I just got my RSS L bracket for my 5D mk2, and it will work with the remote. The catch is that you need to slide the L bracket out from the left of the camera about 3/8ths of an inch and clamp it in that position with the screw. The L bracket has a slot at the screw location that allows this, and was obviously designed to work this way, which is similar to the 1D mk3 bracket. Once you have the bracket in the correct position, you can use the combination in the vertical position on an Arca Swiss clamp. It is a close fit, but it works. I only know for sure about the real Canon remote connector, and not any of the off brand remote connectors. You can leave the bracket slid out all the time, but if you slide it back against the camera it is a better fit and a nicer installation.
None of the other connections that are in that area can have connectors hooked up and still mount the camera in the vertical orientation. There is room to hook up to any of the other jacks with the L plate installed, but the connector and cable would stick out to far, and would hit the base of the clamp if you tried to mount it vertical. The video related connectors would have limited use in the vertical orientation because of the way video works, but the USB hooked up for tethered shooting would likely be very useful in vertical orientation. So the old method of tilting the ball head through its slot would need to be used, which works, but is harder to set up for and change to, and normally needs a more rigid tripod.
Either the A/V composite video output or the HDMI video output could be useful for live viewing of images while in vertical orientation, but that is not possible using an L bracket change unless some special right angle cables could be located. I did some looking all ready, but have not found any. Note that the HDMI would need to be the one particular right angle out of four possible orientations. Also note that the live view output from the mini HDMI connector is High definition, at 1080i, and is quite a nice sharp looking image, and much better than the low resolution live video outputs on previous cameras.
canon needs to "fix" the tiny centralized cluster of AF points in the next iteration of the 5D2.
it was forgivable in the original 5D, but i often have subjects on the periphery of the frame, and the smallish grouping of AF points is getting annoying.
so far I have onyl seen that using high ISO (and I do have a few at ISO3200 that have quite a lot of black dots and lines)
my ISO100 at 6 sec have been clean so far
i wonder if it is just up to slightly different shooting conditions or some bodies are more sensitive than others to it?
the ones I took at high iso were also shot under extreme cold, but your shots appear to be shot in a somewhat warm clime judging by the palm trees!
abam, some of the best cameras in the world only have one AF point which is located smack dab in the center of the frame. Some have one in the center and one on each side. Many of the masters of photography never used autofocus in their careers. Autofocus is unnecessary for most types of photography, some exceptions being sports and wildlife for which the 5d isn't really an appropriate camera.
cdTzabcan wrote:
abam, some of the best cameras in the world only have one AF point which is located smack dab in the center of the frame. Some have one in the center and one on each side. Many of the masters of photography never used autofocus in their careers. Autofocus is unnecessary for most types of photography, some exceptions being sports and wildlife for which the 5d isn't really an appropriate camera.
While I agree with everything you said, this is 2009, and this is a Canon product. AF is expected. Some of the greatest literature in the world wasn't written on a computer, but times change. There is no excuse for anything less than excellent multi-point AF on everything above an XXd body from Canon. IMHO, excellent AF should be on the XXD's too, but I understand that you get what you pay for. $2700 is enough to warrant high expectations.
skibum5 wrote:
so far I have onyl seen that using high ISO (and I do have a few at ISO3200 that have quite a lot of black dots and lines)
my ISO100 at 6 sec have been clean so far
i wonder if it is just up to slightly different shooting conditions or some bodies are more sensitive than others to it?
the ones I took at high iso were also shot under extreme cold, but your shots appear to be shot in a somewhat warm clime judging by the palm trees!
It was taken in San Juan, PR about 8 PM local time. Evening temperatures were in the high 70s. The shot is from a jpeg, but highlight tone priority and noise reduction were off. Only peripheral illumination was on.
"Autofocus is unnecessary for most types of photography..."
i respect your opinion, and i agree with you that AF may not be an an inescapable necessity*, cdT, but i'm of the camp which holds that technology is there to make our photographic lives easier, and to make the camera more transparent in a (hopefully) expedited image-creating process.
can we make nice images with a pinhole 4x5 camera? sure. but there's a reason - or many, rather - why we have en masse embraced the technologies that we have.
*i am a big fan of the late henri cartier-bresson.
I am certainly not saying that you shouldnt use autofocus.. I am saying that many of the best professional photographers have simply made due with the tools that they deem most appropriate to their style of photography. It certainly isnt the camera that allows the photographer to make an amazing image, it's the other way around.
"...many of the best professional photographers have simply made due with the tools that they deem most appropriate to their style of photography."
i completely agree, and i suppose my point is that i and others (brainiac, et al.) have repeatedly posted that our style(s) of photography would benefit from some more peripherally placed AF points.
IMHO, excellent AF should be on the XXD's too, but I understand that you get what you pay for. $2700 is enough to warrant high expectations.
Are you privvy to Canon's cost analysis figures for the 5D2 project Maybe it wasn't enough. Mind you, the question that must be asked in the cost analysis is, "Will this additional feature earn additional money."
They would have to determine not just that the additional feature would be nice to have, but that it would also earn its cost in additional sales.
cdTzabcan wrote:
abam, some of the best cameras in the world only have one AF point which is located smack dab in the center of the frame. Some have one in the center and one on each side. Many of the masters of photography never used autofocus in their careers. Autofocus is unnecessary for most types of photography, some exceptions being sports and wildlife for which the 5d isn't really an appropriate camera.
Many did have the benefit of better viewfinders and split prism focusing. Critical focus (manually) using the viewfinder on most dSLR's is pretty tough. Of course, live view these days helps, but that can't be used in most situations I shoot in (ie, wedding receptions, live concerts, etc..)
Having said this...I find that my 5D2 AF is significantly better than my 5D regardless of them sharing the same AF system (in particular, center point w/expansion in SERVO).
