|
Drunk Badger posted:What's good for 58mm polarizing filters? I've seen one in action and I think it might be worth having for some outdoors pictures. I see this that comes with a case, but I have no idea what brands are the best or worst Marumi Super DHG CPL.
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 04:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 21:57 |
|
|
Anything (way) under $50?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 04:22
|
|
|
Drunk Badger posted:Anything (way) under $50? I have this Hoya, it's pretty ok. http://www.amazon.com/Hoya-SERIES-Circular-Polarizer-Filter/dp/B00006HOAQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1369970805&sr=8-1&keywords=hoya+cpl
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 04:27
|
|
|
Drunk Badger posted:Anything (way) under $50? http://www.amazon.com/Marumi-Filter...58mm+marumi+cpl Non-Super DHG, which is slightly under the Super and some of the B+W and Heliopan stuff, but still better than most of what's out there. They didn't test the Hoya Gs, no idea how they stack up, but polarizers are one of the places where you get your money's worth buying something decent, I think. http://www.lenstip.com/115.4-article-Polarizing_filters_test_Results_and_summary.html
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 06:51
|
|
|
Marumi super dhg
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 08:09
|
|
|
Any opinions on the Sony HT-CT260 soundbar?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 08:29
|
|
|
I own a Rebel XTi and while it is a decent camera, I wouldn't buy one nowadays unless it was very, very cheap or free.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 09:35
|
|
|
Drunk Badger posted:Anything (way) under $50? I use hoya hmc polarizers. Local shop sold 72mm versions for 20eur during clearance sale  I prefer polarizers with both threads so I can use my screw on hoods with them. Hoya hmc is not the best, but in my opinion decent enough if you can buy one for a low price.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 09:43
|
|
|
casa de mi padre posted:If you have the extra money a 50D wouldn't be a bad call. The XXDs feel better in the hands than a Rebel. Also there's probably some nice features. I never considered the older XXDs. The OP calls the 20D a solid camera, and body/bateries/charger sets seem to hover around $100. The 40D sets seem to go around $300, which is looks like in the OP is the next reasonable step up.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 16:06
|
|
|
Huxley posted:I never considered the older XXDs. The OP calls the 20D a solid camera, and body/bateries/charger sets seem to hover around $100. The 40D sets seem to go around $300, which is looks like in the OP is the next reasonable step up. 20D is solid but still fairly outdated at this point. Now days I would go either 40D or 50D. T2i on the Rebel side. for quick feature reference use snapsort.com
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 16:13
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Seamonster posted: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. You will need to sell about 4 of them. May be worth noting that the 70D is probably going to be announced in July. Even selling one the additional cost to buy just a 6D is $1k 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
Seamonster posted: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. Looks like between $500-600. Add $150-200 with the kit lens.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
The Android Play store lists the EOS Remote with 100K-500K downloads, and there's also an iOS version with an unknown amount of downloads. Since it works only with the 6D, seems like Canon's moving a decent amount of these. Also, anyone else got a custom camera neckstrap, just to get rid of the obnoxiously conspicuous Canon one?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 13:03
|
|
|
I have an R-strap, for the few times I actually use a strap. The strap itself is good, but the carabiner feels cheap as hell, and its locking isn't serated. E: and the company is a bunch of over-litigious bums.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 13:10
|
|
|
I also have an R-strap, but not for looks, it's just way more comfortable than having the Canon strap hanging off my neck or shoulder.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
The lil lady and I have a Canon Rebel XT (the original silver one) that has served us well for about 6 years or so. It's done a nice enough job for blogging, travel and occasional professional-ish use. Paired with the 50mm 1.8 it's a good food photography camera. But we've outgrown it. She's a recipe developer/photographer for a regional glossy mag and occasionally she gets photos in larger mags (or I get them in support of her articles.) We have a joint effort in a fancy national mag coming out shortly. I look at the pics and feel like we've pushed the ol' gal as far as we've taken her and it's just simply time for an upgrade. I also had a chance to shoot for a well-known website but the environment in which I shot paired with the limitations of my gear left me with pics that were not up to snuff. I'm debating a 6D versus a 5D mkiii since I really want to go full frame for this upgrade. The pros for our needs from what I can tell are: 6D: WiFi (would be cool to have a live link to a laptop while shooting at home or to upload directly) A little lighter (but either is going to be a big adjustment from the Rebel) cheaper (but I don't want to save a few bucks in the short term and regret in the long term so this isn't the top priority) 5D mk iii: Lack of moire issue on video 2 memory slots More autofocus options (although food ain't really moving around much) More fps (again, maybe not so critical for us since we're not talking sports here) 100% vf coverage (will we care about this?) Larger screen (although either is dramatically larger than what we're used to) headphone jack On the one hand the cost of the 6D would allow a little more lens purchasing power. On the other hand, we're probably good with our friendly 50mm 1.8 for now plus the kit lens with either camera since the 50mm is really our main guy and I don't think we need to upgrade to the 1.4, do we? The 1.8 has uncommonly good optics, as far as I understand. What do you guys think?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 19:15
|
|
|
If the Rebel XT served you well and you didn't feel like you needed more in terms of autofocus, go with the 6D and spend the surplus on glass. People coped fine with the 5D Mk2 autofocus before the Mk3, and the 6D has a more accurate and more sensitive version of it. As such, the million AF points of the 5D Mk3 would be nice to have, but whether it is worth several hundred dollars... As far as the dual slots go, it depends on how much you plan to shoot without dumping the files onto a computer. A 16GB card fits around 520 pictures on it. Also, the sensor in the 6D is supposedly based on slightly newer tech than the 5D Mk3 and 1Dx, showing slightly less noise at same exposure settings. And in regards to weight, it's not only lighter than the 5D Mk3, it's also smaller. Size is more or less the same as the 60D. --edit: Here's a comparison of the sizes, the x/xx/xxxD ones and the new SL1. http://i.imgur.com/CZvIeQJ.jpg Combat Pretzel fucked around with this message at 19:46 on Jun 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 19:41
|
|
|
If you don't give a poo poo about AF might as well get a 5d2 and spend on (used) glass instead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 19:46
|
|
|
Thanks guys. I don't know that we don't give a poo poo about AF, just that the benefit on the mkiii might be overkill. I think the additional ISO on the 6D and the wifi make it more attractive than the mkii, which isn't really cheaper than the 6D anyway. A lot of the pros for the mkiii that I listed don't really seem like things that matter to us too much, except the moire on 6D video, which is annoying.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 19:59
|
|
|
The used prices of the 5D Mk2 are one of the reasons I went with the 6D. For some reason, the used bodies go for 1400-1500€ here in Europe. For 200€ more, I got a compacter fullframe, Wifi (nice for impromptu remote shooting via EOS Remote) and a better sensor as well as better AF. And the thing is brand new, because who knows how the previous owner man-handled his/her camera. On the other hand, if you wait a little longer, the 5D Mk2 prices may drop some more, when more people deflect to the 6D for the same reasons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm for buying a new camera. The XT was a refurb back when I got it and I'd consider that, but for this kind of coin I want maximum warrantee etc... How are your experiences with the moire thing? Is it an issue?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 20:12
|
|
|
Haven't done video with it yet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 20:44
|
|
|
So assuming I go for the 6D, is the 24-105mm 4.0 it comes with worth a drat 4.0 is pretty lame but then I don't have any experience with full sensor and for all I know the extra light makes a huge difference. Is there a better all-around lens that is recommended for a body-only buyer? Or is the price break on getting the lens as a kit add on that good? It's hard to tell on Amazon if it's the same lens, but it looks like they give you an $1100 lens for a $500 upsell on the kit...) And finally, is the 1.4 that much better than the ol' 1.8 when it comes to the 50mm? That's pretty much our every day lens so for a few bucks it could be worth upgrading if image quality was that much better, especially with the $1000 savings over the 5D. corkskroo fucked around with this message at 21:30 on Jun 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 21:28
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Alternatively, get the body only and the 24-70mm/2.8 from Tamron. It's pretty good for half the price of the Canon equivalent. And it has IS, too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 22:13
|
|
|
corkskroo posted:And finally, is the 1.4 that much better than the ol' 1.8 when it comes to the 50mm? That's pretty much our every day lens so for a few bucks it could be worth upgrading if image quality was that much better, especially with the $1000 savings over the 5D. Not optically, really. It adds faster, quieter AF, better build quality, and full-time manual focus.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
corkskroo posted:So assuming I go for the 6D, is the 24-105mm 4.0 it comes with worth a drat 4.0 is pretty lame but then I don't have any experience with full sensor and for all I know the extra light makes a huge difference. Is there a better all-around lens that is recommended for a body-only buyer? Or is the price break on getting the lens as a kit add on that good? It's hard to tell on Amazon if it's the same lens, but it looks like they give you an $1100 lens for a $500 upsell on the kit...) I somewhat regret selling mine and switching to the 24-70 f/2.8L II (mostly for video reasons). Star War Sex Parrot fucked around with this message at 22:40 on Jun 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 22:23
|
|
|
corkskroo posted:Thanks guys. I don't know that we don't give a poo poo about AF, just that the benefit on the mkiii might be overkill. I think the additional ISO on the 6D and the wifi make it more attractive than the mkii, which isn't really cheaper than the 6D anyway. A lot of the pros for the mkiii that I listed don't really seem like things that matter to us too much, except the moire on 6D video, which is annoying. There's moire but it's not terrible, and it doesn't look worse than a 5Dmk2 or 7D so I think it's an okay buy unless you have the extra cash and can afford a better camera system.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 22:38
|
|
|
While 4.0 isn't a blazing fast aperture, you are going to be able to raise the ISO so much higher than you are used to doing if you get the 6d (or even the 5d). A lens with IS would be more beneficial than trying to go to something like 2.8 or lower. I'm slowly creeping up the ISO chain on my 6d...at first I was scared to go higher than 400 because of my previous rebels performance. Now 3200 is no big deal. dont hate the playa fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Jun 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 23:10
|
|
|
Claw Massage posted:While 4.0 isn't a blazing fast aperture, you are going to be able to raise the ISO so much higher than you are used to doing if you get the 6d (or even the 5d). A lens with IS would be more beneficial than trying to go to something like 2.8 or lower. I'm looking at the ISO noise tests on dpreview and it's such a huge jump from any of the current crop sensors. 12k and 25k look better than 6400 and maybe even 3200. I'll miss flippy screen now that I've gotten used to it and it'll kill my wallet but it just looks so drat smooth. I'll be able to use shutter speeds above 1/80!
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 23:21
|
|
|
While we're on the subject, would a 5D classic have better high ISO performance than a 600D? I was considering buying one as a full-frame stills camera, I don't really care that much for video. The higher ISOs on the 600D are just garbage, I was out shooting some boxing last night with a 1.4 lens and had to bump the ISO up to 3200+, it looks awful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 23:28
|
|
|
Thanks again. I definitely have ISO fear based on the Rebel but I suspect I'll get over it. As it stands anything over 400 is drat near unusable. I'll update if I pull the trigger. And since video is likely to be a much less frequent use the 6D will probably be the choice. I really like the idea of wifi onboard. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 23:38
|
|
|
Regarding your 50mm lens question, I would imagine a macro lens would be pretty useful for all of your food photos. There's a 50mm f/2.5 macro for full frame or you could consider one of the 100mm macros as well. You surely already know this but your 50mm on an XT will look like an 80mm on full frame so keep that in mind. That being said, if you have been happy with the 50/1.8, why change?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2013 00:23
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:See comments about the 24-105 f/4L in this thread within the last week. It's really one of Canon's most versatile lenses. And you should absolutely always get the 24-105 kits because it can be sold for ~$800 which is always more than the kit difference. Word, and especially with all the concerns corkskroo is having about video he should know this is probably the best lens for it. The IS, focal range, and quality own all the bones when it comes to having something quick and easy for run and gun shooting. Also get a 1.4, it's good for the soul.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2013 00:28
|
|
Cutie Pie Swag~
|
Just done some night sky photography for star trails, the Wifi remote loving owns.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2013 00:53
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Also, anyone else got a custom camera neckstrap, just to get rid of the obnoxiously conspicuous Canon one? I have a couch camera strap. They are a little longer than normal camera straps so you can sling it around your shoulder like a guitar strap instead of just around your neck. Hand made in the USA, recycled materials, vegan if you're into all that BS.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2013 02:03
|
|
|
Cute as heck posted:Also get a 1.4, it's good for the soul. But get a Sigma.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2013 02:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 21:57 |
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:While we're on the subject, would a 5D classic have better high ISO performance than a 600D? I was considering buying one as a full-frame stills camera, I don't really care that much for video. I have a 5D classic, I have no issues at all using it at 1600, noise can be noticeable at 3200 (H setting) but it is still very useable and cleans up quite well. The only thing I don't know would be how well it would focus at low light from like a boxing event. I mean I've got it to AF fine in probably lower light, but I've also had it not AF well in better light. But noise quality, I've had no issue at all with the camera at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2013 13:53
|
|
