|
Cool, thanks. That book will definitely save me a lot of time farting around with the lens taking grotesquely out of focus images.
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 20:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 23:21 |
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:From the video reviews I've watched, that's exactly what it was designed for: silently maintaining autofocus in video, as long as your body supports the STM functions. It didn't look like it worked so well for that but that's what it sounded like it was built for. Is that incorrect? Ah OK, cool. Video autofocus though 
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
The 40mm STM is quiet, but not silent. Not even on a body that supports STM.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
The 5D classic is one of the best values in photography. I have a 5d3 and miss my 5d1. I shouldn't have sold it. I also went from a t3i to a 5d. I got the same AF, and same noise at 3200iso. Lost ISO above 3200, auto ISO and video. But I gained better noise, better colors, better battery, better picture quality, better DOF control, better handling, another control wheel, interchangeable focus screens etc etc
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
What size filters do you use with a TS-E 24? I'm going to wait until I've played around with the lens for a while before buying a filter set, but it'd be nice to know how much more I have to empty my bank account.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:What size filters do you use with a TS-E 24? I'm going to wait until I've played around with the lens for a while before buying a filter set, but it'd be nice to know how much more I have to empty my bank account. 82mm  Nice and expensive (You got the II right?)
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
Yup. Glad I don't already own filters, it would suck to ditch a smaller size. What's the advantage of using drop-in square filters, is that mostly for grad ND?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:Yup. Glad I don't already own filters, it would suck to ditch a smaller size. What's the advantage of using drop-in square filters, is that mostly for grad ND? Nice with grads to position them, and nice when you want to buy one set for everything. I think they only make big stoppers in drop in also
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
Aside from getting straight buildings, why do you guys like the tilt shift? Is it the selective focus? I'm curious because I know little about them and don't know anyone who has bought one for artistic purposes (maybe technical).
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
Haggins posted:Aside from getting straight buildings, why do you guys like the tilt shift? Is it the selective focus? It's like field camera movements on a dSLR. Except not quite. But sorta. Perspective changes, focus across an inclined plane (shooting at something inclined, make it ALL in focus), shift and stitch the images together for a bigger pano...there's a lot more than just making things look miniature. e: Oh also bigger image circle, so sharper since you aren't approaching the edge when it's set like a regular lens.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
Shellman posted:It's like field camera movements on a dSLR. Except not quite. But sorta. Perspective changes, focus across an inclined plane (shooting at something inclined, make it ALL in focus), shift and stitch the images together for a bigger pano...there's a lot more than just making things look miniature. Nice on extension tubes for macro too, better chance to get more of what you want in focus without stopping way down or focus stacking.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
Who's got the classiest kid on earth? This guy Happy mothers day to all the moms!
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=9663 Pretty cool deals on refurb bodies and lenses: 6D: $1291 40mm 2.8: $111 24-70 f/4 L IS $1019
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
mrlego posted:http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=9663 I actually just sold my 50d and went full frame with the 6D. 1300 for basically a brand new full frame body is a screaming deal!
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:Fuuuuuuuuck. I just impulse bought a TS-E 24 II. Goodbye, money. Welcome to the club! You'll never want to take that damned thing off, its such a great lens. What body are you using it with?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
Turd Nelson posted:I actually just sold my 50d and went full frame with the 6D. 1300 for basically a brand new full frame body is a screaming deal! Yeah I made the same exact jump and I'm glad I did. I normally prefer spending cash on lenses but crop is going no where on Canon. I've been really impressed with the 24-105 that came with it too. IQ seems close enough to my 70-200 2.8 IS II and it's more range than my old Tamron 17-50 2.8. Though it's an f4, dof is effectively the same on a FF as 2.8 is on a crop. Finally, no more angry bee zoom thank god.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
Haggins posted:Aside from getting straight buildings, why do you guys like the tilt shift? Is it the selective focus? Bubbacub posted:What size filters do you use with a TS-E 24? I'm going to wait until I've played around with the lens for a while before buying a filter set, but it'd be nice to know how much more I have to empty my bank account.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 03:00
|
|
|
Well, after sending my 50D and Tamron 17-50 to my mother, she's complained about her pictures being fuzzy. I ask her what she means and she tells me that when she takes pictures of flowers from a few inches away, it comes out fuzzy. So, I guess she needs a macro lens! Are there/what are the go-to macro lenses? Although she has a crop sensor, since I have the 6D now and I suspect my dad will buy a full frame camera in a few years, I think a lens for a full frame sensor would be best. (Also, my dad doesn't understand that focal length =/= minimum focusing distance and I don't know enough about lens design to explain it to him. Anyone know of a good explanation of minimum focusing distance, what makes a macro lens a macro lens, etc. somewhere I can read?) TIA to you all again 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
There's the Canon 50mm Macro (or is it 60? I think it's 50) that people seem to like.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:There's the Canon 50mm Macro (or is it 60? I think it's 50) that people seem to like. 60 is an actual macro (albeit for crop only) , 50 is a half macro, you need the "life size converter" (extension tube) for it to do 1:1. For future FF compatability, without decimating your budget, the non L 100mm macro is a good sharp lens. The L one is insano sharp, and has IS to boot, but it's a lot pricier.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
Love my 60, but yeah, no full frame.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
Get a tamron 60/2, doubles as a great portrait lens.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Get a tamron 60/2, doubles as a great portrait lens. Crop lens, he wants something that will work on FF also
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
Ah, missed that. Any 90/2.8 will do then.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
totalnewbie posted:Well, after sending my 50D and Tamron 17-50 to my mother, she's complained about her pictures being fuzzy. I ask her what she means and she tells me that when she takes pictures of flowers from a few inches away, it comes out fuzzy. If she doesn't understand minimum focus distance, FF is probably an unnecessary upgrade for her. That said, I'd look at the Tamron 90mm macro or the 100mm Canon macro lenses.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
Looks like canon just announced a couple of new wide angle lenses. EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM lens, $1199 10-18mm F4.5-5.6 IS STM, $299 Of course the new f/4 lens has IS, and of course it costs twice as much. Hopefully it fixes some of the corner performance issues with the older designs. I just bought a refurb 17-40 from canon for $570 a couple of days ago. I'm not sure I'd have sprung for this new model, but I'd have held off until I saw reviews for sure. edit: MTF charts here. Looks like they did fix the terrible full frame corner performance. Graniteman fucked around with this message at 14:59 on May 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
Graniteman posted:Looks like canon just announced a couple of new wide angle lenses. That 10-18 is a tempting little bit of kit for SL1 owners though - half the price of the 10-22, and way way smaller and lighter.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 16:00
|
|
|
Graniteman posted:EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM lens, $1199 Costs twice as much as what?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
mclifford82 posted:Costs twice as much as what? Twice as much as a refurb 17-40 from Canon I guess. I'm actually pleasantly surprised at the pricing if it's as good as it looks like it should be from the charts.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
There's a (Canadian) lens sale going on at Best Buy right now. The two I'm interested in are the EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS for $250 (reg.$280) and the EF 75-300 f/4-5.6 II USM is $200 (reg. $250). I'd like to use it to shoot indoor soccer games (at night in a canvas domed field) and the occasional outdoor game in the summer. I don't know which one would be better for this. I have a T1i with a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. I'm only a month into this hobby so I'd rather not spend more than $300 on a lens just yet. Link to sale
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
The 75-300s aren't too hot. The 55-250 is really the pick of the entry-level telephoto lenses, it's sharp and the IS works alright. How's your lighting in that indoor soccer field? Whenever you're doing stuff at night, you're at the mercy of what lighting is out there. It's especially difficult for sports, with lots of movement and chances for shots to get blurred. If it's really dark, both lenses would struggle, honestly, but so would most of them.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
The 55-250 was like $120 on eBay new like 6 months ago. It's a decent lens entry zoom but I'd have to imagine you could find it for cheaper than that.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
smooth.operator posted:There's a (Canadian) lens sale going on at Best Buy right now. The two I'm interested in are the EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS for $250 (reg.$280) and the EF 75-300 f/4-5.6 II USM is $200 (reg. $250). I'd like to use it to shoot indoor soccer games (at night in a canvas domed field) and the occasional outdoor game in the summer. I don't know which one would be better for this. I have a T1i with a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. I'm only a month into this hobby so I'd rather not spend more than $300 on a lens just yet. If you look around you can find a Tamron 70-300 VC used for around 300 bucks. Longer and sharper lens all around.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
I finally got to use my tamron 70-300 VC, and I gotta say: as slow as it is, it is very useable wide open and the VC is very good.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
I use to be a gear head and collecting a bunch of lenses, nowadays I just lend it to friends  Hey guys, I haven't really been taking too many photos or playing with my photo gear. Just used cellphone pictures with dropbox sync - wish Canon can integrate something like this. But now I'm back to spending a bajillion dollars and still taking horrible photos. My cousin gave me his 5d3 and 24-70 ii. I signed up for a studio lighting photo and Photoshop course and have bought a some el cheapo light tents to shoot some company products. Since I'm in a spending spree, what should I get? I still have trouble mastering the 100 Macro. It's hard to set a subject. Ghetto pictures of my ghetto rig - the photos are not paid professional quality, but the product is good enough for basic web/internal catalog/retouching to publish.  Lining everything up - wish I had a piece of white cloth and bigger spot lights.  2 sony battery operated LED's - the whole kit is around 100 USD Man the 5D3 feels so much more complicated than my 50D and the new autofocus is weird. I'm getting weird perspective distortions, does that mean that I have to level my tripod on the exact horizontal plane? Or do I need a tilt shift? caberham fucked around with this message at 06:53 on May 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
Got a few pictures?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 08:09
|
|
|
caberham posted:Hey guys, I haven't really been taking too many photos or playing with my photo gear. Just used cellphone pictures with dropbox sync - wish Canon can integrate something like this. The 6D does this with the built in wifi and I love the hell out of it. There is an app for your phone (I use on my ipad too) and you can send it photos from your camera. Now I can post photos online when I'm on the road or out and about and not feel pressured to run home to the computer to do edits. I haven't gotten around to using lightroom mobile yet, but I feel like I could almost get by with just an ipad and my camera. If I was more casual and only cared about retaining good high res jpegs, then I really wouldn't need a computer at all.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
somnambulist posted:Welcome to the club! You'll never want to take that damned thing off, its such a great lens. What body are you using it with? I wasn't even planning on using it, but it happened to be on my 5d3 when my friends dragged me outside today. Holy poo poo, I wasn't expecting it to be so much fun. It's definitely easy to overdo the tilt effect, but it's kind of mind blowing to have control over the direction of the focal plane.  I missed focus on the girl's face here, but this was close to being an awesome picture (that's her teacher in the foreground).  This thing is gonna replace my 35/1.4 as a walkabout lens. Bubbacub fucked around with this message at 21:40 on May 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
Are you hand holding the lens while adjusting the tilt/shift? I imagine i'd handhold it and just set a DOF path or direction and work the scene till the subjects all line up, but i've never used a TS lens.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 23:21 |
|
|
Yeah, that's how it should work when your subjects aren't moving and you can zoom in on live view. It's really tough to interpret what you're seeing in a dynamic scene with the viewfinder, I should have both stopped down and used less tilt to give myself margin. I haven't had the lens for long enough to get a feel for that yet.
Bubbacub fucked around with this message at 03:11 on May 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2014 02:21
|
|