|
So I paid $1100 for a 5d Mk ii, 3 CF cards, a spare battery, remote and cable release, nice Crumpler bag and a few other bits and pieces + shipping. Good deal, now I just have to wait for it to arrive...
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 10:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 01:19 |
|
|
So is the consensus still that the Canon 85mm f1.8mm is the best on autofocus and sharpness for the price? I'm looking at one, probably not in the L range though and just wondering which to get. May upgrade later down the track. I shot mainly portraits, and I have a 5D Mark II. I've already got a 24-105mm and a 50mm f1.2 ( both of which I usually shoot on). I did a quick search and read the op, just curious if it's still current.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 14:05
|
|
|
For the price, absolutely yes. Outdoor shooters might like the 100mm f/2 better though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 14:31
|
|
|
My 85 is probably the most perfect lens I own. Fast, quick to focus, crazy sharp and beautiful colors. Unfortunately, on a crop body, it's too long for most indoor stuff I do and too short for what I want for outdoor photography. So it sits there in my bag. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 14:35
|
|
|
the_lion posted:So is the consensus still that the Canon 85mm f1.8mm is the best on autofocus and sharpness for the price? The 85 1.8 is nice stopped down to just F/2. It's the next (and hopefully last) lens I purchase for the foreseeable future.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 15:43
|
|
|
I guess to be fair about the 5DC, had I taken this image the other night with my Mk II or III, it probably would have been stunning. As it is, it's just OK. Something like the NEX-5N would have taken a much nicer picture in this situation, most likely. That said, the fact that it's a $500 camera and a loving tank is the reason it's my every-day kickaround. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 15:53
|
|
|
Anyone know if it's a technical or product-line reason for the 5D3 'minimum shutter speed' setting for Av mode + Auto ISO topping out at 1/250th? It seems like it would be a useful thing to use, except 1/250th is still pretty slow for anything moving quickly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
Fart Car '97 posted:I guess to be fair about the 5DC, had I taken this image the other night with my Mk II or III, it probably would have been stunning. As it is, it's just OK. Something like the NEX-5N would have taken a much nicer picture in this situation, most likely. It probably would have looked about the same, honestly. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the 5D is a bad camera and you shouldn't own/use it. It's a really nice camera that is overkill for probably 99% of most people's needs. It was a good camera when it came out and it hasn't gotten any worse except in comparison to the new high-ISO sensors, which do have an edge in technical image quality and are hitting the used market at comparable-to-lower prices than the 5D. For a lot of casual shooters, the ability to shoot available-light handheld anywhere is a really valuable feature, probably moreso than a bigger sensor. Shallower depth-of-field definitely has its place and it's totally fine to prefer it for your day-to-day camera, I just don't think it's really true to say that the 5D has superior image quality to new-gen crop-bodies anymore, is all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 16:25
|
|
|
I played around with the new Sigma 30/1.4 ART on a 5D3 last night and it's a perfectly capable crop sensor lens when used full frame. Extremely minimal vignetting on the corners but the picture is so sharp and the bokeh is so smooth that you hardly even notice, especially if you plan on cropping the result anyway. At $400 cheaper than the full frame version, it's definitely a solid choice for someone with a APS-C who has reservations about upgrading to FF in the future.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 18:06
|
|
|
I've been thinking giving Sigma's track record with the new set of lenses, and the attempt of maximizing apertures, see the 18-35/1.8, and especially if the 24-70mm/2.0 rumor turns out true, them making a 50mm/1.0 would be cool.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:I've been thinking giving Sigma's track record with the new set of lenses, and the attempt of maximizing apertures, see the 18-35/1.8, and especially if the 24-70mm/2.0 rumor turns out true, them making a 50mm/1.0 would be cool. Sigma is going to release a 50mm f/0.7 to work with the 5D3 in taking cave photos
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2013 05:17
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:It probably would have looked about the same, honestly. I originally made that claim - I had been shooting with various Canon crop sensor models for years, and it wasn't until I got the 5d that I really stopped missing film. My t2i theoretically generates better numbers, and my 6d totally obliterates it on paper and in 90% of real-world situations, but there's just something about the 5d's sensor that makes uniquely pleasing images - again, within the modest limits of the camera. I have no experience with the NEX series, so I might be a bit overboard with the hyperbole toward the 5d. I love 'em anyway, but yeah, there's plenty of other great gear out there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2013 05:21
|
|
|
Dual ISO prototyped on 5D2 and 6D: http://blog.planet5d.com/2013/08/magic-lantern-cracks-dual-iso-on-5d2-and-6d-for-14-stops-of-dynamic-range/
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 21:20
|
|
|
If you read the thread it looks like they might have it working on a 50d as well. Cool stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 21:29
|
|
|
I finally popped on Magic Lantern the other day on my 7D. Seems stable enough as long as I don't play around with the focusing features. Dual ISO, zebras, and live audio levels are dreamy. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2013 03:47
|
|
|
So riddle me this: If ISO expansion in the camera hardware is done by an analog amplifier, why the hell don't camera manufacturers just amplify it up to maximum ISO, sample the voltages and store it in floating point format, then let the RAW converter scale it back down to intended ISO/exposure? The only reason the dual ISO stuff needs to be done is because the values get clipped somewhere in the process of reading out the signal.
Combat Pretzel fucked around with this message at 11:38 on Aug 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2013 11:36
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:So riddle me this: If ISO expansion in the camera hardware is done by an analog amplifier, why the hell don't camera manufacturers just amplify it up to maximum ISO, sample the voltages and store it in floating point format, then let the RAW converter scale it back down to intended ISO/exposure? The only reason the dual ISO stuff needs to be done is because the values get clipped somewhere in the process of reading out the signal. The short answer is because that's really stupid. The long answer is that the amp doesn't work as well at full iso as it does at low iso, so why would you want to run it at full iso all the time. Not to mention the issues with shooting at 3200 iso in the middle of the day (which is the sort of thing you're saying people should be doing). There are better ways of not clipping the signal, such as whatever sony/nikon are doing with their cameras.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2013 18:47
|
|
|
I'm not saying that people should shoot at ISO 3200. I'm saying that the camera hardware should amplify the signal as much as it can without screwing with accuracy and store a multiplicator in the RAW file telling any converter how to deal with the signal. Dividing a signal, taken at say an internal ISO 1600, by 16 gives you ISO 100 with a lot of dynamic range towards the shadows. Sony/Nikon are probably doing something like this. Given they seem to be two stops better than Canon, they're probably shooting at 4x the ISO, if it falls within the sensor range, and reduce the resulting signal. I doubt that their sensors are that much more magically better than what Canon has.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
I'm considering a new lens, and of course, it's hard to go wrong. the 70-200 f/2.8L (non-IS) or the 135 f/2.0L. IS isn't a selling point for me, though I wish I could afford the latest 70-200. The 135 is $989 and the 70-200 is $1299. While it is a $300 difference, its negligible in this case. I budget is 1400. I've rented both and loved both and the reason I'm leaning toward the 70-200 is versatility as the rest of my lens are primes (24L, 35L, 50L). I think it's only a matter of time before I get both and if I hadn't done a price check on the 70-200, I would have probably ordered the 135L. Also, maybe in a few months, I could sell the 70-200 and use the value towards the II version. Anyone else in a similar predicament?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 03:04
|
|
|
Where are you getting such a high price for the 70-200? I thought they were about $1000 used including all original accessories, box, etc...
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
Not everyone buys used, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 04:37
|
|
|
geeves posted:I'm considering a new lens, and of course, it's hard to go wrong. I haven't used a 135, but I did have a Sigma 150 macro for awhile. It was a great lens but, I found using a longer prime more restricting. For shorter primes (like your 24, 35, and 50, even an 85), you don't have to "zoom with your feet" too much to get the composition you want. With something longer, sometimes you want to step 20 feet back and can't do it because somethings in the way. All the Canon 70-200s are excellent and I think the 2.8 is a wise choice. A 2.8 at those focal lengths will give you a nice shallow DoF.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 15:35
|
|
|
Autumn cashback time  http://www.canon.co.uk/autumncashback/ I was hoping the 85 1.2 might pop up here, but no luck... Still, the 8-15mm would be a nice fullframe upgrade to my 4mm fisheye crop-sensor-spec lens, even if the 4mm is faster; who would ever need a 2.8 fisheye? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:04
|
|
|
Haggins posted:I haven't used a 135, but I did have a Sigma 150 macro for awhile. It was a great lens but, I found using a longer prime more restricting. For shorter primes (like your 24, 35, and 50, even an 85), you don't have to "zoom with your feet" too much to get the composition you want. With something longer, sometimes you want to step 20 feet back and can't do it because somethings in the way. Seriously, the 70-200s are all so fantastic that they kind of negate the need for long range primes. I recently did an outdoor shoot where I switched between the 70-200 f/4L and 100L and the results are pretty close across the board. Thinking of selling/trading the 100L macro, actually, to pick up something I might use more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 19:54
|
|
|
Haggins posted:I haven't used a 135, but I did have a Sigma 150 macro for awhile. It was a great lens but, I found using a longer prime more restricting. For shorter primes (like your 24, 35, and 50, even an 85), you don't have to "zoom with your feet" too much to get the composition you want. With something longer, sometimes you want to step 20 feet back and can't do it because somethings in the way. bisticles posted:Seriously, the 70-200s are all so fantastic that they kind of negate the need for long range primes. I recently did an outdoor shoot where I switched between the 70-200 f/4L and 100L and the results are pretty close across the board. Thinking of selling/trading the 100L macro, actually, to pick up something I might use more. I ordered the 70-200 this morning and it should arrive tomorrow morning. I expect to have a sore arm after this weekend.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 20:20
|
|
|
geeves posted:I expect to have a sore arm after this weekend. Just doing some 200mm curls, scoping the bokehs. Do you even DoF, bro?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
bisticles posted:Seriously, the 70-200s are all so fantastic that they kind of negate the need for long range primes. I recently did an outdoor shoot where I switched between the 70-200 f/4L and 100L and the results are pretty close across the board. Thinking of selling/trading the 100L macro, actually, to pick up something I might use more. If you do get rid of your 100 macro and still want to retain your macro abilities, I'd highly suggest picking up a close up lens if you can find one. Canon makes an excellent 77mm called the 500D Close up Lens. I'm not sure if they make a 67mm for the F/4 but the one I use is just about as good as having a real macro lens. The only thing you lose is infinity focus, which is really a small inconvenience. Maybe something like this would work? If you can find something made by another camera make that should work too. In fact, I know there are plenty of Nikon users who buy the Canon 500D to use on their lenses.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 01:57
|
|
|
Haggins posted:If you do get rid of your 100 macro and still want to retain your macro abilities, I'd highly suggest picking up a close up lens if you can find one. Canon makes an excellent 77mm called the 500D Close up Lens. I'm not sure if they make a 67mm for the F/4 but the one I use is just about as good as having a real macro lens. The only thing you lose is infinity focus, which is really a small inconvenience. You can also reverse mount a lens, get extension tubes, or get a raynox, or get a tamron 90mm, etc. Tons of options out there for macro.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
Haggins posted:If you do get rid of your 100 macro and still want to retain your macro abilities, I'd highly suggest picking up a close up lens if you can find one. Canon makes an excellent 77mm called the 500D Close up Lens. I'm not sure if they make a 67mm for the F/4 but the one I use is just about as good as having a real macro lens. The only thing you lose is infinity focus, which is really a small inconvenience. That's pretty cool, never knew such a thing existed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 02:22
|
|
|
bisticles posted:Seriously, the 70-200s are all so fantastic that they kind of negate the need for long range primes. I recently did an outdoor shoot where I switched between the 70-200 f/4L and 100L and the results are pretty close across the board. Thinking of selling/trading the 100L macro, actually, to pick up something I might use more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 03:14
|
|
|
Saint Fu posted:I'm a 135/2 fanboy and I love that it's pretty small/light/unobtrusive and the wider aperture reduces the need for IS. That and the price relative to the 70-200/2.8 IS are what make me like it at the expense of focal length flexibility. No doubt, the 135 prime is magic. There is something rewarding about setting up a shot with a focal length in mind and working your composition around that, too. Who am I kidding, I'll have my 100L forever, and I'll prolly end up with the 135 next time it shows up on the refurb page
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 05:05
|
|
|
There were rumors about Sigma making an Art series 135mm/1.8.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 15:33
|
|
|
Where's the ART 50mm 1.4, yo? Why isn't there an autofocusing 50mm that doesn't have a weak point? Canon's 1.4 is fragile and awful wide open. The 1.2 is expensive. The 1.8 is built to break and sounds like a (small) can of wasps. Sigma's current 50mm is bokehlicious but not very good frame edge sharpness and spotty AF, also larger than it really needs to be for what it is. How many years have human beings been making 50mm lenses? Why haven't they gotten it right yet?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 15:43
|
|
|
bisticles posted:No doubt, the 135 prime is magic. There is something rewarding about setting up a shot with a focal length in mind and working your composition around that, too. Elite Taco is selling one in the buy/sell thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3125105&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=157#post418249845 I got mine from the refurb store, and it's definitely my favorite lens.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 15:58
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:Where's the ART 50mm 1.4, yo?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 16:00
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:There were rumors about Sigma making an Art series 135mm/1.8. I think Canon has a patent for a 135 f/1.8 as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
geeves posted:I think Canon has a patent for a 135 f/1.8 as well. They do, but the 135 is one of their best lenses - if they do anything with it, I'd expect it to be add IS and double the price.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
I'm looking for an intervalometer and possibly a remote shutter release, preferably wireless unless there's an overwhelming reason to avoid going wireless, for my 5D2. Suggestions?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 20:21
|
|
|
More promising (albeit pretty generic) news about the 70D: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-70d/7 I just wish we had a solid release date. I've got some events coming up that I'd like to shoot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 23:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 01:19 |
|
|
SeaborneClink posted:I'm looking for an intervalometer and possibly a remote shutter release, preferably wireless unless there's an overwhelming reason to avoid going wireless, for my 5D2. Suggestions? I just got one wireless from amazon. Satechi.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2013 23:23
|
|
