|
The 50 1.8 is a pretty cheap lens and isn't very sharp wide open. Obviously you'll get a lot shallower DOF if you get it but I'd imagine the L Zoom will be pretty sharp at F/4 on a high ISO. You might be better saving a bit extra for the 1.4, which can probably be had for not a lot more secondhand.
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:18 |
|
|
slashtom posted:Hi all It's fine. You will look like every other tourist, can't imagine anyone would even take a second look. slashtom posted:I'm debating whether or not to go for the 50mm 1.8. I guess my second question would be how does the 24-105L at 50mm at f4 compares to canons 50mm 1.8 in terms of sharpness and general iq? Stopped down to f4, not much difference between them. The fiddy is slightly sharper, and has slightly lower distortion and CA. But unless you plan on shooting test charts, I can't imagine you will notice. At about f2.8, you will see the same IQ. http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/EF24-105mm-f-4L-IS-USM-versus-EF50mm-f-1-8-II___164_0_187_0 The zoom gets you IS, which is pretty helpful with dim museum lighting and static subjects. BrosephofArimathea fucked around with this message at 00:43 on May 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 00:39
|
|
|
Bob Mundon posted:Just got the Tamron 70-300 VC in, that thing is ridiculous. Haven't tried it out much to get a bead on image quality (quick looks make me think at 300 and wide open it's still pretty good), but handholding on a crop at 300mm at 1/25 is absurd (480mm equivalent). Amazing these things sell for sub 300 used. I picked this lens up last month for $350 after rebate and it is fantastic. Image quality is fantastic. The autofocus is a bit slow but not terrible. An amazing lens for the price. edit: I'll crosspost this picture from the bird thread. Took this Monday with the Tamron at 300mm from 5-6 feet away on my 6D. 
Tuxedo Gin fucked around with this message at 06:12 on May 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
mrlego posted:With any semi-current body you'll see: Don't really care about the flip out screen too much, I guess you'd use it on a tripod or something where you've set up the camera and want to see the preview from someplace weird? A few of those upgrade points sound good though. But, as I'm sure you're about to tell me when I detail my paltry list of lenses.. I think buying a quality wide lens like the fabled Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 non-VC is really the only thing I should be considering at this point. Hrm.. now to apply something the thread taught me.. is this a EF-S lens.. if I bought a FF body later could I use it? I've had a quick look at the specs on the site but I don't see this information. I've got the two kit lenses, the 18-55 being my favorite and I shoot with it all the time. A little wider and sharper and I would be completely content. I bought a nifty fifty and use it a little, but it's a bit to tight for what I'm normally shooting. The zoom (50-200 or something like that) kit lens is good and produces sharp photos, without the AF 'missing' like the 18-55 does, same for the nifty 50 so I'm guessing I've just shagged out my 18-55 or gotten some shite in there. So I've only got three lenses and two of them are the kits so.. yeah.. makes sense to get that wider, quality replacement for my 18-55. But I'll now be aware if it's EF or not and could be used later with a body upgrade. Saint Fu posted:As a guy who traveled a bunch with first an XSi then later a 5D2, one thing to consider is that the 5D/6D/7D/70D bodies are all significantly bigger than the rebel series. It makes a difference if you're pulling your camera out of your backpack dozens of times per day. Yep, awesome, exactly what I was thinking. I think I'm putting the cart before the horse talking about bodies with my current lens stock so I'll file this away for later, thanks  harperdc posted:The 450D and others in the 000D series will all suffer in terms of AF. Put simply, the entry-level bodies just don't have great AF when compared with the 60D/70D level or the highest tier, the 7D/6D/5DII and III. It was one of the things I noticed the most when I went from a 350D to a 60D. Exactly  edit: that Tamron is $250 new here in Australia.. that's without even looking and the first result that popped up in Google. No-brainer. Tony Montana fucked around with this message at 06:41 on May 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
Yes, Tamron 17-50mm is for crop sensors, Di II in Tamron-speak. Note, just Di lenses are not 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 06:54
|
|
|
EF-S lenses = crop bodies only (or as the Tamron will say, for Canon digital only) EF lenses = any bodies are okay. The Tamron is really good, the autofocus isn't as buzzy as the 50/1.8 but almost. It's a nice lens though, faster than the kit lens while being roughly the same field of view. If you like that flexibility, it's more but better. Tamron 17-50 --> use for a while --> 70D, or used 60D or 7D would be a good path. All are crop, and going used saves money too (time it to when you go to someplace like Hong Kong, Korea or Japan, buy a used body, save massive money over buying it in Australia). Also think about the 40/2.8, the other poor man's favorite.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 06:58
|
|
|
So, awhile back I asked this thread for help picking out a rather large lens and a new dslr for use during our Alaskan vacation. The vacation went pretty great and the used 60D + 150mm-500mm Sigma did a fairly wonderful job of everything. It did make me a bit of "that guy" on the cruise but the pictures turned out well for a couple of amateurs and we certainly have some stuff that (perhaps after some post work) we might print off on canvas and put up somewhere in the house. Only complaint is that I wasn't at all prepared for the juvenile humpback to breach 15 feet from the ship, so we missed that picture!  What can you do?Some examples, no post production work on them yet. We just got back yesterday. These might not even be the best examples, just what I was able to find this morning. ftp://jherndo.no-ip.biz:7000/Alaska/Alaska/Day%202/Camera%201/IMG_3074.JPG ftp://jherndo.no-ip.biz:7000/Alaska/Alaska/Day%203-4/Camera%201/IMG_3857.JPG Extra bonus: playing around with it in Vancouver on the boat before we left, I was taking pictures of a helipad a ways off. People walking to and from the helipad, aircraft taking off and landing, ect. Eventually during a lull there was a guy who got out of his car and starting wandering around near the security fence which I thought was weird so I snapped a few shots. So, after looking at them that evening I now have photographic proof as to why you shouldn't urinate in public! (Note: you can't see anything real interesting but consider yourself warned.)  ftp://jherndo.no-ip.biz:7000/Alaska/Alaska/Vancover%20backup/Camera%201/IMG_2490.JPGIf anyone is really bored enough to start poking through the gallery there, realize it's our vacation pictures. Not all of it is really interesting or all that good, we haven't taken out any of the "soft" focus shots and there are lots of repeats, especially of wildlife when we were in sport mode. You might also see an ugly fat guy posing and smiling in some of them, full apologies on that mark.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 13:21
|
|
|
Tuxedo Gin posted:I picked this lens up last month for $350 after rebate and it is fantastic. Image quality is fantastic. The autofocus is a bit slow but not terrible. An amazing lens for the price. Does yours make a crunchy noise when the VC kicks on and when it stops? Not loud, but want to make sure it's normal. I'd normally think that type of a noise would indicate something is wearing and will eventually give out, but it sounds like reading up on it they all do this. *edit* To clarify, it's barely audible, and if you aren't right up against the lens it's more just like a tone. Only when you get next to it does it sound like anything more. Bob Mundon fucked around with this message at 14:56 on May 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
Bob Mundon posted:Does yours make a crunchy noise when the VC kicks on and when it stops? Not loud, but want to make sure it's normal. I'd normally think that type of a noise would indicate something is wearing and will eventually give out, but it sounds like reading up on it they all do this. I don't know about crunchy but the VC was definitely louder than I expected. I can't really remember ever noticing the IS on my other lenses but it is definitely audible on this lens.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
Tuxedo Gin posted:I don't know about crunchy but the VC was definitely louder than I expected. I can't really remember ever noticing the IS on my other lenses but it is definitely audible on this lens. you should hear the canon 100-400. CLUNK, WHIRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR every time
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
The 100-400 was released in 1998 so it's IS is seriously due for a refresh. (And then there's the 400mm f5.6 which doesn't even have IS on account of nothing have been updated since 1993. But I'm sure Canon would rather release a 500mm f4 III...)
Pablo Bluth fucked around with this message at 23:18 on May 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
Canon would rather just keep making Rebel/Tx bodies and their C cinema line instead of...lenses for either of their mounts.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
Cool! I got a 6D as a wedding gift (largely because I used to shoot concerts and we don't have much of a camera for our honeymoon to Italy). Can't complain really. I picked up a refurbished 40mm pancake with the honeymoon (portability/size) in mind. Any suggestions for a lens or two pickup? I run a blog on woodworking so lots of shots of stuff in the shop (basement under fluorescent) and glamour shots of finished work. Budget can be flexible to an extent. Under $500 for a zoom lens is ideal, but I'll go up to around $1000 for the right lens.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
Walked posted:Any suggestions for a lens or two pickup? I run a blog on woodworking so lots of shots of stuff in the shop (basement under fluorescent) and glamour shots of finished work. I can't recommend this lens enough. http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron-24-70mm-2p8-vc-usd/6 http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Tamron-SP-24-70mm-f-2.8-Di-VC-USD-review-A-uniquely-versatile-pro-worthy-alternative/Conclusion Also, a flash will make far more difference in that situation than any lens. I have a YN568 II, and it gets the job done for a third of the price of a Canon. http://www.amazon.com/YONGNUO-YN568-EX-II-Speedlite/dp/B00DB21TCM
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
edit: I'm dumb; still looking at options. Thats a steep priced lens; and while its probably worth it - I'm not sure if I'm ready to pull the trigger just yet. I think I've narrowed it down to a few options: Canon 24-85 ($180) Canon 28-135 3.5-5.6 IS ($190) Canon 28-105 3.5-4.5 ($140) Tamron 28-75 2.8 ($290) I know it's not top of the line stuff; but I'm not sure I want to take top of the line stuff with me to Italy, and also saving some funds while paying for the wedding is always nice. Walked fucked around with this message at 14:25 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 14:18
|
|
|
I thought the live view focusing and touch screen of the 70D would be kind of gimmicky and useless. I bought one for work along with the Canon 17-55/2.8, and it's actually really nice.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:14
|
|
|
Walked posted:Cool! I got a 6D as a wedding gift (largely because I used to shoot concerts and we don't have much of a camera for our honeymoon to Italy). Can't complain really. Somewhat sidetrack, somewhat not - but as someone who went to Italy for my wedding anniversary last year and went through booking travel, etc, make sure you go to Cinque Terre and Portovenere while you are there, both have *some* of the best food and sights in the country Amalfi coast as well. The whole Rome/vatican thing tends to get touristy and old fast, but if you want some ideas for areas for great photoshoots/travel ideas or want to see what photos we've taken send me a PM.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
notwithoutmyanus posted:Somewhat sidetrack, somewhat not - but as someone who went to Italy for my wedding anniversary last year and went through booking travel, etc, make sure you go to Cinque Terre and Portovenere while you are there, both have *some* of the best food and sights in the country Cool; thanks! My fiancee booked most of the itinerary so I'm kinda just along for the ride. We fly into Rome, and are hitting Cinque Terre for sure, as well as Venice, and the dolomites. We plan to not stress too much about what we do and just have fun; so we arent trying to do all the touristy poo poo and just take it all in. Sending a PM..
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
Walked posted:Cool; thanks! My fiancee booked most of the itinerary so I'm kinda just along for the ride. We fly into Rome, and are hitting Cinque Terre for sure, as well as Venice, and the dolomites. Don't bring a tripod, you need a special permit most places. Just FYI - count on your IS & ff ISO goodness
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:Don't bring a tripod, you need a special permit most places. Just FYI - count on your IS & ff ISO goodness Good; wasnt planning to. Figured the 40mm as my walkaround will do me most of the time anyways. Went with the Tamron 28-75 for $280; seemed like the best bet. BGN condition so we'll see what KEH sends; but their warranty is good enough to try it.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
Walked posted:edit: I'm dumb; still looking at options. I have the 28-105 and while yes, it will take pictures in that range, it's just reeeeeeeeeeally low quality glass now. It's average. It won't take stunners, per se, but it'll give you okay shots from that range. I'd take more of a look at the 28-135 out of those four, since the 24-85 is never really reviewed (reeeeeeally old), the 28-105 isn't terribly great, and the Tamron 28-75 is (apparently according to reviews) better suited to APS-C crop bodies than the full frame. really the best for full frame at a cheaper level is the 24-105 4L...but that's still a chunk of change.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
The 28-135 isn't bad for the money. Kinda meh on crop but much better on FF. Its like a poor man's 24-105 except with a tad less sharpness and more CA although I'm not sure you can get away with f/5.6 in low light even with the 6D's high ISO voodoo and IS.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 16:15
|
|
|
notwithoutmyanus posted:Cinque Terre and Portovenere while you are there, both have *some* of the best food and sights in the country This a million times. Between Cinque Terre and the Greek islands, any of our photos that we've put up instantly draw questions and travel jealousy. Most people can't believe we've actually been to these places and that these are our travel photos. Verman fucked around with this message at 16:43 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
For what it's worth, I used the 28-135 for a good year or two on a 10d and a 40d and did not like it. I felt like the $100 ef-s plastic kit lens (18-55 IS?) was noticeably sharper. I could see it being a better angle of view on full frame, but the increased resolution of a modern FF camera is going to show all of the flaws of that lens.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
I returned my 24-105 L and got 3 lens. 21mm Zeiss f/2.8 50mm Sigma Art f/1.4 135mm Cannon L f/2.8 I love primes, I wonder how long it'll take BH to get the 50mm sigma art.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 06:28
|
|
|
jsmith114 posted:For what it's worth, I used the 28-135 for a good year or two on a 10d and a 40d and did not like it. I felt like the $100 ef-s plastic kit lens (18-55 IS?) was noticeably sharper. No. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...omp=5&APIComp=0 http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...omp=3&APIComp=0
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 13:46
|
|
|
So I'm curious, how does the ancient, original 5D hold up? I'm interested in trying out FF, for portraits. Not really into shooting landscapes, action, etc. Right now I'm using a t3i, for comparison. It's doing the job fine, but I keep running into situations where I can't back up anymore and get the crop I want.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 16:13
|
|
|
Its a great camera and you can pick it up for around $400-500 used in the right places. Its probably the cheapest decent FF you can get at this point. The 6D would be the next step up and thats $1600, hell even the 5d2 is still around $1600 used. I thought there was something with the classic 5D shutter needing to be reinforced but I could be mistaken. I'm sure someone else can chime in on this with more experience but I've sometimes thought about doing the same thing.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
Verman posted:Its a great camera and you can pick it up for around $400-500 used in the right places. The 6D would be the next step up and thats $1600, hell even the 5d2 is still around $1600 used. Yeah that's definitely why I'm asking haha. Saving $1000 sounds good to me, but I assume if the 5D was still "good" it would be worth more. Figure there's no harm in asking though.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
The 5Dc is pretty fantastic for the price if you don't want/need video, high fps, or high end AF. Its a stripped down (by modern standards) stills only camera but the IQ is great and its hard to argue with full frame for ~$500. If you do get one, try to find one that's had the shutter replaced. The shutter went out on mine and that is apparently pretty common.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:No. You are right for the links you posted, but the very cheap 18-55 IS not STM that I was talking about shows a different story. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...omp=1&APIComp=0
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
jsmith114 posted:You are right for the links you posted, but the very cheap 18-55 IS not STM that I was talking about shows a different story. His comparison link vs the 18-55 STM was also using a 60D for the EF-S Lens, and the 1Ds3 for the EF lens. Comparing lenses with his tool on different sensor formats doesn't work well because of the way the tests are shot - always do it using APS-C vs APS-C ,or FF vs FF for the most accurate results. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...omp=0&APIComp=0
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
Just received my 40mm pancake, "smallest DSLR" is now complete. Crazy how much louder the STM focus is in this vs. the other two lenses.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 19:41
|
|
|
Fuuuuuuuuck. I just impulse bought a TS-E 24 II. Goodbye, money.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
sirbeefalot posted:Just received my 40mm pancake, "smallest DSLR" is now complete. Crazy how much louder the STM focus is in this vs. the other two lenses. AFAIK, the STM on the 40mm pancake wasn't really designed intentionally for video, whereas the other two ( I assume you're talking about the EF-S STM lenses) were.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:Fuuuuuuuuck. I just impulse bought a TS-E 24 II. Goodbye, money. There's lots of worse things you could have spent your money on rashly
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:So I'm curious, how does the ancient, original 5D hold up? I'm interested in trying out FF, for portraits. Not really into shooting landscapes, action, etc. It's a great camera as long as you're ok with doing manual focus in dark/ low contrast environments. Even with the best lenses the auto focus felt ancient.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:There's lots of worse things you could have spent your money on rashly I feel like I've kinda been stuck shooting the same poo poo with the same lenses all the time, so I'm looking forward to trying some new techniques. Plus I need a good landscape lens for my vacation this summer.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:AFAIK, the STM on the 40mm pancake wasn't really designed intentionally for video, whereas the other two ( I assume you're talking about the EF-S STM lenses) were.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:18 |
|
|
Bubbacub posted:I feel like I've kinda been stuck shooting the same poo poo with the same lenses all the time, so I'm looking forward to trying some new techniques. Plus I need a good landscape lens for my vacation this summer.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 20:28
|
|
