|
This thread is for the discussion of all things Canon -- lenses, bodies, flashes, accessories, rumors, etc. Feel free to add any knowledge, ask questions, and wank about gear. Here's a little introduction: Canon is one of the leading camera brands. The Canon system is made up of their camera bodies, hotshoe flashes and accessories, and lenses. Camera Bodies Canon's camera bodies can be divided into 7 categories: The early DXX line, Digital Rebel line / XXXD line, XXD line, 5D line, the 7D (to possibly become a 'line'), 1D line, 1Ds line, and the 1DX. The DXXs Canon's first foray into digital SLRs came with the D30, which was updated with the D60 (not to be confused with Nikon's D60, or Canon's later 30D and 60D). These cameras were interesting in that they were APS-C (1.6x crop) cameras, but the EF-S mount was not yet implemented. D30 D60 The Rebels Beginning with the Canon EOS Digital Rebel (in Europe: 300D), Canon introduced their entry-line, consumer dSLR series. The Rebels are inexpensive, but also reflect their price in their performance and construction. The line has been split seemingly in two: the XXXD line (Rebel, XT, XTi, XSi, T1i/2i/3i) and the XXXD line (Rebel XS and T3). Their lineage is as follows: Digital Rebel (300D) Digital Rebel XT (350D) Digital Rebel XTi (400D) Digital Rebel XSi (450D) Digital Rebel T1i (500D) Digital Rebel T2i (550D) Digital Rebel T3i (600D) Digital Rebel XS (1000D) Digital Rebel T3 (1100D) The XS and T3 are the low end of entry level. They lag behind the XXXD in construction, controls, frame rate, buffer size, and general features. In any case, the Rebels offer an affordable first step into photography, and are fully compatible with the entirety of the modern Canon system. Good applications for the Rebels: *A first, inexpensive dSLR for learning *A great option for casual use for people that want better image quality and are willing to put a little effort into their snapshots The XXDs Starting with the 10D, the XXD line is Canon's 'pro-sumer' line of cameras, directed at the serious amateur, or beginning professional. They feature solid, magnesium-alloy construction, good autofocus performance, handling tailored for on-the-fly shooting, good FPS, and are often turned to by wildlife shooters who want the 1.6X crop factor for the most reach on their telephotos. Their line is as follows: 10D 20D 30D 40D 50D The 20D->30D and 40D->50D are both seen as more minor upgrades, opposed to the 10D->20D and 30D->40D upgrade. The 20D is still a solid camera, if a bit dated. Then there is the 60D. Canon took a step backward in the XXD line with the 60D, opting for plastic rather than magnesium construction, inferior controls to the 50D, no flash PC sync socket, fewer fine control features like multiflash control and AF adjustments. This is likely due to Canon releasing the 7D and finding themselves with the XXD line being rather redundant. Good applications for the XXDs: *"Serious amateurs" who want a solid camera for all-around use *Backup body for serious shooters *A way to get a little extra reach for people whose primary body is FF or APS-H The 7D In September of 2009, Canon introduced the 7D. The 7D is an interesting beast. It packs 18mp into an APS-C sensor, but then surprises with decent high ISO performance (better than the 50D). It features a great, brand-new autofocus system and fires at 8fps, making it pretty much ideal for wildlife and bird photography as well as a capable sports and all-around performer. It also shoots HD video. 7D Good applications for the 7D: *All-around use for serious amateurs *Pretty much the best 1.6x body out there -- so extra reach for people whose primary body is FF or APS-H --Especially for sports, birds, wildlife The 5D Line Canon's 5D line consists of three cameras. They feature full-frame, high resolution sensors, and are aimed at portrait, wedding, and studio shooters. They are: 5D 5D Mark II 5D Mark III They first two have a very wide generation gap, but the original 5D is still a great still-life camera. The 5D Mark II's high ISO performance is stellar, and it also features HD video, with manual control after the latest firmware update. It's no replacement for a real video camera, but it also isn't something to just dismiss. The 5D Mark III is pretty sweet. It's got crazy good ISO range, shoots at 6fps, and sports a brand-new AF system that should address the concerns about lackluster AF performance in the Mark II. Good applications for the 5Ds: *Portraits, weddings, interior, editorial -- where IQ is important *They're not bad all-around performers if you can work with the autofocus (which isn't BAD, it's just not amazing) *With the full-frame, the II and III produce some pretty awesome video results. Movie and TV companies are beginning to use them in supplemental roles for their unique advantages. The 1D Line Canon's 1D line is tailored to professional photojournalists and sports shooters. It features high FPS, world-class autofocus, tank-like build quality and weathersealing, and a 1.3x crop factor. The line currently features 4 bodies: 1D 1D Mark II 1D Mark IIN 1D Mark III 1D Mark IV The 1Ds Line The 1Ds line is Canon's flagship studio camera, with huge resolution and full-frame sensors. The three cameras are: 1Ds 1Ds Mark II 1Ds Mark III The 1DX Then, Canon announced the answer to Nikon's D4: the 1DX. Basically, they finally stuck a full-frame sensor in a sports camera. The result is a replacement to the 1D and 1Ds lines, unifying the two. The 1DX has a brand-new, fancy schmancy AF system, shoots at 12FPS (14FPS if you lock the mirror up and capture JPEGs), and a whole bunch of other new-tech features. It's the flagship, now. 1DX The Lenses Canon's lenses fall into 2 main groups: EF and EF-S. EF stands for Electronic Focus; it's just Canon's modern autofocus mount that will work on any Canon digital body without limitations. EF-S stands for Electronic Focus - Short; it denotes lenses that are specially made for 1.6x crop factor cameras: The Rebels, XXDs, and the 7D. It will not mount or function on the 1D, 1Ds, or 5D cameras. Canon designates its top-of-the-line lenses with an "L", standing for "luxury". Generally, L lenses feature high-quality optics, wide and constant apertures, top-notch build quality, weathersealing, and ultrasonic motors. There are, of course, exceptions. Also, there is a bit of a cult surrounding L lenses. Do not fall into it. While lenses, like any photographic equipment, are tools that make the job easier or facilitate the fulfillment of your creative vision, do not make the mistake of believing that buying expensive equipment will magically better your photography. That being said, let's continue. In addition to Canon's lenses, there are of course third-party offerings from Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, etc. Also, as Martytoof and Clayton Bigsby added, you can use a mechanical adapter and physically mount and use Nikon F-Mount, Olympus OM, Leica R, and M42 lenses, albeit in stopdown metering mode, and with or without AF-assist, depending on whether or not your adapter has the required circuitry. You can also get some K mounts on there but generally have to do a little modification to the aperture lever. There's also the C/Y mount where you can find some pretty nice glass... However, not all lenses will mount with the adapters -- you have to be careful that the rear of the lens doesn't bang into the mirror. Furthermore, other mounts can indeed be adapted to Canon cameras, but without adapters with optics (which usually degrade image quality and magnify a bit), these other mounts will lack infinity focus. Here is the list of adaptable mounts, taken from this page.  The Flashes Canon makes several TTL shoe-mount flashes. The most popular are the 430EX II and 580EX II. The new hotness is the 600EX-RT, which has built-in radio controls to talk to other 600EX-RTs without the need for line-of-sight or optical slaving. Both feature bounce, swivel, and zoom heads as well as full-auto and full-manual operation. The 580EX is a step up from the 430EX, with better controls, more power, a bounce card, a PC sync port (the 430EX does not have one, which is pretty much inexcusable on Canon's part), and the ability to act as a commander unit to control other Canon flashes remotely. Other notable parts of the Canon flash system are its macro flash, the MT-24EX, and a commander unit (not a flash, but a way to control other remote flashes), the ST-E2. There are, of course, other and older Canon flashes, but I'm not terribly familiar with them. That doesn't mean they're not a viable option. Look into them, or if you know about them, post about them! I hope that this introduction to the Canon system was at least a bit useful. I personally own the following Canon gear: Digital Rebel XT 5D Mark III EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II EF 50mm f/1.8 EF 70-200mm f/4L dakana fucked around with this message at Apr 21, 2013 around 13:48 |
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 16:33 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2013 17:45 |
|
|
Finally, separate threads for different manufacturers. I have the following: Canon XTi EF 50mm f1.8 II EF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 II (Non IS) I almost never use either Canon lens now that I have my Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 but sometime in the future I'm definitely going to pick up one of the 70-200L lenses.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 16:39 |
|
|
Thoogsby posted:Finally, separate threads for different manufacturers. My kit lens is definitely my least favorite lens in terms of optical and build quality, but without any other wide solution, I put up with it. The 70-200s are all fantastic -- sharp, well-built, and useful as hell. The f/4L especially is an excellent value. I picked mine up for about $560, brand new.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 16:43 |
|
|
dakana posted:My kit lens is definitely my least favorite lens in terms of optical and build quality, but without any other wide solution, I put up with it. Yay Canon, boo beer. Where did you find new Canon gear this cheap? Does Canon have any good rumor sites to read? Not like nikonrumors which is terrible but perhaps something at least semi-reliable.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 16:50 |
|
|
dakana posted:The 70-200s are all fantastic -- sharp, well-built, and useful as hell. The f/4L especially is an excellent value. I picked mine up for about $560, brand new. Yeah this will most likely be the one I buy. IS would be nice but I don't think it's worth the extra cash. But I need to get a tripod first anyway. And another guitar, god drat I pick the most expensive hobbies.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 16:52 |
|
|
robertdx posted:Yay Canon, boo beer. Huh. That's odd: I bought mine in July of 2008 for $560 on Adorama, new. Now it's $599. I blame the recession 
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 17:04 |
|
|
robertdx posted:Yay Canon, boo beer. There are some used offerings here that might be worth looking at-- KEH is very honest with their ratings, to the point that they seriously under-rate the quality of stuff that they are selling.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 17:39 |
|
|
You should put something in the OP about P&S, Canon's Powershot line is pretty great. Edit: Also noting a couple of those oddball early models like the D30 and D60. 
pwn fucked around with this message at Jul 13, 2009 around 17:57 |
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 17:55 |
|
|
I shoot with the original 5D and really have no plans to upgrade to the Mk2 any time soon. Great camera and they are pretty cheap now. The files are big enough for 95% of uses, if I need something bigger for a job I just go for medium format digital. My portfolios are 11x17 full bleed and the prints are amazing (and how often do most people print bigger than that?). I have one 4'x6' print made from a 5D file and it looks perfect, no pixelation or artifacts even if you stick your nose up to it.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 18:02 |
|
|
Hah, I was about to post saying the 580 EX doesn't have a PC port, but I fiddled with mine and it does! Still OP, you might want to distinguish between the EX and EXII lines. I have: 400D Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 Canon 50mm f1.8 Canon 55-250mm f4-5.6 Canon 430 EX Canon 580 Ex I have recently received a windfall monopoly style from a distant relative passing, so I thought I might invest it into camera gear. I'm facing sophie's choice between the D700 and the 5DmkII. I love the ergonomics on the D700 which is the only one of the two I've found in a store to demo. Hopefully the 5D compares. I figure the 5DmkII is probably the better buy because that way I don't have to sell my flashes which are probably the most worthwhile gear I still have. I figure on picking up the 24-70 and the 100mm macro if I do go the Canon path. With Nikon I'd probably barely be able to pick up the 24-70 and an SB-900. I mostly shoot photojournalism/travel/portraits. I haven't tried sport, although I am curious - however I don't think I'll get the opportunity anytime soon. I am pretty adamant to get a macro lens sooner rather than later. Honestly, I'd really like to get some Canon shooter's opinions. My only real life friend into photography shoots nikon and is an absolute zealot and says that there is no reason to get a 5d mkII because everything it does, the D700 can do better.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 18:12 |
|
|
I went with the 5D mark II in the spring largely because of the high-ISO power that it offers, which is valuable for the journalism/wedding/event work that I do. It has proven a fantastic camera-- if you're used to shooting Canon I think it'd be silly to switch to the D700 unless you really really want to use it for sports or something. That said, I think even the 5D is going to be an upgrade over the 400D in sports AF, etc. I am comparing it to the 1DIIN, which isn't a terribly fair comparison.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 18:22 |
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Hah, I was about to post saying the 580 EX doesn't have a PC port, but I fiddled with mine and it does! Still OP, you might want to distinguish between the EX and EXII lines. Even video? I shoot Nikon so I cant help too much but I think the 5D II is a pretty capable camera, one thing to consider is the size of files it creates and having to store/edit them. There are a few people who shoot the 5DII and I think there may be a few that shoot with the D700, they probably could give you a better idea. If you move to the 5D your 10-20 will not be able to be used on it, but you will have a 40D as a backup body which is a real bonus.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 18:28 |
|
|
TsarAleksi posted:I went with the 5D mark II in the spring largely because of the high-ISO power that it offers, which is valuable for the journalism/wedding/event work that I do. It has proven a fantastic camera-- if you're used to shooting Canon I think it'd be silly to switch to the D700 unless you really really want to use it for sports or something. That said, I think even the 5D is going to be an upgrade over the 400D in sports AF, etc. I am comparing it to the 1DIIN, which isn't a terribly fair comparison. Yeah, high ISO is a huge draw for me. I'm so tired of getting unusable images at 800 and 1600. I'm also never getting a lens below f2.8 after my adventures in f4-5.6 land. I need to really find a good camera store to test out a 5d mkII. I've tried a few consumer electronics stores but they have the most bizarre selections. I can understand mostly low end cameras, but the occasional D3 or D700 was unexpected, as was carrying nearly the whole sony line. Dread Head posted:Even video? I shoot Nikon so I cant help too much but I think the 5D II is a pretty capable camera, one thing to consider is the size of files it creates and having to store/edit them. There are a few people who shoot the 5DII and I think there may be a few that shoot with the D700, they probably could give you a better idea. If you move to the 5D your 10-20 will not be able to be used on it, but you will have a 40D as a backup body which is a real bonus. From what I've seen on flickr, the 10-20 does fit but has really whacky vignetting. So, it might make for some interesting circular lomo-style photos. I've found myself using my 50 the most out of my lenses. Extreme wide angle is interesting visually, but I find I mainly end up using it on 20mm. The 24-70 on the ff would give me that at several stops less than the sigma too. My nikon using friend is really nuts to the point he can't even admit that Canon makes a "usable" product. He's always telling me random rumors that Canon ship defective L glass on purpose. Photography is his main hobby/pursuit and he has said if he was forced to use canon he'd give up. The scary thing is that he works part-time at a camera store. He apparently advises all his customers to use UV filters on all their lenses. So, after that I pretty much stopped listening to him. Paragon8 fucked around with this message at Jul 13, 2009 around 18:37 |
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 18:30 |
|
|
^ What a loving idiot. I have a 17x22 print of an image shot at 1600 on the original 5D and it is not grainy at all, it looks perfect. I'm sure the 5DII is amazing.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 18:43 |
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Yeah, high ISO is a huge draw for me. I'm so tired of getting unusable images at 800 and 1600. I'm also never getting a lens below f2.8 after my adventures in f4-5.6 land.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 19:04 |
|
|
Paragon8 posted:Honestly, I'd really like to get some Canon shooter's opinions. My only real life friend into photography shoots nikon and is an absolute zealot and says that there is no reason to get a 5d mkII because everything it does, the D700 can do better.  Nikon, but your pal's full of poo poo. The AF's better, high ISO is maybe better, but the sheer pixel density is going to make the 5d2 better at other things.Paragon8 posted:My nikon using friend is really nuts to the point he can't even admit that Canon makes a "usable" product. He's always telling me random rumors that Canon ship defective L glass on purpose. Photography is his main hobby/pursuit and he has said if he was forced to use canon he'd give up. The scary thing is that he works part-time at a camera store. He apparently advises all his customers to use UV filters on all their lenses. So, after that I pretty much stopped listening to him. The controls on the 5D are just about the same as the xxD line, the body's just beefier. It's a great camera. evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at Jul 13, 2009 around 19:20 |
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 19:17 |
|
|
Is the powershot g10 any good? I need a high quality p&s camera, and there was an offer on it I was looking at, but I'm not sure whether I want it just because it looks better than every other p&s camera in the shop. I need something that works relatively well in low light, which my current lovely camera doesn't.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 20:09 |
|
|
RobertKerans posted:Is the powershot g10 any good? I need a high quality p&s camera, and there was an offer on it I was looking at, but I'm not sure whether I want it just because it looks better than every other p&s camera in the shop. I've heard lots of good things about it, and I would really like one. The feature-set seems more geared towards people who are serious about photography, particularly because it doesn't have the super-zoom range that some of Canon's other point and shoots offer. That said, what do you want out of a camera? If it's going to be a point and shoot back up to an SLR system, then I think it's a really solid camera. But if you're looking to get into photography more seriously, it might be more worthwhile to spend that much money on a basic SLR setup.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 20:11 |
|
|
RobertKerans posted:Is the powershot g10 any good? I need a high quality p&s camera, and there was an offer on it I was looking at, but I'm not sure whether I want it just because it looks better than every other p&s camera in the shop. I need something that works relatively well in low light, which my current lovely camera doesn't. I have heard they are good but I have heard from a few people they actually like the G9 better, for example I dont think the G10 has a time lapse setting but the G9 did. I think they are both solid cameras, and would not mind one my self if I was looking for something like that. You may also want to look into the lumix LX3 (I think that is what it is) it is supposed to be very good as well.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 20:54 |
|
|
I've got a LX3. IQ is more than I can handle, lens is nice and fast, I like it a lot. Bad points: lens isn't really long enough (60mm equivalent max), and the mode dial is too easy to knock into the wrong setting.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 21:28 |
|
|
Any of you Canon girlies want to trade a 5dmkII 24-70 for a D3 24-70 straight up.  I can get L glass cheaper than I can the shorter end Nikon glass.[just wanted to spam/post in your thread]
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 21:40 |
|
|
That's like asking someone with a hologram charizard to trade for a diglett. Not happening son
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 21:42 |
|
|
Yeah I read books. posted:That's like asking someone with a hologram charizard to trade for a diglett. Not happening son Is this a Magic in the gathering reference?
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 21:43 |
|
|
advion posted:Is this a Magic in the gathering reference? nigga aint heard of a diglett
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 21:44 |
|
|
Cheers for the replies; an SLR would be great, I haven't had one for a while, my photography's lapsed, and I should get back into it a bit more heavily, but as it stands a professional quality p&s is what I need. The Lumix maybe looks a better bet, though lack of a viewfinder is a bit annoying. G9 as well - could possibly get that quite a bit cheaper for no great descrease in quality. edit: didn't see that reply, & yeah, the length not so good. Just doesn't look as solid either, I'm going to go compare in the shop though. RobertKerans fucked around with this message at Jul 13, 2009 around 21:49 |
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 21:46 |
|
|
Haha, well just putting it out there anyways just in case
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 21:46 |
|
|
advion posted:Haha, well just putting it out there anyways just in case I would do it, but I have no 5d mk II or 24-70  400d for a hologram charizard straight up.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 21:50 |
|
|
RobertKerans posted:edit: didn't see that reply, & yeah, the length not so good. Just doesn't look as solid either, I'm going to go compare in the shop though. advion posted:Haha, well just putting it out there anyways just in case evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at Jul 13, 2009 around 22:01 |
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 21:55 |
|
|
Another thread to follow! Now that us canon geeks have our own thread, we can discuss what lenses would qualify as a 'hidden L' (AKA a lens that is L-quality without the red ring) For example, the 10-22. Best EF-S lens eeeeever!
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 22:07 |
|
|
Gambl0r posted:Another thread to follow! Now that us canon geeks have our own thread, we can discuss what lenses would qualify as a 'hidden L' (AKA a lens that is L-quality without the red ring) The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS also uses the same quality elements as L lenses. The decision to not denote any EF-S lenses as L was a marketing decision.
|
| # ? Jul 13, 2009 22:08 |
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:I wouldn't worry about the build TBH. I wouldn't bang on the lens (but I wouldn't on the Canons either), but the rest is just magnesium alloy you can crack skulls with. No it's actually only had about 5,000 pictures taken with it and it's still in fairly new shape. I can just get L glass at cheaper prices than I can Nikon glass.
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 05:33 |
|
|
So why not just sell it? 
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 07:44 |
|
|
brad industry posted:I shoot with the original 5D and really have no plans to upgrade to the Mk2 any time soon. Great camera and they are pretty cheap now. The files are big enough for 95% of uses, if I need something bigger for a job I just go for medium format digital. Same. I sold my 40d body and a 10-20mm sigma and got a 3rd hand 5d original. I just can't imagine needing something more. If I were ever asked to do something billboard sized, i'd just rent an S2, but like Brad says, I've done 13x19" prints of my 5d, and you just can't see any problems whatsoever. No noise, no softness, nothing. I love how 90% of people with a 5d II only ever upload to flickr web sized. Makes me lol.
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 08:46 |
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:I love how 90% of people with a 5d II only ever upload to flickr web sized. Makes me lol.
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 08:54 |
|
|
dakana posted:...a PC sync port (the 430EX does not have one, which is pretty much inexcusable on Canon's part) SirRobin fucked around with this message at Jul 14, 2009 around 09:29 |
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 09:26 |
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:
I have so many pet peeves with flickr. It really bugs me how so few people post exif data and only upload tiny images. The tiny images I can kind of understand if they want to stop people stealing their work. Not to mention that flickr has a seedier underbelly than deviantart.
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 11:34 |
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:
I don't :3
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 14:43 |
|
|
That being said, what's a good, cheap place for huge prints online?
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 14:53 |
|
|
DaNzA posted:That being said, what's a good, cheap place for huge prints online? I Would be interested in this too (a place in Canada at that!), but I dont think this is the thread to discuss it in, possibly make one on printing?
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 15:12 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2013 17:45 |
|
|
Paragon8 posted:I have so many pet peeves with flickr. It really bugs me how so few people post exif data and only upload tiny images. The tiny images I can kind of understand if they want to stop people stealing their work. Flickr is, to me, great for the community aspects if you're into that, but there are better places to set up a site to display your gallery and show work to people. And yeah, the flickr underbelly is really weird and creepy.
|
| # ? Jul 14, 2009 19:29 |
|
