ready.  Now was the moment for the true test of the 5D Mark II – what would the editing experience be like?

The first thing I was interested to see is the dust.  On my old 5D, this was constantly a problem – especially with my macro shots using the MP-E 65.  On the new Mark II – this is improved considerably.  I have not cleaned my sensor once – even with an air blower – since buying my camera and I change lenses quite often.  Dust was almost non existent in my first 2,000 shots but has recently started to turn up.  Still, it is far less than what I had with my original 5D after even 1,000 shots.  In particular on my old 5D I had severe dust problems in the corners.  With the Mark II, dust is more evenly spread around the sensor and rarely occurs in the corners.  I will still need to clean my sensor from time to time but overall this was a big positive.

My other big concern was the resolving capacity of my lenses.  As many of you know, the microstock sites will reject an image if it is not tack sharp at 100%.  As the 5D Mark II is a 21 megapixel camera, that means getting a tack sharp image is more difficult.  The lens needs to resolve this resolution and I need to hold the camera still enough and use the proper shutterspeed to prevent blur.

The overwhelming majority of my shots used the MP-E 65, 180L macro, and the Canon 100-400.  I can say for sure that these lenses can definitely resolve 21 megapixels.  In general, I found more keepers with the 5D Mark II than I did with my 5D.  How can this be?  The answer is that I have more options with downsizing my picture than I ever did before.  This is particularly the case with the MP-E 65 above 3x.  Now when images are slightly out of focus I simply resize the picture down to around 11 megapixels and things look much better.  I did not have this flexibility with my old 5D.

Of course, I am more cautious about my shutterspeed and keeping the camera steady now.  For instance, I always use a monopod with my 100-400.

The resolution is simply amazing at times.  I was stunned at some of the detail on my fly shots and noticed some things I had never noticed before (mentioned in more detail in an upcoming post).  When I get the shot right on, which is most of the time except when I take the MP-E 65 above 3x, the details are simply stunning.  When the focus is slightly off, I have the flexibility to reduce the size of the shots.

Interestingly enough, the size of the shots produced by the Mark II can be an issue.  While most microstock sites are with the times, StockEXpert rejected one image for being too large.

Even stranger, I am still a bit confused about the results I am seeing with my 180L.  On my 5d, I have to admit that I was a bit disappointed with it.  All of my shots appeared to be slightly soft and in general I felt that my MP-E 65 outperformed it.  Therefore, when I started processing the shots I took with it I was ready to downsize them when I noticed that they were already very sharp and did not require downsizing.  The math certainly does not make sense but my 180L is now a very sharp lens.  I have not setup AF micro adjustment yet and even if I did it would not make a difference as all of my macro shots are manual focus.  I truly have no idea why this is but the results are unmistakable.  Perhaps I have just learned to use the lens better – who knows…

In terms of noise at high ISO, I was quite impressed compared to my old 5D.  With my old 5D the rule generally was ISO 100 and 200 no noise reduction was required.  At ISO 400, I needed to use Noise Ninja.  ISO 800 was iffy and usually the shot was beyond saving but one or two miracles did occur.  With the Mark II, I have no problem submitted pictures at ISO 1600 with a Noise Ninja pass.  I did not have any shots at ISO 400 or 800 so I cannot tell there, but I was awfully tempted to submit the ISO 1600 shots without noise reduction, but still did because I know the microstock sites are picky.  I also submitted one shot at ISO 3200 but I think it will most likely be rejected.  Therefore, I will not hesitate to shoot up to ISO 1600 in the future for stock pictures.  At ISO 6400, the pictures are clearly beyond saving but can still make a good 8×10 of the kids.

Overall I am very happy with the camera and feel that it will definitely allow me to be more profitable in microstock, even though I will continue to take only the shots I like.

Addendum:

At the time I wrote this the shots had not yet gone through the reviewers.  While so far they have only gone through Shutterstock, I at least have some data here.  Somewhat predictably with them, of the 42 shots I submitted only 12 were accepted.  Interestingly, the ISO 3200 image was not rejected for noise, but for poor lighting (which admittedly wasn’t so great).  The following were the rejection reasons:

5 were rejected for noise.  This is typical SS as all but one of the images were shot at ISO 100.  Another reviewer would have probably accepted them.  One of the images was shot at ISO 1600 and was dark.

6 were rejected due to focus.  Most of them were drop photos where the drop is OOF, though the icicles above were IF.

5 were rejected due to poor lighting.  All of them were shots where I had used shadow/highlight which indicates this reviewer did not like the effect.  I kind of agree, but in the past reviewers did not have issues with it.

1 shot was rejected due to ‘overuse of noise reduction software’.  This is interesting as I took the shot at ISO 100 and did not use noise reduction software.

13 were rejected due to ‘limited commercial value’.  This is a big issue with insect shots as it is entirely at the whim of the reviewer.

Overall more submissions will be necessary to see at what ISO I can submit shots.  They did not seem to have a problem with the ISO 3200 image, but perhaps the reviewer did not examine the noise after seeing the lighting issue.  The ISO 1600 image was rejected but it was dark in the first place – so more noise is likely.  Still, two images and a Shutterstock reviewer are not enough to determine the high ISO capabilities of the Mark II regarding microstock.

Focus was not a big issue so I am clearly not outresolving my lenses.  Other than that the issues were very typical with Shutterstock.  For IStockPhoto, I suspect they will agree with the lighting issues and will agree with most of the focus issues – though one or two drop shots may get through.  They will probably reject the ISO 1600 shot, but the shots at ISO 100 they will not reject for noise.  I suspect they will not reject my ‘limited commercial value’ shots, but may reject them for other reasons.

Overall I am pleased so far.  Shutterstock reviewers have become more difficult as the site grows and macro and insect shots are notoriously difficult to get through.  Also of the 42 shots submitted, 30 had no technical problems (I don’t buy noise at ISO 100).  In the past, I have just waited a few months and resubmitted the shots with a high acceptance rate which I may do in this case as well.

All in all I think the Mark II is working very well for microstock.

Addendum 2

I just received the results of my first 15 images from Dreamstime, which is more similar to IStockPhoto in its reviews than Shutterstock.  Of the 15 images, 12 were accepted.  Interestingly enough, the ISO 1600 image was accepted.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Therefore it was nice to see Canon still has a bit of ingenuity up their sleaves in the TS-E 17 F4 lens.  One area where Canon still has an advantage over Nikon is in their lenses.  Canon simply has far more lenses and far more good primes specifically.  Nikon has a few lenses Canon doesn’t – such as the 14-24 and the 200-400, but the Canon lenses I use most often – the 70-200/4 IS and the MP-E 65 – have no equivalents in Nikon.

Still, Canon has the tendency lately to sit back on their laurels and let Nikon catch up.  That is what happened with high ISO capabilities and I expected the same to occur for lenses – where Canon’s strategy lately has been to upgrade existing lenses.

This is not the case with the TS-E 17 – which is the ultimate interior photography lens.  Already I am salivating at the thought of taking real estate pictures with this lens – though I’m having more than a little trouble convincing my wife that it is worth it!

I had planned to buy the TS-E 24 at some time, but I wasn’t crazy about it.  I had heard that the lens was not great optically and 24mm is a great distance from my 16-35 that I normally use.  I did use a friend’s TS-E 24 briefly in a house I photographed, but I put the lens away because I needed something much wider.  The TS-E 17 fits the bill exactly.

I hope that this is a sign for the future – that Canon will keep innovating.  They now have another lens with no equivalent in other systems and I suspect a good number of interior photographers will buy a Canon camera if they are not using one just to be able to use this lens.

Now if I can just figure out where to get $2500.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

I also bought a Gitzo monopod together with the RRS tilt head.  I will review these at a later time, but from experience I knew that if I wanted a sharp picture, I needed some kind of stabilization.

I’m not much for taking shots of teddy bears and diagrams in the house to test a lens.  I prefer to take it in the field and give it a try.

The following are the shots I got.  At the end I will give my impressions of the lens.

  The one above was actually taken by my son Eitan, who at age five is already starting to surpass me.  He made it very clear when we got to the zoo that he wanted to see elk.  When we got there I just helped steady the monopod and camera, and he made this composition.

This is one of those “what if?” shots.  If I would have just used a shorter shutterspeed so two of the birds wouldn’t be blurred from head movement, and I had composed it slightly differently to get all of the middle bird’s tail in the shot, it would have been a great shot.

My biggest lesson with my first shoot with this lens is to pay better attention to shutter speed.  With the monopod, I was able to shoot at 1/40 and still have a sharp shot.  Even with IS, this simply would not have been possible.  However, I need to keep in my mind whether the animal is moving, and use a shutterspeed that is more appropriate with the speed of the subject.

In terms of my opinions of the lens, in general I like it.  It has its disadvantages.  It is by far my slowest lens at 5.6 – which takes getting used to.  I am too spoiled by other lenses where I shoot often at f4 or f2.8.  Autofocus is also rather slow on this lens compared to other lenses I have.

In terms of sharpness, the lens is decent.  It is not as sharp as my other L lenses, but the images are usable.  As long as I use a monopod and a decent shutterspeed – taking into account the speed of the subject – the pictures should be saleable.  This is not the case for the large Sigma telephotos, so this is a plus.

I’m not crazy about the push pull.  My wife tried the lens and hated it.  I can live with the push pull, but I would prefer a standard zoom.

In general, this is a compromise lens.  It cannot hold up to the larger primes, but it is much cheaper and smaller than they.  The next lens up would likely be the 300mm 2.8 – which is quite a bit pricier and more expensive.  Sigma does have some intermediate lenses, but given my experience with Sigma telephotos and their reputation, I would never buy one. 

Therefore, given the limitations I think this is the best lens out there for the purpose.  It certainly would not be my first choice given a safari to Africa or rain forest trip, but for zoos and for travel photography where wildlife is not the main focus, I think it is a decent alternative.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

This weekend we took the kids to a birthday party at a jumping house.  I had been to this identical location several months earlier with my old 5D and I was keen to see what the true difference would be.

The first thing I did was crank it up to ISO 6400.  As this was inside a large building and the lights were rather dim, the whole place was very dark.  Even at ISO 6400 I could not have taken the shot with just ambient light.  Therefore I added a 580EX II together with a Lumiquest diffuser, put the camera in AI servo, and let the camera rip once the kids started sliding.

With my old 5D, during a shoot like this I would wind up with maybe one or two decent shots.  Not the case here.  With each slide, I would take about three or four shots.  Some of those I would delete, but I would get at least one or two good shots from each attempt.

With my old 5D, I would take as many shots as I could with the hope that at least one or two would come out great.  The the Mark II, I actually stopped photographing at one point because I realized that I already had some good shots and I then started sliding myself.

I do not think that the AF is any faster than my old camera, but it does seem to have the knack to follow a subject much better.  I do not think that I have improved my skills much here as it was only a few months ago I shot in the exact same location under the same conditions.

Also, the additional .9 fps did seem to matter here, as it probably enabled me to get one more shot per slide.  ISO 6400 helped not just to get some of the ambient light, it also enabled the flash to keep up with the faster frame rate.  I did not have any shots where the flash failed to recycle quick enough – though I did have the flash hooked up the my CP-E4 just in case.  When I switched to ISO 3200, though, the flash had a harder time keeping up and I would have at least one black frame.

All in all I really like this camera so far.  With my original 5D, I had planned to upgrade to a 1Ds Mark III someday.  With the 5D Mark II, I do not feel the need to upgrade to a 1 series camera – though I’m sure Canon will release something someday that will change my mind.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

To be honest, recent lens releases by Canon have been extremely dull.  I was completely underwhelmed with the recently announced 24mm 1.4 II as I really have absolutely no use for a lens like that.  My suspicions are that this trend will continue for next year.

There are two main reasons why I think Canon will not release many new lenses next year.

1. Canon doesn’t really need to do this.  Canon already has a good lead over Nikon in terms of lens variety and Nikon has been releasing lenses at a slow pace itself.  With cameras, I have noticed that Canon seemed to prefer to let Nikon catch up to them before releasing anything new.  To a lesser degree, that may be the same case with lenses.
2. We are in an economic downturn.  Most companies I know of have cut features from their products and reduced the number of products in development.  Canon (and Nikon) are no different here.  If Canon releases more lenses next year than it did this year, the only reason will be that these lenses were already very mature in development.

That being said, the following are my opinions on upcoming lenses.  Rather than state what I think will be released compared to what will not, I will rank them from one to ten with one meaning the chances are very low to ten being an almost certainty.

Canon 24-70 2.8 IS – Likelihood 6

Recent rumors suggested that this lens was a certainty when the 5D Mark II was released.  They were obviously wrong.  To be honest, I’m not sure it would be a good move for Canon to release this lens.  They already have a 24-70 2.8 and a 24-105 f4 IS that serve completely different purposes.  With a 24-70 2.8 IS, I would expect their 24-105 f4 IS sales to fall as more people will not have a need for both lenses.  I rank this as only slightly likely due to the large number of rumors about it.

Canon 35mm 1.4L II – Likelihood 8

This lens was also rumored to be coming and I suspect it is much more likely.  Canon often releases lenses of similar focal lengths close to each other (see the 14mm 2.8L II and the 16-35mm 2.8L II) so this would be a natural pair for the 24mm 1.4L II.  The other factor that makes it more likely is I also have no use for this lens – which given my luck makes it more likely.

Canon 14-24 2.8 – Likelihood 1

I would certainly be one in the first in line to buy this lens, but it’s not going to happen.  This lens would undercut two other lenses Canon recently introduced – the 16-35mm 2.8L II and the 14mm 2.8L.

Canon 200-400 F4 – Likelihood 3

I would not be surprised if Canon has at least entertained this lens, but I doubt they will release it anytime soon or at all.  I do think that Canon desperately needs a zoom telephoto higher than the 100-400, but I doubt it’s coming anytime soon.

Canon 600mm 4L II – Likelihood 3

In general, Canon already has a lead over Nikon in the telephoto primes department.  Their 600mm lens is already cheaper and just as highly (if not more highly) regarded than the Nikon counterpart.  The only reason I could see Canon releasing this would be to increase the price of their telephotos.  This lens wouldn’t be entirely unrealistic given that Canon has recently introduced a (very expensive) 800mm 5.6 lens.

Canon 100-400 4-5.6L IS – Likelihood 5

The main difference between this lens and the current 100-400 is the F4 starting point – which I believe would allow the lens to use a 1.4x extender and retain AF.  This lens was rumored to be released but like the others did not show up.  The push pull on this lens has been long hated and I have seen comments that this lens is soft – though there are also comments that recently produced lenses are much sharper.  I do think this is the most likely telephoto to see an upgrade – especially more so since I plan to purchase the existing 100-400 soon – but my suspicions are that we will not see this lens next year.

Canon 180mm 3.5L II macro – Likelihood 4

I have seen some rumors that this lens will be updated.  I have the current version of this lens and love it.  I do think that this is the most likely macro lens to receive an update – but I don’t think any macro lenses will be updated soon.  Still, my intuition tells me that an update is coming – though not likely for next year.

Canon 400mm 4L IS II – Likelihood 4

Of all the prime telephotos, I think this may be the most likely to be updated.  Compared to the other primes, it has the lowest reviews.  It is also a good lens for handholding – so some of the technology from the 800mm 5.6 would be helpful.  I don’t think it is a very sexy lens but if it is lightweight it would probably sell decently.

Canon TS-E 24 3.5L II

With the new video feature, the tilt shift lenses will receive new focus.  This is the only tilt shift to have the L designation and does fit well into the recent wide angle focus at Canon.  Therefore, I think this is the most likely tilt shift to be updated.  I have also read a number of reviews that the current version has its issues – meaning that it is more likely to be updated.

Will there be new lenses?

You probably have noticed that most of these lenses are updated to existing ones.  This certainly seems to be the trend at Canon, so I went with it.  While I would love to see an imaginative lens like the MP-E 65, I just don’t think we’ll see it.  Of course, I have been wrong more often than right lately – so take all of this with a grain of salt.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Therefore, I thought I would compile my own list of rumors.  These are exactly that – rumors.  However, I have compiled them based of numerous posts in DPReview, past practices of Canon, and common sense.  Therefore, without further ado.

When will Canon release the 5D Mark II?

They will release it the same time they have been saying all along – at the end of November.  I think this will be very close to the end of November, and many packages may arrive the first week of December.

Will everyone receive the 5D Mark II that preordered?

It depends on when you preordered it, but everyone in the US that preordered within the first few days of the announcement will receive it in the first wave.  If you have not already preordered the camera, you likely will not receive it this year unless you get in on one of the first orders from B&H or you get lucky with your local camera store.

What SLR cameras will Canon announce soon?

Canon will release an upgrade to the 40D/50D next year – most likely in September but there is a possibility for April.  The new model, tentatively called the 60D, will be similar to the 50D but will have video.

Will Canon release a 1 series body next year?

Yes, the new body will include video, will have more megapixels (though my guess is the 1Ds body will not be substantial – probably from 21 MP to 24).  The bodies will have a new AF as well.  High ISO performance will be similar to the 5D Mark II.

Will Canon release a new flash to update the 580EX II?

Yes, it is just a matter of time.  There is always a small team at Canon working on the next flashes.  It is possible this flash may be released next year, but I don’t think Canon feels rushed here.

Will Canon ever get rid of the direct print button?

Nope, the button will be there for the foreseeable future.  Some exec at Canon has a soft spot for this button.  They have made it more multi-purpose though – it now controls Live View.  This is likely the future of the button.  Canon will keep the direct print feature until it becomes too expensive to maintain.  When someday in the future a new generation of printers is released that won’t work with this button, expect the direct print feature to be removed, but the button will stay for Live View purposes.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Coming from the 5D, the 40D is certainly a different camera.  I suspect that many people right now are trying to make up their mind whether to purchase a new 50D or a used 5D, so I thought I would offer my opinions on the differences (the 50D and 40D are very similar cameras).

First, I am not going to dwell on the well known aspects such as image quality and noise.  There are many well respected web sites out there that will go into detail for these cameras.  In general, though, I felt the 40D was a very good camera.  Knowing that its high ISO capabilities are not as strong as the 5D, I didn’t push it very much.  On a few occasions I went up to ISO 800, but generally tried to keep it as low as possible.

As the 40D is a new camera, it has a number of improvements over the 5D.  The following are my impressions of them.

Dust removal – As with all newer Canon cameras, the 40D has automatic dust removal.  I tested this by taking some shots with my MP-E 65, which is the king of all lenses when it comes to showing dust.  I did find significantly less dust than I am accustomed to, particularly in the corners.  However, the images were certainly not dust free, and I will still have some cloning work to do.  The dust removal feature does reduce the amount of cloning I need to do though.

LCD – The 40D has a much nicer LCD than my 5D.  This helped significantly when making decisions about which images to keep.  I suspect with zoom I could have a good indication of how in focus an image is, but I didn’t have time for that.  Still, images I thought were in focus on the viewfinder turned out to be out of focus when I downloaded them.  I suspect the viewfinder on the 5D Mark II will be an improvement here.

Live View – I didn’t use this feature at all, and suspect I won’t use it much on the 5D Mark II except for the taking movies.  The MP-E 65 requires eye coordination and Live View is basically useless in this aspect.  When taking pictures of the kids, I felt it was unnecessary.

Viewfinder – Displaying the ISO in the viewfinder was very helpful.

Bursts – the 40D has a much higher frames per second than the 5D. In practice, I didn’t really use this.  My preferred style is to anticipate the moment, then take the shot.  I never pushed my old 5D in terms of burst and didn’t come close to using the feature for the 40D.

Autofocus – This is very hard to quantify, but based on the results I believe the AF in the original 5D is better.  In similar settings and lighting conditions I have had more ‘keeper’ shots, despite the fact that I used the same settings.

Feel – The 5D is certainly a larger camera and ‘feels’ more professional.  Perhaps it is just my familiarity with the 5D, but it feels much better in my hands.

Crop factor – This was very welcome when taking macro shots and when using my telephoto lens.  It was of course unwelcome when using my wide angle lens.  In general though I didn’t feel that I got any shots I wouldn’t have gotten with my 5D.  The depth of field was also a bit nicer in the macro shots, as the 40D has a bit more than the 5D.  Still, my style is to generally blur the background a bit, which is more difficult when you have more DOF.

Pop up flash – I used hot shoe flashes whenever necessary, but Nelya used the pop up flash.  I offered to put one of my flashes on the camera, but she didn’t want to bother.  In my opinion, the shots show the effect of a weak uni-directional flash – all the more reason that I prefer to not have a pop up flash on my camera.

Wife’s opinion – Nelya actually used the camera for the first party as I volunteered to help with the event.  She didn’t like the camera at all – saying that it felt more like a ‘toy’ compared to my old camera.

In general I think the 40D is a great camera.  When choosing between an old 5D and the newer 50D (which is essentially the 40D with a better LCD and 50% more pixels), I would choose the 5D simply because I prefer having less DOF and I like the feel of the camera more.  For purely macro and telephoto reasons though, the 50D certainly has its advantages.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Comments that I heard were

“I just don’t have that much patience.”

“I took a number of shots, but they all came out blurry”

I feel like some sort of zen master, when I prognose that the reason that they failed to take good shots had nothing to do with their photography skills (they’re both better than I), but that they were unable to find their inner peace to use the lens correctly.

Unlike most other lenses, the only chance you have to get good shots with the MP-E 65 is to completely concentrate on the subject.  Nothing else matters except for getting the photo.  There is no room for thinking about other subjects – but instead you must concentrate entirely on the subject in front of the lens.

When I believe that I have the subject in focus, I hold me breath to steady the camera – rather like rifle shooting.

Ultimately, the MP-E 65 is the ultimate lens for relaxing – because it cannot combine with worries.  Perhaps that is why I like this lens so much – because I find myself in a different world whenever I use it.  I find myself in a world not inhabited by war, terrorism, successes, and failures but instead one inhabited by aphids, ants, and springtails.

So if you do come across this lens some day, do not think of merely going outside to get a few pictures.  Instead, clear your mind completely, focus on your subjects, and prepare yourself to enter a new world.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

First of all, I have never really bothered with video that much.  I tend to not enjoy watching videos of weddings, events, and vacations that others greatly enjoy.  I do enjoy videos of my kids, so we purchased a Canon HF10 some time ago.  This is a very nice video camera, though we still do not have a good decoder for the AVCHD format.

However, the Mark II offers some new perspectives on video previously unavailable to me.  For one, the quality is considerably better than the HF10.  While it is certainly missing features present in top video cameras, the raw quality of the video is on par with the best video cameras.  Therefore, I plan to use it for the following purposes.

1. Video of kids.  I’m not sure how much we’ll take with the HF10 and how much we’ll take with the Mark II.  My guess is the HF10 will still take the lion’s share of the video.  However, when I feel that the video is very important, I will likely use the Mark II.
2. Macro video.  In particular I hope to take macro stock video.  I am still working out a number of the details on how I plan to go about this, as lighting and stability are significant issues that I have not yet fully addressed.  Once I do start creating these videos, I will obviously post them here along with my technique.
3. Real estate videos.  I have gone back and forth about the need and use of video in real estate.  The truth is I have yet to see a real estate video that does a good job.  However, I have some ideas on how this may work and I plan to do use an upcoming listing of Nelya’s to test my theory out.

So, yes, the HD video feature of the Mark II is useful in my opinion.  It is not a replacement for a full video camera, but I suspect if you understand it’s limitations it makes a great tool for those of us unable or unwilling to spend tens of thousands on a professional video camera.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.