|
DGK2000 posted:Can I ask how much more zoom you get compared to a 18-55mm lens? I've got the kit lens that came with my Rebel T3 and I found that I just can't get some of those far away shots that I crave. Five more zoom.
|
# ? Apr 13, 2013 17:48 |
|
|
# ? May 15, 2024 03:45 |
|
DGK2000 posted:Can I ask how much more zoom you get compared to a 18-55mm lens? I've got the kit lens that came with my Rebel T3 and I found that I just can't get some of those far away shots that I crave. You get a lot. Here's a handy tool to give you an idea of how much it really is. http://tamron-usa.com/lenses/learning_center/tools/focal-length-comparison.php
|
# ? Apr 13, 2013 18:11 |
|
|
# ? Apr 13, 2013 18:38 |
|
Mr. Despair posted:You get a lot. Here's a handy tool to give you an idea of how much it really is. That was an incredibly helpful tool, thank you. That also gave me an idea of how little difference there is between a 250mm and 300mm.
|
# ? Apr 13, 2013 19:36 |
|
Ugh, my battery wasn't charging for my Nikon and I popped into the local camera shop so I could see if it was the charger or the battery. $75 dollars later and now I have a brand new 3 ounce piece of plastic to charge my battery.
|
# ? Apr 13, 2013 22:30 |
|
One of my mothers-in-law has a Canon T1i with the 18-55mm and 55-250mm kit lenses. She keeps it on Auto and only considers the 55-250 a REAL zoom lens. She's adorable. I was playing with her camera tonight, and while it has the exact same buttons and layout and feel as my Xsi, the menu is so much more polished and the ISO performance blows mine out of the water. Then I was talking to another friend with the same set of lenses and a T3i going on about how people are giving him poo poo for having a bottom-of-the-line camera. I gave him some product comparisons and showed him that I can get a decent performance out of my much older/lower spec'd camera, so he should not feel in any way bad about his camera nor is it limiting his photography in any way. I say all this to say that I am extremely happy that I have an older, somewhat limited camera, because I'm already taking far better pictures with it than I was with my crap super-zoom P&S a year ago and rather better pictures than the two above-mentioned people are, so it's letting me do my tiny, tiny part in showing people even newer than me to photography that gear does not make the photo. I also feel weird being the "photo expert" for some of my friends because I understand the exposure triangle and own Lightroom. Also, MIL loaned me her 55-250mm lens to play with. So that's awesome.
|
# ? Apr 15, 2013 06:36 |
|
FISHMANPET posted:Ugh, my battery wasn't charging for my Nikon and I popped into the local camera shop so I could see if it was the charger or the battery. You do know chargers cost like $15 from GadgetInfinity, right? Or was this essential for the ~risque~ shoot.
|
# ? Apr 15, 2013 08:44 |
|
Valdara posted:One of my mothers-in-law has a Canon T1i with the 18-55mm and 55-250mm kit lenses. She keeps it on Auto and only considers the 55-250 a REAL zoom lens. She's adorable. I was playing with her camera tonight, and while it has the exact same buttons and layout and feel as my Xsi, the menu is so much more polished and the ISO performance blows mine out of the water. Then I was talking to another friend with the same set of lenses and a T3i going on about how people are giving him poo poo for having a bottom-of-the-line camera. I gave him some product comparisons and showed him that I can get a decent performance out of my much older/lower spec'd camera, so he should not feel in any way bad about his camera nor is it limiting his photography in any way. Yup, I picked up a D50 a few years back so I didn't have to pay for film anymore. I feel there are times I'm missing nice shots because of slow burst rate or low ISO, but I'm still able to produce really nice photographs. In all honesty, an 8 year old DSLR in day time taking portraits, landscape or architecture isn't much worse than a brand new one. Sports, night and indoors may be another story, but that's also largely equated out if you use a flash. In daytime, almost all cameras are equal aside from megapixels.
|
# ? Apr 15, 2013 10:45 |
|
SoundMonkey posted:You do know chargers cost like $15 from GadgetInfinity, right? I was dumb and didn't think it would cost that much so I didn't even bother to look online. I figured it would be a little more expensive but it'd be OK because I could go to a store and figure out of it was the battery or the charger. Whelp.
|
# ? Apr 15, 2013 14:21 |
|
FISHMANPET posted:I was dumb and didn't think it would cost that much so I didn't even bother to look online. I figured it would be a little more expensive but it'd be OK because I could go to a store and figure out of it was the battery or the charger. The cheapo chinese 10-bux charger would also have had a power adapter for your car. TWICE THE CHARGING OPTIONS FOR 15BUX. You got ripped off, son
|
# ? Apr 15, 2013 15:13 |
|
Valdara posted:I say all this to say that I am extremely happy that I have an older, somewhat limited camera, because I'm already taking far better pictures with it than I was with my crap super-zoom P&S a year ago and rather better pictures than the two above-mentioned people are, so it's letting me do my tiny, tiny part in showing people even newer than me to photography that gear does not make the photo. I also feel weird being the "photo expert" for some of my friends because I understand the exposure triangle and own Lightroom.
|
# ? Apr 15, 2013 16:35 |
|
FISHMANPET posted:I was dumb and didn't think it would cost that much so I didn't even bother to look online. I figured it would be a little more expensive but it'd be OK because I could go to a store and figure out of it was the battery or the charger. Does it at least say NIKON on the charger? I'd take that poo poo back, unless it's outside their return window and even then I'd try to get it done. That's a huge difference.
|
# ? Apr 15, 2013 17:18 |
|
It's a new in box Nikon MH-24 charger. I could have saved $20 getting it online, oh well, not that big of a deal.
|
# ? Apr 15, 2013 18:20 |
|
I'm looking at a Pentax K-II as my first dslr. I have some nice old manual Pentax lenses and I like the compatibility feature, along with the weather sealing. Does anyone have a K-II or have an opinion on it?
|
# ? Apr 15, 2013 20:17 |
|
Ethanfr0me posted:I'm looking at a Pentax K-II as my first dslr. I have some nice old manual Pentax lenses and I like the compatibility feature, along with the weather sealing. Does anyone have a K-II or have an opinion on it? Might wanna pole your head into the Pentax thread. Assuming it hasn't gone to archives
|
# ? Apr 15, 2013 21:04 |
|
Ethanfr0me posted:I'm looking at a Pentax K-II as my first dslr. I have some nice old manual Pentax lenses and I like the compatibility feature, along with the weather sealing. Does anyone have a K-II or have an opinion on it? You mean K-5II, right? Pentax's current flagship is the sequel to the widely-considered-excellent (I don't have one, yet, but I want one) K-5. At the moment, there are two K-5II - the normal one and the K-5IIs, which costs about $100 more and has had its anti-aliasing filter amputated; the trade-offs inherent in that difference are immaterial to most photographers in most situations, but there are reasons to go either way. A K-30 will also meet your stated wants of compatibility and weather sealing, for considerably less money. In fact, Pentax's (Ricoh's) current marketing strategy places weather sealing prominently in their advertising. My understanding is the weather sealing on pretty much all current and recently (within the last 2 years or so) discontinued DSLRs is about the same - that is, pretty drat good. Off the top of my head, I'd say you'd get good weather sealing on K-7 and K-5, but probably not on K-m, K-x, or K-r. All Pentax DSLRs are fully compatible with all* K-mount lenses, going back to the first K-series lenses from the 1970s. * There are some lenses that are marked or claimed by sellers to be K-mount but have a problem when mounted on autofocus cameras (including all Pentax DSLRs). But if it says "PENTAX" on the lens, it will fit on a Pentax DSLR. We can get into a discussion about this in the Pentax thread (of course it's not in archives! Canikoneers have such short attention spans).
|
# ? Apr 15, 2013 23:22 |
|
ExecuDork posted:* There are some lenses that are marked or claimed by sellers to be K-mount but have a problem when mounted on autofocus cameras (including all Pentax DSLRs). But if it says "PENTAX" on the lens, it will fit on a Pentax DSLR. We can get into a discussion about this in the Pentax thread (of course it's not in archives! Canikoneers have such short attention spans). The last time I posted in that thread was to bump it back to page 1 because it was literally two days from archives
|
# ? Apr 16, 2013 00:27 |
|
SoundMonkey posted:The last time I posted in that thread was to bump it back to page 1 because it was literally two days from archives Still better than any of the Olympus threads.
|
# ? Apr 16, 2013 00:31 |
|
Sup Noobs. Just posting in this thread to let yall beginners know im selling some amazing entrylevel gear for Nikon http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3125105&pagenumber=144#post414522928
|
# ? Apr 18, 2013 15:14 |
|
Valdara posted:One of my mothers-in-law has a Canon T1i with the 18-55mm and 55-250mm kit lenses. She keeps it on Auto and only considers the 55-250 a REAL zoom lens. She's adorable. I was playing with her camera tonight, and while it has the exact same buttons and layout and feel as my Xsi, the menu is so much more polished and the ISO performance blows mine out of the water. Then I was talking to another friend with the same set of lenses and a T3i going on about how people are giving him poo poo for having a bottom-of-the-line camera. I gave him some product comparisons and showed him that I can get a decent performance out of my much older/lower spec'd camera, so he should not feel in any way bad about his camera nor is it limiting his photography in any way. Some of my favorite images came from the XSi. I still miss it somedays. Having a lightweight, smaller camera is so nice in some situations.
|
# ? Apr 18, 2013 17:23 |
|
Valdara posted:Then I was talking to another friend with the same set of lenses and a T3i going on about how people are giving him poo poo for having a bottom-of-the-line camera. Is your friend associated with a bunch of pro photographers or something? Who would give someone poo poo about owning a "bottom-of-the-line camera"
|
# ? Apr 18, 2013 18:44 |
|
I just pulled the trigger on a T3i + goodies. Kinda feel horrible knowing I just spent 670 bucks butttttt I've always wanted a DSLR. Still though, moneyyyyy
|
# ? Apr 18, 2013 21:07 |
|
Shogunner posted:I just pulled the trigger on a T3i + goodies. Kinda feel horrible knowing I just spent 670 bucks butttttt I've always wanted a DSLR. Thats not even the tip of the ice on one of my lenses. Grats, welcome to the expensive hobby.
|
# ? Apr 18, 2013 21:12 |
|
Casu Marzu posted:Some of my favorite images came from the XSi. I still miss it somedays. Having a lightweight, smaller camera is so nice in some situations. Thanks again! She's beautiful. And I haven't figured out how/bothered to change the EXIF data, so all the pictures are still credited to you. Enjoy your new, terrible portfolio!
|
# ? Apr 18, 2013 23:22 |
|
Valdara posted:Thanks again! She's beautiful. And I haven't figured out how/bothered to change the EXIF data, so all the pictures are still credited to you. There should be a tab in the options for copyright, I think it's there. But I'd keep it this way, much more hilarious. Shogunner posted:I just pulled the trigger on a T3i + goodies. Kinda feel horrible knowing I just spent 670 bucks butttttt I've always wanted a DSLR. Welcome aboard. You'll have a blast, and stay broke.
|
# ? Apr 18, 2013 23:48 |
|
sorry, dp
|
# ? Apr 18, 2013 23:48 |
|
Hey guys, Im looking at picking up my first DSLR and I would really like to support the local shop/local business, plus get some time handling a camera before I spend my money. Ive looked around a bit, and I didnt see a thread for local shops, so does anyone have any recommendations for a Goon in the Phoenix, AZ area? All I could find online was Tempe Camera and the reviews were less than stunning.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2013 01:32 |
|
Hey guys. Not sure whether to ask this in the Canon thread, the Lens one or this here noobie one, but here here goes. Basically, I want to get into photography. I'm a complete beginner to the world of semi-pro photography but it interests the hell out of me so I am going to take the plunge. I think I have made up my mind on a Canon 7D as it seems to be a good all rounder that I'm not going to grow out of any time soon. It also seems to be around my price point (Although camera prices in Australia are hosed and it varies anywhere from $960 (grey import obviously) to $2200 (gently caress that)). Initially I will be using the camera for baby/dog photos and travel photos. Eventually I want to move into things like landscapes, street photography and panoramas. I'm obviously not very well versed with what makes a good lens or which lens' are suitable for which situation but I'm wondering what I should be starting with. I was all set on getting one of the fixed 50ml lenses that all the threads recommend but then the OP throws a spanner in the works with a giant asterisk about crop factors. I'll use the below as examples. Should I be considering buying any of the below bundles or should I be sourcing the lens' elsewhere individually? If so, I'm guessing I will want at least a couple of lenses, so which ones should I be starting out with. http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/category577_1.htm http://www.teds.com.au/canon-eos-7d
|
# ? Apr 28, 2013 14:08 |
|
xcore posted:stuff about getting a 7d I took a look at those links of yours, and I'm just going to leave price out of it as I can't really make sense of those prices ($500 for the 18-55 IS kit lens?). That being said, teds.com actually carries a bundle that I was going to recommend separately. That would be getting the 7D body along with the EFS 15-85 IS USM and a 50mm prime. The 15-85 is a fantastic focal range on a crop sensor (1.6x factor for the 7D) and is the sharpest EFS lens I've used. Got the shot below on a T4i with that lens at 85mm. I've also been able to capture Multnomah Falls from the base to the top at 15mm (it's about 300 ft). I used to have the EFS 10-22mm for landscapes but replaced it with this as I didn't really need the extra 5mm on the wide end. Then of course the nifty fifty, the plastic fantastic (http://www.teds.com.au/canon-ef-50mm-f1-8-ii). I'll be up front, I personally hate using this lens. I find its autofocus obnoxiously loud and slow, and the build quality is that of a Fisher Price toy. All that said, you can't argue with the results you get from it, especially for portraits. It's pretty awesome for those and the price sure is right. So: 7D body with EFS 15-85mm IS USM and 50mm 1.8 prime. You'll use the 50 for dog/kid pics, the 15-85 for everything else. All told I think that'd be like $2150 aus from teds.com. I have no idea if that's in your price range, but I can honestly say this isn't an inexpensive hobby Have fun!
|
# ? Apr 28, 2013 16:26 |
You can also just buy from B&H and make sure every order comes out to under $1k AUD if you're not too worried about warranty. That's where basically all my camera stuff came from when I was in Australia, except for my body which I bought used on ebay.
|
|
# ? Apr 29, 2013 07:17 |
I was doing some basic editing in post today and I noticed that my jpegs from when I shoot in jpeg+raw are noticeably cropped vs my raws. I wouldn't care so much but I usually just throw the jpegs to facebook since it'll mangle them anyway. Is there any way to prevent this forced cropping or should I just suck it up and do the conversions in Lightroom myself from now on? I'm assuming that the cropping is occurring in camera or while the photos are imported.
|
|
# ? May 1, 2013 06:34 |
|
hcenvirons posted:I was doing some basic editing in post today and I noticed that my jpegs from when I shoot in jpeg+raw are noticeably cropped vs my raws. I wouldn't care so much but I usually just throw the jpegs to facebook since it'll mangle them anyway. What version of Lightroom are you using?
|
# ? May 1, 2013 19:00 |
I'm using a canon t3i with Lightroom 4.4. The actual jpegs straight from the camera are cropped and missing detail on all four sides while the raws aren't missing this stuff. For instance, I took a portrait shot of a friend where the jpeg cuts off part of his chin while the raw has his shirt and shoulders visible.
|
|
# ? May 1, 2013 19:09 |
|
How much cropping are we talking about, and does the RAW show a lot of distortion? If the RAW is distorted and the crop is slight, it could be Lightroom's attempt at perspective correction.
|
# ? May 1, 2013 20:05 |
|
hcenvirons posted:I'm using a canon t3i with Lightroom 4.4. The actual jpegs straight from the camera are cropped and missing detail on all four sides while the raws aren't missing this stuff. For instance, I took a portrait shot of a friend where the jpeg cuts off part of his chin while the raw has his shirt and shoulders visible. Post examples. We aint all seeing wizards ya know. I dont think perspective correction is the problem.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 01:11 |
It's weird. It doesn't seem like it's on all of the pictures and I can't quite figure out what it is. Anyway, here's the same picture for an example. The first is a raw as viewed through lightroom and then exported into a jpeg. Face is covered just because I don't like upping photos of friends to photo sites. The second is a jpeg straight from canon's import program. On the other hand though, is the same for both. I know I used the canon 40mm for the portrait shot and I think I might have used the tammy 17-50 for the latter. However, other photos from the same day with the tammy also have this cropping going on.
|
|
# ? May 2, 2013 05:27 |
|
hcenvirons posted:It's weird. It doesn't seem like it's on all of the pictures and I can't quite figure out what it is. You had the 16:9 aspect ratio selected. The aspect ratio you select in the menu applies to JPEGs, not just video. RTFM
|
# ? May 2, 2013 05:46 |
MrBlandAverage posted:You had the 16:9 aspect ratio selected. The aspect ratio you select in the menu applies to JPEGs, not just video. RTFM Except I didn't change any settings between those two shots or at all that day? The cropping just happens randomly regardless of which lens was being used as well. I get what you're saying but I'm not following why there are times that there's no cropping in the jpeg vs the raw.
|
|
# ? May 2, 2013 05:54 |
|
hcenvirons posted:Except I didn't change any settings between those two shots or at all that day? The cropping just happens randomly regardless of which lens was being used as well. I get what you're saying but I'm not following why there are times that there's no cropping in the jpeg vs the raw. If the camera is putting you in 16:9 randomly, might want to ask Canon why its doing that, not us.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 15:16 |
|
|
# ? May 15, 2024 03:45 |
|
hcenvirons posted:Except I didn't change any settings between those two shots or at all that day? The cropping just happens randomly regardless of which lens was being used as well. I get what you're saying but I'm not following why there are times that there's no cropping in the jpeg vs the raw. RAWs will never be cropped. Were you changing modes at all, like between green box and PASM? Green box mode has its own set of settings.
|
# ? May 2, 2013 16:45 |