How do I make run smoothly then? I have a GeForce 9200m GS with 256MB dedicated video memory and it's still choppy. Plus I got 4 gigs of ram and 2gb CPU :confused:

I dunno...the X200 is known for its speed though. 2 Ghz may not be fast enough to run 1080p, while the X200's 2.4Ghz may be just enough.

FML...

Guess what!

http://gizmodo.com/5385717/canon-5d-...video-at-24fps

Everybody complaining in the 1D Mark IV comment thread that there won't be any more video firmware updates for the 5D Mark II is kinda wrong: Canon is enabling the 24fps and 25fps 1080p video recording that's found on the 7D and 1D Mark IV, bringing it about up to par. Update's due sometime next year, though no firmware switcheroo's gonna deliver the 1DMkIV's low-light sensitivity. [Planet 5D via Canon Rumors]

Tomaz do you have a 5DMII now?

He's had one for quite some time now.

Since April

hey, has anyone used the 15-85mm that the new 7D is released with? i've been tryin to find some reviews of it online. thinkin of upgrading to it. there's a website that's splitting the 7D kits here, and selling them for a bit cheaper... around £450...

i have a Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 right now, but i'm tryin to think whether or not the extra reach and the IS would be worth it.... can't afford the bloody 18-55 f2.8. might look into the new tamron EF-S mount with VC tho.

http://www.revscene.net/forums/photo...99977p209.html

Scroll to the part where I posted 3 pics of my cats. They were taken with the 15-85mm IS lens. That lens is freakin' sharp as hell. Definately worth the money. Don't bother with the 17-55 f2.8.

Please don't insult the 17-55 IS ;) I have this lens and you would enjoy the F2.8 in low light :thumbsup: and it is sharper than the 15-85

I have mine hooked up to a Dell 30" ultrasharp monitor via displayport (through ultrabase). So yea...it runs 1080P with no problems.

I use a program call Zoom Player. Plays 1080p with no problems. In fact, Quicktime works fine too. It might be the codecs that you have installed.

Not really insulting it. I know it's a great lens. But it's also $200 bucks more. So if one doesn't care to have a f2.8 vs f3.5 and wants that extra reach, than 15-85 is the way to go :)

No, it isn't. The Canon 17-55 isn't bad, but the 15-85 is sharper overall, especially in the corners. The one area where Canon is lacking compared to Nikon is the wide to tele zoom lenses.

apple macbook pro ftw! My 2007 mbp C2D can still keep up with those 1080p vids :). Can't say the same for friends who have PC laptops from that year, lol.

That's because most PC laptops don't have the specs the MBP have/had. I just bought a 17" 3.06Ghz MBP and it just flies through 5D mkII RAW files in Lightroom, not to mention 130MB 65MP Phase One TIFF's. It's amazing what this thing can do. :)

Oh sh*t... I didn't know that since I've never used the 17-55. I'm glad I bought my 15-85 then. I love it :D
Posted via RS Mobile

The 17-55 is also f2.8 constant, while the 15-85 is 3.5-5.6 through it's range.

85mm and f5.6 does not make for good low-light performance. I would rather have 55mm and f2.8 and crop.

^^ I guess it all depends what you use it for. I find I don't really shoot at 85mm much so that wouldn't matter for me. I am most between 15 and 50mm, but it's good to have that extra reach.

I'm don't know what your source is but that is not true according to these reviews:
15-85: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/46...3556is?start=1
17-55: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/42...is_50d?start=1

The 17-55 is consistently sharper (at center and corners) than the 15-85 looking at the MTF charts even at F2.8 (except at 50mm). But when stopped down to F4, it is sharper at all focal lengths from 17-55

Oh it's an EF-S, shitty.

My source is my first hand experience, and from the examples I've seen, The 15-85 is sharper overall, but the 17-55 does have the advantage of a fast, constant aperture. The copy of the 17-55 I tried was shit compared to the copy of the 15-85 we have, and definitely worse (not by much) than the Nikon 17-55 f2.8. Would I use the 15-85 professionally? No, in that case I would use the 17-55 for sure, but the 15-85 is a great walk around lens.

Yup, both 17-55 & 15-85 are EF-S. For FF, the 24-70L & 24-105L are the equivalent lenses.

24 is not wide enough!

For FF it is.