|
I'm currently rocking a 70D with a Canon 18-135 3.5-5.6 IS kit lens (and a nifty fifty, but that's not strictly relevant). It's been great so far, but a friend is selling his Sigma 18-200 3.5-6.3 OS for $200. I'm considering picking it up to replace my 18-135. Is this a good idea? I'm tempted by the longer focal range that I sometimes find lacking on my current lens. I really like the idea of a huge focal range, decently versatile walking-around lens, and I won't have the money to go for something more specialized for a while. I'm worried it would be too much of a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none type situation, though. Thoughts? Has anyone got experience with this particular lens? It's the non-HSM variant, if that makes a difference.
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 19:23 |
|
|
Portfolio posted:I'm currently rocking a 70D with a Canon 18-135 3.5-5.6 IS kit lens (and a nifty fifty, but that's not strictly relevant). It's been great so far, but a friend is selling his Sigma 18-200 3.5-6.3 OS for $200. I'm considering picking it up to replace my 18-135. Is this a good idea? I'm tempted by the longer focal range that I sometimes find lacking on my current lens. I really like the idea of a huge focal range, decently versatile walking-around lens, and I won't have the money to go for something more specialized for a while. I'm worried it would be too much of a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none type situation, though. Do you have the actual 70D kit lens (the STM version?) or the older non-stm one. The sigma almost certainly has worse IQ than the STM, and will not have the video AF niceties that the STM provides.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:For you nice peeps and advice, let me include a snap taken with that kit lens, indoors with me manually focusing Unless it's like super dark and AF isn't working or something, there is pretty much no reason to ever go through the abject horror that is attempting to use the focus ring on a kit lens. Someone recently was trying to sell their T2i + kit lens on Facebook, and the AF was completely hosed in the lens, but they didn't want to budge on price because "you don't really need it anyways, it's easier manually." It didn't go well for them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:http://i.imgur.com/XYdYzSn.jpg I base this assessment on my current strong desire to get completely plastered on very expensive hooch. Australian marketing strikes again!  
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
The AF is screwy. It's got a bit of grit or something is slighty hosed with the fine motor control and it is just slightly off with the focus. I know it's the lens because with others it's fine.. and really that lens has done more than is fair to expect. That lens was my primary lens and I shot basically everything with for: a motorcycle trip around Vietnam with a Russian Minsk motorcycle - a bit like Long Way Down throughout Thailand, pictures of the boxing and 7 year old pro fighters was amazing heaps of Australia.. countless 4WD and other trips with things like the Victorian Alps Europe, last winter's ski season in Italy. Hanging around my neck (once I was a good enough skiier) and shooting the real Alps which was absolutely incredible. Then France, England, Germany, etc tons of other crap It's been great (very impressed with the Canon kit, even though it's entry level) and my combo of 450D and that kit 18-55 has taught me digital SLR photography and where I want to go next. I really want to step it up as I love the hobby, being a bit of a techy nerd anyway and it's the hobby you do with all your other hobbies. I don't see any reason not to look straight into full frame when I get home. Anyways, here is an example of the AF being a bitch. This looked great in the preview and only later do you realize.. hang on  It's not easier to use that flimsy, thin ring at all and it's actually a royal pain in the rear end.. but I'll get by for the next couple of weeks. That nifty 50 is too tight for most of what I shoot though.. I find it hard to use often and reaching back for the wider lens. ExecuDork posted:This is a good picture - your kit lens is apparently fine and you're good at using it. Thanks mate  That silver dial on the front, you turn it to the latitude of the Penfolds winery in Magill, South Australia to open the box. That whole place, Linley, was crazy. When I walked in there was M's desk.. as in M from James Bond.. his actual desk with a wooden inlaid map of the world on it.. used from the original movies. It was worth more than a small house.
Tony Montana fucked around with this message at 23:42 on Jun 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:Do you have the actual 70D kit lens (the STM version?) or the older non-stm one. The sigma almost certainly has worse IQ than the STM, and will not have the video AF niceties that the STM provides. It's the STM. And I guess you're right, I hadn't thought about video autofocus. Good call, that poo poo rules. EDIT: Does that mean that video autofocus will only work with HSM Sigma lenses?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted: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.. Ted's is the most loltastic of high street camera retailers. Take any price they advertise and halve it to get a realistic ballpark of what you should pay. They once tried to charge me $200 for a flimsy Chinese lightstand. Not even new, the demo one they had on the floor. DWI (HK retailer who are pretty popular here) have it for AUD$272 (with shipping), so you should be able to pick it up for a hell of a lot less than $700. http://www.dwidigitalcameras.com.au...xFG4ilHsgjw_wcB BrosephofArimathea fucked around with this message at 01:57 on Jun 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
Portfolio posted:It's the STM. And I guess you're right, I hadn't thought about video autofocus. Good call, that poo poo rules. It's not that - the video AF will work with other lenses, it's just that with the STM lenses it's completely silent and has that nice slow roll into focus that looks good on video. With USM/HSM lenses, you can hear a lot of clickety focusing noise, and it more zips to focus instead of slow rolling in. I don't even want to know what it sounds like with the old AF motor lenses (50/1.8, old 35/2, Sigmas 20/1.8, etc) - probably like you're running a garbage disposal while filming. Not sure what your price range is for more reach, but the 55-250 STM can be had on ebay for 280-300$ and it's a drat good performer, especially considering the cost and size.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
BrosephofArimathea posted:Ted's is the most loltastic of high street camera retailers. Take any price they advertise and halve it to get a realistic ballpark of what you should pay. That's the non-VC version. The Ted's quote was for the VC. The 7D body from Ted's is 1090 While your online retailer has it for 895 You might be able to talk Teds down a bit too, but it's hardly half the price or 'loltastic'. They are a high street retailer compared to an online only store. Ted's has people in it you can go and talk to and try kit out with.. unlike London stores that behave much like an online retailer and unless you're basically just ordering via part number then it's poo poo. The VC Tamron is actually half price though, 349 fom DWI vs 700 from Teds. But yeah, less than 300 for the non-VC version and I'll certainly be waiting to get home to get another lens. Cheers for the link.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:It's not that - the video AF will work with other lenses, it's just that with the STM lenses it's completely silent and has that nice slow roll into focus that looks good on video. With USM/HSM lenses, you can hear a lot of clickety focusing noise, and it more zips to focus instead of slow rolling in. I don't even want to know what it sounds like with the old AF motor lenses (50/1.8, old 35/2, Sigmas 20/1.8, etc) - probably like you're running a garbage disposal while filming. I dunno, on a crop sensor I like having the nice wide end of the 18-135. And yeah, I have an Sigma 50 1.4 HSM and it's noisy as hell with video AF. I don't tend to use it for that, though — if I shoot video with that lens it's usually in a sit-down interview situation where I don't need the AF. You've convinced me. I do enough video that I think I'll stick with the STM 18-135.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
Portfolio posted:I dunno, on a crop sensor I like having the nice wide end of the 18-135. And yeah, I have an Sigma 50 1.4 HSM and it's noisy as hell with video AF. I don't tend to use it for that, though — if I shoot video with that lens it's usually in a sit-down interview situation where I don't need the AF. Yeah I wouldn't use the 55-250 as an only, just as an additional lens for the reach I meant
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
Is the sony RX100 mk1 still a solid option for a compact? I want something other than my gripped 50d/lenses for travel and backpacking trips where weight and space - or the lack thereof - is important. $400 is sort of the upper end of what I would ideally like to spend but I wasn't sure if anything out there came close to the rx100 for less. All the reviews I've come across have said this is a solid camera and the video samples Ive seen have been incredibly high quality.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 23:18
|
|
|
Anyone have any experience buying from Tristate Camera? They have really good prices on a bunch of seemingly new Tamron lenses (a third less than anywhere else in some cases), which "include a warranty card in the box" but they don't seem to be an authorized dealer, which makes the prices + warranty seem dubious. For a third off though I don't think I really care about a warranty, since that price is similar to buying used. What I am worried about is them being some shady ripoff in another way I haven't thought of yet. Edit: looking at a bunch of random gear, some of their prices are Hong Kong-level low, but they claim to be based out of NYC.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
Don't a lot of places like this pop up in NY, sell a bunch of grey market/broken items and then run with the money? edit: Yep Karasu Tengu fucked around with this message at 00:22 on Jul 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 00:12
|
|
|
Verman posted:Is the sony RX100 mk1 still a solid option for a compact? I want something other than my gripped 50d/lenses for travel and backpacking trips where weight and space - or the lack thereof - is important. $400 is sort of the upper end of what I would ideally like to spend but I wasn't sure if anything out there came close to the rx100 for less. All the reviews I've come across have said this is a solid camera and the video samples Ive seen have been incredibly high quality. The RX100 still takes great pics. I mean, a MkIII will be better, but if you're looking for a good outdoor camera it's tough to beat an RX100. I might upgrade to a MkIII but I've had a Mk1 since release date and I've actually used it more than my full frame simply because I have it on me more often.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
So I'll be living in France for about seven months and wanted to replace my ancient point n' shoot with something that could take better photos of architecture and landscapes. Photography was always more of a casual hobby for me but the boyfriend has convinced me to step up my game and so I got a Fujifilm X-E1 - but just the body. Now for the lens! I've done a bit of research so I know I should be looking for a wide angle lens, and hopefully one I can use for somewhat casual photography as well. I'm not looking to get fantastic shots of cats or friends honestly, although maybe I can get a nice lens in the future for that. I was convinced too, that if I get a converter, I can also get an older manual lens for pretty cheap. A certain amount of ease of use, though, is still kinda important to me because I'm pretty new to all this. Any recommendations?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
Balqis posted:I've done a bit of research so I know I should be looking for a wide angle lens, and hopefully one I can use for somewhat casual photography as well. I'm not looking to get fantastic shots of cats or friends honestly, although maybe I can get a nice lens in the future for that. I was convinced too, that if I get a converter, I can also get an older manual lens for pretty cheap. A certain amount of ease of use, though, is still kinda important to me because I'm pretty new to all this. Any recommendations? I wouldn't play the "adapted manual lens" game for my primary lens, particularly if you've never manual focused before. They're a nice way to stretch out your lens money a bit but they're a lot less convenient to use than a lens purpose-built for the system. If you don't know what you want, get the 18-55mm lens. They're the gold-standard "babby's first lens", every system has them, and there's a reason. They do an acceptable job at 90% of your shooting, and when you figure out where that 10% is you can buy more specific lenses to address that. If you want a prime lens, a 35mm-equivalent length* somewhere between 35mm and 50mm is the usual recommendation for a one-lens kit, so look at the Fuji 23/27/35mm lenses. If you want two prime lenses I'd get a 18mm f/2 and a 35/1.4, which will be 28mm + 50mm equivalent. * Focal lengths are usually referenced in terms of their full-frame/35mm equivalent, so take the real focal length and multiply by the crop factor, 1.5x here. The shorthand for the FF focal lengths equivalents is: <24mm equivalent: superwide 28mm equivalent: wide 35-40mm equivalent: wide-normal/slight-wide 40-58mm equivalent: normal 60-100mm equivalent: short-tele 100-200mm equivalent: tele/mid-tele >200mm equivalent: supertele/long-tele Or something along those lines. Primes vs zooms is always a bit of a debate. Zooms cover multiple focal lengths, but usually you have to stop down a bit farther to get equivalent sharpness, and they're just slower. Primes force you to zoom with your feet sometimes, but that forces you to think about composition and perspective a little harder, so some people prefer them. Something like a 18-55 is a staple and pretty much everyone owns something similar (17-50, 24-70 on FF, etc). Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Jul 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
Manual lenses are fun, but if you're kinda new and coming from a point and shoot you'll be better served with the 18-55mm or a normal prime.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:I wouldn't play the "adapted manual lens" game for my primary lens, particularly if you've never manual focused before. They're a nice way to stretch out your lens money a bit but they're a lot less convenient to use than a lens purpose-built for the system. The 18-55mm is not the entry level kit lens in the Fuji lineup. That would be the 16-50mm. The 16-50mm is much lighter and wider in terms of FOV, the 18-55 has a larger max aperture, better build quality, and is better edge to edge shot wide open. The focusing speed is slightly better with the 18-55 but not noticeably so. All that said the 16-50mm is no slouch optically.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Manual focusing without a focusing screen has always been a pain in the rear end to me. I can't imagine manual focusing regularly, much less always without some kind of OVF.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 05:48
|
|
|
It's easy when you can cheat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 06:46
|
|
|
I installed magic lantern on my T3i just for focus peaking. I miss it on the 6d so much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 13:51
|
|
|
Dropped my Sony A700 while backpacking. Fortunately got some good shots before the LCD took a poo poo. Any clue where to get this fixed?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
joeshmoetogo posted:Dropped my Sony A700 while backpacking. Fortunately got some good shots before the LCD took a poo poo. Any clue where to get this fixed?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
If you're particularly brave you could get one that's being scrapped for parts and replace the LCD yourself, but you can get another working one for less than $300 if you dig around.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:If you're particularly brave you could get one that's being scrapped for parts and replace the LCD yourself, but you can get another working one for less than $300 if you dig around. I did this with an old Samsung point-and-shoot once. They all had problems with lens motors - but mine had a bad LCD - so I went on ebay and bought a broken lens one for $20 and took its perfectly working LCD.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 10:59
|
|
|
Holy poo poo Keh looks like this decade almost now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
Shellman posted:Holy poo poo Keh looks like this decade almost now. Yeah and in the process they managed to make it even more useless than it already was. What should we sort lenses by? Surely not focal length.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
KEH looks worse and is somehow laid out even shittier. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 01:59
|
|
|
Urgh the old layout, albeit ancient, was so much easier to find what I wanted.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:Yeah and in the process they managed to make it even more useless than it already was. Well you can kinda sorta still sort by focal length by choosing alphabetical sorting
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Urgh the old layout, albeit ancient, was so much easier to find what I wanted. It's ok, we're all here for you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:Yeah and in the process they managed to make it even more useless than it already was. The amazing part is that it does sort them by focal length. But it puts a 100mm before a 17mm, a 300mm before an 85mm... it just uses the first digit. High school project imo
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
dakana posted:The amazing part is that it does sort them by focal length. But it puts a 100mm before a 17mm, a 300mm before an 85mm... it just uses the first digit. High school project imo It was like this before. How did they completely redesign their website without improving it in the ways that would actually have mattered? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:It was like this before. How did they completely redesign their website without improving it in the ways that would actually have mattered? It didn't do that before. 28mm was always well before 100mms.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 07:01
|
|
|
Looks like they paid somebody peanuts to do the whole site in Wordpress. Also their cart doesn't work at all. I tried adding poo poo and my cart is always empty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
There's a used Sigma 50 1.4 for sale for the same price as a used Canon 50 1.4, however its focus switch button is broken so it's stuck on AF. Kind of tempted to snag it but no MF could get annoying but I rarely use MF. Should I wait for a better lens?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
Ringo R posted:There's a used Sigma 50 1.4 for sale for the same price as a used Canon 50 1.4, however its focus switch button is broken so it's stuck on AF. Kind of tempted to snag it but no MF could get annoying but I rarely use MF. Should I wait for a better lens? The only thing I'd be worried about is if the fact that the AF switch is broken implies any other damage, or a proclivity to become damaged easily. Other than that, though, assuming it's a USM lens you should be able to MF by turning the focus ring. Might be tricky to get focus confirmation (I think I get it when my lens is set to MF and I use my AF button on my camera), but assuming you've got back button focus set up (and you should  ) then it'd be pretty seamless.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
Can anyone recommend me some small, cheapish manual flashes with PC sync for use in street photography?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 19:23 |
|
|
try it with a lime posted:Can anyone recommend me some small, cheapish manual flashes with PC sync for use in street photography? I've owned a Vivitar 285HV for 3 years (I own a total of 3) now with no issue. Get that with a metal hot shoe (the ones that come with them suck) and it's about $100.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 19:24
|
|