|
Infinite Karma posted:I'm looking for a little advice. I've got a T3i with the kit 18mm-55mm, Canon 50mm F/1.8, and Canon 75mm-300mm lens (which was $9 new, or else I wouldn't have bought it). I'm more on the budget/hobby side than the prosumer side of photography, if that isn't apparent. I've been using a 28mm 1.8 as my go to for years on crop and I love it. It's not the super duper sharpest in the corners, but it's also a lot smaller and cheaper than the 35 1.4s that are available. That 20 1.8 sounds like a chainsaw when it's focusing, and has weird colors and all over softness unless you stop it down. I was not impressed, sold it forward quickly. Very different lenses though - one is moderately wide on a crop camera, and one is about the same field of view as a 50mm on full frame.
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2013 20:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 07:22 |
|
|
mrlego posted:
You lose an effective stop with a 1.4, and 2 stops with a 2, so autofocus can slow down. With an f/4 and a 1.4 you're going to f/5.6 which is still fine for any Canon body to AF within spec, so it won't be drastically reduced. The 1X bodies (and I think the 5d3 now with the firmware update) are rated for f/8 on the center point. Some teleconverters either won't report the change in effective aperture and distance, or will report it but somehow still hide themselves (kenko pro's do this) and the camera will still try to AF, but it becomes hit or miss then. Once it locks it can be decent at tracking though - my 70D and 100-400 do ok with both of the kenko pros if there is very good light. Oddly, better on the outer points than the center, and others online seem to report the same thing. Not sure how it will do on the 6d's system - since the center point is supposed to be very sensitive in garbage light, it might be ok. One thing to note, is that if you're using the kenko pros (distance/aperture reporting, but not "hey i'm a TC" reporting) on an AFMA capable body, you will have to turn off AFMA for the attached lens or it will lock the camera up. (assuming you had it on in the first place) Using the canon TC's and going over f/5.6 it will just lock out AF unless you use live view, in which case you're only going to be snapping pictures of dead animals. Edit: For comedy, try stacking 3x , 2x, 1.4x on a 400mm on crop body and try composing a picture with the .4 degree angle of view. timrenzi574 fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Dec 12, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2013 16:54
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:The crop sensor is mathematically no better than a full-frame if you're going for reach. The "extra" reach is because the sensor only captures the center 60% of the image, which is exactly the same as if you cropped that percentage of pixels from the center of a full-frame. A full-frame sensor has the same pixel density as a crop-frame, it's just a bigger area being exposed. Depends on the resolution of the sensors / pixel density Canon pixel sizes of current bodies: 18MP APS-C canon is 4.3micrometer (7d/60d/t5i/t4i/etc) 20MP APS-C canon is 4.1micrometer (70d) 20MP FF canon is 6.54micrometer (6D) 22MP FF canon is 6.25micrometer (5dm3) 18MP FF canon is 6.9micrometer (1dx) So you do get more resolution from the 18/20MP APS-C than you do by cropping the fullframe to the equivalent size, although if you're shooting above 1600 ISO the detail gains from the FF sensor not having to smush everything likely makes up for the difference.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2013 19:17
|
|
|
theloafingone posted:The 28mm 1.8 does not seem like a good lens as per this review: I've been using this lens as my go to for a decade on my 10D (and now my new 70D) - It's actually pretty nice - it's not ULTRAMEGASHARP wide open, but most SLR lenses not made in the past few years are not. (Take my 50 1.4 with it's built in soft focus effect @ 1.4 as an example  ) I have heard that sigma is excellent though.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2013 17:20
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Anywhere from 400 to never depending on your definition of "unacceptable." It's amazing to me that people who would have bought 800 speed disposable cameras 15 years ago on vacation, or paid a wedding photographer a lot of money for pictures taken on portra 800, will spend a lot of time on internet forums ranting about how 6400 ISO is just UNUSABLE on their whatever camera. If I have to take a picture at 12800, I'd rather take it and downsize it than not take it at all.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2014 04:51
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:I think it's more the fact that, unless you're shooting black and white, digital at higher ISOs looks much worse than film (or it used to anyway). With high-ISO film, you just had lots of grain but with digital you start getting weird colour issues. Like, if you bump up any of the Canon T3i/550D/60D sensors to over 6400, the colors start looking awful. Saying that, the 5D3 and newer models are all starting to look really good a super high ISO. Sure, if you need it at full size, since you can't be too agressive with the chroma noise removal if you need a 5000 pixel wide image still. But that doesn't make it useless/unusable - it makes it useless for gigantic fine art prints. It's perfectly fine for taking pictures of my kid without grabbing my flash and posting them on facebook at 1000x700. And at that point I'm feeling spoiled that I can even take a picture of my kid without a flash in that little light anyway. I guess what I'm trying to say is, the internet seems to be full of a lot more people who profess to need fine art quality out of their digital cameras than my impression of the actual amount of fine art photographers that are in the world. These are both EOS-M photos, taken in JPG , one @ 6400, and one @ 12800, with just a little run through perfectly clear, but no real effort put into them. They're not useless for what I want them to be, which is snapshots of my kid that I can post on FB and send to grandma to ooh and ahh over, and maybe put a 4x6 on my desk at work for a little while. And these were underexposed and had to be lightened so they're worse than they had to be too.   Edit: I think this one is 3200 or 2500, something else people say is unusable from this sensor  and if you don't mind smooshing detail, you can get very clean (detail not really that significant at this size, for this use, IMO, but everyone has opinions. Personally I prefer the not smooshed, but if one valued clean above all else I guess this would work. I'm sure if it was a photo of my wife, she'd prefer it since it would make her skin look 10 years younger ) Strong noise reduction  vs not (SOOC default jpg NR, just resized)  Edit again: And one more that I spent more than 30 seconds on (but still less than 5 minutes, on a JPEG mind you) to clean up a little without totally wiping out detail. I stand by my statement that this sensor is totally usable @ 6400 and 12800, for the right purpose. 
timrenzi574 fucked around with this message at 04:11 on Jan 2, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
IanTheM posted:The 70D has a new sensor, 20 MP, though I'm not sure if it's much better in low light. slightly, but not by much. the jpegs look better because it's got a newer processor, but meaningless if you shoot raw
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
BrosephofArimathea posted:After a two weeks with my new 6D, initial impressions are pretty positive. Can't you set fec to the 'set' button? I can on my 70d , and it doesn't do anything else anyway
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
BrosephofArimathea posted:Yeah - but then I lose it as a raw+jpeg/IQ, which you can't assign to anything else. It's just a dumb design decision. Ah, yeah I guess if you use that a lot it would be annoying. ETTL2s 'reliability' made fec the must for me
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
bisticles posted:Weird, this sounds like a great idea and it doesn't seem to be an option on the 5D3. Anyone know a way, or if it has been added in the latest firmware? On the 70d there's a cf that let's you customize just about every button, it has a n icon list for each one and let's you change each one. Not sure if the 5d3 is the same. Edit: it is, check page 321 of the manual timrenzi574 fucked around with this message at 03:35 on Jan 10, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
BrosephofArimathea posted:5d3 already has fed on the iso button. You have the CF menu to change the custom mappings, but on that specific model, you can't change set to fec in the custom functions though... because reasons. You can set it to a bunch of less useful functions, though. Crap, you're right I just looked at it again on my PC and not my ipad. I counted the rows wrong, the available option for SET was ISO, not FEL. FEL is available on the ISO button though like it was on my old 10D (shared with metering mode there, but on the top control row)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2014 05:09
|
|
|
GobiasIndustries posted:Probably dumb, but if I picked up an EOS-3, it would work with any EF lens I currently own right? I'm hoping to invest in a 6D soon anyway and I love shooting film, so it'd be great to pick up something that'd let me utilize my current lens setup. That would be the EOS claim to fame. Any canon lens should work just fine - no guarantees on third party reverse engineered stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
GobiasIndustries posted:Very cool. Almost all of my lenses are first-party; is there any site that I can check to see if my 3rd party stuff (namely my 70-300 Tamron) works? Not that I know of, and lenses sometimes vary depending on revision what works and doesn't on what bodies. It's relatively rare when it does happen so I wouldn't worry too much, just something to keep in mind
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
Huxley posted:Sure thing! You can get a white box (separated from kit) 18-135 STM for under four hundred. I think I paid 360 for mine
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:Does it misreport the aperture at 600mm to keep autofocus working beyond f/5.6? Only on 1 series bodies (and I think 5d3 latest firmware? ) - It doesn't seem to be tied to aperture per se in Canons firmware anyway, because the exif of my 100-400 + Kenko Pro 300 TC's report correctly as f/8 and f/11 , but it still AF's. I think it's actually reporting itself as a teleconverter + lens that makes it shut down. (The lens data just shows the 100-400 , but with 800mm f/11 when it's on the 2x)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:That sentence didn't make sense! AF stops working at and above f8 not above f5.6. I got what you were getting at. It's above f/8 on 1 series and 5d3's, above f/5.6 on all others. But as I said, I think it's actually a teleconverter reporting thing more than anything - I'm betting this will still AF on a body that is supposedly only good to 5.6
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
Ferris Bueller posted:I have always wondered about that limitation. Obviously with a little light it would be hard for the auto focus systems to function but is the fail rate so high that they just decided to switch off the autofocus to prevent that, or will it actually harm the camera some how? I ask the harm question because I have read that you can tape off contacts to force a body to attempt to autofocus above its f stop cutoff, but the camps seem pretty polar opposite in the don't so camera death insures vs the doesn't bother a thing just expect poor results. Poor success, so they disable it to prevent people bitching about it. There's no real reason I can see that it would damage anything, unless you just sat there for 20 minutes racking focus back and forth over and over again trying in vain to lock on, MAYBE it could wear out the lens parts. But, as AF systems have gotten better, it seems silly to me. I bought a 2x for my 100-400 years ago on my 10D, and it was well earned to turn it off there - it would not lock on anything even in bright sunlight. 1.4x would work ok, if it was super bright, but still a poor keeper rate. By comparison, I just decided to try the experiment again with my new 70D and the Kenko 300 Pro's , and it's night and day. The 2x will lock in one shot and servo, in my home office. Not exactly a bright sunny day. I was pretty impressed, and look forward to spring now. This all btw, is referring to viewfinder/PD autofocus anyway. Live view will always work even with small apertures, but taking a photo with live view and a long tele is like a cruel joke trying to handhold it. Tripod only there.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
flummox posted:I'm told the Mark II has somewhat better video, for reasons I don't understand well enough to say. 6d has a bit more low light capability; it's lighter and more compact than the Mark II and built just as well. You can also control the 6d via your smartphone - which is incredibly useful if you're using a tripod to do HDR or blended images. Aside from that they're both excellent. I'd go for the 6d, if only because it's newer. I thought this would be the gimmickiest feature in my 70D, but it is really really handy. And being able to grab pictures quickly and upload somewhere if you want is great if there's something you love so much you want to share it immediately.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
feigning interest posted:Don't forget that this also means that canon will be releasing an accessory EVF that should also work on the EOS-M. That's pretty cool, I guess. not unless it uses like an hdmi cable - there's no spare pins for data for an EVF on the M's hotshoe afaik.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Haggins posted:Canon Rumors says that this show is more consumer oriented and focused on P&S and low end DSLRs. I just wish someone would make an hdmi evf that was -small- , been wishing since I bought my M. All the ones on the market are 3.5" monitor ones. Way too big.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
1st AD posted:http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=736853&is=REG&A=details&Q= Ahh 3.2 was EXACTLY what I needed! I just want an EVF that isn't bigger than the M itself. Is that so much to ask for? (Apparently my expecations of a 220$ purchased on a lark camera are too high)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
megalodong posted:I think Canon have learnt from the reaction to the T5i, and won't even release such a thhahahahahahahahahahaha. What they've learned is that they can rebadge the same camera with a new mode dial and sell more of them than anybody else can
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:I just found out there's a T5 (without i) now... Thread title needs updating. Honestly though, I can see completely why Canon does it from a business perspective - like I said up above, they sell a TON of rebels, old tech or no. The T3 sells by the bucketload, and the T5 will too. When people walk into walmart wanting to buy a DSLR so they can take pictures of their kids soccer game, and they see a T3 kit for under 400$ , that's what they are going home with. <6 months after release, this T5 will be occupying that same price point on walmarts shelves, and they'll sell bucketloads of them too.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
Haggins posted:The lenses are made for crop so I'm guessing the sensor would have to crop itself or you'd get massive vignetting. If I spend the money on a high end camera I'd rather not have to rely on any work arounds. It automatically enters a crop mode I'm pretty sure. So you lose part of the sensor
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Is ~200-250 basically your budget? I ask only because for a couple hundred more you can get a used Canon 100mm f2.8 USM macro and it is one of the best lenses Canon makes. Its as sharp as any L and it doubles as an excellent telephoto portrait lens. The other macro lens that people around here recommend is the Tamron 90mm f2.8. I realize that neither of these were the ones you were asking about but I think they would be better options if you can swing it. And if on crop, the EF-S 60/2.8 is similarly fantastic, and < 400 used.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
erephus posted:I just saw what Canon did here. The secret is waiting a while before you upgrade. I shot my 10D for a decade, and the 70D is like a magical fountain of technology to me because of it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
erephus posted:I am a bit a naive. And I believe that the 60D was as much of an "meh" upgrade as well when that model was released. I get it - I looked at where Nikon is last year when I went to upgrade, and it kinda made me say drat, but I have a giant pile of canon poo poo that has been accumulating in my life since 1994, and I just don't have it in me to just start over. I figure they'll do something amazing eventually, for now I'm happy enough. Having a toddler, the AF upgrade alone made the 70D worth enough to me.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:Pfft, a real pro would also have a 200-500/2.8 in their kit to cover the long end. Nobody leaves home without their 1200/5.6 ready to rock
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 04:15
|
|
|
One Swell Foop posted:I have a T1i and I'm about to meet a guy on Saturday to buy his 7D (+ CF card) for a little over CAD$700 so I can do bird photography with more likelihood of getting birds in flight in focus and with better ISO performance and image quality. Great plan or terrible plan? Love my 100-400. I endorse this plan  
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
megalodong posted:Speaking of the 100-400L, I'm looking for a good super-tele, and I've come down to that or the tamron 150-600. The canon is only like 5 hundred more, but EX rated ones on KEH go for 8-900$ just FYI. With that said, I've never used the Tamron as it's brand new and I've had my 100-400 for a while - the reviews all show the IQ to be excellent so that isn't in question. I did own the bigma once upon a time, and it weighs about the same as the Tamron (4.3 lbs vs 3 for the canon 100-400) - that extra 1.3 lb was a big deal to me, and sealed the fate of the bigma vs the 100-400. If you're gonna be holding it up for long periods of time, it can start to make a big difference, or at least it did for me - YMMV. What's the heaviest lens you've shot with prior to now? It might be worth you going to try both of them out and see how you feel about the size difference.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
megalodong posted:Heaviest is my 24-105 at 600-700g or so. I live in New Zealand though, so places like KEH are a no-show unless I want no warranty, and I also live in a town where the chances of me actually being able to try one let alone both of them out is nearly non-existant. Jeez, Canon is ripping you guys off. That's almost 2000USD, they go for 1560USD on amazon here. I think you'll be happy with the images out of either lens, it's just the weight that makes me know I won't be trading my 100-400 in anytime soon. YMMV - obviously there's tons of people who don't mind a 4+ lb lens at all.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2014 05:45
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:I would lean toward the tammy as well. The reviews are stellar considering the price and the extra reach is invaluable. There might be some issue with af servo on some canon cameras though? There has been some grumbling on photo forums. Might be fud, might be real. If you get one of those, buy from a seller with a good return policy just in case. If you decide on the Canon 100-400, be aware that a new version is expected to be announced in the next few months. That could drive prices up as people anticipate a much more expensive replacement. I feel shame and weakness. I never minded lugging the bigma around, it was just holding it up to my face for stretches of time that I thought sucked - but I only do that once every few weeks, not daily. The extra 100mm wasn't worth it to me (plus I'm the weirdo who actually likes the pump zoom action)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
Haggins posted:Lenses like that should really be on tripods. That's exactly why I like the 100-400 so much - it's the perfect weight to handhold comfortably for decent stretches of time, and not require a tripod. Any heavier and it just starts to feel like a chore.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
mrlego posted:DPP has all the adjustments for editing, which is fine in the beginning For a casual shooter or student it's a good starting point. Yeah it's a good raw converter, the workflow is just a little wonky. I prefer ACR
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Does sharpness really matter that much when you're shooting at f/1.8? This. This is like the problem with the 28/1.8 and 50/1.4 with haze wide open in bright scenes. I don't shoot them wide open in bright light, I shoot them wide open in dark scenes, so it's not really all that relevant. I guess if you're a narrow DOF junkie, but to me, ultra narrow DOF is a sacrifice I have to make for available light, not a desired trait. I don't want ULTRA DOF where everything is in focus, but conversely I also don't want pictures where nothing but half of someones eyelashes are in focus either. As always, YMMV.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
broken boy soldier posted:Is a 5D classic a big jump up in terms of quality when compared to the 1Ds? If so, that would actually be a really good option for me. As long as the autofocus system is at or above the quality of the 60D I am working with now I'll be fine. Noise and video is really a non-issue. The biggest difference you'll have to get used to will be how little of the frame is covered by AF points in comparison to your 60D, IMO. Even if you used to shoot on a 35mm camera, use a crop DSLR for long enough exclusively, and it's really weird when you pick up a FF again.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:One more question about the 85 1.8 before I pull the trigger: Does it do macro? Max Mag is 1:7 , so nope. You can get some extension tubes though, It probably does 1:1 or close to it with a whole stack of them. None of Canon's macros are fast lenses - there's the ef-s 60/2.8 , the 100/2.8 (L and non L) , and the 180/3.5 Edit: And the 50 which isn't 1:1 without extra bits, and the MP-E which is more of a microscope lens than a macro lens
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
rio posted:I've got my 5d and I've got my Tamron 24-70 2.8 IS - I'm in love! You could pick up a used 100-400 (ex are 800-900 on keh) or the new tammy 150-600. Or if you want a seriously awesome but low cost lens, the canon 200/2.8 is a bargain for what it is. It's very close to being as sharp contrasty and awesome as the 135, a bit longer albeit a stop slower, and goes for like 600 bucks used. It's a hell of a lot more compact than any 70-200 zoom too.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
Haggins posted:Well as much as I complain about Canon, I just pulled the trigger on the 6D + 24-105 + Pro 100 Printer + 32GB SD card + Paper + some print order thing all for just $2100 after a $400 mail in rebate. Pretty killer deal. I use the 80MB/s sandisk extreme "plus" with my 70D, and it works a treat - you can shoot jpeg pretty much forever without the buffer backing up, and RAWs are 21 or so before it slows down, and it clears up fine in a few seconds. Which DIGIC is the 6d? I think 5 wont get anything out of faster than 45mb/s, and 5+ the 80mb/s
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 07:22 |
|
|
Haggins posted:B&H says DIGIC 5+. Should be golden with the extreme plus then, I don't 5+ can write fast enough to take advantage of the extreme pro , and the plus is significantly cheaper.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 20:52
|
|