|
mclifford82 posted:To me the Nikon stuff has always seemed "backwards" -- the way everything turns is the wrong way, from zooms, to lens back caps, everything. That alone is enough to keep me on the Canon side. Yeah what the gently caress is this "micro" is macro!? Getthatshitouttahere.
|
#
¿
May 24, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:I assume there's no noise benefit to using ISO 50 on a 5D III, considering Canon has it disabled by default? Ahaha, the 24-105 is one the most versatile lenses Canon makes. Even better now that CA can be autocorrected in jpegs from your 5D3. Very, very, very few people who already own one could ever have good enough reasons to get rid of it. The cons just don't outweigh the pros of that lens.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2013 21:34
|
|
|
If you're shooting the next Star Trek movie...
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
How are 60Ds doing in the used market? I know I'm going to have to sell mine in order to finance a 5Dm3 later this year.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2013 16:20
|
|
|
Cool. I'll probably just end up selling to a goon in a few months time because gently caress ebay fees and craigslist tirekickers.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2013 16:30
|
|
|
I could see where f/4 wasn't enough when you couldn't take the ISO high enough due to noise but these newer full frame sensors are just that much better and ISO3200 and above. Also don't forget the IS. I'd rather have a slightly noiser image thats sharp than a less noisy but blurred one due to shake.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhT05YQD4DM Around 5:00 is when you can get a really good demonstration of the glare cutting capabilities of a good CPL filter.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2013 03:34
|
|
|
Actually, the T3 with its "bigger" pixels should theoretically have a better diffraction limited aperture than any of the other 18mp APS-C sensors. Landscape shooters rejoice?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
Film is by now (IMO) one of those lower cost hobbies that the 50mm 1.8 is basically required for.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2013 03:08
|
|
|
Sheeet, I shot a bit for some friends when the cherry blossoms were going on in DC and I still used RAW
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2013 02:24
|
|
|
Eye ess oh strange, but I just realized I say the same thing when referring to disc images as eye-soh...
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2013 12:46
|
|
|
Come to DC right now and see all the
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2013 17:02
|
|
|
Its focus by wire. The focus ring isn't mechanically coupled to the elements.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
Disappointing showing from the Koreans there. Their 35mm 1.4 set the bar really high. Equalling or bettering the 35mm L in pretty much all areas except "bokeh quality" at a third of the price.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2013 05:46
|
|
|
woot fatigue posted:I just sold my 10-22 and now I'm considering selling the 17-40 as well and replacing it with either the Samyang 35/1.4 or Sigma 35/1.4 and having all primes. Both 35mm lenses you mention are really good. The Sigma in particular really sticks it to the 35mm L but if you don't absolutely need autofocus then saving some $$ going with the Samyang won't disappoint either.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2013 13:33
|
|
|
mAlfunkti0n posted:Someone tell me the 6D is junk and I don't want it. I hate being poor at the moment. Ok I got this. -Less than 100% viewfinder. but you can change focusing screens unlike the 5D3 -SD card only. slow burst rate means you only really need an SD card -No joysick. you don't even get enough AF points to need one, heh
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2013 15:42
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:gently caress autofocus, buy a Takumar 35/3.5, the king of 35s. Maybe I'm just an ignorant noob, but 3.5 doesn't seem particularly fast and isn't that the whole point of primes?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2013 20:33
|
|
|
GOD. loving. DAMNIT. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EOS-7...=item5657813681
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2013 17:08
|
|
|
There were a couple dozen left when I looked, hence my dilemma. Eh, what do I care, I'm saving up money for a 5dm3 anyways.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2013 18:30
|
|
|
If the refurbished ones ever go for 20% off again, they will also be about $2300.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
They are not reputable.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2013 20:27
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:This is Canon we're talking about. I'm going to optimistically guess $1399, but won't be surprised if they make it closer to $1799, about where the 7D came out if I remember. Yay new? sensor! Canon basically doesn't have to develop any new AF systems for APS-C sensors for the next 2-3 years so I'm not impressed in the least on that front. Shoehorn the 7D's AF into freakin everything. It'll even find its way into the SL1 size bodies someday 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2013 20:31
|
|
|
bobfather posted:I saw that a couple days ago, but it was live for no more than a couple hours and it never got posted to any of the deal sites I frequent. Good thing I have a retail box 60D purchased new. I'll be lucky to get $450 for it by the time I can afford a 5dIII though  just kidding, I only paid like $600 for it 2 years ago 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
24 is pretty wide on full frame - more than 80 degrees angle of view. In any case you should have a 24-105 just because.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
The 18-135 isn't a terrible lens and certainly destroys the 18-55 in every aspect but don't be surprised to find the resale value being lovely if you upgrade. More premium stuff like the 15-85 will hold its value much better.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
2500 shots per weekend every weekend also means you're stuck in front of a computer working on RAW files for the rest of your life 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2013 23:22
|
|
|
Somebody knows somebody who knows a guy who's brother is a Canon service tech and has a complete set of repair tools at home...or something... Lens shows up on ebay as used but "recently fully serviced by canon" so its not technically an outright lie...
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 13:42
|
|
|
Properly exposed? Mostly. Regardless of noise though, there's no way the 2 images could look that similar due to dynamic range suffering at such high ISOs. Even if the 70D can do 12800 like it was 6400 on the 60D (the minimum expected 1 stop of this new sensor to make it worthwhile)...its still not exactly desirable. I'd be more interested in using 1600 and 3200 like it was 800 and 1600 before, respectively.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2013 15:56
|
|
|
Does anyone have the list of how many points various things are worth for professional services? Getting a 404 on the Canon site.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2013 14:21
|
|
|
Sell it as broken in ebay? You'll might get more for it than the value of 20% off something from the refurb store unless you're gunning for a 5D3 or something pricey like that. People usually get a $10 broken point and shoot specifically for that particular discount so it seems heavy handed to use a DSLR for it, broken though it may be. As for going for a new dslr body, I'd say it depends on your inventory of lenses. If you have mostly EF-S lenses then the 60D or 7D make good upgrade choices.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2013 14:52
|
|
|
The 6D will not be getting dual ISO (anytime soon). The 5DIII and 7D get it because they have 8 channel output from the sensor and everything else has 4 channel.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
There's a lot riding on the 70D high iso performance seeing as it will set the tone for the 7D2, unless they go batshit crazy and decide to make a sensor dedicated JUST for it. But if indeed it is good then my dream setup will be: 5D3 w/ 24-105L and 70D/7D2 w/70-300L and with a 100mmL macro for portraiture and macro. Shoot anything, anywhere, pretty much anytime, always have IS and all without spending a penny on lighting 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 04:29
|
|
|
I wouldn't call the 7D's AF a limitation, especially considering that the rebel lines are so far behind. In fact I'd call it a wise business decision on Canon's part to spend a little more time and effort into making a great (for the time) AF system for your flagship APS-C body which will then filter down to the entry level cameras eventually. I don't see how SL1 sized bodies with better sensors, dual pixel AF and the 7D's 19 pt system in the future would be a bad thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
Even if the ergonomics don't make the case for the 60D (they should), get it for the better viewfinder, second control dial and most of all the top lcd.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2013 21:14
|
|
|
What is the basis for your reluctance to go full frame? Lenses? Sell your EF-S stuff. Canon treats the whole line like a second class citizen anyway; there's no staying power in it. Since you mentioned night shooting, I have to tell you RIGHT THE gently caress NOW that the 6D has (ALOT) less long exposure noise than even the 5D3: http://petapixel.com/2012/12/13/canon-6d-and-5dmk3-noise-comparison-for-high-iso-long-exposures/ Pretty damning evidence to go with the 6D if you ask me.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2013 15:10
|
|
|
I'd consider the 5D as more of a DOF improved side-grade from a current gen crop body and that's about it. Still, if you can find a good deal on it, have the right lenses (no EF-S crap, the most important part) and/or shoot outdoors/well lit portraits exclusively then its still totally a nice camera. EDIT: Dunno if anyone else has reported this but something seems off with this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Canon_EOS-1D_X_body.JPG scroll to the bottom and look at the exif... Seamonster fucked around with this message at 18:42 on Aug 8, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
For the price, absolutely yes. Outdoor shooters might like the 100mm f/2 better though.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2013 14:31
|
|
|
Dual ISO prototyped on 5D2 and 6D: http://blog.planet5d.com/2013/08/magic-lantern-cracks-dual-iso-on-5d2-and-6d-for-14-stops-of-dynamic-range/
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2013 21:20
|
|
|
Where are you getting such a high price for the 70-200? I thought they were about $1000 used including all original accessories, box, etc...
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 15:19 |
|
|
Where's the ART 50mm 1.4, yo? Why isn't there an autofocusing 50mm that doesn't have a weak point? Canon's 1.4 is fragile and awful wide open. The 1.2 is expensive. The 1.8 is built to break and sounds like a (small) can of wasps. Sigma's current 50mm is bokehlicious but not very good frame edge sharpness and spotty AF, also larger than it really needs to be for what it is. How many years have human beings been making 50mm lenses? Why haven't they gotten it right yet?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2013 15:43
|
|