60D users, friends and their random OT B.S.

Well then day off early morning shots more properly

Rivest wrote in post #14878831
Thanks Vinz and Mirco, was actually taking a break from here, quite busy with life.

Yup, my 5D is dead. I'll have to send it to Canon. Looks at the thread I started for it if you want more details: https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1219067

Dude, sorry to hear that!

andrewopolis wrote in post #14880404
Yay, thank you Mirco, Vinz, Marc, Mike, & Lisa!

OOoooooooooo Lisa is selling an S100..... That reminds me, I was listening to music on YouTube all day & night (including now) & found S Club 7. I was in love with those girls....

S100 is great...wonder why she is selling it.

From Saturday, slight disclaimer on these, all SoOC except for a little bit of Hue correction on a few of them, I was shooting from a Highrise that has this polarized window glaze on the double pane windows that kind of tosses a color cast on some of the shots. A couple of slight crops as well.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/61744772@N06/7​823166122/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/61744772@N06/7​823108372/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/61744772@N06/7​823109124/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/61744772@N06/7​823109604/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/61744772@N06/7​823107674/

Is CA normal to any lens under bright condition like shooting outdoor in a mighty sunny day? My 85 f1.8 seems to have it in some shots(not all) in that given situation.

Can be corrected in LR though.

I need your thoughts while i still have time to return this lens.

vinmunoz wrote in post #14882476
Is CA normal to any lens under bright condition like shooting outdoor in a mighty sunny day? My 85 f1.8 seems to have it in some shots(not all) in that given situation.

Can be corrected in LR though.

I need your thoughts while i still have time to return this lens.

I think I mentioned before that CA is "the" problem with this lens wide open (and that's why it's not exactly branded L). I've seen CA with my 50mm 1.4 too though.

from http://www.photozone.d​e …1-canon_85_18_50d?start=​1
"LoCAs (non-coinciding focal planes of the various colors) are a primarily problem with ultra-fast prime lenses and the EF 85mm f/1.8 USM suffers quite a bit here as well. At f/1.8 the greenish and magenta focus halos are very obvious. The situation improves slowly towards f/2.8 but you can still spot traces of bokeh fringing at f/4 although it's not disturbing anymore here. This is all not unusual but it's not desirable either. "


Also: http://www.flickr.com …iscuss/72157622​842792759/

vinmunoz wrote in post #14882476
Is CA normal to any lens under bright condition like shooting outdoor in a mighty sunny day? My 85 f1.8 seems to have it in some shots(not all) in that given situation.

Can be corrected in LR though.

I need your thoughts while i still have time to return this lens.

Normal, and a pain. Every lens can do it, even L class. The defringing tools in LR or DXO Optics pro do an amazing job of correcting it.

By the way guys... I've decided to sell my 50mm 1.4 in order to get a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS. I'll be shooting a wedding vow renewal event in a couple months taking place in the evening/night so that OS would be a nice complement to my 30 and 85 + flash (at least I think so, lol). I also want it for the small concerts and showcases that I go to.

So if anyone here is looking for a 50, let me know!

Keyan wrote in post #14882541
Normal, and a pain. Every lens can do it, even L class. The defringing tools in LR or DXO Optics pro do an amazing job of correcting it.

pretty much!

even thought I never had an issue with my 85 1.8 but then again, i rarely shoot wide open with it.

drum&bassist wrote in post #14875593
so, i need some lens advice. I love my 70-200, but I really want IS. and while I'm upgrading, I might as well get something a bit faster.

I don't quite have the funds, nor could I justify the cost of the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II, but a used MK 1 is just within my budget. then, of course, there's the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 OS, which can be found for $300- $400 cheaper. and i'm pretty much stuck between these two...

I've got the sigma 17-50mm f/2.8, which I love, for the most part...but it backfocuses like crazy when wide open...and that's kinda left a bad taste in my mouth when it comes to Sigma.

any advise? anyone with experience with either of these beasts on our fair 60D?

anyone have any input on either of these lenses?

in related news, I've listed my 70-200 f/4 L in the market section, if anyone's interested. Hopefully I will have made up my mind by the time this sells and I have the rest of the $$ to upgrade.
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1219665

thanks guyz, i guess we'll just have to live with it. Yes lightroom do a very good job getting rid of it.

Maria, that's gonna be my setup too in the wedding i'm doing in a month. 85mm, 17-50 and my coming canon 28mm f/1.8.

You got the sigma 30, right?

vinmunoz wrote in post #14882980
thanks guyz, i guess we'll just have to live with it. Yes lightroom do a very good job getting rid of it.

Maria, that's gonna be my setup too in the wedding i'm doing in a month. 85mm, 17-50 and my coming canon 28mm f/1.8.

You got the sigma 30, right?

Nice! And yup, I have the Sig 30. By the way, are you going to use flash/how do you plan to use it? Just curious as I don't want to screw up this event! I'm going to check out the venue soon and see what I have to work with... I have 2 months to practice my evening/nighttime shots, and since the venue is not too far from where I live I could practice there as well.

Any other wedding/event shooters that use flash, feel free to chime in

I asked tha church if flash is allowed and yes it is so i guess i have to use flash with a diffuser. I don't know if using a flash affects the very important candid shots.

Posting this pics again to show you it's not showing up everytime like this first 2 pics.

Vinz, will you be using flash on camera or off camera? I still can't decide what I want to do; on camera seems like it might be more convenient but off camera tends to be less harsh and give better results...