--- "John M. Lovda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This was undoubtedly covered before but.
>
> Can someone tell me the datecode scheme for newer
> EOS lenses?
...snip...
> My newer lenses just have a long, faintly engraved
> serial number which ends with a letter on the back.
> My 85/1.8 = 3
At 8:52 PM -0800 11/16/00, Skip wrote:
>The 100-300USM is well spoken of, a true ring USM, and the build quality
>is far superior to the 75-300, whether it is USM, IS or none of the
>above. [...]
I have owned and used both lenses - the 75-300 USM II and the
100-300 USM. As noted the build qua
It seems that the archives are working again.
But still it has archived up to about 19 Sep. only.
http://www.listquest.com/goto/canoneos
Rodrigo Gimenez
*
***
***
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*http://w
Nathan D Burns wrote:
>
> I have a Canon 28-105, 100- 2.0, 28- 2.8
>
> I had a 75-300 not USM Canon and I did not like the picture
> quality or the design at all.
>
> I want to get a zoom to handle the 200 plus range. I want
> crisp pictures.
>
> Please recommend a lens for me to buy.
>
> Na
--- Ray Amos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video wrote:
>
> > At 04:37 AM 11/16/2000, you wrote:
> > >Is the EOS 30 (Elan 7e) much lighter?
> >
> > EOS 3 = 27.5 oz.
> > Elan 7E = 20.3 oz
> > Rebel G = 12.3 oz
> > Rebel 2000 = 11.8 oz.
>
> If 7 oz. determines whether you get
Gary Russell writes:
>>I don't want to get a "wish list" started again, but
I would sure like to see Canon come out with a battery
pack/booster for the EOS 3/1v that maybe took only 4
batteries. <<
Doesn't the 4-AA cell pack BP-E1 fit the EOS-3 and
EOS-1v? I know the BP-E1 booster made for the EO
Nathan D Burns wrote:
| I have a Canon 28-105, 100- 2.0, 28- 2.8
|
| I had a 75-300 not USM Canon and I did not like the picture
| quality or the design at all.
|
| I want to get a zoom to handle the 200 plus range. I want
| crisp pictures.
|
| Please recommend a lens for me to buy.
Once you
On Fri, 17 Nov 2000 07:56:44 +0900, "Jim Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>What I'm saying is that I do see the correct depth of field in
>viewfinder when using DOF preview. I can tell what's in focus and what's
>not. Plus, I can see it change when I change apertures. What I see is what I
>g
This was undoubtedly covered before but.
Can someone tell me the datecode scheme for newer EOS lenses? FD lenses
and some of the first EF lenses (such as my Type I 50/1.8) had the
datecode stamped in white ink on the back. Z=85, A=86, B=87, etc. My
newer lenses just have a long, faintly eng
- Original Message -
From: Daniel Rocha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> In conclusion, the IS & VR have the same stab capabilities.
Daniel:
Is Nikon having trouble perfecting their VR, or is it some other issue they
haven't quite worked out that's keeping their 80-400 lens from being
I have had much better pictures since I turned the ECF off
on my A2E.
I do not have a antireflective on my glasses.
When using EFC
I had noticeable difficulty seeing the scene in focus
through the viewfinder with several lens until I purchased a
28-105 and a 100-1.8, both Canon. My focus seems
I have a Canon 28-105, 100- 2.0, 28- 2.8
I had a 75-300 not USM Canon and I did not like the picture
quality or the design at all.
I want to get a zoom to handle the 200 plus range. I want
crisp pictures.
Please recommend a lens for me to buy.
Nathan D Burns
Gustine, CA
Nathanb @writeme.com
- Original Message -
From: Mortimer Snerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Does someone have a comparison of weights and sizes
> once the optional battery packs/grips are added? I
> suspect that's the way the bulk of "serious" amateurs
> will use the cameras, those lithium cells get pretty
> expensi
Robert Meier wrote:
>
> --- Bob Sull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Robert Meier wrote:
> >
> > > Or maybe Canon was too conservative with their
> > > numbers. Also Nikon seems to have a few advantages
> > > over Canon.
> >
> > Like what?
>
> According to a previous message
> 1) Nikon's VR start
sorry, just testing
*
***
***
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***
At 06:37 PM 11/16/00 -0600, you wrote:
Consider the following combinations
that might be used
on an EOS-3 camera:
[1] 300mm f4 canon IS + canon 2X converter
for an effective 600mm f8;
[2] 100-400 canon IS set to 400mm + canon 1.4X
convertor for an effective 560mm f8.
Which will be sharper?
Which w
Consider the following combinations that might be used
on an EOS-3 camera:
[1] 300mm f4 canon IS + canon 2X converter
for an effective 600mm f8;
[2] 100-400 canon IS set to 400mm + canon 1.4X
convertor for an effective 560mm f8.
Which will be sharper?
Which will focus faster?
Is there any pracitic
--- Ray Amos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some one suggested I purchase a BG-ED3 battery grip
> for my backordered
> D30. Does anyone know what this is? Maybe a
> webpage with a photo and
> description? It's about $150.
>
> Ray Amos
http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/d30/access.html
_
--- Bob Sull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Meier wrote:
>
> > Or maybe Canon was too conservative with their
> > numbers. Also Nikon seems to have a few advantages
> > over Canon.
>
> Like what?
According to a previous message
1) Nikon's VR starts up faster then Canon's IS
2) can automa
Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video wrote:
> At 04:37 AM 11/16/2000, you wrote:
> >Is the EOS 30 (Elan 7e) much lighter?
>
> EOS 3 = 27.5 oz.
> Elan 7E = 20.3 oz
> Rebel G = 12.3 oz
> Rebel 2000 = 11.8 oz.
If 7 oz. determines whether you get a 7E or a 3, lift weights for two
weeks and you will never no
--- Bill White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> B&H has a web page that compares all Canon cameras.
> You may find this helpful.
>
>
http://www02.bhphotovideo.com/FrameWork/charts/comp_canslr_1.html
That's a very nice page.
Does someone have a comparison of weights and sizes
once the optional bat
> -Mensaje original-
> De: Maria T Hansson [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Enviado el: Jueves 16 de Noviembre de 2000 2:55 AM
>
> Karen,
>
> I'm considering the purchase of an EOS 3 body. What I am worried about
> though is the weight. I have an EOS 500N (Rebel G?) and since I have
rather
Robert Meier wrote:
> Or maybe Canon was too conservative with their
> numbers. Also Nikon seems to have a few advantages
> over Canon.
Like what?
Bob
--
//
( 0 0 )
-73 de [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Living in the last year of the 20th Century and 2nd Millenniu
> >Paul, I understand what you're saying. You say the viewfinder is showing
> >maximum DOF at all apertures, right? I suspect a camera malfunction if it
> >happens on all lenses, at all apertures, and you've cleaned the
camera/lens
> >contacts.
>
> No, what I am confused about is if DOF preview sh
Hi,
I wear glasses and found that the Current EOS 3 to be much better than the
A2E while using ECF. However I don't know for sure if it is equal with &
without glasses.
George
*
***
***
* For list instructions, including unsubscr
At 19:02 16/11/00 +0100, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>They have tested the lenses in various shutter speed configuration,
>with and w/o the stab, from 1/500s to 1/4s.
>It's the same compensation for the IS & VR ! The VR seems to
>be erratic at 1/60s. Tests remade various times.
>1/30s is the lowest value
> Jim Davis wrote:
> > I would like to buy a teleconverter for my EOS camera.
> > Any comments on the following would be appreciated.
> > I definitely want a 2X converter, and since not an L lens...
>
> To widen the issue a little, do list members have a view as to the 'best'
> third party convert
--- Thys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, like we expected, Nikon is piling marketing hype
> on their implementation
> to make it look better than the Canon version.
Or maybe Canon was too conservative with their
numbers. Also Nikon seems to have a few advantages
over Canon. All in all I do not
Gary Kaplan said on 16/11/2000:
>I am concerned that the eye control focus won't work well for me since I ware
>glasses. I was wondering what peoples experiences have been with ECF. Any advice
I wear glasses with anti-reflective coating and ECF on my EOS 5 / A2E has always
worked fine for me.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Rocha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>They have tested the lenses in various shutter speed configuration, with
and
>w/o the stab, from 1/500s to 1/4s.
>It's the same compensation for the IS & VR ! The VR seems to be erratic at
At 01:43 PM 11/16/00, Gary wrote:
>I am trying to decided between the Elan 7 and 7E. I would like to get the
>7E but I am concerned that the eye control focus won't work well for me
>since I ware glasses. I was wondering what peoples experiences have been
>with ECF. Any advice would be apprecia
bobpen wrote:
> I am among those still 'building' my EOS kit, so decisions like 'flash or
> converter' or 'macro or IS' are never far from my mind. One day I'd like
> them all! Any thoughts are welcome.
Ok . . . it seems to me that if you are building a system you would want to
select items th
I am trying to decided between the Elan 7 and 7E.
I would like to get the 7E but I am concerned that the eye control focus
won't work well for me since I ware glasses. I was wondering what peoples
experiences have been with ECF. Any advice would be appreciated.
Thanks'
Gary
--
~~~
Paul Prior MD wrote:
> No, what I am confused about is if DOF preview shuts down the aperture
> to "show" the DOF, that should only -increase- DOF, right? So why
> don't you see a very shallow DOF all the other times when the lens is
> wide open.
FWIW, that *is* what I see (and of course how
At 10:35 AM 11/16/2000, you wrote:
>No, what I am confused about is if DOF preview shuts down the aperture
>to "show" the DOF, that should only -increase- DOF, right? So why
>don't you see a very shallow DOF all the other times when the lens is
>wide open.
But you do. Set your tele lens to wide
De : Paul Prior MD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Why, then when you are looking through the camera to focus these
> lenses do you see the whole field in focus? Isn't the lens operating
> at wide open aperture when focusing in EOS cameras? I thought so, to
Quite strange... To verify it try to focus a cl
De : Thys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Have they devised any 'effectiveness' tests for the respective IS and VR
> systems to verify the '2 vs 3 stops handholdable usage' claim.
Yes ! I have forgottent to write some words about it ! Sorry :)
They have tested the lenses in various shutter speed configura
--- Jim Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, my eyes are pretty good, but there's no
> way I can refocus an out
> of focus viewfinder image. As to the size of the
> viewfinder, I don't know
> what that has to do with anything - when you view,
> everything looks more or
> less lifesize (de
I think you have to "look" at this from another point of view.
I ask you know: Have you ever realized what the DOF of your eye is? Oh yes. At
the very basics, your eye is a lens and it has a focal point, minimun focus
distance (augmenting with the age!) etc.
Your brains are always working to com
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Paul Prior MD wrote:
> No, what I am confused about is if DOF preview shuts down the aperture
> to "show" the DOF, that should only -increase- DOF, right? So why
right
> don't you see a very shallow DOF all the other times when the lens is
> wide open.
You do. 8-)
Did yo
At 04:37 AM 11/16/2000, you wrote:
>Is the EOS 30 (Elan 7e) much lighter?
EOS 3 = 27.5 oz.
Elan 7E = 20.3 oz
Rebel G = 12.3 oz
Rebel 2000 = 11.8 oz.
--
regards,
Henry Posner
Director of Sales and Training
B&H Photo-Video, and Pro-Audio Inc.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com
*
***
***
>can you please recommend me good photo store with Canon >equipment in/near
Washington DC?
>I am also interested in buying Canonet GIII17QL, so if >there is some used
equipment store nearby i will very >appreciate any info about it ...
Try Penn Camera. They have stores all over the DC metro are
>I had a question pop into my mind today, probably simple, but I
>couldn't explain it.
>
>Wide aperture lenses have shallow DOF, this I know. My 2.8L and
>1.4/50 both produce a striking blur and I probably shoot the vast
>majority of my pics at 3.5 and below.
>
>Why, then when you are looking thr
>>> gauzak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
gauzak> Hello list, After 10 months of use, my beloved lens (28-135
gauzak> USM IS) has died. One week ago, when I brought it out of my
gauzak> backpack, I saw the zoom didn´t come down 70mm, I can only
gauzak> move the zoom between 70 and 135mm.
I hav
In a message dated 11/16/00 9:44:47 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Jim Davis wrote:
> I would like to buy a teleconverter for my EOS camera.
> Any comments on the following would be appreciated.
> I definitely want a 2X converter, and since not an L lens...
>
To
Hello All,
can you please recommend me good photo store with Canon equipment in/near
Washington DC?
I am also interested in buying Canonet GIII17QL, so if there is some used
equipment store nearby i will very appreciate any info about it ...
thank you very much
best regards
Peter Holly
*
**
At 03:55 AM 11/16/00, Maria wrote:
>Karen,
>
>I'm considering the purchase of an EOS 3 body. What I am worried about
>though is the weight. I have an EOS 500N (Rebel G?) and since I have rather
>large hands compared to most women, the 500N feels a little bit too small
>when I compare it to the fee
Jim Davis wrote:
> I would like to buy a teleconverter for my EOS camera.
> Any comments on the following would be appreciated.
> I definitely want a 2X converter, and since not an L lens...
>
To widen the issue a little, do list members have a view as to the 'best'
third party converters? Like
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 16:50:29 +0900, "Jim Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> >Paul, if you are indeed seeing the whole depth of field in focus, you
>must
>> >have set your custom function to show DOF. Check your functions.
>> >You should certainly be viewing wide open as a default.
>>
>> Ah, but
> I would like to buy a teleconverter for my EOS camera.
> Any comments on the following would be appreciated.
> I definitely want a 2X converter, and since not an L lens...
>
> Tokina RMC Doubler 2X - $119.95
> Tamron 2x SP AF pro $195.00
> Kenko Mc7 2x AF teleplus $143.00
> Kenko Pro 300 2
>After 10 months of use, my beloved lens (28-135 USM IS) has died. One
>week ago, when I brought it out of my backpack, I saw the zoom didn?t
>come down 70mm, I can only move the zoom between 70 and 135mm.
>In brought it to the shop and they said that it looked like the zoom
>was broken after a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hello list,
>
> After 10 months of use, my beloved lens (28-135 USM IS) has died. One
> week ago, when I brought it out of my backpack, I saw the zoom didn´t
> come down 70mm, I can only move the zoom between 70 and 135mm.
>
[...]
> The question is: Anybody has had
Karen,
I'm considering the purchase of an EOS 3 body. What I am worried about
though is the weight. I have an EOS 500N (Rebel G?) and since I have rather
large hands compared to most women, the 500N feels a little bit too small
when I compare it to the feel of the EOS 3 grip.
However, I'm not ve
I would like to buy a teleconverter for my EOS camera.
Any comments on the following would be appreciated.
I definitely want a 2X converter, and since not an L lens...
Tokina RMC Doubler 2X - $119.95
Tamron 2x SP AF pro $195.00
Kenko Mc7 2x AF teleplus $143.00
Kenko Pro 300 2x $199.95
Kenko
54 matches
Mail list logo
