|
DoctaFun posted:You could pickup a 50D, 60D, or 7D even for that budget if you are willing to go used. The 7D is looking like it might be the right choice. Still, I'm torn between it and the Olympus OM-D since something smaller would be nice to have for carrying around. But having to get new lenses sounds less than appealing. Though that Sigma 8-16mm lens looks crazy fun. Holy poo poo. jerry seinfel fucked around with this message at 08:01 on Feb 16, 2013 |
#
?
Feb 16, 2013 07:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 10:10 |
|
|
Hello! I am not a newbie but I am borderline between beginner and intermediate. I had a d50 for a few years and then it fell off a table and died and I've been using a point and shoot or my iPhone. My P&S is getting old and the lens is fuzzy and it just kinda sucks rear end in anything but direct sunlight? But it's small and very portable and that is important. With my tax return, I am looking for a new, Nice Camera. I am looking at a Fuji x100 because it's compact, gives me a lot of manual control, and on eBay it's within my (ideal) budget of $800. I played with one at a camera shop and it seems nice, complete with fun learning curve of its autofocus, and feels good in my hands. But!!! I am a fashion person type and take a lot of self-portraits for documenting outfits (my post history is mostly WAYWT thread) and the x100 has no electronic shutter release which might pose a problem? I take a lot of my self-portraits outdoors as my apartment has no bare walls for a studio space of sorts. Should I suck it up and get this camera and a cable release or could you tell me similar options? My d50 and I had a good menage with the wireless remote but it was so bulky and I want something to slip into my purse instead of carrying a spare bag or a backpack everywhere. Also, the x100 looks really pretty and although that's like not as much of a factor as everything else it is a bonus. Thanks for any help! district 12 fucked around with this message at 07:55 on Feb 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2013 07:53
|
|
|
I just got an X100 last week so hopefully some of what I researched might help you with your decision. First of all, if you are unfamiliar with it google "sticky aperture x100". To maximize avoiding this issue which will cost you hundreds for Fuji to fix if they are not in a generous mood that day (they are not obligated to do warranty work on second hand cameras) look for one with a serial of 21A or higher. Ask the eBay sellers one by one about it before bidding. Ultimately I ended up going with amazon because an awesome dude was selling his there for under 800, it was a few months old, had the original receipt was in like new condition and started with 21a (all of the good stuff). I am really pleased with the camera. It is very satisfying to use and as a guy who would always post process it is nice to have some photos come right out of the camera with a look that I like enough that I have been skipping post a lot and either going with an OOC jpeg or converting the raw in camera to jpeg. Regarding electronic release, I guess that is something you'll have to decide. Another option would be a Sony NEX 5N for under 500 bucks and get something like the Sigma 30 1.8 with it and still have cash left over. Great performance and image quality, cheapo remotes available to shoot yourself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2013 15:57
|
|
|
Thank you so much for answering my questions! I have done a lot of research about it and was familiar with the sticky aperture fiasco, but didn't know about the specific serial numbers. But I just found out a friend has one and takes self-portraits with the self timer easily enough so I think that answers that question. I don't place that high of a value on remote shutter release over image quality and low-light handling so I think once that return is in my hands I will be the new owner of an x100!
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2013 21:04
|
|
|
When I foolishly sold my Nikon D80 kit last year, I sold with it my camera body's sleeve that I think was made out of neoprene. It was for the body only- any idea who sells them now? I see a ton of ones for bodies+lenses on Amazon and B&H, but I am hoping for a recommendation to replace my sold-off one for my new D600 body. TIA.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2013 01:59
|
|
|
Lenscoat makes some body covers too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2013 11:17
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Lenscoat makes some body covers too. That was it- thank you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2013 18:28
|
|
|
DPR tested the Sigma 35/1.4 and it's stomping on the first party options. If the new 30/1.4 is just as good it should be a decent option for folks with APS-C cameras.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 17:50
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:DPR tested the Sigma 35/1.4 and it's stomping on the first party options. If the new 30/1.4 is just as good it should be a decent option for folks with APS-C cameras. quote:At Photokina 2012, Sigma announced a reorganization of its lens lineup into three categories - 'Contemporary' covering lightweight, flexible zooms, 'Sports' for larger telephoto lenses, and 'Art' for a wide range of optics aimed at serious photographers, including ultra-wideangles, macros and fast primes. 'Art' and 'Contemporary' lenses? Really guys?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
spog posted:'Art' and 'Contemporary' lenses? Really guys? I can't wait to see this on a "pro's" portfolio or ad. "I only shoot with 'Art' lenes.  "
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2013 20:42
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:I would get the 35/1.8. It's cheap and works properly and a good focal length. There really aren't a lot of APS-C primes in that focal length, there's the Sigma 30/1.4 which is OK and then you skip down to like the 14mm range and wider. Unfortunately full frame primes have to cover a lot more sensor and are usually a lot bigger, heavier, and more expensive. BANME.sh posted:Everyone here will recommend the 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX. It's really good. Platystemon posted:Get the DX lens and passthrough tubes. Manual focusing on a crop camera is unfun and setting the aperture on the lens is unfun.. If you want to, you can always manual focus anyway, and setting the aperture in aperture‐priority or manual mode is fundamentally the same as setting it on the lens. Got the 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX yesterday. Holy poo poo, it's a different world from the kit lens. It's like I've been shooting through a jar of treacle until now. Thanks for the advice guys! Now that I've caught the bug, next on my list is the tamron 70-300 
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2013 10:52
|
|
|
Recommend me what to buy! What you are looking to buy: Lenses (lensi?), strap and tripod Budget: $1-1.5k (Australian) Your photo gear you already have: Canon 7D, battery grip. What you plan on using your purchase for: Video/Photo. Snowboard/Ski parks. What you find limiting about what you have now: I don't have anything now!
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 08:42
|
|
|
quote: At Photokina 2012, Sigma announced a reorganization of its lens lineup into three categories - 'Contemporary' covering lightweight, flexible zooms, 'Sports' for larger telephoto lenses, and 'Art' for a wide range of optics aimed at serious photographers, including ultra-wideangles, macros and fast primes. Uh, that actually seems fairly accurate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 09:42
|
|
|
EvilElmo posted:Recommend me what to buy!
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 09:46
|
|
|
Bob Socko posted:Surely you have a lens or two already. Way lenses do you have? None. Just bought the body. I used to have a 50mm 1.8 and a 17-55 (or similar kit lens) on a 550D previously (a few years ago)
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 10:35
|
|
|
Well what do you want to shoot?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 11:20
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Well what do you want to shoot? Mainly snowboard park shots (rails, jumps etc). Video and photo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 11:34
|
|
|
EvilElmo posted:Mainly snowboard park shots (rails, jumps etc). Video and photo. 70-200 f4L (assuming you shoot mostly in good light) and an ultrawide of some sort (action sports people love these) tokina 11-16 2.8, sigma 8-16, there's a few options out there. I'm not too well versed on the video side of things, but i know primes are generally more desirable for that and the canon 85mm 1.8 is incredible for the price.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 16:04
|
|
|
I'd probably get a 35/2 IS, an UW zoom of your preference, and a 70-200/4 IS.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 16:28
|
|
|
Yeah, get a wider prime for video. The wider and closer you can get, the bigger the jumps and hits will look. Optionally, find a GoPro Hero3 and see how that works for you. And do not skimp on quality glass, you will be in the cold and poo poo will be bombarded by the elements.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
I've taken my 70-200 F4 IS to the hill a couple times now and it's been fantastic. The length is great, it's not so heavy that it sucks to carry around all day, and the weathersealing (with a filter) gives me peace of mind.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 21:43
|
|
|
I get mine this Saturday 
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2013 21:45
|
|
|
So this is probably a dumb question buuuut... I picked up the Tamron 70-300mm the other day based on this thread's recommendations and absolutely adore it but I've noticed my D3100's battery life took a major poo poo. Does this lens (at least compared to the kit, fixed 50 and 50-200) suck up that much more juice or is it time for a new battery?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2013 17:22
|
|
|
Recommendations for a general purpose Canon Mount walkaround lens? I have my eye on the Sigma 17-50 2.8, or Sigma 17-70 2.8-4. I'm trying to decide if the extra speed of the 17-50 will be worth the extra money and sacrifice of the extra 20mm... I can get a used 17-70 for $300, or a demo model 17-50 for $460. I mostly do automotive photography but all I have for a lens now is a 50mm 1.8 and it's very restrictive. I'd like to get something more "general purpose" that I could use, again, as a walkaround, and maybe some street photography, etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
For street you'll enjoy the touch of extra reach IMHO. Edit: vvvv both good points Maker Of Shoes fucked around with this message at 00:58 on Feb 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2013 19:09
|
|
|
Get the 17–50 because it has better optics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
I'd get the 17-50. 50-70mm isn't that much of a difference and a constant aperture is nice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 00:27
|
|
|
Maker Of Shoes posted:So this is probably a dumb question buuuut... I picked up the Tamron 70-300mm the other day based on this thread's recommendations and absolutely adore it but I've noticed my D3100's battery life took a major poo poo. Does this lens (at least compared to the kit, fixed 50 and 50-200) suck up that much more juice or is it time for a new battery? Haven't played with this lens that much but I'd assume that the increased weight and black magic VR contribute to increased battery drain.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 03:30
|
|
|
_adam posted:Recommendations for a general purpose Canon Mount walkaround lens? I have my eye on the Sigma 17-50 2.8, or Sigma 17-70 2.8-4. I'm trying to decide if the extra speed of the 17-50 will be worth the extra money and sacrifice of the extra 20mm... I can get a used 17-70 for $300, or a demo model 17-50 for $460.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 03:54
|
|
|
Maker Of Shoes posted:I picked up the Tamron 70-300mm the other day based on this thread's recommendations and absolutely adore it but I've noticed my D3100's battery life took a major poo poo. Does this lens (at least compared to the kit, fixed 50 and 50-200) suck up that much more juice or is it time for a new battery?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 15:12
|
|
|
Saint Fu posted:That 17-70 has a pretty close minimum focus distance allowing you to get 1:2.7 magnification vs 1:5 with the 17-50. If you're interested in doing a little macro, the 17-70 might be a better choice. The 17-50 is better. The extra 20mm and moderate improvement at macro are not good reasons. If you're going to shoot macro, buy a macro, or extension tubes. If you need to shoot in the 50-70 range, there are better choices. As a walk around the 17-50 is the much much better lens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 15:50
|
|
|
All very good points. Think I'll go with the 17-50... Especially since I plan on buying a 70-200 this year as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 00:19
|
|
|
Someone might be selling a tamron 17-50 in the buy sell thread.... ... Alright it's me. But regardless of where you get it from, the 17-50 was my favorite lens to have on my t2i.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 06:42
|
|
|
I'm in the market for a Vivitar Series 1 90mm 2.5 Macro Lens because it is an affordable macro option in that focal length for me. However they stopped manufacturing this lens long before the Canon EF mount came about. Am I correct in my understanding that a Canon FD or Minolta SR mount will not adapt well to a canon EF body due to the need for extra optics in the adapter? And am I also correct in assuming that an Olympia or Nikon version will convert just fine to a Canon EF mount since no optics are required? For reference it will be going on a 5D MKII. Bobx66 fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Feb 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 17:26
|
|
|
Bobx66 posted:Am I correct in my understanding that a Canon FD or Minolta SR mount will not adapt well to a canon EF body due to the need for extra optics in the adapter? And am I also correct in assuming that an Olympia or Nikon version will convert just fine to a Canon EF mount since no optics are required? FD or SR versions will work at macro distances with simple mechanical adapters, but you’ll lose infinity focus. On the bright side, you’ll get better than 1:1 magnification. Olympus and Nikon mount lenses will maintain infinity focus.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
K mount lenses will work too, BUT will need some modification to work right on a FF camera (the aperture lever can hit the mirror if you don't bend/take it off somehow).
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 17:37
|
|
|
Bobx66 posted:I'm in the market for a Vivitar Series 1 90mm 2.5 Macro Lens because it is an affordable macro option in that focal length for me. However they stopped manufacturing this lens long before the Canon EF mount came about. Try the Tamron Adaptall 90mm f/2.5 Macro. It's an awesome lens. Nice and sharp. I use it with my NEX 5N all the time. You can get Adaptall-to-EF adapters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
Thank you for the info guys!
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
HPL posted:Try the Tamron Adaptall 90mm f/2.5 Macro. It's an awesome lens. Nice and sharp. I use it with my NEX 5N all the time. You can get Adaptall-to-EF adapters. Is the 2.8 version better or worse?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 10:10 |
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:K mount lenses will work too, BUT will need some modification to work right on a FF camera (the aperture lever can hit the mirror if you don't bend/take it off somehow). What's with Canon and full frame mirrors hitting things? Or do K mount aperture levers stick out A LOT more than F mount ones, since the flange focal distance isn't that much shorter?
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2013 23:49
|
|