5D CLASSIC admirers, assemble! (2)

inthedeck wrote in post #7630516
I think she meant the 200 f/2.8 is the one with the issues?

You're right... maybe he did mean the 200 f/2.8. I wonder if that one has a switch though. it's possible.

Sorry, yes, I meant the 200/2.8 prime.

I was actually glad to find that that there's something wrong with it, because it means that Canon should be able to fix it. With a better MFD I'm sure I'll enjoy it a whole lot more than before.

Btw. they say it'll be a sunny day tomorrow. I'm so happy. Earlier today the prognosis said it'll rain the entire week, and I really want to take a photo trip to town and try out my new 5D.

shimmishim wrote in post #7630236
^ beautiful.

the only thing i'd do (if it's possible - not sure how good your photoshop skills are) is remove some (not all) of the hair across her forehead especially the larger strand that goes across her eye brows... oh and bring the highlights in a smidgen more (highlights look blown on her neck).

im not that super great at photoshop right now. just learning as i go. how would i bring the highlights on the neck down

shimmishim wrote in post #7630592
You're right... maybe he did mean the 200 f/2.8. I wonder if that one has a switch though. it's possible.

Good thought! It doesn't seem like it though. At least I can't find any such switch on it.


I'm a "she" btw.. Speaking of which: Where are all the females? Surely there are other girls/women/ladies with 5Ds? I see some in the 5DII thread, but rarely any here.

Helena wrote in post #7630615
Good thought! It doesn't seem like it though. At least I can't find any such switch on it.


I'm a "she" btw.. Speaking of which: Where are all the females? Surely there are other girls/women/ladies with 5Ds? I see some in the 5DII thread, but rarely any here.

Ack! Sorry! That's embarrassing on my part!!!

Davidletran wrote in post #7630600
im not that super great at photoshop right now. just learning as i go. how would i bring the highlights on the neck down

What program are you using? Lightroom or photoshop or elements or dpp or etc...

shimmishim wrote in post #7630236
^ beautiful.

the only thing i'd do (if it's possible - not sure how good your photoshop skills are) is remove some (not all) of the hair across her forehead especially the larger strand that goes across her eye brows... oh and bring the highlights in a smidgen more (highlights look blown on her neck).

shimmishim wrote in post #7630651
What program are you using? Lightroom or photoshop or elements or dpp or etc...

cs4 photoshop ext and lightroom 2.3rc

Helena wrote in post #7630453
--I have talked about selling my 200/2.8 since I prefer to use the 70-200/4IS at that focal length, and because its MFD is very frustrating. I have had a feeling that there's something wrong with the MFD, but since the lens is very sharp even wide open and has no other problems I thought that I was imagining it, but today I decided to test it and found that the MFD is around ~3.5m! (It's supposed to be 1.5m.) No wonder I found it frustrating to use. So, I will send it to Canon for calibration, and who knows, maybe I decide to keep it afterwards.

yea, that seems abnormal - you don't have the focus liimiter switch on, do you?


My 200 f/2.8 focuses fairly closely....

Harleypugs wrote in post #7629313
Took the 5D to St Martin over the weekend....

Here are a couple for the plane buffs....

On final from the Sunset Beach bar...

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Landing over Maho beach....

That first photo is awesome! I'm a bit jealous since St. Martin has been on my wish list for a long time.

versedmb wrote in post #7630673
yea, that seems abnormal - you don't have the focus liimiter switch on, do you?


My 200 f/2.8 focuses fairly closely....
http://brownphotograph​y.smugmug.com/photos/4​58017219_GNtBa-L.jpg

Beautiful!

I did have it on! How incredibly embarrassing! What must you be thinking of me now. I'm normally quite good at technical stuff, but it never occurred to me that there might be something like that. I had never heard of it until today.

This means that I still have a 100% success rate with my lenses. I mean, every single one has been perfect and not needed calibration. I thought that 200/2.8 would be the first.

How fortunate that I mentioned the "problem" here before sending it to Canon! They'd sure get a good laugh if I had. I will bring it to town tomorrow and try it out with the correct setting. This is wonderful.

Davidletran wrote in post #7630665
cs4 photoshop ext and lightroom 2.3rc

In lightroom, the slider under exposure will bring recover the highlights. Just adjust this slider to the right. Watch the histogram until the bar that extend past the right side of the histogram start coming in view.

OR

If you want to recover the highlights on her neck only you can always do a layer mask in CS4 and adjust the levels on her neck only. <- This isn't difficult to do.

Lightroom method is easier. You can also use the adjustment brush in lightroom to do something similar but not sure if you have recovery functionality with the brush.

Helena wrote in post #7630721
Beautiful!

I did have it on! How incredibly embarrassing! What must you be thinking of me now. I'm normally quite good at technical stuff, but it never occurred to me that there might be something like that. I had never heard of it until today.

This means that I still have a 100% success rate with my lenses. I mean, every single one has been perfect and not needed calibration. I thought that 200/2.8 would be the first.

How fortunate that I mentioned the "problem" here before sending it to Canon! They'd sure get a good laugh if I had. I will bring it to town tomorrow and try it out with the correct setting. This is wonderful.

Wait... how is this switch different than what i was talking about before?! LOL.

I'm so confused...

doubleo6point9 wrote in post #7630694
That first photo is awesome! I'm a bit jealous since St. Martin has been on my wish list for a long time.

Thanks!

It was a blast.....I recommend going.

Jon

Helena wrote in post #7630721
Beautiful!

I did have it on! How incredibly embarrassing! What must you be thinking of me now. I'm normally quite good at technical stuff, but it never occurred to me that there might be something like that. I had never heard of it until today.

This means that I still have a 100% success rate with my lenses. I mean, every single one has been perfect and not needed calibration. I thought that 200/2.8 would be the first.

How fortunate that I mentioned the "problem" here before sending it to Canon! They'd sure get a good laugh if I had. I will bring it to town tomorrow and try it out with the correct setting. This is wonderful.

Hey, don't feel bad. I did the same thing last year when I was trying to shoot flowers with my 70-200 - I thought for sure there was something wrong with it.

shimmishim wrote in post #7630759
Wait... how is this switch different than what i was talking about before?! LOL.

I'm so confused...

LOL Sorry, it's the same thing indeed, but I misunderstood at first. English isn't my primary language (as I'm sure you can tell by my posts). Thank you too!

versedmb wrote in post #7630782
Hey, don't feel bad. I did the same thing last year when I was trying to shoot flowers with my 70-200 - I thought for sure there was something wrong with it.

Pheew, glad to hear I'm not alone. I was actually blushing (in real life) from the embarrassment.