You may recall that B and H had a problem with sending out packs of 2 A7R3s to buyers ordering one. (Sony packages these cameras in outers of 2). I recently ordered, from Adorama, 2 A73 bodies, (one each for my wife and myself), I received 2 packs of 2 - a total of 4 cameras and an error on their part of $4,000. The same error B and H had made. Although I could have legally kept the unordered / unsolicited cameras I contacted Adorama and sent them back.
What was irritating and has soured me on ordering further from them there was no acknowledgement of receipt and not even an email saying thanks. Made me feel I shouldn't have bothered!

Most definitely not an 'old wives tale'. I turned down a trade with an owner of one of the Mk 1 s who told me while we were discussing the lens of his need to have this professionally cleaned every year. I live in San Diego County which is hot dry and dusty in the summer and had no reason to doubt him since he was trying to get rid of it and giving full disclosure. I now own the EF 100 - 400 L Mkii, (which I'm planning to sell if anyone is interested), and all comments as to it's excellence and very good performance with an extender are spot on. One of Canon's best lenses to date.

Two points.
1) Canon specify using a filter on the L series lenses to complete the water sealing of a mounted lens.
2) Although I only use a filter when necessary to protect the lens its quite possible to get the front element of a lens scratched if the filter 'protecting' it breaks. I know from bitter experience.

OK. I understand the idea of removing another possible variable in the processing chain. It seems unlikely to me that it will produce any significant differences to the RAW image particularly when the preview images on camera show the same issue. They presumably are using these same lens corrections.

Now I need to find a disc and load DPP ...........................

Perhaps you could clarify.
We both have ACR set to automatically identify the lens and apply the Adobe profile. Camera Calibration is set to Adobe Standard. Are you suggesting we should import to DPP first and use Canon lens corrections without allowing ACR to handle this when we import to Lightroom - presumably in DNG.

I have found several used samples of this newest version of the ef-s 18-135 usm on the Adorama site and have ordered one in E(xcellent) condition so that we can do a side by side comparison with the stm lenses we are currently using. Their used equipment comes with their 90 day warranty and since this lens has a high serial number it may well still have Canon warranty as well.

Adorama are a terrific company to buy from because of their policy of allowing any purchaser up to 30 days to return anything for a full refund. This effectively reduces our risk to the postage costs. Their prices are usually highly competitive and I have no hesitation in recommending them to anyone looking for great service and prices. (I have no connection to Adorama apart from being a highly satisfied customer for many years).

I'll post our results to this thread once we've evaluated the lens.

I'm obliged to you. The announcement of this lens slipped by me.
From his review and the sample images the CA seems considerably improved - to the point where I could probably live with this lens. I will definitely get hold of a copy of it and see if is as good as the review suggests.

Thank you.

Yes we have both Lightroom and PS set up with the profiles. We shoot RAW and are using the CC versions of ACR.

Without getting into Canon/Nikon issues I do agree with the 18-135 range the pro end of the crop market has been very neglected by Canon and FWIW I've written and told them so ;-). The longer lenses are by no means bad. I have the EF 100-400 Mk ii and it is excellent. I can carry it easily, handhold it down to 1/60 and image quality is outstanding.

I thought the USM version preceded the STM and was a considerably poorer lens optically.

My wife and I both have this lens. The CA is not a problem with every shot - only in strongly backlit scenes with lots of edges, (leaves twigs etc). We both have the same problem and in similar or identical shots. One which almost guaranteed the effect occurred when including a window with leaded panes in a poorly lit room. It's just as obvious with either lens.

I should add that this is an effect that was also common on the older generation of Canon's L series 24-105, although less so.

I find the walk-around lens that best suits my needs to be around the 18-135 range. I'm using the standard Canon EFS 18-135 STM. There is a lot to like with this lens and I am happy with it except for the CA fringing in some backlit situations. The purple/pink fringing - particularly noticeable in foliage has been a major nuisance in pictures from a recent trip to Wales and caused enough additional work in editing these pictures that it's now got me looking for a lens less inclined to cause this.

Since Canon doesn't produce anything of professional quality that covers this range I would be grateful for suggestions. I don't want to lose the good features - fast accurate focus, four stop is, sharp images and nice controls but I'm almost ready to forsake Canon if I can't find a lens that answers my need and I really don't want to do that.

The Sigma 18-135 f1.8 looks like a candidate and if anyone has experience with this or has any other suggestions that might offer a resolution I would be most appreciative.

One postscript to my previous post.
If shooting anything you don't want to lose make sure that your cards are big enough so that you can change them when you wish and not because they are full. This way when things are happening and you don't want to stop shooting you won't have to. In addition you can choose when you have enough images that loss from the card going bad is beginning to worry you - nobody makes you use all the space unless you want to.
Also most storage media are more likely to corrupt data when close to capacity. I don't know of any risks associated with having some spare room.
It's worth saying that although I have a mix of makes, sizes and speeds I certainly wouldn't if I was back doing this stuff professionally. I would choose from one of the two or three top makes, (assuming their quality control would be excellent), and I would be using these in a mirrored configuration in my dual card camera.
It all comes down to the importance of your images and your level of paranoia ;-)

John,
I would suggest that the card size is only relevant if it's so small that you are continually swapping them out or you fail to off load your images on a frequent basis.
I have a mix of makes in both SD and CF cards - about a dozen 32Gb and another half dozen 64Gb. At the end of each shoot the images are off loaded and a new directory made on the card. When the card becomes 80 - 90% full I put in a new formatted card. (If time permits I reformat in camera before continuing to shoot.)
The full card is put away in a small card case and only formatted and used again after I've filled all the other cards I have. This allows the cards to be used as medium term back-ups to the hard drive. With this idea in mind I try to have enough cards for complete vacations and they travel home in my small card folder on my person.
After returning home and processing the images the edited copies are uploaded to SmugMug as a further backup.

Regarding the reliability of cards I have only ever had one card fail - a Lexar. Makes I currently use include Transcend, Delkin, Samsung, SanDisk, Adata, Kingston, and PNY. I have never found any significant difference between their performance . All are at least class 10 and some much higher speed than that. My 7Dll has dual processors so this may contribute something to this experience and most of the time I shoot with the shutter set at High Speed Silent mode although the standard High Speed, (10 fps), is used occasionally. This is mostly for handheld moon shots. The one attached was shot this way and is of 11 frames stacked. Manual setting f8, 1/800 EF-100-400 ll + EF 1.4X ll. Edited in CC

(Download)

Check out State Farm's all risks personal items coverage. This gives repair or replacement and all my camera equipment is covered against pretty much everything except government seizure and war at $16 / $1,000 / year, pro rata.

I had a claim a year ago for repair to a dropped lens and their service was exemplary. Professional overnight shipping was suggested - and included in the claim. They researched the steps needed to get Canon to provide a quote and State Farm sent a check as soon as the quote arrived. I was reimbursed even before the lens arrived back!

Coverage with State Farm is cheaper than many of these Extended Warranties and does not require prepayment. There is no deductible. It can be kept for any period you wish AND you will have a local agent to help process your claim as needed.

Highly recommended instead of no name extended warranties.

A timely hint to keep on track. I did at least mention it in my post but I suspect, as is usually the case, the hogs were just trying to help someone who appears relatively inexperienced.