# what to do



## 500d (May 23, 2013)

i have a 500d and im thinking of upgrading to a new body but should i buy new glass instead


----------



## ahab1372 (May 23, 2013)

depends


----------



## Drizzt321 (May 23, 2013)

Some more information would be helpful for us to give you some advice. First, do you find yourself technically limited by your camera? Or are you just thinking because you have some cash you should get the latest and greatest? The general advice most often given is get better glass rather than replacing your body. A fantastic body with some crappy glass won't give you the images you think you might get. But a great lens on a decent body (and virtually all bodies these days are at least decent) can improve your image quality (which can be somewhat subjective) quite a bit. If you think you want to make photography a long term serious hobby, I'd look at Canon L series lenses, although there have been some recent releases by Sigma and Tamron which provide quite good quality at a significantly lesser price than Canon L. In the case of the new Sigma 35mm, it actually is optically better than the Canon 35mm L.


----------



## rs (May 23, 2013)

What lenses do you currently have? What do you shoot? What's your budget? What limits you most with your current kit?


----------



## bseitz234 (May 24, 2013)

Yes. Glass is always a better investment than bodies. If you're asking the question, glass will be a better benefit than a new body.


----------



## wickidwombat (May 24, 2013)

sorry my psychic powers are malfunctioning at the moment you are going to have to fill in a fair bit more info here if you want a serious answer from anyone since without my psychic powers I have no way of know WTF you already have, how much money you have to spend or what it is you want to do with your gear

failing that buy 4 1Dx bodies and 2 of each and every Canon L series lens 12 Ex600RT flashes

oh better get a couple of 5Dmk3 for backups and so you can do continuous RAW video with Magic lantern

that should about cover it


----------



## eml58 (May 24, 2013)

wickidwombat said:


> sorry my psychic powers are malfunctioning at the moment you are going to have to fill in a fair bit mor info here if you want a serious answer from anyone since without my psychic powers I have no way of know WTF you already have, how much money you have to spend or what it is you want to do with your gear
> 
> failing that buy 4 1Dx bosies and 2 of each every Canon L series lens 12 Ex600RT flashes
> 
> ...



Other than this being exceptionally good advise, it's also what I miss after living overseas for 30 years, the Aussie sense of what most of us call, Humour, it doesn't quire translate in the rest of the world, but I still love it, I'm still laughing as I write this.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (May 24, 2013)

eml58 said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > sorry my psychic powers are malfunctioning at the moment you are going to have to fill in a fair bit mor info here if you want a serious answer from anyone since without my psychic powers I have no way of know WTF you already have, how much money you have to spend or what it is you want to do with your gear
> ...


I agree although I'm not Aussie.

Also, very sound advice as always from WW


----------



## tiger82 (May 24, 2013)

wickidwombat said:


> failing that buy 4 1Dx bodies and 2 of each and every Canon L series lens 12 Ex600RT flashes
> 
> oh better get a couple of 5Dmk3 for backups and so you can do continuous RAW video with Magic lantern
> 
> that should about cover it



I actually met someone like that He currently has 2 1DX, 2 1D4, 1D3, 5D3, 5D2 and every L glass and Canon accessory. He put down photojournalists because some of their work is in black and white and he never shoot jpeg because it's for the lesser shooters. I watched him at an event and he spent more time fiddling with his gear than shooting. He was shooting with a ring flash at a sporting event. He told me he is a first adopted of everything Canon releases and would never sell any old body because their actuations are so low.


----------



## RGF (May 24, 2013)

500d said:


> i have a 500d and im thinking of upgrading to a new body but should i buy new glass instead



Yes if you love glass, no if your glass is sufficient


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 24, 2013)

500d said:


> i have a 500d and im thinking of upgrading to a new body but should i buy new glass instead



Neither. Get an underwater housing. 

Of course, I'm just guessing that's your most pressing need, based on the information you provided. :


----------



## rpt (May 24, 2013)

tiger82 said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > failing that buy 4 1Dx bodies and 2 of each and every Canon L series lens 12 Ex600RT flashes
> ...


So that is one way of getting low actuations on a body. Keep fiddling and don't shoot!


----------



## rpt (May 24, 2013)

Hobby Shooter said:


> eml58 said:
> 
> 
> > wickidwombat said:
> ...


I like that kind of humour too. Also not an Aussie. Although Radio Australia was my favourite radio station in the 70s - too bad I can't catch it any more. May be I should build a hobby kit radio with 13 and 16 meter band and check. Do they transmit on short wave any more?


----------



## dstppy (May 24, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> 500d said:
> 
> 
> > i have a 500d and im thinking of upgrading to a new body but should i buy new glass instead
> ...



You know, I wait, anticipate, for this man's posts, searching for wisdom . . . and now he's frigging out-sarcasming me . . . WTF????

Well played sir, well played. You're a techno-mage, aren't you?


----------



## sanj (May 24, 2013)

eml58 said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > sorry my psychic powers are malfunctioning at the moment you are going to have to fill in a fair bit mor info here if you want a serious answer from anyone since without my psychic powers I have no way of know WTF you already have, how much money you have to spend or what it is you want to do with your gear
> ...



lol


----------



## wickidwombat (May 24, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> 500d said:
> 
> 
> > i have a 500d and im thinking of upgrading to a new body but should i buy new glass instead
> ...



Looks like neuro's psychic powers are still fully functioning so you're in luck! ;D


----------



## Don Haines (May 24, 2013)

Drizzt321 said:


> Some more information would be helpful for us to give you some advice. First, do you find yourself technically limited by your camera? Or are you just thinking because you have some cash you should get the latest and greatest? The general advice most often given is get better glass rather than replacing your body. A fantastic body with some crappy glass won't give you the images you think you might get. But a great lens on a decent body (and virtually all bodies these days are at least decent) can improve your image quality (which can be somewhat subjective) quite a bit. If you think you want to make photography a long term serious hobby, I'd look at Canon L series lenses, although there have been some recent releases by Sigma and Tamron which provide quite good quality at a significantly lesser price than Canon L. In the case of the new Sigma 35mm, it actually is optically better than the Canon 35mm L.



Have patience people... not everyone checks things every half hour on the computer.... give the OP time to answer the request for more information.

Drizzt321's advice is a sound place to start. To add to it, I would say that there really isn't much difference in sharpness of image between any of the canon bodies.... it's mostly lens dependant. A Rebel with good lglass will take sharper pictures than a 1DX with a $250 kit lens. Under good lighting, IQ (Image Quality) is similar, but the FF bodies will perform much better in poor lighting. The biggest difference between bodies as you go up in price is AF system, something critical if you are after BIF (Birds In Flight) but somewhat less critical if you are after landscapes.... which (hopefully) tend not to move too quickly.


----------



## Northstar (May 24, 2013)

500d said:



> i have a 500d and im thinking of upgrading to a new body but should i buy new glass instead



I had to read your question several times.....and after considerable thought, several google searches, and a phone call to a fellow photog, I've figured out the answer to your question......"maybe" 

Whew...that was a challenging one ;D


----------



## 500d (May 24, 2013)

is my 500d good enough i shoot mainly still images 
ISO quality is of great importance to me if i buy a 5dmk3 i would have to buy cheap lens


----------



## 500d (May 24, 2013)

i shoot only landscapes


----------



## Drizzt321 (May 24, 2013)

If you're shooting landscapes, you're on a tripod, or at least a monopod most of the time, correct? Then you can generally use a longer shutter speed to avoid higher ISOs, and a mix of open and stopped down. 

If you don't have a good quality tripod, and you mostly shoot landscapes, I'd actually invest in a high quality tripod first. It'll cost you as much as some mid priced lenses, but if you select the right one you can use it for years and it will help with your landscapes a lot when it comes to fine detail. Just stop down (higher f-number) your lens to around 6.3-8 which generally increases the lens sharpness by a good bit on nearly all lenses.

If you have a pretty decent tripod, then it's time to look for a lens. Do you want ultra-wide? Or is wide to normal going to be good enough? And do you think you'll move up to full-frame (FF) camera like the 6D or 5d3 in the future? For ultra-wide, there's really only a few options for crop-sensors, but they tend to be decent to good optically. You can get ultra-wide FF lenses that will work on your 500d, but they'll function as wide to normal focal length lenses.

Frankly, one of the cheapest lenses you can get is actually quite sharp. The Canon EF-40mm f/2.8 is quite sharp even wide open, and stopped down improves some. It's also only $200, I think $150 right now after the coupon/rebate that Canon is offering. It'll be in the normal focal range (~64mm effective field of view) on your camera, but it's quite cheap, and a great deal.

If you want wider, the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4 for $900 is very good optically, although it'll be ~56mm FoV for you which is still normal. Next is really looking at the Canon 24/28mm lenses, with the 24L f/1.4 probably being among the better, although still quite expensive. Then there's the Canon 17-40 and 16-35 zooms. The 17-40 might be quite good for you since it gives you ~28-64mm FoV, while avoiding the extreme corners where it tends to be quite soft. It's also relatively inexpensive, $839 ($739 right now after rebate) and pretty good optically, except for extreme corners which on a crop you won't have. The 16-35 v2 is a good bit better in the corners, and a lot more expensive. From what I know, both are quite good optically stopped down, although the 16-35 is still the better.


----------



## 500d (May 24, 2013)

what about 14mm????????


----------



## ahab1372 (May 24, 2013)

+1 on the tripod, I'd start there. There are several threads about tripod choices here.
Then think about a CPL filter if you don't already own one.
You'll mostly shoot stopped down, even kit lenses perform decently stopped down. So instead of thinking primarily about _better_ lenses, you should maybe think about a different focal length that you currently don't have.
If you want to upgrade the camera for better IQ, consider the 6D over the 5DmkIII. You don't really need the better AF of the 5D for landscapes.


----------



## 9VIII (May 24, 2013)

Before the 5D3 got mentioned I was going to say 6D, now that it has, and landscape is in the picture, get the 6D.

And if you're short on cash for lenses, the Pancake is actually pretty amazing.


----------



## Drizzt321 (May 24, 2013)

500d said:


> what about 14mm????????



14mm is pretty good, but for $2200 I'm hard pressed to recommend it for you right now. The 17-40 does quite well, especially on crop, and is more versatile and costs a heck of a lot less. For that money you can get the tripod, 17-40, and one or two non-L primes from Canon such as the 40 f/2.8 or 85 f/1.8 or 50 f/1.4, although they are not really landscape lenses.


----------



## 500d (May 25, 2013)

is gitzo a good tripod


----------



## jdramirez (May 25, 2013)

I agree film frame is the way to go for landscape, and I also concur with a good tripod. but you can probably get away with using a 5dc for around 600ish and then getting a lens. the classic isn't awesome in low light, but that is what the tripod and long exposure times are for. it doesn't take successive shots quickly, again... not really necessary. 

as for a lens, the 17-40 will do. when stopped down it is a pretty nice lens.


----------



## jdramirez (May 25, 2013)

500d said:


> is gitzo a good tripod



people talk about it here like it is... and I'm willing to believe them. I have a $40 tripod that I like, but people don't share my enthusiasm for cost effective tripod.


----------



## rpt (May 25, 2013)

jdramirez said:


> 500d said:
> 
> 
> > is gitzo a good tripod
> ...


LOL! What about a $40 tripod that one uses for say 30 years?


----------



## Random Orbits (May 25, 2013)

jdramirez said:


> people talk about it here like it is... and I'm willing to believe them. I have a $40 tripod that I like, but people don't share my enthusiasm for cost effective tripod.



I had received a tripod years ago as a gift, and it worked ok with my 20D and 17-55. It was not robust enough to handle the 70-200 II, so I used it with the lightest lenses I had, and that was iffy. The legs were plenty strong/stable enough, it was the center column/head interface that was weak. One of my favorite pictures was taken with it and the 100L on a beach. The legs did not disassemble and I was unable to get all the sand out, so it started making grooves along the metal legs. The head/column interface failed completely at the end of last year. I'd like the tripod to keep the heaviest lens/body combo stable and to be able to be taken apart to be cleaned. Can it be achieved with a $50 tripod... no. Can it be achieved with a $300+ tripod... yes. It's up to user to determine which type, material, features are applicable.


----------



## sandymandy (May 25, 2013)

eml58 said:


> Other than this being exceptionally good advise, it's also what I miss after living overseas for 30 years, the Aussie sense of what most of us call, Humour, it doesn't quire translate in the rest of the world, but I still love it, I'm still laughing as I write this.



Maybe u are just around the wrong people


----------



## Drizzt321 (May 25, 2013)

500d said:


> is gitzo a good tripod



Gitzo is a good brand, as is RRS (Really Right Stuff), and I have a Benro which is a chinese knockoff of some of the more expensive Gitzo/RRS, but it's pretty good quality. I'd recommend going for Arca-Swiss type heads (Gitzo, RRS, some others) rather than Manfrotto which apparently doesn't have just 1 standard for quick release plates, but a couple.

However, tripods (plus head) can easily range up to the price of a good lens, however as long as you don't knock it around too much, they tend to last as long as a good lens.


----------



## 500d (May 25, 2013)

THE 6D IS QUITE TEMPTING but so expensive


----------



## Drizzt321 (May 25, 2013)

500d said:


> THE 6D IS QUITE TEMPTING but so expensive



The 6D is quite good for what it is, although it lacks some things a more general high end camera like the 5d3 does well (specifically the AF system and a few edge features). What lenses do you have now? If you have a couple of good lenses, you may gain more by the 6D which will be a big jump over the 500D's sensor in many situations. If you don't have any good lenses, go for a good lens or two, and a good tripod if you don't have one. Don't forget to get a shutter release cable and learn how to use it and mirror lockup for your landscapes.


----------



## 500d (May 25, 2013)

Drizzt321 said:


> 500d said:
> 
> 
> > THE 6D IS QUITE TEMPTING but so expensive
> ...




55 -250mm

18-55mm 
no tripod


----------



## Drizzt321 (May 25, 2013)

500d said:


> Drizzt321 said:
> 
> 
> > 500d said:
> ...



Ok, so none of your current lenses will work on the 6D, since those are EF-S lenses. If you go for the 6D kit with 24-105L it's a pretty nice all-around lens, but even stopped down it won't excel at landscapes. Great general purpose lens though.

If you're serious about landscapes, I'd first get a good quality tripod. Skip the $200-300 range, and go a bit higher. I don't have the link handy, but basically it's a cost comparison showing someone starting off with a really cheap tripod, decide they need a better one and get a mid-range, then decide they need a better one and get a higher end tripod. In the end, they would have saved money if they had gone right for the higher end tripod. Not that I'm saying you should spend $600 on the lens, and another $400 on the head, but if you can budget $600-700 for legs + nice head, you'll be a lot happier for a long time.

Next, I'd go for another lens. Depends on you're budget and desire, but for landscape I'd go more for the 17-40L or 24mm Samyang/Rokinon lens. That one is manual focus, manual aperture, and you won't have any lens EXIF info, but it is pretty good optically, especially when stopped down to f/4 or a bit further. However, the Canon 17-40L is more flexible, although it starts at f/4 it does improve stopped down and has AF and full lens EXIF info. Both of those are around $600-700 I believe. For you, I'd recommend the Canon 17-40L for now, and it should suit you're needs pretty good.

So, for less than the cost of a 6D body only, you can get a very good tripod and a good quality lens that will be quite good for your current needs, and give you some room to grow and experiment and learn. I also recommend going online and searching and reading about landscape photography. There is a lot of material out there on the internet. I likely will take some time to learn the techniques, and then figure your style, but keep at it and don't give up.


----------



## rs (May 25, 2013)

500d said:


> 55 -250mm
> 
> 18-55mm
> no tripod


They're both EF-S lenses. If you do go for a FF body such as the 6D, you'll have to set aside some budget to buy EF lenses to go with it. What's your budget?

If your budget only stretches as far as a 6D, put your money into a good lens and a tripod instead. Preferably an EF lens so you have the option of upgrading to FF later on, should you choose to.

For good reasons the 17-40 keeps getting mentioned. However, if you really want wide and don't mind buying more into the EF-S system, the 10-22 could be worth looking at.


----------



## 500d (May 25, 2013)

Drizzt321 said:


> 500d said:
> 
> 
> > Drizzt321 said:
> ...




what tripod do you head do you recommend?

would the 6d and the 17-40 give me substantially better shots


----------



## Drizzt321 (May 25, 2013)

500d said:


> Drizzt321 said:
> 
> 
> > 500d said:
> ...



I'd say start with a tripod and 17-40L, and save you're money for a year or two and see where you're at. Maybe get another lens in the middle sometime. Right now it sounds like you don't have a lot of experience shooting, but really want to get more into it. Eventually you will likely want to upgrade to a full-frame sensor, but not necessary at the moment. Once you've shot with the 17-40 for a while, learned more about what and how you like to shoot but still want the 6D, I'd rent it for a week or so and shoot some side-by-side if you can with your current body and see if you really think it's a huge leap in image quality.

Substantially better shots is quite subjective, as most photos are more limited by the composition (so you), and the lighting which you may or may not be able to influence or control. Equipment does play a role, but in most cases composition and lighting make the photo, rather than the specific lens and/or body. You may certainly reach a point or want to shoot something where you will need better equipment, or some specialized equipment (such as a Tilt-Shift lens for architectural photography).

As for tripods, I'm not an expert on them so I'll defer, but Gitzo and Really Right Stuff are both top quality brands, and Benro has a pretty good reputation despite it being Chinese knockoffs. Remember that tripods and heads have limits as to their maximum designed weight they can hold. I'd recommend overspeccing by quite a bit, rather than getting just what you think you'll need. That's what I did and I'm quite grateful I did as I now have a 8+ pound medium format film camera, which if I specced to the equipment I have otherwise what I got wouldn't have been able to hand it. I'd say spec to 12+ pounds which will let you move up to a larger body, and heavier glass while still having a margin and likely not having a tripod that weighs a ton, especially if you get a carbon fiber one.


----------



## wickidwombat (May 27, 2013)

well with those few extra nuggets of info

since you ONLY shoot landscapes the higher iso bodies are going to show no real improvement
and it would seem budget is indead an issue

5dmk2 iso 100 (IQ is pretty much on par with the 5Dmk3 maybe a tad sharper
17-40 L (you will be stopped down most of the time anyway
good tripod (i use benro which are chinese gitzo knockoffs and are very good)
you will also need a good polarising filter and a 10 stop ND go with B+W here or a high end hoya
there is no cheap way around it (cheap filters = crap images)
also i would recomend a good L bracket so its easier to mount the camera in portrait and maintain 
the camera central over the axis of the tripod.

also get a longer lens for compressed landscapes again always on a tripod the 70-200 f4L non IS version is cheap and very good too may as well grab a 50mm f1.8 too to cover the middle and just in case you do decide to shoot something that requires a wider aperture


----------



## adhocphotographer (May 27, 2013)

If i were you, i would sell both of your current lenses and put it towards buying a EF-S 10-22, EF 24-105 (2nd hand) and a tripod.

If and when you want to invest in a full-frame camera (6D, 5D etc...) you can sell the 10-22 for a descent return (it is a great lens) and you will already have a lens.

All of this depends on your budget though...

With extra cash i would grab the 70-200 f/4L IS and/or 17-40 f/4L.

there are lots of options, most are not cheap... 

Photo gear is like heroin... be careful!


----------



## RLPhoto (May 28, 2013)

I used my 450D until it died, then I used the 7D for 3 years, then I moved to the 5D3's and see no need to upgrade past it.

450D----->7D------------->5D3.

But before I did any body upgrades, I got my set of primes to use.


----------



## serendipidy (May 28, 2013)

500d said:


> i shoot only landscapes



Where do you shoot your landscapes? Are you unhappy with your results now?


----------



## serendipidy (May 28, 2013)

RLPhoto said:


> I used my 450D until it died, then I used the 7D for 3 years, then I moved to the 5D3's and see no need to upgrade past it.
> 
> 450D----->7D------------->5D3.
> 
> But before I did any body upgrades, I got my set of primes to use.



I started with the 450D (still have it...very low actuations). Then, got my present DSLR, the 7D. So, I guess I'm two-thirds done ;D


----------



## 500d (May 28, 2013)

serendipidy said:


> 500d said:
> 
> 
> > i shoot only landscapes
> ...






in cities, iso could be better on my camera


----------



## Drizzt321 (May 28, 2013)

500d said:


> serendipidy said:
> 
> 
> > 500d said:
> ...


----------



## 500d (May 30, 2013)

Drizzt321 said:


> 500d said:
> 
> 
> > serendipidy said:
> ...




what about getting a speed light


----------



## Drizzt321 (May 30, 2013)

500d said:


> Drizzt321 said:
> 
> 
> > 500d said:
> ...



Speedlite or strobes are fine for closeish use, but if you are trying to capture city-scapes, they won't realy help you at all. They aren't a sun or a nuke, they just can't put out that much light. If you're talking about people across the street or in front of you it could help, but you're going to be very, very visible.


----------



## verysimplejason (May 30, 2013)

I'm a 500D user and I find ETTR helps a lot especially when using high ISOs. It helps much on retaining details even when you apply some NR. Shoot RAW when you can (for me, ALWAYS). RAW + ETTR do wonders to your photos especially for landscape photography. HDR processing also helps if you find that DR isn't enough. Just be careful when applying saturation and for those halos to help you produce realistic pictures. All-in-all 500D isn't that bad if you're just ready to give some extra effort in PP. For action shots, just get a 7D or those with better AF. 500D isn't enough to get action shots. You might get some but the hit rate is just very low. Pre-focusing and some good old panning helps though. For all its shortcomings, I think 500D is a perfect camera to hone your skills while you're saving for a better body. Go for some good primes/L first before you buy the body that you want.

P.S. If I'm going to start all over again however, I won't start with an APS-C. I'll start with a 5D and some good primes instead and a speedlight.


----------



## Zv (May 30, 2013)

If the 500D is anything like the 550D then you can take really good pictures with it - including cityscapes. I imagine it won't be so good at high ISOs but as people have mentioned a tripod is what you need not a new camera. Also shoot in RAW and get a nice long exposure with a fair amount of detail using a smaller aperture like f/8. You can then dial down the exposure and brightness in post or dodge and burn to bring out more detail where you need it. I find lightroom's adjustment brush to be quite useful for a quick fix but for more detailed work move over to photoshop and use layer masks to adjust specific areas.

Getting the color balance right in camera for night scenes can save a lot of headache - Personally I like to shoot near the tungsten side of the white balance scale for night/blue hour shots. 

When I first started I never could figure out why my night landscapes looked crappy. Mostly because the camera was choosing white balance, focus point and aperture for me in P mode. Shoot in manual mode, using live view to focus manually. Use mirror lock up and a remote release. helps to shoot on a calm day, with little wind. 

A speedlight might help illuminate some of the foreground if nothing else. Just make sure you gel it to match the white balance setting.


----------



## 500d (May 30, 2013)

Zv said:


> If the 500D is anything like the 550D then you can take really good pictures with it - including cityscapes. I imagine it won't be so good at high ISOs but as people have mentioned a tripod is what you need not a new camera. Also shoot in RAW and get a nice long exposure with a fair amount of detail using a smaller aperture like f/8. You can then dial down the exposure and brightness in post or dodge and burn to bring out more detail where you need it. I find lightroom's adjustment brush to be quite useful for a quick fix but for more detailed work move over to photoshop and use layer masks to adjust specific areas.
> 
> Getting the color balance right in camera for night scenes can save a lot of headache - Personally I like to shoot near the tungsten side of the white balance scale for night/blue
> 
> ...





is there a site or books that teach how to shoot in manual 
how do you know what wb setting to use


----------



## Zv (May 31, 2013)

I wrote a blog article about white balance as part of a series that goes over the basics. Here's the link. 

http://zeebytes.blogspot.jp/2012/09/photography-101-white-balance.html?m=1


----------



## verysimplejason (May 31, 2013)

500d said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > If the 500D is anything like the 550D then you can take really good pictures with it - including cityscapes. I imagine it won't be so good at high ISOs but as people have mentioned a tripod is what you need not a new camera. Also shoot in RAW and get a nice long exposure with a fair amount of detail using a smaller aperture like f/8. You can then dial down the exposure and brightness in post or dodge and burn to bring out more detail where you need it. I find lightroom's adjustment brush to be quite useful for a quick fix but for more detailed work move over to photoshop and use layer masks to adjust specific areas.
> ...



Here:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/

As for white balance, you can get a gray card or a white non-reflective material and take a picture of it under the lighting condition you were in, then use it as your WB (you can consult your manual on how to use custom WB, don't worry it's easy). Or, just take it with DAYLIGHT WB in RAW and adjust it in PP (lightroom or Canon's DPP) later. I always use full manual mode when taking landscapes. Expose to the right (ETTR), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposing_to_the_right, means using your histogram and make sure almost all the graphs are in the right. Just be careful of clipping. It's a technique used with RAW and later adjusted during post-processing in order to decrease noise especially in shadows. Canon cameras are famous in good highlight recovery but bad with the shadows that's why you overexpose a little bit and then just adjust (darken) it later in post process. I'm sorry but I just assumed that you don't know these and I just want to help you. Have fun!


----------

