FAQ: Canon EOS 450D / Digital Rebel XSi Volume III


30.01.2009 12:15:00

picture that show how much vignettes
 

30.01.2009 12:38:00
Robyaty and nonnative blend of native generally no different except beech? Mean CANON EW-60C.
As I understand it to take home for 20 bucks against nonnative 5 to Ponte escho one inscription canon?

30.01.2009 13:26:00

likely canon missed or saved
not think that canon fools
if it is written in the description 78D, instead of just 78, and therefore must be taken 78D or equivalent from Flama
letter D is not just stuck.
I myself have is an analogue of Flama hood and in the description it is worth it and my lens
nikagogo extra vignetting on the pictures I do not watch.

look here how different blends for example 17-40,
and the difference is just something one last letter


at home even the inside of the hood velvet fashioned
+ less glare
- stick dust


30.01.2009 15:10:00

So the velvet for that and stuck to it and even the dust caught, not the front lens.

30.01.2009 20:48:00
Well, this is its analogue from flama. . .

30.01.2009 22:46:00

maklai, well, so this is an analogue of its flama. . .

agree.
You just bought an analog Canon EW-78 from Flama.
KMK, it was necessary to take the time and look for analogue hood Canon EW-78 D (if such exists at all in nature), as recommended by your 18-200.
78 and 78D apparently different blends

30.01.2009 22:52:00

about pens: mechanical buttons, wheels must be adjusted in the same way as on the camera, otherwise there will be unexpected sensations in the transition to a portrait orientation - and this similarity is best achieved when the handle of the same manufacturer as the camera.

my 450D c native handle BG-E5, the feeling is different, and wheels, and buttons. can, of course, entirely non-native guard, but also native devaysa differences are.



just any lens vignetting is present (to a greater or lesser extent, but still depending on the focal length), one of the methods of struggle - hood (because it has the form 4 petals) and \\ or DPP software. EW-60C does not apply to such.

broke his entire brain, but have not figured out how to blend struggling with vignetting?
here to add vignetting, lens hood can, especially if it is by standing on the telephoto and Shirikov

30.01.2009 23:15:00
Are you sure that Canon EW-78 exists in nature? i have not. all or D, or BII. and not in a hurry one looked at ofsayte bought analogue. analogue is suitable for 28-200, and is focused on this. photo lay out tomorrow, today was a lot of running around - not to gallery.

30.01.2009 23:27:00

weakly broken begin with, to answer the question - why has the petal lens hood design and why the cross and that the top, bottom and sides?

30.01.2009 23:43:00
petal lens hood prevents vignetting compared with a solid blend of
but not the lens itself

31.01.2009
quote:
:
petal lens hood prevents vignetting compared with a solid blend of
but not the lens itself
not prevent if we find fault with words. She disguises her, leaving the light in one place and removing it a little different.

31.01.2009 0:36:00

why hood has a lobe structure and why the cross and that the top, bottom and sides?

good observation, now, if you look more closely, you can notice that the top / bottom petals larger than the left / right.
answer, IMHO, is obvious - because the sky is usually on top, and water, which can reflect light - below.

31.01.2009 0:40:00

answer, IMHO, is obvious - because the sky is usually on top, and water, which can reflect light - below.
. . . and yet incorrect.

31.01.2009 0:43:00
and what is the correct in your opinion?

31.01.2009 0:48:00
quote:
:
and what is the correct in your opinion?
I give a hint: The frame is not square.

31.01.2009 0:56:00

Still not square.
Maybe not so simple? Why is my full-time hood ET-74 for Canon EF70-200 / 4L round? Still a still non-square, 1, 5/1.

31.01.2009 1:01:00

Why is my full-time hood ET-74 for Canon EF70-200 / 4L round?
Because it did so.

correct petal lens hood is more effective (just like the hood) "pot", more comfortable and more beautiful.

31.01.2009 1:11:00
But round
easier to manufacture and easier to operate. I think it's in the corner of the field of view lens. On Shirikov round would be fearsome and monstrous proportions.

31.01.2009 1:15:00

easier to use.
preferred flap.

On Shirikov round would be fearsome and monstrous
On Shirikov hood usually quite small in contrast to telephoto.

31.01.2009 1:55:00
moment, but long petals immediate left and right, and top and bottom short.

31.01.2009 2:43:00

moment, but long petals immediate left and right, and top and bottom short
So you're it (hood) put the wrong

31.01.2009 3:24:00
delirium what is with these blends it also must turn on the lens, snap? But when I did just dress - long petals as it should turn out, but after the turn they are already pobokam. . . or it should be a little turn, and not all the way? well explain how you would normally put it right? see the fact that there was never a man hood by the way, if you put a normal, long petals up / down all right in the frame

31.01.2009 7:15:00
All the same, it seems
not of this glass hood. . .

31.01.2009 10:08:00

On Shirikov round would be fearsome and monstrous proportions.

this here for me, complete with the lens Sigma 55-200, with a long lens and wider at the tip 200mm looks cool

31.01.2009 11:05:00
No 850 for the course, no. But is it possible to buy in Moscow batruchku + 2 akkuma 2000 p?

, not expelled. And to you it will come together with the letter "Your item has been shipped", or together with other somehow? I have recently asked if he could track the parcel on which I answered "Usually delivery takes 2-4 weeks." And I do not know. . .

31.01.2009 11:38:00
quote:
:
. . . answer, IMHO, is obvious - because the sky is usually on top, and water, which can reflect light - below.
Well then that the sky above, and below the water's obvious, but it will provide more illumination is not so obvious.
 

31.01.2009 12:01:00

not, of 850, of course not. But is it possible to buy in Moscow batruchku + 2 akkuma 2000 p?
why 2000? three times as much - it's a little cheaper 2550 pen can be purchased without ACC

31.01.2009 12:11:00

And you his exiled together with the letter "Your item has been shipped", or together with other somehow?
I do not remember, all rubbed upon receipt. . . But the room was some sort. . .
"Usually delivery takes 2-4 weeks"
Well, yes, that's right in the middle - 3, so that 2 can only begin to wait. . .

31.01.2009 12:15:00

slightly cheaper than you can buy without a handle acc

Already it is impossible = (
Comrade svest already sells them at 3000r, although on his website and hanging old price, but when you call, he argues raising $ and says the new price.

31.01.2009 12:21:00
On

yesterday Fidel his ad on klubfotoru 2500
bent course, although in light of the rest of the rise in the price - then maybe normal. . .

31.01.2009 12:55:00
Hello. Tell me, are there alternative battery charger for Canon LP-E5 & amp; Maybe something from firms Enkatsu, Acme, Ansman?

of Canon 450 without the charger. . . . A native - LC-E5E frankly expensive.

31.01.2009 12:57:00

seen on the hammer sold, plus the fact that even the car can be charged 500 rubles
seems worth

31.01.2009 13:17:00
Wow already 3000r pen, I 4days ago still on 2600zakazal

31.01.2009 13:19:00
quote:
:

seen on the hammer sold, plus the fact that even the car can be charged 500 rubles
like cost

Thank you.
And the name does not tell me to look more in detail?

quote:
:
quote:
:

seen on the hammer sold, plus the fact that even the car can be charged 500 rubles
like cost
Thank you.
And the name does not tell me to look more in detail?

Sorry! Found. Thank U!

31.01.2009 13:46:00

ponimate, the thing: I handle initially and did not need the sort. Well t. E. I did not feel any pressing need, and know the price of this accessory from Canon - finally got sick. But akkumy needed. Original, again, unreasonably expensive (although I must pay tribute Canon - I did not expect to make 2000 shots on a single battery, but though it was not the limit). From third parties in Moscow that was the cheapest - 900 rubles, and even then, they were only formally calls on firms failed. And then I bought two batteries + handle 200 rubles more than if I had just bought two batteries in Moscow. True, it is not taken yet, but I especially nowhere to hurry.

31.01.2009 14:09:00

from third parties in Moscow, which was the cheapest - 900 rubles
tezhe fottiks were 500 in Moscow reduced

yes normal course ordered, especially if slowly

31.01.2009 18:45:00
quote:
:

easier to use.
preferred flap.

On Shirikov round would be fearsome and monstrous
On Shirikov hood usually quite small in contrast to telephoto.

Colleges because everything is so simple, the lens focusing ring which vraschaetsya (eg whale) - hood round, while the lens which does not rotate (L - s) - Radar! And if all the lenses would not rotating end portion, then perhaps everything would have been lepeskovye hood!

31.01.2009 19:19:00
In
Canon EF 70-200 / 4L nothing rotates. Internal focusing. Native blend nonetheless round.

31.01.2009 22:51:00
quote:
:

At Canon EF 70-200 / 4L does not rotate. Internal focusing. Native blend nonetheless round.
correctly, ie. A. If there was lepeskovaya the lens hood with a variable focal length, the maximum effect of its application is observed at minimum focus distance. And for maximum glare would fall into the lens. Therefore, to telephoto 70-200 - compromise - a round lens hood. Yes, I was not quite right. Yet rights. . .

31.01.2009 22:55:00

If there was lepeskovaya the lens hood with a variable focal length, the maximum effect of its application is observed at minimum focus distance. And for maximum glare would fall into the lens.
for "pot" is the same.

31.01.2009 23:34:00
quote:
:
for "pot" is the same.

Well, do not tell me why she "pot" to glare shining onto the far end

01.02.2009 0:10:00
quote:
:
quote:
:
for "pot" is the same.
Well do not tell me why she "pot" to glare shining onto the far end of
not see any difference.

01.02.2009 0:15:00
between lepeskovoy and pot? the difference in my ochevidnat ( http: // toothwalker. org / optics / lenshood. html )

01.02.2009 0:54:00

between lepeskovoy and pot?
. . . . in principle between the behavior of the two on the zoom. . .

difference in my ochevidnat ( http: // toothwalker. Org / optics / lenshood. Html )

. . . and she was not in favor of the pot: "Both the tulip hood and the rectangular hood are more effective than the round hood. Not only because they are longer, but also because their shape is matched to the pyramidal cone and leaves no holes. A rectangular hood reduced to the same length as the round hood in figure 9 would still be more effective. "- what I actually said.

01.02.2009 18:24:00
Colleague, we agree with you in principle, and I mean

01.02.2009 22:13:00


Finishing blend of forms. Perhaps engineers Canan so chose the length and diameter of the lens hood for zoom 70-200 , it blocked all "holes" for the side illumination, not vinetiruya while. And petal shape was not needed.

01.02.2009 22:20:00

that it blocked all "holes" for the side illumination, not vinetiruya while. And petal shape was not needed.

Read the article that pointed out. Correct petal lens hood will always be more effective against stray light than the correct "pot".

01.02.2009 22:27:00

articles to read. So what? Pots still do. So it's someone who needs it. (C) Mayakovsky.

02.02.2009 9:48:00

Perhaps it is easier and cheaper to do? Why put the pots offer mainly on obektivy starting with ~ 50 mm focal length?
 

02.02.2009 9:52:00

correct petal lens hood will always be more effective against stray light than the correct "pot".

Yeah. I'm on the 70-200 / 2. 8 blend was curly, and both versions / 4 it is round - because the lens budget

FAQ: Canon EOS 450D / Digital Rebel XSi Volume III

info@www.about-digital-photo.com