|
Can I be the one to ask the obvious question here? Why not simply go with a 5Dmk3? I mean this in the least abrasive way possible; Just very curious 
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:05 |
|
|
Martytoof posted:Can I be the one to ask the obvious question here? Why not simply go with a 5Dmk3? I mean this in the least abrasive way possible; Just very curious That's a good question, and it's really the decision I'm trying to make. The thing pulling me toward nikon is the sort of stagnant sensor design from canon. Three more EV of dynamic range on any of the nikon options is pretty appealing. I think the 70D reviews rolling out now show a lack of progress on the canon front. Another advantage for me of the d800 is that I could shoot in crop mode when I do studio-stacking extreme macro, where the microscope objectives don't fully cover a full frame sensor. The higher pixel count in the center of the frame in DX mode would let me keep my current macro workflow. And to head off the inevitable criticism, I am an engineer / nerd / hobbyist, and I enjoy the technical aspects of photography (the craft as much as the art). The birds thing is just one aspect of photography I enjoy and probably wouldn't be the deciding factor in anything. Also I could put the difference between a 5diii and a d800 toward some nice glass. That's sort of what kills me. The d800 is a good camera, has better dynamic range, and is $700 cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 22:35
|
|
|
All very good points, thank you
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2013 22:53
|
|
|
The other thing to think about with moving to full frame -- whether a Nikon or Canon -- is that you're going to lose 1.6x your reach. So to replace that 100-400, you'd need to look at an equivalent of 160-640 to get the same reach on a full frame camera. That said, Nikon has two 80-400s out -- one is the screw-drive AF and the other is their AF-S version. The AF-S is quicker than the AF, but I'm not sure how it'd compare to the 100-400.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 00:30
|
|
|
Graniteman posted:I'm thinking about going to a full frame nikon system from my current canon 7D. I've got a canon 100-400 f/4-5.6 lens that I really enjoy using for birds and crap like that, and I'm not really seeing anything in that ballpark for nikon mount in terms of price and performance. Can anyone recommend something in the neighborhood of 400mm with decent sharpness and autofocus speed (comparable to that 100-400 canon) for <$2,000? I read that the 80-400 AF is dog slow, but I haven't used it. Start looking at third parties, particularly Tamron's dirt-cheap (for a reason, but still) 200-400 5.6, or a Bigma for that matter. The 80-200's AF isn't hugely slow that I've noticed, especially if you're using the focus limiter, which you would be for birds anyways.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 00:39
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:Start looking at third parties, particularly Tamron's dirt-cheap (for a reason, but still) 200-400 5.6, or a Bigma for that matter. I'm definitely game for a third party option. If you have ones in mind then let me know and I'll check them out. I always rent gear before buying so I'm just looking for suggestions really.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 03:04
|
|
|
http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-150-500mm-Telephoto-Digital-Cameras/dp/B001542X64/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1377829434&sr=8-1&keywords=sigma+500mm and http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-50-500mm-4-5-6-3-Telephoto-Nikon/dp/B003A6H2Y8/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1377829434&sr=8-5&keywords=sigma+500mm are the two bigmas.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 03:26
|
|
|
I have a D800 and I'm renting a 50-500 over the weekend to test out, so let me know if there's anything in particular you'd be looking for with the combo. I've never used the longer Canon offerings so I won't be much help on comparisons though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 04:54
|
|
|
powderific posted:I have a D800 and I'm renting a 50-500 over the weekend to test out, so let me know if there's anything in particular you'd be looking for with the combo. I've never used the longer Canon offerings so I won't be much help on comparisons though. I'd love to hear how the autofocus performance is for something like birds in flight. And of course your impressions for image quality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 05:11
|
|
|
Any good legacy glass out there that can easily be adapted to a Fuji X-E1? Something not terribly expensive?
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 11:01
|
|
|
Elderbean posted:Any good legacy glass out there that can easily be adapted to a Fuji X-E1? Something not terribly expensive? Old Pentax glass used to be extremely cheap and easy to convert. Still is relatively cheap if you know what to look for. A lot of people recommend the Pentax 35 f3.5, 28 f2.8, and 50 f1.7
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 14:07
|
|
|
I don't anything about the Fuji X-E1, but a bit of googling around leads me to believe pretty much any old SLR glass can be adapted fairly easily. There are a few orphan mounts from back in the manual-focus days, lots of quite good glass if you're patient and know where to look. Besides Canon FD, Minolta MD, and Konica AR, each of which will have its own set of first-party well-regarded lenses (Canon L-series (still very expensive); a few Minolta Rokkor gems; Konica Hexanon), there's Contax/Yashica. Every few months I ponder picking up an old C/Y body and some lenses and just playing with it. As far as I know, nobody carried C/Y stuff forward into the autofocus era in any signicant way so they're really orphaned. But, the Zeiss name is all over C/Y from the late 70's/early 80's, and Zeiss has that crazy reputation for making ridiculously expensive but insanely good glass. I think your best bet is to search around for either a set of lenses in a particular mount - I'd hold out for something more interesting than the standard consumer 35-70/70-210 zoom kit - or one very good deal on a cool old lens (an interesting and very well regarded individual lens, something like a big bright telephoto 200mm f/2.8, or a 35/2.8, or a fisheye, or whatever strikes your fancy) and then get the adaptor for that lens mount. It's likely the best way to get a set of lenses is to buy somebody's attic clean-out at a garage sale or on Craigslist / Kijiji / Gumtree; shoot film in the old camera body, too, film is fun!
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 14:08
|
|
|
Elderbean posted:Any good legacy glass out there that can easily be adapted to a Fuji X-E1? Something not terribly expensive? Seconding the Minolta MD mount and Pentax M42 mounts - lots of decent lenses for under $100. The Vivitar Series 1 / Tokina 90mm Macro is widely regarded as one of the best portrait/macro lenses around based on IQ wide open. You can score one for $150-$400 depending on whether you want the macro extender, condition, etc. For a shorter portrait length, a lot of people talk about the 50mm Takumar or 58mm Rokkor, but the 55mm 1.8 Takumar is an amazing lens that you can get for $30. If you're looking for something fancier the Voigtlander Leica M mount lenses look great, work great, and have a very small adapter. The 15mm will run you ~$500 and is possibly one of my favorite lenses ever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2013 14:37
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Every few months I ponder picking up an old C/Y body and some lenses and just playing with it. As far as I know, nobody carried C/Y stuff forward into the autofocus era in any signicant way so they're really orphaned. But, the Zeiss name is all over C/Y from the late 70's/early 80's, and Zeiss has that crazy reputation for making ridiculously expensive but insanely good glass. I shoot C/Y. Have an Yashica FX-D which is a simple aperture priority SLR that's really solid and small. Yashica also made great glass (especially the primes, the 50mm and the 24mm - the 135 2.8 is supposed to be good also and is beautiful wide-open) and you can have them for next to nothing. You can also get zeiss lens in C/Y for reasonable prices (compared to other mounts). It's a dead system, but one i'm particularly found of. To add about the solid part: Mine has swimmed in a river, shot under torrential rain, on glaciers and bellow freezing temperatures, took several falls to the floor and is left inside my bag all the time, which I take very little care with dropping, banging against things, etc. Never ever had a problem, just dings on the corners. The yashica 50mm 1.7 feels so solid it's ridiculous. Primo Itch fucked around with this message at 03:59 on Aug 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 02:51
|
|
|
That's a hell of a positive recommendation, Primo Itch. I've been thinking about the way everything I own (not just cameras) seems to deteriorate more rapidly than for other people. My GF, possibly in a blatant attempt to make me feel better, pointed out an alternate hypothesis, that I simply own things for longer, or things that are older, than most people. In any case, I prioritize "toughness" (as in, will this thing survive being around me for longer than 5 mintues?) over many other features. An old Yashica sounds like the perfect fit for my habit of... wait, you described exactly what I do with all of my cameras. "Wait, lemme get my camera I'm gonna take a picture here" *CLUNK* "Nah, it's fine. Now smile!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 14:14
|
|
|
So I ordered a 60D for my mom for her birthday from B&H last Sunday. I got it shipped by Purolator, as I always do, and figured it would arrive Thursday or Friday this week. When it didn't show up yesterday I was starting to get worried, but their whole tracking system was down so I couldn't see where it was. This morning I discovered that apparently the driver wanted an early start to the long weekend and listed my address as incorrect/doesn't exist. I've double checked. They are sending it to the right address. So now with the long weekend taking away an extra business day they have like two days to fix this gently caress up and actually send me the stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
When I ordered my X100S a few months back the Canada Post guy flagged me as not being home literally seconds after he scanned it onto his truck. So it looked something like this:
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 19:01
|
|
|
Yeah, I loving hate that. I've had that happen a couple of times too with CP, it's really annoying. I called Purolator and the lady's going to fax the office to send my stuff again, except that because they're not going to receive the fax until after the trucks have gone out for the day, my camera's not going to get shipped until Wednesday, and my mom's birthday is on Thursday. So now there's literally no margin for error. I'm never using them again, that's for sure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 19:46
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-150-500mm-Telephoto-Digital-Cameras/dp/B001542X64/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1377829434&sr=8-1&keywords=sigma+500mm and http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-50-500mm-4-5-6-3-Telephoto-Nikon/dp/B003A6H2Y8/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1377829434&sr=8-5&keywords=sigma+500mm are the two bigmas. The reviews for both of them make them seem pretty poor compared to the canon 100-400. Anyone have any experience with them? Related story: I have previously rented a 5DIII with a tamron 24-70. This weekend I rented a 6D to try out. I really like the built in GPS. Holy crap the autofocus is so much worse than what I'm used to. For static indoor stuff or landscapes I don't notice a difference. But when I went down to the nature preserve to shoot some birds I literally could not get it to focus on any birds in flight. I have been shooting birds in flight with my 7D/100-400mm for a few years and have a pretty good sense for what is a more or less challenging shooting scenario. Even in the best possible case where a duck was making a slow inward flight toward me and I manually prefocused on the duck, as soon as I hit the AI servo focus button it would lose focus and not regain it. I expected it to be harder to get focus, but I didn't think that the camera would be incapable of picking out the duck against the sky at all. So I guess I'm learning the difference between good AF and bad...
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 21:05
|
|
|
I haven't actually had a chance to do more that futz around in my yard with the rented 50-500 bigma but I can already tell it's not for me. One, it's definitely deserving of the bigma name (but I should have expected that) and two it seems to really be in need of a focus limiter. I keep having issues where it'll hunt a little bit and then just get stuck at MFD for some reason instead of continuing to try. I may need to give adjusting the autofocus preferences in camera a bit. When it doesn't get stuck it actually seems quite good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 21:15
|
|
|
quote:telephoto for Nikon stuff It's a bit more of an investment, but I've been pretty happy with the Sigma 120-300 (the generation right before the new Sport model) - it performs decently with extenders and autofocus is pretty quick on the D800.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 23:58
|
|
|
Dpreview have a review up on the Sigma 18-35/1.8 lens. http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sigma-18-35-1-8 Direct link to lens comparison beetween Sigma 18-35 and Canon 17-55
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 20:25
|
|
|
erephus posted:Dpreview have a review up on the Sigma 18-35/1.8 lens. Looks pretty great, better than the Canon across the board if I'm reading it right. Doesn't get much softer going from f/2.8 to f/1.8 either. I don't know if the focus issue is just because f/1.8 is a really wide aperture, or if maybe it's not triggering the more accurate (cross?) AF points in the camera body, or if it's a lens issue. Worth pointing out that it should work on the dock, so if it's just a microfocus issue they could correct that. Sigma's tearing it up lately. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 20:34 on Sep 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 20:32
|
|
|
edit: stupid question, nevermind
Lamb of Gun fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Sep 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 20:45
|
|
|
My Canon 35mm f2 doesn't work anymore. The autofocus is stuck and in manual it just spins without focusing.  Does anyone have any idea how much a repair might cost?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2013 00:21
|
|
|
smallmouth posted:My Canon 35mm f2 doesn't work anymore. The autofocus is stuck and in manual it just spins without focusing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2013 00:27
|
|
|
smallmouth posted:My Canon 35mm f2 doesn't work anymore. The autofocus is stuck and in manual it just spins without focusing. Canon's repair website will give you a base estimate and will contact you if repair costs exceed the base estimate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2013 01:22
|
|
|
Hrm, at those price I might just get a pancake 40mm. Thanks for the suggestions, everyone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2013 15:26
|
|
|
Crosspost from the SH/SD thread about monitors, but I thought someone might find this helpful. I was looking for a new monitor and spent a long time doing a lot of research and talking to printers/artists and here's my result. I'm an artist and do huge prints of photos that are displayed in nice galleries and cost a lot of money so things need to be Done Right. I was replacing an Apple Cinema Display. I looked a lot at monitors that displayed all of Adobe RGB and were still CCFL backlit and buying calibration equipment that was four figures and a FireGL card so I had a continuous 10-bit pipeline blah blah blah What it came down to was no matter how perfectly accurate the color on my monitor was, when adding in the variables of paper and ink combinations, lighting, glazing, etc., that it didn't matter. 'Convential' monitors displaying 99% or whatever of sRGB were sufficient if the overall quality of the display was good. I will always having to tweak based upon what comes out of the printer, there will always be test prints. So I bought a Viewsonic VP2770-LED and, because it was LED backlit I needed a new colorimeter, I bought an i1Display. The two work together marvelously, and I'm very happy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2013 23:10
|
|
|
A heads-up that Newegg has CineRAID CR-H458 4-bay RAID enclosures for $170 after coupon EMCXLVX55 with a $40 mail-in rebate card (final price $130). If you're looking for extra storage these look pretty nice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
I'm considering picking up one of the Yongnuo flashes, is there a generally accepted recommended model? I'm thinking about the 560 but it's fully manual and I don't know how much of a deal the missing TTL would be. The 565 does TTL but is more expensive and has rather mixed reviews on amazon. There's also the 468 II which I assume is an older model. Which one would be a good pick for a first external flash?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
What's the closest full frame equivalent to the Sigma 8-16mm?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:What's the closest full frame equivalent to the Sigma 8-16mm? A lot of brands have a 10-20 or 12-24. Generally for a lot of dollars.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2013 22:32
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:What's the closest full frame equivalent to the Sigma 8-16mm? Nikon has a 14-24 mm f/2.8, it won't have quite as wide an angle of view as 8 mm does on an 1.5x crop but it's the closest you get without finding a copy of the mythical Nikon 13 mm prime. Canon doesn't have any zoom that goes that wide. They have a 16-35 mm f/2.8 zoom, and then a 14 mm f/2.8 prime. SoundMonkey posted:A lot of brands have a 10-20 or 12-24. Generally for a lot of dollars. Nikon's 10-24 is DX, and Canon's 10-22 is EF-S.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2013 22:32
|
|
|
nielsm posted:Nikon's 10-24 is DX, and Canon's 10-22 is EF-S. I'll be god damned, I thought at least one of those brands made a full-frame 12-24. They quite plainly don't, though. EDIT: Was probably thinking of the 14-24. SoundMonkey fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Sep 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2013 22:48
|
|
|
Sigma makes a 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG IF HSM. No idea how it really performs, but it's pretty unique in that it's a 12mm rectilinear on full frame.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2013 23:06
|
|
|
dakana posted:Sigma makes a 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG IF HSM. No idea how it really performs, but it's pretty unique in that it's a 12mm rectilinear on full frame. Yah this is the only equivalent lens, it has basically exactly the same angle of view as the 8-16 does on crop (technically even a bit wider, actually, if you are comparing on Canon, whose crop sensors are a touch smaller than Nikon's).
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 01:04
|
|
|
dakana posted:Sigma makes a 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG IF HSM. No idea how it really performs, but it's pretty unique in that it's a 12mm rectilinear on full frame. I've got it, it's a one-trick pony, but it does that trick well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
Canon has the 8-15 but it is a fisheye lens.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 01:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:05 |
|
|
dakana posted:Sigma makes a 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG IF HSM. No idea how it really performs, but it's pretty unique in that it's a 12mm rectilinear on full frame.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 07:56
|
|
