|
After a lot of deliberating and research, I ended up going for the Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC for my long lens over the canon 135 f2 or version 1 of the canon 70-200 2.8 is. It seems like short of the Canon version 2 to be my best option for both versatility and IQ. I can always return it I guess. I have been really pleased with the Tamron 24-70 vc so if it is comparable then I think I should be a happy camper - it is still new enough, though, that I was having some issues finding reliable sources of impartial reviews of actually using the lens in everyday scenarios. Anyone here tried one/have one?
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 18:57 |
|
|
rio posted:After a lot of deliberating and research, I ended up going for the Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC for my long lens over the canon 135 f2 or version 1 of the canon 70-200 2.8 is. It seems like short of the Canon version 2 to be my best option for both versatility and IQ. I can always return it I guess. I have been really pleased with the Tamron 24-70 vc so if it is comparable then I think I should be a happy camper - it is still new enough, though, that I was having some issues finding reliable sources of impartial reviews of actually using the lens in everyday scenarios. Anyone here tried one/have one? I used to have this, but I was really unhappy with how spotty the autofocus was compared to the Canon 70-200mm 2.8. I returned it and got a Canon 70-200 f/4L IS. The autofocus is much quicker and much more accurate, and the loss of one stop doesn't hurt me too badly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
I got a new T5i for $520 shipped ($550 - $30 in Best Buy certs) and so far, I like it a lot. I know the general consensus about the T5i is 'meh' when comparing it to the T3i & T4i, but I have been playing along with a pair of Rebel XT bodies since they were new on the market. Of course I bought it before I remembered to check here, so is there anything specifically wrong with the T5i or is it just the "WTF Canon, a new knob does not a new model make!" factor? eta: hurr, I don't can't math. DILLIGAF fucked around with this message at 00:25 on Feb 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 00:04
|
|
|
DILLIGAF posted:I got a new T5i for $530 shipped ($550 - $30 in Best Buy certs) and so far, I like it a lot. They supposedly fixed the issue with the grip material peeling off on the T4i. Between that and the knob, it was mostly just fit and finish improvements. It wasn't enough that I felt like kicking myself over buying a T4i a month before the T5i was announced.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
Beowulfs_Ghost posted:They supposedly fixed the issue with the grip material peeling off on the T4i. Between that and the knob, it was mostly just fit and finish improvements. It wasn't enough that I felt like kicking myself over buying a T4i a month before the T5i was announced. Yeah it's not 'bad' it's just a rebadge, not a new camera that's why everyone rips on it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
T5i is nice if you've never had to experience any of the older rebels before and in fact probably makes for a nice crop sensor companion to the 6D for extra telephoto reach. Other than ergonomics and a slight build quality disadvantage, the T5i puts the final nail in the 60D's coffin in terms of features. I'd still recommend a used 60D as a first body though since any upgrade you make after that will be configured more similarly to it than any rebel. Y'know, like a real (d)SLR should be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
OK! Been talking about this in another thread, and I'm torn still. I plan on getting rid of my T4i, and upgrading so I can shoot sports photography as well as some portraits and the like. I am currently on the 70D and the 7D. My main issue with the 7D is the fact that it doesn't have a flip screen (I like to get low angled shots, gently caress the touch screen), the video capabilities aren't as good and the wifi capabilities would be really fun to mess around with (that iphone app blew me away). Problems with the 70D include the fact that the buffer is HALF of what the 7D is, the shell (even though they are both weather resistant and I am not rough at all with my camera), and the FPS. So, I come to you. Video capability is something I could USE (not need) because I am also a journalist, and have essentially everything I need to make a story. Audio booth, editing software, and the like. So, it would be nice to have something that could do that and it really impressed me with how the 70D handled video, focusing while in video mode, and the quality. Sports photography is going to be my main focus. I will be opening a small venture to try and go to local clubs, youth games and the like to get photos and get money as a side job. A hobby really, but one that I feel like I can start to make money off of, at least pocket change to help pay for the equipment I'm going to pay out for. This will include taking portraits and the occasional wedding. Those are simple enough, but won't be a focus for me as sports would be. So...I need your help. Seeing that a 70D and a 7D are ROUGHLY the same amount, I'll be selling my t4i, battery pack, extra battery, and 75-300 for around 600-650. What should I get? Or should I wait until the 7Dmkii is announced, and just focus on getting a Sigma 120-300 2.8 for the sports games in the mean time? The reason I'm sort of opposed to that has to deal with the buffer on the T4i which is loving horrible. I could also sell my Tamron 17-50 2.8 with the T4i for an extra 200 or so, but that would mean I'd have to get the kit lens, and I have no idea how the 2 compare. Help please  keep in mind also, that this is something that I can afford only one at a time with. So, if I get the body, I'll have to wait a few months to get the Sigma and vice versa. My first "official" sports shoot is on March 30th for a low league Soccer (Football) game. I've got a really nice Monopod, Manfrotto 690B, I think...Got it in Italy, so that's already taken care of. Really good Mono by the way. Doubles as a club.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
DILLIGAF posted:I got a new T5i for $520 shipped ($550 - $30 in Best Buy certs) and so far, I like it a lot. There isn't much difference between the T4i and the t5i to be honest. Spec wise, body wise, everything except the kit lens, which is not exactly WHOA!
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
Soulex posted:OK! I don't own a 7D, but I do own a 70D, and I can tell you I think it's splendid. It's what, 1fps slower? The RAW buffer is a good bit smaller, but it's still not a slouch - I can fire off 21-22 raw files in a row before it slows down, and it doesn't take long to clear the buffer and pick back up. JPEG I haven't bothered to even see how many frames it can go for - I tested it to about 70 and decided that was getting a little silly. The plastic body... eh. I'm over it - I had a 10D before which was mag, but my car is made of plastic and I trust my life to that. Canon's touch screen implementation is marvelous - it's something you think is super gimmick until you get used to it. I vote 70D. Edit: Especially since you're talking about using the articulated screen for low angle shots, the touchscreen is awesome - tap where you want focus, and it focuses and shoots. How could live view shooting be more convenient than that? timrenzi574 fucked around with this message at 06:17 on Feb 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
Soulex posted:OK! I'd go with the 7D. AF on it is blazing fast and that extra buffer/fps will help you in sports.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
Since the firmware upgrade, I've never filled my 7D's buffer. It's absurdly huge. That said, I only remember filling it up once or twice with really active bird stuff when it was still equal to the 70D. I'd go with the 70D- all things being pretty equal, go with the newer. I like the flipscreens for schnoz grease protection too. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 07:41
|
|
|
Keeping all this in mind, would you spring for the lens first or the body? Like I said, my current set up is a T4i
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 07:54
|
|
|
Soulex posted:There isn't much difference between the T4i and the t5i to be honest. Spec wise, body wise, everything except the kit lens, which is not exactly WHOA! I understood that part, and cared not at all since I was upgrading from an old 8mp, 2.8fps, no video Rebel XT. Either would have been a big change for me. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 13:33
|
|
|
I think the XXD line became pointless after the 50D/when the 7D came out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 15:39
|
|
|
One or the other, shooting with a 40D and a 60D I've never even once considering buying a 7D.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
Soulex posted:Keeping all this in mind, would you spring for the lens first or the body? Like I said, my current set up is a T4i That's a tough one, because that 120-300 is a pretty bitchin lens. Too rich for my blood, but very droolworthy 
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
Haggins posted:I think the XXD line became pointless after the 50D/when the 7D came out. I've had a 600D for years but I always regret not spending a bit more on a 60D (or a lot more on a 5D2 but anyway) My college has a bunch of 60Ds and they feel like actual cameras, the 600D is far too small for my hands and my little finger hangs off without the battery grip. Also the 60D has better native features like more ISO choices, custom WB and in built gyroscope for levelling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 18:02
|
|
|
Haggins posted:I think the XXD line became pointless after the 50D/when the 7D came out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
Never even realized we had a whole photography subforum. Any tips on shooting with the nifty 50? I bought one but the number of good shots I've take with it are few, it's always too tight. I'd use my kit 18-55 the most and am on the lookout for a good deal on a wide, zoom lens replace it. The autofocus has kinda gone a bit in it, it'll be off frequently enough that if I really want the shot I'll go manual just to make sure it doesn't gently caress it up. Rather than spend any money on it getting it fixed or cleaned, I'd just prefer to spend it on something that can go wider.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:Never even realized we had a whole photography subforum. just gonna quote myself from the buy/sell thread here: A COMPUTER GUY posted:Thirding the rec for the Tamron 17-50, especially if you get the version without Vibration Compensation since it's noticeably sharper
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:09
|
|
|
Can you go even wider again? I'm usually dragging my DSLR to places that are epic landscapes or structures, being able to capture more would be great. I've already got plenty of lenses on the tight side.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
17 is ok for that. If you want a 10-15, be prepared to spend an assload of money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:Never even realized we had a whole photography subforum. ^^^Beaten by a mile^^^ If your 50 is too tight and taking a step back isn't an option (not being smart, spaces can be tight, I know), you can get fast primes in shorter lengths, just not for $100. The Sigma 30 is popular at around $300, I think. The non-VC version of the Tamron 17-50/2.8 is sharp, fast, and relatively cheap ($250-300). It's the lens everyone recommends for good reason. I'll be nearly as fast in low light as your 50, but give you the flexibility of a zoom. OK, my question. Looking at a first telephoto (to go along with MY 17-50), I'm investigating either the Tamron VC 70-300, or spend an extra on the 70-200/4 L (non-IS). Reviews call the Tamron slow to focus, but optically good. It has more reach and is cheaper, but the 70-200 is pretty much superior in every way I've read, aside from length and price.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
Huxley posted:^^^Beaten by a mile^^^ I exchanged my Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC for a Canon 70-200/4L IS and I couldn't be happier with the swap. Go with the Canon. and then buy a Tamron 150-600 for when you need reach 
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Sigma 120-300 2.8 is going to be my next lens. gently caress the low grade poo poo I have.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:Can you go even wider again? I'm usually dragging my DSLR to places that are epic landscapes or structures, being able to capture more would be great. I've already got plenty of lenses on the tight side. Sigma 8-16
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
The Tamron 17-50/2.8 sounds real interesting and I'll take a look. Thanks guys. edit: ha, and that Sigma too
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
What are you guys' opinions on buying refurbished lenses on eBay? I'm ready to buy the Tamron 60 f2 Macro and it's $500 new on Amazon, but on eBay there's a guy selling a refurbished one with a Buy It Now price of $309. It comes in the original box with lens cap/hood, comes with a 90 day warranty and there's a picture of the box that has a factory refurbished guarantee sticker on it. The dude has 100% positive feedback with over 6,000 ratings which sounds promising. Just wondering because I've only ever bought new things on eBay before through Buy It Now, never anything refurbished. My girlfriend bought a brand new Tamron 17-50 2.8 (same one I have except without the VC) on eBay last year for like $200 less than retail price and the autofocus just broke on hers recently, but that could be completely coincidental.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
Even second hand. Optics are high precision instruments that if taken care of and not displaying various red flags of damage should shoot great for basically ever, right? I've seen ancient lenses on sale that apparently shoot well. Is there a list of things you should look for with a second hand lens?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
Of the lenses I've bought off eBay, I have not had a problem with a single one. Ymmv
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
Soulex posted:Of the lenses I've bought off eBay, I have not had a problem with a single one. Ymmv I googled around and other people were saying the same thing, so I pulled the trigger. If it ends up not being in not so good condition, I can just return it. There was a 30 day money back guaranteed on the listing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
A COMPUTER GUY posted:I exchanged my Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC for a Canon 70-200/4L IS and I couldn't be happier with the swap. Go with the Canon. 24-105 f4 IS, 70-200 f4 IS and that Tamron sniper rifle (along with a 40mm pancake and 85mm 1.8 for other dickings around) on a 5D3 would be my dream setup.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
A COMPUTER GUY posted:I used to have this, but I was really unhappy with how spotty the autofocus was compared to the Canon 70-200mm 2.8. I returned it and got a Canon 70-200 f/4L IS. The autofocus is much quicker and much more accurate, and the loss of one stop doesn't hurt me too badly. I just got the lens today and have not had a ton of time to fully test yet, but at least on my 5D I am not seeing any significant speed issues. Probably because of the already slow focus on the 5D. Accuracy seems to have no issues but after a weekend with it I will know for sure under more varied circumstances. I wonder if it varies from lens to lens. The IQ is pretty awesome - really nice look to the images, and since I would have it paired with Tamron's 24-70 2.8 VC is is nice to have a uniform look throughout my focal lengths.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
I haven't gotten a chance to shoot with my 6D yet, but I am flying out on a trip tomorrow. Since this is my first full frame I have no idea what a good upper limit ISO is on this camera. Like for example on my 50D, ISO 1600 was the "looks good" upper limit. On my Xti it was 800.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 09:14
|
|
|
Your mileage will vary of course, but I've found that upwards of 6400 is perfectly usable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 09:23
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Your mileage will vary of course, but I've found that upwards of 6400 is perfectly usable. I've successfully taken usable pictures at 12800 ISO; I think the general ISO noise/grain is more pleasant than on my old camera, it's mostly grayscale, rather than random rainbow colors. (Now that I wrote that out, I think I've posted to the same effect earlier in this thread) This photo is taken with the 24-105 f4L at 1/80 sec, f/4, ISO 8000 (click for larger size):  Only adjustments are white balance/cropping/resizing in Lightroom, no noise reduction.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 14:50
|
|
|
dorkanoid posted:I've successfully taken usable pictures at 12800 ISO; I think the general ISO noise/grain is more pleasant than on my old camera, it's mostly grayscale, rather than random rainbow colors. It all depends on lots of factors too - what purpose do you need it for, was it properly exposed, being smart about nr and sharpening , etc. I'm perfectly happy with 12800 pics from my 70d and M if I'm just making 4x6 and 5x7 prints or 1000pix wide for Facebook posts or email. If it was underexposed to begin with the noise will look much worse when you raise it. But properly exposed, you can be gentle on the nr for detail areas, very aggressive in oof areas, mask your sharpening well and it comes out looking great. It's mind blowing to me sometimes how little light you can use to get a photo nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:It all depends on lots of factors too - what purpose do you need it for, was it properly exposed, being smart about nr and sharpening , etc. I'm perfectly happy with 12800 pics from my 70d and M if I'm just making 4x6 and 5x7 prints or 1000pix wide for Facebook posts or email. If it was underexposed to begin with the noise will look much worse when you raise it. But properly exposed, you can be gentle on the nr for detail areas, very aggressive in oof areas, mask your sharpening well and it comes out looking great. It's mind blowing to me sometimes how little light you can use to get a photo nowadays. Of course, but I love that on the 6D I can keep the ISO on "auto" for 99% of the time, while on my 550D I'd be a bit annoyed if I went above 800. The problem - at least on the 550D - was that even with careful processing afterwards, you could see the rainbow-effect in the scaled down/final picture.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
dorkanoid posted:Of course, but I love that on the 6D I can keep the ISO on "auto" for 99% of the time, while on my 550D I'd be a bit annoyed if I went above 800. Weird, it's the same sensor as the M and ACR makes the chroma noise not an issue at all on those. If I had a FF I'd probably shoot at 52k no problem, I'm that guy .
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 16:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 18:57 |
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:Weird, it's the same sensor as the M and ACR makes the chroma noise not an issue at all on those. If I had a FF I'd probably shoot at 52k no problem, I'm that guy I might be too focused on pixel-peeping  Regardless, how the ISO works is one of the best things about the 6D (I can't say if the 5D3 - or even 5D2 are as good/better, I've never tried them) In some cases I think the 6Ds ISO grain adds to the picture rather than destroys it
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2014 17:57
|
|