|
JacobRyan posted:Yeah I bought the XT when I was fresh out of high school, with a Circuit City credit card when I was building credit so I didn't have a ridiculously high credit limit. Once I finish paying off the windows and HVAC work we had done to the house I'll probably invest in a 7D. Sell off the XT for whatever I can get it, or maybe donate it to some poor photography college student at my old college I went to for Graphic Design. Hmm.. I have a pair of XTs that I used for years (and still use) but I recently bought a t5i and I don't see any real difference. When shooting continuous, I get some trailing write lag to CF, and I get some trailing write lag to SD. I don't notice any real difference in the amount of time I am waiting, except I am shooting at 5fps vs 3, so the net win is the t5i.
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
Mathturbator posted:No it's not. SD cards cannot keep up when you are shooting RAW files at any useful FPS That's 10+ seconds of CONTINUOUS shooting. I'd go ahead and say that's a pretty edge case scenario for most users. Maybe 5 years ago I could see the benefit of CF over SD, but nowadays both the camera tech and the card tech have advanced enough that to 98% of all users can't really tell the difference.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 16:50
|
|
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:What? Define "useful" FPS? Most modern cameras with SD cards have enough of a buffer to allow for 50+ shots in burst mode before the card will start to lag. Even the 70D , which has a pretty dang fast framerate for a consumercam (slightly over 7) can buffer 20 or so RAW's before slowing down to a couple FPS.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:What? Define "useful" FPS? Most modern cameras with SD cards have enough of a buffer to allow for 50+ shots in burst mode before the card will start to lag. Consumer-grade bodies don't. For example a D5200 has buffer for 8 shots RAW, 35 shots JPEG. Canon T4i, 6 shots RAW 19 shots JPEG. Basically cameras that are likely to not have a CF slot are also likely to not have much buffer. Also imaging-resource lists the 70D at 20 shots JPEG and 14 shots RAW, not 20 RAWs. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 17:24 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but I am having a slight problem with my 5dmkII. Sometimes when viewing through the viewfinder, the image goes a little dark. One moment I am viewing everything fine, but when I try to take a photo it goes dark (not totally dark), like a little opacity is added and the lens wont respond/focus. If I move the lens (zoom) in and out, it goes away. I've experienced this maybe 3-4 times during the last 10k pictures I took. What could this be? Dirty contacts? Problems with the lens (I think it happened with 2 different ones, not sure)? I cant really replicate the problem because as I said, it happened so few times that I didn't really pay attention to it. I don't even know how to search online to read about a similar problem. I was thinking of sending the camera to Canon for repairs, but I don't know if its the lens or the camera, and I currently have 3 lenses I use, so it might get expensive to send it all to clean/check out. I've used the camera on beaches, woods, dusty roads, etc, so it might be just dirty. Is cleaning the contacts with some alcohol ok?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
Which lens? My thoughts immediately leap to a problem with the image stabilizer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
I am currently using: 5dmkII EF24-70mm f/2.8L USM EF70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM EF50mm /f1.4 USM The 24-70 is the one I use the most, and I guess it might be the one I've first noticed this problem. The 50mm one is getting some light grinding noise, and from reading online I think it might be the AF starting to fail (another problem).
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
Oh, I bet it's the mirror actuator or something in the mirror box. The darkening is when the lens stops down, normally you wouldn't see it because the mirror flips up but that's not happening. The lens not focusing is probably caused by the camera locking out the focus system while the shot is taken (since the AF sensors are in the viewfinder and won't work during a normal shot). That's my guess at least. vvv Or you could be hitting the DoF preview, yeah
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 17:49
|
|
|
El Laucha posted:Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but I am having a slight problem with my 5dmkII. Sometimes when viewing through the viewfinder, the image goes a little dark. One moment I am viewing everything fine, but when I try to take a photo it goes dark (not totally dark), like a little opacity is added and the lens wont respond/focus. If I move the lens (zoom) in and out, it goes away. I've experienced this maybe 3-4 times during the last 10k pictures I took. What could this be? Dirty contacts? Problems with the lens (I think it happened with 2 different ones, not sure)? I cant really replicate the problem because as I said, it happened so few times that I didn't really pay attention to it. Depth of field preview button, can there be something that triggers the function? Perhaps something is stuck, a sandcorn or something small enough that keeps the button half pressed. Is it connected to when setting small aperture on the camera?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Consumer-grade bodies don't. For example a D5200 has buffer for 8 shots RAW, 35 shots JPEG. Canon T4i, 6 shots RAW 19 shots JPEG. Basically cameras that are likely to not have a CF slot are also likely to not have much buffer. That's not what I get. I get 20-21 RAW's, then it slows down. JPEG I have not been able to fill the buffer - I stopped after 70+ shots because I thought it was a bit silly to keep going Edit: This is with the Sandisk Extreme Plus 80MB/s cards
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Consumer-grade bodies don't. For example a D5200 has buffer for 8 shots RAW
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
Mathturbator posted:No it's not. SD cards cannot keep up when you are shooting RAW files at any useful FPS To which cameras are you referring to?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
rcman50166 posted:To which cameras are you referring to? I don't know what they're using but I notice a huge slowdown when I'm using the SD card slot on a 1DIV shooting RAW.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 01:49
|
|
|
The only reason I ask is because if you get a fast enough card, it's hard to notice the difference. I made the switch pretty seamlessly. Then again, I've never shot a 1D.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 01:59
|
|
|
Canon's cameras are not UHS-1 yet, their SD writing interfaces top out at about 13MB/s last I checked. You can go way faster with an CF card and yes, it DOES make a difference while shooting burst with RAW. Trying to argue anything else is silly, it is a real, measurable benefit. Your Rebel's burst will last you a second or so and then dive down to about .5-.8fps shooting raw. My 7D has a 24-deep buffer (after firmware 2.0) and just like a Rebel, will be writing to the (much faster) CF card while continuing the burst. It gives me 3-4s of higher-speed burst rate, and/or the ability to fire multiple bursts. If I do manage to deplete my buffer I can still shoot 1.5-2fps. It's an actual, tangible benefit to have a faster card and a deeper buffer. Just because it doesn't matter to YOU does not mean it doesn't matter to some of US. One of the deciding factors for me for 7D vs 60D years ago was the fact that I hated my Rebel XSi's buffer as I constantly ran into it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
LiquidRain posted:Canon's cameras are not UHS-1 yet, their SD writing interfaces top out at about 13MB/s last I checked. You can go way faster with an CF card and yes, it DOES make a difference while shooting burst with RAW. Trying to argue anything else is silly, it is a real, measurable benefit. Your Rebel's burst will last you a second or so and then dive down to about .5-.8fps shooting raw. My 7D has a 24-deep buffer (after firmware 2.0) and just like a Rebel, will be writing to the (much faster) CF card while continuing the burst. It gives me 3-4s of higher-speed burst rate, and/or the ability to fire multiple bursts. If I do manage to deplete my buffer I can still shoot 1.5-2fps. The 70D sd slot is "fully exploiting" UHS-1 according to wikipedia. I know it writes way faster than anything else I've used from them with an SD slot. I was mistaken earlier about the JPEG's , sort of. It occasionally will slow down to 3.5-4fps for like a second and then start firing away at 7 again, so it has some little hiccups, but never actually stops and slows to a crawl. Raw it will drop between 17-21 in my retesting, and slow down to only a couple fps for a bit while it shuffles out the buffer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 03:39
|
|
|
At least on the 40D and 60D both had burst shutter buffers that filled at ~75 jpegs or ~14 RAW. After that it transferred whatever data was remaining to the card. Card write speed had nothing to do with the limitation on either. It only affected the clearing times. Edit: That's a 14 second burst in jpeg on the 60D. I'm not sure what you'd need more for. rcman50166 fucked around with this message at 06:56 on Mar 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 06:54
|
|
|
Wasn't aware the 70D was UHS. Thanks for the heads up. That puts it on par with CF then, with a good card. Write speeds can make a difference, as they can effectively extend your buffer. While you keep snapping, the camera is dumping files out. The faster it can, the quicker the tail end of your buffer frees up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 09:25
|
|
|
LiquidRain posted:Wasn't aware the 70D was UHS. Thanks for the heads up. That puts it on par with CF then, with a good card. Last I checked, the 6d also uses UHS-1 properly. Someone feel free to correct me if I remembered wrong though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 11:36
|
|
|
theloafingone posted:Last I checked, the 6d also uses UHS-1 properly. Someone feel free to correct me if I remembered wrong though. Meanwhile Canon gimped the 5dmiii with a crappy non UHS-1 SD card slot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Manos posted:Meanwhile Canon gimped the 5dmiii with a crappy non UHS-1 SD card slot. win some, lose some
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
I'm thinking of getting THIS BUNDLE and although a majority of my friends (who are into cameras) say it looks like a good deal ONE friend pointed out it seemed a little too good to be true. The main points of the package are the following: Canon EOS 70D 20.2 MP Dual Pixel CMOS Digital SLR Camera + EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Telephoto Zoom Lens + Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II SLR Lens It comes with a whole range of other crap but I won't list it. For $1,349.99 I read the reviews and this guy sells enough that I can trust the seller (I think) however one buyer noted it DID NOT come with a US Warranty. Can anyone tell me why a camera may not come with a warranty and whether this listing raises any particular flags?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
Jet Ready Go posted:I'm thinking of getting THIS BUNDLE and although a majority of my friends (who are into cameras) say it looks like a good deal ONE friend pointed out it seemed a little too good to be true. The camera is most likely gray market (i.e. it was bought in hong kong and sold in the US) which would make the warrenty void. The bundle looks okay, but I would say the 75-300 is not the greatest first general purpose lens to look for. The reason why a lot of camera manufacturers bundle an 18-55 of some sort is because they fit the bill for most forms of photography. You can get decent landscape shots since it goes that wide, and at 55mm, portraits look pretty good. Just make sure those lenses fit what you want out of the camera and you are fine without the warrenty.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
Jet Ready Go posted:I'm thinking of getting THIS BUNDLE and although a majority of my friends (who are into cameras) say it looks like a good deal ONE friend pointed out it seemed a little too good to be true. It's missing a kit lens - the widest thing there is the 50mm, which is a long lens on a crop sensor. Of course if you were planning to buy a Tamron 17-50 anyway, that could be a plus. The 75-300 isn't a great lens, if you were assembling the kit from scratch I'd suggest buying a Sigma 70-300 Apo DG Macro or making the leap to a 70-200 f/4. Decent-quality stuff (especially used) holds value much better than the stuff they throw in all the kit deals. New bodies tend to drop especially hard in value, good glass holds its value forever. I don't keep track of Canon's pricing any more so I can't tell you if that's good or not. I do notice they've tacked on a bunch of filters and poo poo and you may be paying a high price for some crappy UV filters and lens converters. I think overall you can probably do better putting the pieces together yourself on KEH or something, and then it would come with a warranty. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Mar 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
Is there a way to shoot with live view and a remote control on my 60D? I have a uWinKa RC-C8 remote, can't find the model online but it's got 5 buttons, S, W, T, S, 2S. edit: well I just dropped the remote and it no longer works. so... cats fucked around with this message at 21:36 on Mar 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
HolyDukeNukem posted:The camera is most likely gray market (i.e. it was bought in hong kong and sold in the US) which would make the warrenty void. The bundle looks okay, but I would say the 75-300 is not the greatest first general purpose lens to look for. The reason why a lot of camera manufacturers bundle an 18-55 of some sort is because they fit the bill for most forms of photography. You can get decent landscape shots since it goes that wide, and at 55mm, portraits look pretty good. Just make sure those lenses fit what you want out of the camera and you are fine without the warrenty. Is there a way to figure out where the camera originally came from if I have it in hand? I have a few friends scattered around in Singapore, Hong Kong and Japan that I can ship to if the camera breaks and the warranty comes from one of those places? I don't know if that's how this works.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
Not all 18-55mm lenses are created equal though; the newest STM version has noticeably less CA than the previous version, shorter MFD and internal (and faster) focusing too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
Just scored a 100L Macro from KEH for under $800. Can't wait to play with it!
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
harperdc posted:the thrifty fifty is great for the cost but it's AF is definitely a weak point. It'll hunt around in low light a LOT, and I think it'll hunt around with the aperture more wide open. It sucks, but it's a fact of living with it. Okay, I thought that's what it might be. It really is a good lens for how much it cost, in any case. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
I'm sure this has been asked before, but any recommendations for telephoto (probably zoom) on a full frame? Seems like 70-200 f/4 L non-IS is basically the bare minimum for entry. Is there anything comparable to the 55-250 for crop, or are the cheap ones mostly crap? I don't do a TON of work that the 24-105 isn't long enough for, but it'd be nice to have the longer end of the range covered.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
The tamron 70-300 VC that always gets talked about does cover FF if you want something flexible and solid for relatively cheap, especially if you buy used or witha rebate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
Shellman posted:I'm sure this has been asked before, but any recommendations for telephoto (probably zoom) on a full frame? Seems like 70-200 f/4 L non-IS is basically the bare minimum for entry. Is there anything comparable to the 55-250 for crop, or are the cheap ones mostly crap? I don't do a TON of work that the 24-105 isn't long enough for, but it'd be nice to have the longer end of the range covered. You'll more than likely want longer than 70-200 on a FF. I rented the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L this past weekend and while I really enjoyed using it (even the push-pull zoom mechanism), I wasn't at all impressed with the IQ. The range was great though. I actually might check out the one Mr. Despair brings up this weekend to see how I like it. The price is definitely right. I used the Canon 70-300mm USM on my T4i a lot and that's also a good choice I think.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
mclifford82 posted:You'll more than likely want longer than 70-200 on a FF. I rented the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L this past weekend and while I really enjoyed using it (even the push-pull zoom mechanism), I wasn't at all impressed with the IQ. The range was great though. I had heard bad things about the 100-400 being soft and sorta...sucking in dust when you zoom it if you're not careful, due to the push-pull mechanism? Not sure if that's true or not. Figured I'd be looking in the 70-300 range since 200 isn't that long, but seems like some of canon's best are those. Canon has a couple different 70-300s, I'm assuming you're talking about the regular black one, and not the DO or the L series? I had considered that, but forgotten all about Tamron--there must be a reason that goons like it so much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
Shellman posted:I had heard bad things about the 100-400 being soft and sorta...sucking in dust when you zoom it if you're not careful, due to the push-pull mechanism? Not sure if that's true or not. Figured I'd be looking in the 70-300 range since 200 isn't that long, but seems like some of canon's best are those. Canon has a couple different 70-300s, I'm assuming you're talking about the regular black one, and not the DO or the L series? I had considered that, but forgotten all about Tamron--there must be a reason that goons like it so much. dust is everywhere everywhereeeeeeeee
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 04:00
|
|
|
Shellman posted:I had heard bad things about the 100-400 being soft and sorta...sucking in dust when you zoom it if you're not careful, due to the push-pull mechanism? Not sure if that's true or not. Figured I'd be looking in the 70-300 range since 200 isn't that long, but seems like some of canon's best are those. Canon has a couple different 70-300s, I'm assuming you're talking about the regular black one, and not the DO or the L series? I had considered that, but forgotten all about Tamron--there must be a reason that goons like it so much. The 100-400 was really hit or miss with QC up until a few years ago, but just about every new copy of it is a-ok optically. This is a fine lens, and even the bad copies were just QC problems that a trip to service could fix. It's a great piece of glass, and a very very popular one for Canon, and has been for a long time. It's the accessible super-tele for enthusiasts who don't drop $$$$$ on glass. The new tamron zoom is stealing a bit of it's thunder now though. Any lens that changes length when it zooms will suck in more dust than an internal zooming lens - push pull or not. And it's really not an issue unless you're shooting in the desert or some huge slobs house constantly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
Just Announced: Canon EOS-1D W: The Professional DSLR Designed Specifically for Wildlife Photographers also announced to be in development: EF 200-600mm f/4 L W IS USM/STM Lens http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=9393
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 05:54
|
|
|
I might be a bit too cynical, but surely this is an april fools joke.. Looking at the feature list; "Animal Eye Tracking and Zone Animal Eye Tracking." "Canondrophobic" as well as the the widlife stripes?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
Please don't post dumb April fool's day jokes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:Please don't post dumb April fool's day jokes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
Trambopaline posted:I might be a bit too cynical, but surely this is an april fools joke.. It is. I particularly love the 24 FPS burst rate it gets. Totally unprecedented. Whirlwind Jones posted:Please don't post dumb April fool's day jokes. Yeah, that's a great way to make sure I don't do that. mclifford82 fucked around with this message at 06:12 on Apr 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2014 06:08
|
|