|
nielsm posted:Yes, it will, but consider that on a crop format sensor, 50 mm is rather long, and indoors areas tend to be more cramped than ourdoors. A longer lens means you have to be further away to get the same subject coverage. It'd be fine for portrait-ish things, but bigger scenes can be tricky, e.g. the family in the couch or so. 28/1.8 is the closest, but thats more than twice the cost of the 50/1.8. And it's a compromise lens even if it is one of my favorites, old design, definitely not as sharp as the newest stuff. The old 35/2 is pretty sharp, but also a good bit more expensive than the 50/1.8. the 40/2.8 is a little bit shorter than the 50, and not too expensive (and very nice wide open) but 1 1/3 stop slower.
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:39 |
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:28/1.8 is the closest, but thats more than twice the cost of the 50/1.8. And it's a compromise lens even if it is one of my favorites, old design, definitely not as sharp as the newest stuff. The old 35/2 is pretty sharp, but also a good bit more expensive than the 50/1.8. When you consider that the 50 1.8 lacks edge sharpness and vignettes like crazy at f1.8, and only starts to get good at f2.2+, the 40mm 2.8 looks much better, moreso since it's sharp as a tack and has well-controlled vignetting wide open.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
bobfather posted:When you consider that the 50 1.8 lacks edge sharpness and vignettes like crazy at f1.8, and only starts to get good at f2.2+, the 40mm 2.8 looks much better, moreso since it's sharp as a tack and has well-controlled vignetting wide open. Very true, but when faced with the choice of "no shot" vs "kinda hazy shot" , do you pick no shot? Most of these super fast primes are not so hot wide open (unless they are the brand new sigmas, or the really expensive L's) , but it's nice to have when you need it, just like the 12800 ISO that's only really suitable for 4x6's and 1200x800 screen viewing is great to have vs not have at all. But, I digress. When I have the choice I'd rather use the 40 with a flash than my 50 1.4 without 
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
The only reason I ever pull out my 50 1.8 anymore is because it's a 1.8 for the shallow dof. Then again, I already have a 17-50 2.8. I don't think getting the 50 or 40 is a bad idea for someone who is just starting out. I had nothing but my 50 for almost 2 years and I felt it made me a better photographer. I had to put more thought and effort into making a photo and I really learned the limitations of my camera.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:I think the Digic 5 cameras are topped out with the 45MB/s cards (Sandisk Extreme) as far as write speed goes. I know that my EOS M (Also Digic 5) doesn't clear buffer any faster between those and the Extreme Plus 80MB/S ones I use for my 70D (Digic 5+) Ok, I'll spend the extra money for an extreme.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
If you travel the 40 STM is great and as a crop shooter I've never felt constricted with a 50 or 40mm lens. It is a shooting preference and I decided that it wouldn't be a problem having a standard prime on a crop when I looked at the focal length I shot with my 17-55 and a good amount/majority were at 40+mm. Another nice thing about the 40mm is it really sharp wide open and the contrast this lens renders is really nice is well. I don't know how it stacks up against the 50 1.8 in the image category, but from what people have said you might have to step the 50 down to get acceptable(your judgment) results. Build quality is unquestionably better on the 40, when I played with the two lenses before deciding on a light weight prime for travel the 40 was hands down built better and worth the extra bucks for me. Here's some examples of the 40mm and canon 7d.  _MG_6742.jpg by Flying Ferris, on Flickr  _MG_6443.jpg by Flying Ferris, on Flickr  _MG_6539.jpg by Flying Ferris, on Flickr An example of how it handles a challenging light/flare situation.  _MG_6421-2.jpg by Flying Ferris, on Flickr Ferris Bueller fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Jan 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
40mm stm is vastly superior to the 50 1.8 in terms of image quality
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
^^ I won't argue that, butbobfather posted:When you consider that the 50 1.8 lacks edge sharpness and vignettes like crazy at f1.8,
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
Vignetting is always more severe on full frame sensors.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
Cracking answers. Thanks all. I need to have a little think and a play myself, by the sounds of things but what you have said has been dead useful.timrenzi574 posted:The prime would give you better lowlight no flash capability, but it's nice to learn to take flash photos that look good also. They don't have to look crappy Don't suppose anyone can point towards some reading to help me begin this journey? Cheers again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 16:26
|
|
|
Zellaby posted:Cracking answers. Thanks all. I need to have a little think and a play myself, by the sounds of things but what you have said has been dead useful. The first basic rule is "the larger the light source, the better" - so getting a flash that lets you bounce is a good start. A white ceiling or wall indoors makes a very good light source if you bounce your flash off that instead of firing it straight on at people. It's a good place to start because it doesn't require any special equipment other than the flash (and maybe if you want a little more wraparound light, an omnibounce or similar plastic diffuser cap, which is cheap) Example - this is just with a 270EX bounced off my parents ceiling on christmas, with an omnibounce. It's almost entirely lit by flash, ambient had very little to do with it.  If you go through the "lighting 101" article archive on strobist, it's good reading to learn about flash technique. Starting from very basic bounced flash like the above example, to off camera flash, to more advanced modifiers like umbrellas, softboxes, snoots, speedgrids, multiflash setups, etc. Edit: It would help if I provided the link! http://strobist.blogspot.com/ timrenzi574 fucked around with this message at 16:46 on Jan 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
I'd also recommend Direction & Quality of Light. Bouncing light off a white ceiling is certainly better than bare-flash-straight-ahead in most situations, but you can wind up with some pretty unnatural results if the bulk of your light is too close to the subject. There's a good quick read about the topic by the author HERE. Whenever possible, flash bounced behind the photographer results in a more pleasing result than lighting something in between the subject and the lens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
I've always liked Zack Arias' lighting advice, and his 1500 Question/Answer tumblr (with associated links) is a treasure trove of information: http://zarias.tumblr.com/
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
bisticles posted:I'd also recommend Direction & Quality of Light. Bouncing light off a white ceiling is certainly better than bare-flash-straight-ahead in most situations, but you can wind up with some pretty unnatural results if the bulk of your light is too close to the subject. There's a good quick read about the topic by the author HERE. Whenever possible, flash bounced behind the photographer results in a more pleasing result than lighting something in between the subject and the lens. Agreed! I just think it's a good basic technique to pick up the knack of first, and one that can be used in a lot of informal situations without much hassle (don't have to plan much for distance/flash power, easily done on camera with a smallish flash in a lot of houses, etc. )
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
I am on the market for a short focal length "fast" prime, e.g 35ish mm, F1.4, but am struggling a bit to pick one. I am currently shooting with Canons 24-105mm F4.0L, and while i love its versatility ive been frustrated many time at how slow it is, also i dont utilize it fully: Looking in Lightroom, about half of my "keepers" are on exactly 24mm or 105mm focal length, with the remaining half a steady decline from 24 to 70ish. I barely have any photos at all between 70 and 104, and a good spread of photos from 25 to 50. My photos are for the most part of bigger groups of people, or full body shots, or landscape/scenery/touristy. I am not very big on portraits/faces, i like to get a lot into each shot. I am largely in this for "documenting" my experiences, rather than creating art. I am a picky guy though, and have an OK expendable income, so i like to do my documenting with expensive hardware.  With that said, i am looking at buying 1 of these 3 lenses: Canon 24mm 1.4L Canon 35mm 1.4L Sigma 35mm 1.4 ART The 24mm seems a little bit too specific (though i would love to have it for photographing northern lights or landscape when its dark) The Canon 35mm reviews well and is quite expensive, but being First-party and L glass you know what you are getting. It will probably also be easier to sell should i discover that i dont like it. I see that it was launched in 2003, is this something that is of any concern? The Sigma 35 gets stellar reviews (for its price and for the fact that it is Sigma) i am just a bit skeptical about getting a 3rd party lens. Do we know it will continue to be compatible with future canon cameras? Does its USM-equivalent motor last as long as Canons? It also has quite a lot less warranty, only 1 year vs Canons 5 (at least where i live) If price was "no issue", (and/or if the 2 35mm's cost the same) would you get the Canon or the Sigma? I have been pondering about this for a while, but not really reached a decision yet. I was hoping someone had some different points of view or some details i havent thought about.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
I think most people are going to pick the Sigma. They've been doing incredible work lately and the 35mm is both sharper and cheaper than the 35mm L from what I've read. Future compatibility shouldn't be an issue. Sometimes it does break with new models, I had it happen with a Sigma superzoom waaaay back when the first digital rebel came out, but all you have to do is send it in for a firmware update (or use Sigma's lens dock.) Sigma and Tamron are both making really, really good lenses these days if you're in the top of their ranges, and their service is generally good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
The sigma uses the new USB dock to prevent being locked out of Canons ecosystem, I wouldn't worry about that. If you hold the new sigma, any fears regarding the build quality will disappear. The thing is metal, focuses noiselessly, and weighs like half a kilo. It's by far my favorite and most used lens at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:The sigma uses the new USB dock to prevent being locked out of Canons ecosystem, I wouldn't worry about that. If you hold the new sigma, any fears regarding the build quality will disappear. The thing is metal, focuses noiselessly, and weighs like half a kilo. can't you guys convince him to buy the canon, so they'll hurry up and release the II next week? (for 17,500$, but i heard the new IS system actually absorbs all your vibration , and then you can put it on your back later for a massage)
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
Sigma lenses on a Canon body is the way to go these days.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Sigma lenses on a Canon body is the way to go these days. Why Canon? Aren't their sensors noticeably lagging Nikon's these days?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Why Canon? Aren't their sensors noticeably lagging Nikon's these days? Yeah, but they're still "good enough" for the average person. Really whatever system you have sigma lenses are probably the way to go.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Why Canon? Aren't their sensors noticeably lagging Nikon's these days? Actually yes but I'm guessing the dude who asked was a Canon shooter. You're right though, newest Nikon DSLRs are much better for stills and I'm a Canon diehard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
On the flip side I'm a career canon hater and yet I wound up with a 5DIII because of it being the best all-round camera (IMO).
Mightaswell fucked around with this message at 00:03 on Jan 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
5DIII is the best Canon in a long time. That AF 
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
Does anybody know a place to send out Nikon stuff to get repaired (or a place near the DC metro area)? The film rewind assembly on my FM2 fell apart and is missing a pin (and also the part that opens the back fell inside). It could be an easy fix, but I've been too busy recently to dick around with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
As nice as the 3rd party lenses may get, the 1st party ones still hold their value better - although this may eventually change as Sigma releases more great lenses and increases it's reputation. In the meantime, I keep buying used Canon lenses, using them for a few years, and reselling them for the same price or more than I paid for them. It's like a really long-term, really cheap rental. I realize most people probably don't change their lens lineup that often, but it's something to think about if you are planning to upgrade down the road or try out different types of photography!
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 03:12
|
|
|
Ineptitude posted:The Canon 35mm reviews well and is quite expensive, but being First-party and L glass you know what you are getting. It will probably also be easier to sell should i discover that i dont like it. Supposedly there's a new 35L coming this year, to get it up spec vs most new 35/1.4s.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 04:13
|
|
|
IanTheM posted:Supposedly there's a new 35L coming this year, to get it up spec vs most new 35/1.4s. Not sure if I believe that - there has been a new one imminent for a quite a while. Maybe the Sigma 35 has forced their hands though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
Shmoogy posted:Not sure if I believe that - there has been a new one imminent for a quite a while. Maybe the Sigma 35 has forced their hands though. Canon was going to come out with a lot of stuff right before the earthquakes happened, but a lot of their lens plans got severely delayed. This year they're supposedly pushing it all forward.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
Chill Callahan posted:Does anybody know a place to send out Nikon stuff to get repaired (or a place near the DC metro area)? The film rewind assembly on my FM2 fell apart and is missing a pin (and also the part that opens the back fell inside). It could be an easy fix, but I've been too busy recently to dick around with it. I can recommend Pro Camera in Virgina, I've been sending them a lot of work the last few months and their pricing and turnaround time have been very good. http://www.procameraus.com/
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
The problem with Canon is they don't give a poo poo about their crop sensors. The sensors haven't really improved much since 2007. As far as the high end full frame side goes, things are great except for the big price increases. A 5d3 is a little more reasonable now, but it's been out for almost 2 years now. Their modern L lenses (created within the last few years) are top of the line. For lenses like the 70-200 2.8 II, I don't think any third party lenses come close. I'm sure it's the same as with the 24-70 IS II. Now when you look at their older primes (with designs from the 80s and 90s) Sigma is kicking their rear end. Sigma is also making awesome lenses in areas that Canon hasn't bother to venture to like the 8-16, 35 1.4, 50 1.4,18-35 1.8, 300-800 etc.. Sigma also doesn't jack up their prices $500+ when they come out with a new lens unlike Canon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
Slow moving on sensor tech as they may be, I have to give kudos to canon service for still being awesome, even if you're not a CPS member. I mailed my EF-S macro last thursday because the focus ring was sticking around the 1M mark, and it's on a fedex truck back to me today.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2014 15:45
|
|
|
Haggins posted:As far as the high end full frame side goes, things are great except for the big price increases. A 5d3 is a little more reasonable now, but it's been out for almost 2 years now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
Haggins posted:The problem with Canon is they don't give a poo poo about their crop sensors. The sensors haven't really improved much since 2007. As far as the high end full frame side goes, things are great except for the big price increases. A 5d3 is a little more reasonable now, but it's been out for almost 2 years now. The 24-70 2.8 II doesn't have IS. Only one I know of that does is the Tamron. I don't think their full frame sensor tech has really advanced that much either, not in the same way that Nikon has anyway. Where they've made the biggest improvements in FF stuff is in the not-sensor areas like AF, FPS, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
I have a feeling that the 5D2 sensor would perform just as well as the 5D3 if it had the same modern Digic processors behind it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
Shows how much I've been seriously considering the jump to FF. I just want a camera that gives me excellent results past ISO 1600. I'm pretty much SOL unless I get a used 5d2 or a 6D or 5D3. i'm sure I'd be happy with a 5d3 personally. Either way, it's one of those low on the list, buy it when I can items. Now if they had something to compete with the Sony a7r for $2300 (or to a lesser extent D800 for $2800), I would probably find a way to get money to buy it as soon as I could. I'm still holding out hope Canon will do something to wow me, but if they don't catch up by next generation of cameras, I'm going to have to abandon ship. Maybe they should just buy Sony sensors too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
Sony's FF sensors are amazing, but the new crop of crop cameras from Nikon actually use Toshiba sensors.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2014 20:11
|
|
|
I just assumed it was the same since Nikon at one point bought sensors from Sony.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
I thought the D800/E still used a Sony sensor? Is it the 600/610 that are Toshiba-based?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:39 |
|
|
Bob Socko posted:I thought the D800/E still used a Sony sensor? Is it the 600/610 that are Toshiba-based? Those aren't crop though. powderific posted:Sony's FF sensors are amazing, but the new crop of crop cameras from Nikon actually use Toshiba sensors.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 22:49
|
|