Jon L

Oh, snap! Has anyone noticed that today Facebook has changed their photo viewer, so that when you click on a photo to view, the bottom of the photo is cut off in order to display an ad at the lower right corner. Only way to view the entire photo is to keep pushing control/- to make the photo small. Absolute FAIL and shows where Facebook is headed! http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=10100503334101314

I had the 35L on when I found some bees. With 11mm extension tube, this meant I was only 2 inches away from the bee in order to focus!

Kind of disappointed that all these bodies (550D, 600D, 60D) basically share same sensor/IQ with difference in features only. I was hoping for some sort of announcement towards mirrorless canon body or 5D mkiii myself...

Canon 35mm F/1.4L with 13mm extension tube. A few inches of space to work with...

I just ran into this F/16 limit today and remembered that "feature" of 85L. At these apertures, I simply could not reach a shutter speed that would give me a non-blurry photo hand-held. The Canon 50mm F/1.4 is turning out to be a nice macro lens with a 31 mm extension tube, but I'm still pretty close to the object; definitely not for nervous insects. This one's with 50 F/1.4

And my first foray into Macro, mostly with 21mm tube. Hand-held shots, and I found out real fast Wind is Your Enemy. I'll have to try a tripod next time, but I'm usually shooting from a high, contorted position, so not sure if it'll work out for macro. Also, where are peoople keeping their F-Stop for daylight Macro work? I kept it at F/8 mostly but seem to recall reading it should be higher.

OK, so I was too cheap to buy a good dedicated macro lens. I bought the ProOptic extension tubes instead, which I ended up using with Canon 85mm F/1.2L II. 35mm F/1.4L was simply too short in focal length for anything longer than the 13mm extension tube..

Getting used to the 35L bokeh..

I (wisely) stayed away from the dynamite idea, but did make use of a submersible sump pump, which pumped for DAYS to get rid of most of the water. It seems to have worked with frogs so far, though I did hear them a little bit today..

santa barbara sea urchin in champagne beurre blanc, fines herbs Went to a Chi-Chi 2-Michelin Restaurant last night and had the 35L on.. Girls loved it. I don't know about you guys, but I'd rather bite into a juicy porterhouse..

I was simply concerned whether my 35L sample was a bad copy or not since I have never seen these purple/blue reflection spots (not purple fringing) shooting the same scene at night with other lenses, including 50F/1.8, 50F/1.4, 85L, 35F/2, etc. I'm feeling much better after spending a little more time with the 35L, which is obviously superb glass. I still wonder about the reflection spots, though, and wonder if other 35L users have noticed similar reflection spots shooting into light, similar to the 4 rows of multiple purple/blue spots in this photo?

Just took some random shots. I do like how the 35L holds up in daylight but will be comparing to my 35 F/2 to see if the money difference is "worth it." I do like the bokeh of 35L so far.

I just received the Canon 35mm F/1.4L, and unfortunately it's already 8 PM. I have read about 35L's problems shooting into harsh lighting, but there's some terrible reflections (see the purple/blue brights spots in the middle of the frame) and horrible purple fringing, which was so bad unless I "defocused," which is why the rest of the buildings are not sharply-focused. The purple/bright reflections are the first time I've seen that with ANY lens, except when cheap UV filter, etc was attached to the front at night. The front glass of the the 35L basically is a flat, thin glass element similar to a filter, actually! I sure hope this lens lives up to the hype in the daytime

I wish! You can't see them, and as soon as you get close, they stop making noise. Right until you go away. Anyway, here's a photo of the problem by Moonlight.

There is an abandoned house next door that's in foreclosure. People moved out, and there is an unfinished pool in backyard, a large dig but without any concrete. After the recent rains, the hole is now full of water, apparently rife with numerous frogs. There's a dirt yard with wild bushes everywhere also. There is VERY loud frog noise intermittently throughtout day and night at all hours. Called HOA, who said they can't do anything as they can't enter the property. They (and I) called "Vector control," who do not deal with frogs but will come out "in few business days" to take a look for mosquitos. In the meanwhile, I got zero hours of sleep last night due to the frog noise, despite ear plugs. The gate to this house's backyard is open. WHAT can I spray/dump/deploy so I can sleep tonight? On-line search seems to suggest things like salt, bleach, citric acid, but we're talking about a large pool of water and back yard.

I look forward to your Rokinon 14mm shots. Do you plan to use software for the well-known distortions? I shoot with Tokina 11-16mm, which is a great wide-angle, but I do find I dislike the too-obvious wide-angleness of many shots, esp internal architectural, at the widest focal lengths. In fact I pretty much stay 15-16mm even on my 1.6x body..

BTW, someone locally is offering me good trade, as far as dollar amount, for his Canon 28-300mm F/3.5-5.6L lens. What's the word on this zoom? I know it's very heavy and has relatively slow aperture, but I figure I could sell it if it's too much..

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5043/5366551004_f2001893ba_b.jpg

LOLROTFL! Now that's funny... Anyway, a lot of people seem to like the JPS Labs In-Wall cabling. http://www.jpslabs.com/powercord.shtml#paciw

I sure hope their estimates aren't correct. For example they estimate the 50 F/1.4 and 50 F/1.8II will go up by 10%, which is ludicrous for these ancient designs. Canon should own up and give them real USM at least before raising prices that much IMO.

Whaatt??! Don't they ususally make some official announcements before actually raising prices?

I saw that yesterday, but Newegg is in CA and the vicious CA sales tax makes it the same thing I wish Adorama, B+H, etc would have a sale instead..

That actually looks great and not too heavy to boot, except it costs like 3x 70-200 F/4L and it's "only" F/4-5.6. Nah, I think I'll try to be a little more sensible with my budget. In the end, I am a prime-lover and still need to get the 35L first methinks.. Model Weight Dimensions w/o Hood Filter Year Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens 24.9 oz (705g) 3.0 x 6.8" (76 x 172mm) 67mm 1999 Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L IS USM Lens 26.8 oz (760g) 3.0 x 6.8" (76 x 172mm) 67mm 2006 Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM Lens 46.2 oz (1310g) 3.3 x 7.6" (85 x 194mm) 77mm 1995 Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM Lens 52.6 oz (1490g) 3.5 x 7.8" (89 x 199mm) 77mm 2010 Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS L USM Lens 37.1 oz (1050g) 3.5 x 5.6" (89 x 143mm) 67mm 2010 Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens 22.2 oz (630g) 3.0 x 5.6" (76.5 x 143mm) 58mm 2005 Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM 25.4 oz (720g) 3.2 x 3.9" (82 x 100mm) 58mm 2004 Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Lens 16.9 oz (480g) 2.8 x 4.8" (71 x 122mm) 58mm 1999 Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM 48.7 oz (1380g) 3.6 x 7.4" (92 x 189mm) 77mm 1998 Canon EF 300mm f/4.0 L IS USM Lens 42.0 oz (1190g) 3.5 x 8.7" (90 x 221mm) 77mm 1997 Canon EF 400mm f/5.6 L USM Lens 44.1 oz (1250g) 3.5 x 10.1" (90 x 257mm) 77mm 1993

I had the 85 F1.2L II on the camera when this bird took off. I wish I had a telephoto lens so I don't have to crop off 70% of my photo