|
xzzy posted:I love the poo poo out of my square filters, but I only use graduated ND and solid ND. Everyone should have a set. What set do you have?
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 11:51 |
|
|
I started with a cheapie plastic set I found on Amazon to see if I'd enjoy using filters, then once I decided it was the coolest thing ever I began upgrading to Lee filters (usually as I destroy the cheap ones). The fear with the cheap ones is that they introduce a color cast to photos but I don't notice any problems.. nothing that Lightroom can't fix anyways. I haven't bought the big stopper yet, it's next on the list.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
Yeah, I have the Lee 0.6ND grads in hard and soft edge, plus a big stopper, a little stopper, and a circular polarizer. I feel like I have all the filters I'd realistically need for any situation. Is there a good case I can use for the 4x4s and 4x6 filters? Dealing with the individual soft cases feels a little cumbersome sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:Yeah, I have the Lee 0.6ND grads in hard and soft edge, plus a big stopper, a little stopper, and a circular polarizer. I feel like I have all the filters I'd realistically need for any situation. My hitech 100mm ND grad set came with a soft pouch that was supposed to just be for shipping, but it works well as a storage option for ~7 filters. I'm pretty sure they sell filter pouches seperate, but don't have any links offhand.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
Oh good, I managed to stumble in on time for filter chat. I was just looking at getting a ND filter, but they seem to come in various sizes. Would I need a 40mm size filter to fit my 40mm size pancake? I ask because I see KEH has 39mm and 40.5mm filters but nothing squarely 40mm.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
Chalets the Baka posted:Oh good, I managed to stumble in on time for filter chat. I was just looking at getting a ND filter, but they seem to come in various sizes. Would I need a 40mm size filter to fit my 40mm size pancake? I ask because I see KEH has 39mm and 40.5mm filters but nothing squarely 40mm. Most people will recommend buying a quality, larger circular polarizer though (like 77 or 82mm) and using step-down rings for compatibility with your smaller glass.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
^ birds move fast Chalets the Baka posted:Oh good, I managed to stumble in on time for filter chat. I was just looking at getting a ND filter, but they seem to come in various sizes. Would I need a size filter to fit my size pancake? I ask because I see KEH has and filters but nothing squarely . Forgive me if this isn't the case, but is your pancake a lens (the Canon f/2.8 STM, for instance)? If so, refers to the focal length. You'd want the filter size, which for the Canon is .
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
I got an adjustable ND filter with 52mm threads (So the 40 STM, 50 1.8) on eBay for less than $10, it was well worth it. You twist it to change the level of ND. There's not really any useful markings on it to determine level of filtration but with digital, you can really just test it as you go. http://www.ebay.ie/itm/52mm-Variabl...=item3f3098c1fd Quantum of Phallus fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Jun 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
Is there a good tutorial or write-up somewhere on what filters do?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 01:46
|
|
|
smooth.operator posted:Is there a good tutorial or write-up somewhere on what filters do?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
The explanation for polarisers is cool as hell, it's all about blocking out certain wavelengths light based on the direction theyre moving in or something. You'll know what I'm talking about when you see the diagrams.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 09:36
|
|
|
To clear up, or maybe add to the confusion, circular polarizers don't have to be circular in shape. The linear/circular name refers to the way the light is polarized by the filter. Linear polarizers apparently can mess with autofocus systems so almost all polarizing filters will be circular, even if they're square.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 12:07
|
|
|
Cokin P Series are still the go to square filters, I think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 12:42
|
|
|
rcman50166 posted:Cokin P Series are still the go to square filters, I think. I started with those but ended up selling them and getting a Lee set (Cokin Z equivalent). Cokin P has a short mount for wide angle lenses but only accepts one filter. If I wanted to stack filters I had to use the normal mount and couldn't shoot wider than about 28-30mm on full frame.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 13:02
|
|
|
You could always go z-pro or x-pro and open up that can of worms 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2014 13:13
|
|
|
From a quick glance on Amazon, the Cokin Z-pro isn't more expensive than the Lee stuff. How wide can I go with the Z-pro on 35mm, anyway?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:From a quick glance on Amazon, the Cokin Z-pro isn't more expensive than the Lee stuff. How wide can I go with the Z-pro on 35mm, anyway? I did this research a while back so I don't remember the exact numbers, but as long as you are using a lens in something common like 77mm filter size, it shouldn't be an issue. Z-pros are 100mm x 150mm.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
A friend was researching old cameras for fanfic or something, so I burned a flashbulb for her to show how they work. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NVtNYVo-oU Edit: "That's warm" in the sense of it burned the hair off my arm. Chillbro Baggins fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Jun 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2014 21:57
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
My Sigma 30mm is here! I tested it at home and love it and can't wait to give it a whirl this weekend.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 16:22
|
|
|
I'm looking for the 17-50 2.8 Tamaron non-VC that is recommended as the go to replacement for the general use kit lens. I found this: http://www.onestop-digital.com/inde...czn2kMn2RvD_BwE Can someone confirm that's the one?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:I'm looking for the 17-50 2.8 Tamaron non-VC that is recommended as the go to replacement for the general use kit lens. Looks like it, yeah. Buy it used though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
I'm in London and only here for another week or so. I need another lens as I'm about to road trip across France and Italy and my kit lens sucks and the AF is starting to go. I'll go back through Hong Kong on the way home.. so I might pick up another body then.. but I want that Tamaron quickly, with zero hassles and the price is not a problem. Back in Australia I'll be getting into the used scene, absolutely. Also, it's EF, right? Not EFS? So I can use it on my 450D and could go FF with it if I got the body? Or have I got that completely wrong?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:I'm in London and only here for another week or so. I need another lens as I'm about to road trip across France and Italy and my kit lens sucks and the AF is starting to go. I'll go back through Hong Kong on the way home.. so I might pick up another body then.. but I want that Tamaron quickly, with zero hassles and the price is not a problem. The Tamron is EF-S. Don't quote me, but I could have sworn that third party manufacturers (might actually just be Sigma?) base all their EF-S lenses off the EF mount type which would mean you could mount their EF-S lenses on a full frame but it would likely vignette as it was not made for the full frame image circle.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
theloafingone posted:The Tamron is EF-S. This is, for the most part, true. Generally it's pretty hard to mount an EF-S lens to an EF body anyway, though I have had at least one guy try it and succeed, thereby blowing the mirror off his shiny new 6d. Some people just don't know when two bits aren't meant to go together.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 12:05
|
|
|
I stuck my Tamron 17-50 on an old EOS EF-mount film body. Went on just fine but obviously vignetted all to hell.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
E: Wrong thread because I'm dumb!
DJExile fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Jun 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 14:46
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:I'm in London and only here for another week or so. I need another lens as I'm about to road trip across France and Italy and my kit lens sucks and the AF is starting to go. I'll go back through Hong Kong on the way home.. so I might pick up another body then.. but I want that Tamaron quickly, with zero hassles and the price is not a problem. Sigma uses EF mount even for their crop lenses, at least. This is the Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 on the Canon 6D, at 17mm: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
I bought a Sigma APO 400mm 5.6 Canon mount, how much am I going to hate it and want to buy a Canon 400mm 5.6L as per my original intentions?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 06:24
|
|
|
SeaborneClink posted:I bought a Sigma APO 400mm 5.6 Canon mount, how much am I going to hate it and want to buy a Canon 400mm 5.6L as per my original intentions? Seriously though, I've heard it's mediocre wide open. Usable, but mediocre.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 06:43
|
|
|
Bob Socko posted:You'll hate it less than the hole in your bank account that the Canon will make. eh ~1100 camerabux isn't bad, it's no 400 f2 or 600 f4  I was planning on buying the 400 5.6 before August anyway, and the sigma was cheap as chips, basically purchase on a whim. If I hate it I guess I'll just sell it 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
Wow, the 400/5.6L is that cheap? I stand corrected then. Anyway, here is a link to reviews of the Sigma, albeit in a-mount. They can be summed up as "meh", though you'll probably have decent results at f/8. If yours is a later version of the lens, you might have better luck.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 07:06
|
|
|
Looking for an Arca-compatible plate for my 70-300L. It's pretty compact relative to the other chunky white Canons, do I need one of the long plates or will one that's sized to fit a camera body work ok?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 13:15
|
|
|
So I can't find that Tamaron 17-50 non-VC from anywhere that will deliver it before I have to leave. Buying it retail from a shop seems the only way to ensure getting it - but this is London and the customer service culture is loving astoundingly poor.. like so bad that I had to leave the city and come home before I punched someone. I'm talking about spending hundreds of pounds on a lens and you don't have any stock, can't let me try a couple and really aren't interested in anything I'm asking you about? This is Jessops, one of their old camera stores from forever and generally the name is synonymous with 'camera specialist'. So.. gently caress.. anyway.. the only one they had was the VC version for about 350 pounds which is something like 700 bucks Australian or US. I saw it for around that from Ted's Cameras in Australia and so it doesn't seem that insane.. but I don't want the VC version and they tell me the non-VC is 'old and we don't have it, probably noone else will either'. Admittedly Ted's didn't have the non-VC on their site either. Is there another lens by Sigma that is as good with the same kind of range? Prices in Hong Kong are actually about the same as in Australia so I'm considering just saying gently caress it, shooting the road trip with my screwy 18-55 kit and waiting to get home before getting a new lens. It's annoying though.. there is going to be some great stuff to shoot along the way and it's a great opportunity. I'm sure you all know the point of having camera gear is then going to places worthy of using it.. and driving from England through France to Italy and back is a pretty amazing. Pay 700 bucks for that VC.. yeah I could I guess. Just shits me its not the lens I want and 700 bucks man.. a brand new 7D body is 1k back in Aus and of course less second hand.. I could upgrade body and get the non-VC used for probably a few hundred bucks more than buying that VC version from bloody Jessops.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 14:23
|
|
|
Jessops staff are morons, working for a company that doesn't understand the failing business model that they are trying to follow. Sigma 18-50 f2.8 Comparing the previous gen of each (when I last looked), it was near as dammit the equal to the Tamron for IQ.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 14:33
|
|
|
The VC version is completely fine. If you pixel peep there's some minor difference in sharpness (see http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/(lens1)/497/(brand)/Tamron/(camera1)/619/(lens2)/185/(brand2)/Tamron/(camera2)/619 for a comparison) but I doubt you're going to notice it in your holiday snaps on Facebook. Plus if you end up shooting indoors at all the VC might even come in handy. The main downside in my eyes is that it's 100g or so heavier and generally more expensive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
Or if you WANT to pay 700 bucks (actually a little more new), Sigma 18-35 1.8 for crazy fast constant aperture wide zoom. Loved mine to death until I went full frame.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
If you're going to mostly be photographing outside during your trip, your kit lens is fine. Before I upgraded to fancy L glass, I think I got more keepers with my kit 18-135 than with my Tamron 17-50. It's a fast constant-aperture lens, but I didn't really love it for anything besides that. Pick up a cheap 50mm or 30mm prime if you want to do some shooting indoors. Bubbacub fucked around with this message at 14:48 on Jun 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 14:45
|
|
|
I've got the nifty 50 and despite being tight, it's good. After finding the non-VC from a place who offered a phone number, I call them and they don't pick up the phone. Honestly, gently caress this and I'm not putting a single dollar through the English economy. I'll wait to get home and buy some used stuff - my kit will have to do and I'll just manually focus as the AF on it is missing now. Man, combine it with the food and general attitude of a Londoner.. the weather is great right now but gently caress this place. No wonder when I say I'm returning to Australia the English themselves say 'I don't blame you'. For you nice peeps and advice, let me include a snap taken with that kit lens, indoors with me manually focusing http://i.imgur.com/XYdYzSn.jpg It's a crazy box that cost something like 50k US with some win that's about 15k US in it.. my friend is a wine guy for the Australian label Penfolds. Tony Montana fucked around with this message at 15:25 on Jun 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
Oh, if you already have the 50, you'd probably be just fine using that for the whole time. Bust out the 18-55 if you want some wide angle outdoor shots, stop down, manual focus, no problem. I kinda feel like the 17-50 is overrated. It's a good, affordable lens, but don't feel bad for not having one. Try to find a shorty 40 if you can, it's significantly nicer feeling than the nifty 50. The focusing is quieter, it's sharper, and the color rendition is better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 11:51 |
|
|
Tony Montana posted:Is there another lens by Sigma that is as good with the same kind of range? I know you've already made your decision, but thought I'd reply directly to this question in case anybody was interested. Sigma does make a 17-50 2.8 OS HSM. While not quite on par with the Non-VC version, it does look quite nice compared to the Tamron VC version.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 16:31
|
|