[amitk26]

Originally Posted by MadBiker

I have a Canon 70-200 2.8 L Lens. The lens has some evident fungus in it. But does not have any effect on IQ.

The Lens works 100% fine, But just wanted to check if clearing it will improve the AF or performance of the lens.

I'm not sure if i should send it to canon service to open up the lens & clean it. Have the following questions about the fungus:

Get it cleaned ASAP talk to Canon service about the calibration etc.

Fungus if allowed to grow will itch the glass. Once lens is cleaned store it in dry air tight box with silica gel. Since Chennai is a humid place you need to recharge the silica gel by heating once it is saturated

Fungi spores are almost everywhere in atmosphere it will grow if you keep your lenses in dark humid places. Show some light to the lens at-least once in a week. Investing in DigiCabi also makes sense if you have expensive glass.

[skandyhere]

Originally Posted by MadBiker

I have a Canon 70-200 2.8 L Lens. The lens has some evident fungus in it. But does not have any effect on IQ.

The Lens works 100% fine, But just wanted to check if clearing it will improve the AF or performance of the lens.

I don't think it is possible for fungi or anything else that's visible to the eye to not impact image quality. If you don't see any effects under normal shooting conditions, I suggest you stop down to as far as it gets (say, f22?) and shoot a blue featureless sky. You will most likely see blotches from the fungus as it comes into proper focus due to the small aperture.

Either way, you should certainly not let the fungus remain as it can spread to other lenses.

Also, what's AF got to do with fungus?

[MadBiker]

Originally Posted by amitk26

Get it cleaned ASAP talk to Canon service about the calibration etc.

Fungus if allowed to grow will itch the glass. Once lens is cleaned store it in dry air tight box with silica gel. Since Chennai is a humid place you need to recharge the silica gel by heating once it is saturated

Fungi spores are almost everywhere in atmosphere it will grow if you keep your lenses in dark humid places. Show some light to the lens at-least once in a week. Investing in DigiCabi also makes sense if you have expensive glass.

Thanks for the inputs Amit. Couple of friends had very bad experience with Canon Service & I'm planning to give it to some one who is much experienced with cleaning the fungus / re-calibration etc.

Originally Posted by skandyhere

I don't think it is possible for fungi or anything else that's visible to the eye to not impact image quality. If you don't see any effects under normal shooting conditions, I suggest you stop down to as far as it gets (say, f22?) and shoot a blue featureless sky. You will most likely see blotches from the fungus as it comes into proper focus due to the small aperture.

Either way, you should certainly not let the fungus remain as it can spread to other lenses.

Also, what's AF got to do with fungus?

It has not affected under normal shooting conditions. I dont shoot at f22, will give it a try to check the IQ.

I was checking if the presence of fungi will affect the glass in anyway which could affect the normal functioning of the lens.

I will get the fungus cleaned as soon as possible. Thanks!

[bobster]

Hi guys, I am looking to buy a DSLR shortly. I have zeroed down to Sony SLT A 57 and Nikon D5200. i am mainly looking for sharp image quality with decent autofocus speed. As per specs Nikon's using D7000's autofocus mechanism, however having used A57 which has good autofocus and AK-47 rivaling FPS, also further more Sony's offering a 1.8F 50mm fixed focus lens free along with the kit lens(heard its a limited time offer). However what hasn't swayed me in Sony's favour is that Nikon D5200 is latest camera and Sony's been launched around 8-9 months back also the Nikon brand effect is not easily shaken off. so suggestions are welcome and thanks a lot in advance.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by bobster

Hi guys, I am looking to buy a DSLR shortly. I have zeroed down to Sony SLT A 57 and Nikon D5200. i am mainly looking for sharp image quality with decent autofocus speed. As per specs Nikon's using D7000's autofocus mechanism, however having used A57 which has good autofocus and AK-47 rivaling FPS, also further more Sony's offering a 1.8F 50mm fixed focus lens free along with the kit lens(heard its a limited time offer). However what hasn't swayed me in Sony's favour is that Nikon D5200 is latest camera and Sony's been launched around 8-9 months back also the Nikon brand effect is not easily shaken off. so suggestions are welcome and thanks a lot in advance.

Both cameras are mid level DSLRs offering excellent image quality.
But Nikon brand effect has 5 letters while sony has 4. So 20% loss to sony.
A57 is 3 letters and D5200 is 5. Again 40% advantage to brand Nikon.
So it makes sense to buy Nikon due to stronger brand image, as that seems to be the lead criteria here

[Behemoth]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Both cameras are mid level DSLRs offering excellent image quality.
But Nikon brand effect has 5 letters while sony has 4. So 20% loss to sony.
A57 is 3 letters and D5200 is 5. Again 40% advantage to brand Nikon.
So it makes sense to buy Nikon due to stronger brand image, as that seems to be the lead criteria here

(The Lighter side of Tanveer!
Wish Marketing and Brand perception were so simple - Companies would probably be running to give really long names to their products!)

Jokes apart, I would also recommend the Nikon D5100, which is available at real value for money prices and is a great camera. Though I am not sure on why the person posting this request needs a DSLR at this stage if he does not know the basic features - a DLSR in the hands of an amateur is a sure recipe for disaster! Might be better for him to pick up a Point and Shoot with higher zoom.

[aim120]

Originally Posted by bobster

Hi guys, I am looking to buy a DSLR shortly. I have zeroed down to Sony SLT A 57 and Nikon D5200. i am mainly looking for sharp image quality with decent autofocus speed. As per specs Nikon's using D7000's autofocus mechanism, however having used A57 which has good autofocus and AK-47 rivaling FPS, also further more Sony's offering a 1.8F 50mm fixed focus lens free along with the kit lens(heard its a limited time offer). However what hasn't swayed me in Sony's favour is that Nikon D5200 is latest camera and Sony's been launched around 8-9 months back also the Nikon brand effect is not easily shaken off. so suggestions are welcome and thanks a lot in advance.

The D5200 is new and for the first time uses a untested Toshiba sensor,where as the D5100,D7000,D600 and D800 uses the tried and tested Sony sensor which is known for their high dynamic range.So i would wait for the reviews.

The A57 is a multiple award winning camera (dpreview gold award, EISA etc) there is hardly any negatives to the camera other then the native cons of SLT.
It has a much bigger EVF the size of full frame cameras,compared to tiny mirror based OVF of the D5200.
It also does image stabilization on all lens mounted to it even with cheap macro and prime lenses.
For manual focusing it has focus peaking.Also since its showing a live view basically what you see is what you get and can determine accurately the depth of field.
Sony slt cameras are the only ones that does PDAF in movies or in live view and which actually works.

In ebay.in its quite a lot cheaper and with the free lens with this camera makes its even more value for money.

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by aim120

... showing a live view basically what you see is what you get and can determine accurately the depth of field. ...

Are you sure? Other than Macro mode, I couldn't figure out on the LCD even with a magnifying glass.

[aim120]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Are you sure? Other than Macro mode, I couldn't figure out on the LCD even with a magnifying glass.

Well true if you have a prehistoric camera with a poor resolution screen,with the EVF on the Sony you can magnify it 10 times and has a extremely high density of pixels in just .5" EVF.
But what i meant was by "what you see is what you get" is that any settings you change from Aperture,ISO,Shutter,Ev will be shown before you take the Shot or record a movie.With a OVF camera unless one is sure about what exactly those settings do at that moment of taking the picture ,you will only know whether the image was over/under exposed/blown highlights/clipping etc only after you have taken the Shot.

Here is the D7000 OVF vs the A77 EVF ,where the EVF clearly as the edge.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zf-8NYaQ9XQ

EVF vs OVF

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPmatcZ99Qw

[bobster]

thanks a lot aim120, you are right about d5200's Toshiba sensor being an unknown entity.

[bobster]

Originally Posted by aim120

The D5200 is new and for the first time uses a untested Toshiba sensor,where as the D5100,D7000,D600 and D800 uses the tried and tested Sony sensor which is known for their high dynamic range.So i would wait for the reviews.

The A57 is a multiple award winning camera (dpreview gold award, EISA etc) there is hardly any negatives to the camera other then the native cons of SLT.
It has a much bigger EVF the size of full frame cameras,compared to tiny mirror based OVF of the D5200.
It also does image stabilization on all lens mounted to it even with cheap macro and prime lenses.
For manual focusing it has focus peaking.Also since its showing a live view basically what you see is what you get and can determine accurately the depth of field.
Sony slt cameras are the only ones that does PDAF in movies or in live view and which actually works.

In ebay.in its quite a lot cheaper and with the free lens with this camera makes its even more value for money.

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Both cameras are mid level DSLRs offering excellent image quality.
But Nikon brand effect has 5 letters while sony has 4. So 20% loss to sony.
A57 is 3 letters and D5200 is 5. Again 40% advantage to brand Nikon.
So it makes sense to buy Nikon due to stronger brand image, as that seems to be the lead criteria here

haha, you are spot on with your analysis tsk1979, i might have probably go for the Nikon but even the multi brand retailer is recommending the sony hands down.

[bobster]

Originally Posted by Behemoth

(The Lighter side of Tanveer!
Wish Marketing and Brand perception were so simple - Companies would probably be running to give really long names to their products!)

Jokes apart, I would also recommend the Nikon D5100, which is available at real value for money prices and is a great camera. Though I am not sure on why the person posting this request needs a DSLR at this stage if he does not know the basic features - a DLSR in the hands of an amateur is a sure recipe for disaster! Might be better for him to pick up a Point and Shoot with higher zoom.

well behemoth you are right about me being an amateur photographer however i am learning some tricks here and there.I have been using Canon SX30is with 36X zoom since the last 2 years but found the autofocusing speed quite pedestrian along with low light performance which is barely better than a mobile camera, indoor results see noise creeping in from 800 ISO onwards and lastly photos being on the softer side as well(my Nikon S6 P & S had better results which costed less than half than sx30) what basically i am looking for is stellar image quality at a decent cost as photography right now is a hobby for me and who knows might turn into a passion someday

[Behemoth]

Originally Posted by bobster

well behemoth you are right about me being an amateur photographer however i am learning some tricks here and there.I have been using Canon SX30is with 36X zoom since the last 2 years but found the autofocusing speed quite pedestrian along with low light performance which is barely better than a mobile camera, indoor results see noise creeping in from 800 ISO onwards and lastly photos being on the softer side as well(my Nikon S6 P & S had better results which costed less than half than sx30) what basically i am looking for is stellar image quality at a decent cost as photography right now is a hobby for me and who knows might turn into a passion someday

Welcome to the DSLR bandwagon then, but be prepared!
Some clear benefits of DSLRs compared to Point and shoots:
1) Quicker Autofocus
2) Better ISO sensitivity and hence better night time pics
3) Faster flash cycling helps taking more pics indoor
4) Much better Image quality

But there are some disadvantages too!
1) Much Heavier to lug around and take on Holidays
2) Pictures others take of you, with your DSLR will almost never come out well!
3) You lose the zoom range, as with P&S and small sensors you can get 10x/32x with miniscule lenses, but with a DSLR, you will need huge lenses and realistically you will be able to carry around only upto a 3x zoom!
4) Getting ready for a perfect shot with a DSLR takes time , while with a P&S you can be ready immediately.
5) People will treat you like a photographer when you go to family events!

Trust me, I have been bitten by the DSLR bug - it does have its advantages but there are flip sides too!

So, I would also suggest that if you are starting afresh, you should consider the mirrorless range of cameras which actually give you the benefits of both sides!
You can consider Sony NEX F3/ Nikon 1 V1/J1 / Oly PM1. There is also a separate thread on TBHP for Mirrorless which you can refer to.


Regards,
Behemoth

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by aim120

... Here is the D7000 OVF vs the A77 EVF ...

Weren't we talking about A57?

Originally Posted by aim120

... But what i meant was by "what you see is what you get" is that any settings you change from Aperture,ISO,Shutter,Ev will be shown before you take the Shot or record a movie.With a OVF camera unless one is sure about ...

Oh, so you *are* talking of something else, not about being accurately able to see DOF in the EVF as you wrote? Hmmm... which means you haven't actually seen it yourself? That's OK.

[R2D2]

Originally Posted by aim120

Well true if you have a prehistoric camera with a poor resolution screen,with the EVF on the Sony you can magnify it 10 times and has a extremely high density of pixels in just .5" EVF. But what i meant was by "what you see is what you get" is that any settings you change from Aperture,ISO,Shutter,Ev will be shown before you take the

I have used an EVF Sony camera and found it pathetic.

Don't go by the hype on EVFs especially not from Sony.

You can note flickering in the EVF, noise, colour discrepancies and lag. Use both EVFs and OVFs especially in low light and you will note the difference. My bro may be buying a Sony A99, the top end Sony SLT, instead of a Canon 5D Mk3. He's still in the decision making stage. If he goes in for the A99 I will compare that camera's EVF with my Nikon cameras (D4 & D800). That should be a pretty fair comparison.

EVFs are pretty good with all the WYSIWYG features but they have a long way to go before catching with the 'immediacy' and accuracy of an optical VF. But there's no doubt that mirrorless is the future. The reflex mirror is a legacy that will be discarded.