|
Also don't wait patiently for your friends to realize they are in your shot and move out of the way. If they've only got P&S or kit lenses, they don't have a clue that they could be in the way. e: new page... I found a decent small bag at Best Buy for my M + zoom + 22/2. It's a Manfrotto case so probably costs more than it should (although I'm pretty sure it was < $40). I can't see the exact one online, but it's really simple, Just a zipper compartment, one padded divider, and a little velcro pocket in the lid. I'm not a huge fan of zipper openings, and I wouldn't have minded another small pocket on the outside, but it packs stuff in really efficiently and is compact to throw over your shoulder or to throw in another bag. I needed something ASAP for a trip a couple of weeks ago and this works pretty well for me. BetterLekNextTime fucked around with this message at 16:30 on Aug 2, 2013 |
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 16:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:03 |
|
|
 Oh look! A package for me! Judging by the size of the box, it must be some article of clothing I recently purchased online.  wtf Canon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2013 06:10
|
|
|
Haha, maybe they ran out of bubble mailers or something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2013 06:15
|
|
|
Or they hired a shipping manager who used to work at a computer manufacturer. Doesn't matter which one, they all do the same dumb poo poo with packaging.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2013 16:43
|
|
|
I had a refurb 100L show up in a box that was something like 1x2x3ft, it was ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2013 01:00
|
|
|
I'd like opinions on whether or not a mk3 is worth paying more than a 6D if I am selling my 7D kit to afford it. I take food/concert photography with most of my income coming from food. The idea of built-in wifi and GPS make me extremely happy as does the lighter weight but I dunno y'all...
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2013 20:29
|
|
|
Depends on how much you need that godly Mk3 AF
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2013 20:34
|
|
|
mdtyson posted:The idea of built-in wifi and GPS make me extremely happy as does the lighter weight but I dunno y'all... Those are all pluses on the 6D. What about the 5D3 do you want that the 6D doesn't offer? It sounds like from what you shoot the 6D would be just fine.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2013 21:10
|
|
|
mclifford82 posted:Those are all pluses on the 6D. What about the 5D3 do you want that the 6D doesn't offer? Is the 6D at least as good as the 7D when focusing in low light? I find that to be the worst part about the 5Dmk2, and I know it's significantly upgraded in the mk3. Concert photography is all about focusing in low light so that might be extremely important to him... Food photography could easily be done with either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
Gambl0r posted:Is the 6D at least as good as the 7D when focusing in low light? I find that to be the worst part about the 5Dmk2, and I know it's significantly upgraded in the mk3. Concert photography is all about focusing in low light so that might be extremely important to him... Food photography could easily be done with either. The center AF point in the 6D is probably the single most accurate low-light AF point in Canon's lineup. The non-center AF points suck. So if you're good with focus->recompose, you're fine.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 01:47
|
|
|
If you want really accurate low light focusing you should probably just buy a pentax k-5ii instead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:If you want really accurate low light focusing you should probably just buy a pentax k-5ii instead. The Canon Thead: Buy a Pentax.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
Canon is pretty much that Kenny Rodgers song, except none of us figured out when to fold.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 03:58
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Depends on how much you need that godly Mk3 AF This is pretty much it, along with greater durability and some semblance of "future-proofing." Also, after playing with both the 6D had less to offer as far as quickly changing settings go - the UI seems god awful whereas the mk3 is very similar to the 7D setup I'm used to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 08:04
|
|
|
I've gone through a few cameras by now, 1100D / 100D / 700D / Pentax K-50 / 60D and I'm going to settle with the Canon 60D. This being the first time using a DSLR, I really didn't know what to look for, wasn't comfortable with what I got and was second guessing myself constantly. Looking for a good enough package deal that left me enough money to upgrade the lens further down the road. I guess that all of the camera bodys, except for the 1100D, had newer technology and some more convenient photo shooting features in them compared to the 60D. What I got was the Canon 60D and two lenses, Tamron 70-300 F/4-5.6 Di VC USD and Canon EF 50 mm f/1,8 II. Perhaps I didn't get the most value for my money but I liked the whole package. I'm figuring out whether I should return the Pentax and get the money back or a Tamron AF SP 90/2,8 Di VC USD Macro 1:1 lense. I guess the sound advice would be to wait, but I don't know.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 10:02
|
|
|
Played with a 70D today at Canon's service centre/retail outlet in Osaka today. It's pretty nice.
 In short: this is what the EOS M should have had in the first place. The speed of the live view AF still needs improvement though, if you ask me, as it still falls short of the phase-array/viewfinder AF and Olympus' contrast AF. However, contrast AF (even Olympus') has unreliable subject tracking. LiquidRain fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Aug 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 11:28
|
|
|
erephus posted:I've gone through a few cameras by now, 1100D / 100D / 700D / Pentax K-50 / 60D and I'm going to settle with the Canon 60D. You should get a wider angle lens. A good choice is the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 without vc. 50mm and above may make it hard to frame some shots you may want.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 13:14
|
|
|
mdtyson posted:the 6D had less to offer as far as quickly changing settings go - the UI seems god awful whereas the mk3 is very similar to the 7D setup I'm used to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 13:50
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:The gently caress? The Canon UI's are virtually all the same. Probably talking about the physical controls. It is different with the removal of the joystick. However, going from a 40D to the 6D I don't miss it .. there isn't a single thing I dislike about the 6D.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 14:31
|
|
|
Yeah, harder to navigate without joystick but I'd probably get used to it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
Well, there's that directional button on the large dial.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
mdtyson posted:Yeah, harder to navigate without joystick but I'd probably get used to it. I use center point AF + back button focus to recompose, so I never really use the joystick anyways.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
I have been using a 400d for about 5 years, and it is well overdue for an upgrade. I mainly shoot landscapes, travel photos and people. After not taking many photos in the past 12 months I have picked up the bug again but am conflicted on upgrading. Full frame has always been really appealing but even second hand a 5d II and a few lenses will take me up to around $3000. How are the original 5D's holding up compared to the latest Canon crops? There is a guy selling one locally with only 10k shutter actuations for $500. I could get that and a 24-105 F4L separately for ~$600. The other option is sticking with the crop sensor and getting a used 60D for around the same price. The video recording would be cool but not something I would be seriously into. I already have a Sigma 17-70 which is a great little lens so wouldn't be forced to buy new glass at the same time. But... I want full frame and the sexy build quality of the 5d. Would I be missing out on video recording and the newer processing and low light capabilities or should I go with the 5+ year old workhorse?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 00:52
|
|
|
Ahh man I could now get a used 5d Mk ii with some accessories for $1100... it's only money right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 01:06
|
|
|
deaders posted:Ahh man I could now get a used 5d Mk ii with some accessories for $1100... it's only money right? If it's not rent money, go for it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 01:13
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:If it's not rent money, go for it. That's the validation I needed! Thanks anonymous internet person  No it's not rent money, I do pretty well but am getting married in a year so have some big purchases coming up in the next 6 months...
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 01:29
|
|
|
deaders posted:That's the validation I needed! Thanks anonymous internet person Gotta have a good camera for the honeymoon! There's always a way to justify camera purchases You won't regret getting the 5Dmk2!
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
deaders posted:That's the validation I needed! Thanks anonymous internet person I bought a 5d3 6 months before my wedding, and planning to buy a house this year* so don't feel bad  *if I stop buying camera gear
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 02:04
|
|
|
So if I do get this Mk ii (discussing it with seller now) is the 24-105 f4L the best value for money lens for now? I do have the nifty fifty which I can use straight away but will need to get one new lens to start with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 02:23
|
|
|
For the record, the 5d is still an excellent camera for the money. It doesn't have the ridiculous low-light capabilities of the later iterations, it doesn't do video and the AF is - shall we say - stately. But within its limits (below iso 800, stationary or slow-moving subjects) the image quality will pretty much destroy anything else your $500 can buy. Think of it as it as a very, very good film camera that never needs reloading. edit: the 24-105L with the 50 will be a very nice basic setup with a mk11. I've been using one with my new 6d and the image quality is easily on a par with my other L zooms. flummox fucked around with this message at 05:06 on Aug 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 04:39
|
|
|
flummox posted:For the record, the 5d is still an excellent camera for the money. It doesn't have the ridiculous low-light capabilities of the later iterations, it doesn't do video and the AF is - shall we say - stately. But within its limits (below iso 800, stationary or slow-moving subjects) the image quality will pretty much destroy anything else your $500 can buy. Think of it as it as a very, very good film camera that never needs reloading. As someone who owns all 3 iterations of the 5D, the 5DC is still a wonderful camera, and I don't think I'll ever sell it. The 5DC w/ the nifty 50 is my "goes literally everywhere with me" camera.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 10:39
|
|
|
deaders posted:That's the validation I needed! Thanks anonymous internet person Just make sure you have a system you like before you pop out any money eaters.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 14:07
|
|
|
I am kind of in the same boat as deaders, but I don't want full frame, and I really want an upgrade from my 350D which I bought when it was brand spanking new. I mostly shoot landscape photos, some exterior and I've been using it to take drunken photos of drunken people at parties. And it hasn't suffered any damages from it either. Now and then I also do portraits, but that's like once every leap year or so. I've been reading about 70D, since I could do with a better option to shoot film than my phone (SGSII) and my 5 year old HDV cam (some random Panasonic camera), but also want a good upgrade so that I can get better shots of the aurora borealis during Winter and genereal sky photos at night. Should I wait for the 70D to come out, or are there other alternatives for me?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 15:02
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Yeah, my lenses. It's a hassle to sell them all and buy new ones. And I've never felt the need to go full frame. Even though the Winter lasts from late October to mid April in this part of Norway. e: Also, my father is getting a 6D, so I can just use his if I want to. Datasmurf fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Aug 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 15:24
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:http://petapixel.com/2012/12/13/canon-6d-and-5dmk3-noise-comparison-for-high-iso-long-exposures/
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 15:34
|
|
|
flummox posted:For the record, the 5d is still an excellent camera for the money. It doesn't have the ridiculous low-light capabilities of the later iterations, it doesn't do video and the AF is - shall we say - stately. But within its limits (below iso 800, stationary or slow-moving subjects) the image quality will pretty much destroy anything else your $500 can buy. Let's not go too far here. The 5D is a perfectly fine camera, but it's comparatively low resolution and the sensor has relatively high noise compared to modern iterations. I picked up a NEX-5N with 18-55 and the Sigma 30/2.8 for $425 and it would blow the 5D out of the water in all of the "image quality" metrics (resolution, high ISO performance, has video output, etc) for a body costing roughly half as much. Of course it's worse in other ways (contrast-detect AF only, depth of field, menus, babby's first camera mode, etc) but there are better bangs for your buck for pure IQ. The 5D is great outside or in studio lighting where its sensor isn't too strained and there's nothing wrong with having a "bright-light" camera (that's what I have MF/LF for), but it's pretty awesome to basically never have to use flash even indoors. Just realize that you are paying a bit of a premium to buy an older camera with a larger sensor. The real problem is that Canon doesn't give a poo poo about their crop sensor lineup. They need some fast cheap primes to cover the normal length and wider end. You can deal with that by jumping to full frame or by buying some of the more expensive zooms, but overall the cost of Canon gear has just been too high for me and I got out. Simple example, everyone else has a cheap normal prime around the $200 mark (Nikon 35/1.8, Pentax 35/2.4), and the Sigma 30/2.8 is only $100, while Canon forces you to either pay $300 for a 25-year-old full frame lens or deal with a longer-than-normal focal length (40/2.8) on Canon's smaller-than-normal APS-C sensor. In the NEX system there's even a Sigma wide lens and a Sony superwide prime lens for reasonable prices, have fun paying for an ultrawide with full-frame coverage so you can crop it back to superwide (or springing for a high end wide zoom). gently caress paying first-party prices for a lovely selection. Canon's crop sensor lineup is embarrassing, most of all that stupid crippled mirrorless they farted out to check the box on that market segment while avoiding cannibalizing their other lines. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 18:55 on Aug 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
I'd agree with the above posters. The 5d is certainly a very capable camera and can still produce great images, but the low light performance of it is pretty limited. If I always had control of my lighting, it would be fine but that's not always the case and I think a lot of the recent crop bodies even do better in low light. I had a 5d for a while though and I did love it, just depends on how and what you shoot. That being said, ff was more important to me than noise reduction so it was an upgrade for me. All depends on what you want! CarrotFlowers fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Aug 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2013 21:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:03 |
|
|
Eh, my 5Dc has AF and high ISO noise no worse than my 600D. Worth it for for the overall image quality and handling improvements. As for video, the wife's Nikon j1 does a fine enough job of that for my purposes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 09:28
|
|
