|
harperdc posted:Then think about the pancake 40 because it's soooooo awesome :3 What makes the pancake awesome? I debated on getting it instead of the 50mm 1.8, but chose the 50mm for the extra aperture.
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 17:17 |
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:what in the gently caress Tamron 150-600 which, while not as enormous as the fabled Bigma, is still sizable enough to deserve the nickname "Tamzooka".
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
Phummus posted:What makes the pancake awesome? I debated on getting it instead of the 50mm 1.8, but chose the 50mm for the extra aperture. Build quality and image quality. Metal mount and better plastics; a little narrower aperture, but 2.8 is still fine (the 50 mm is only really usable after it's stopped down a bit). I'm also happier with the image quality coming out of the 40 mm than from the 50; it just seems to be better glass. I have mine still but I've never been tempted to put it back on since getting the pancake lens.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
Pure sharpness wide open. And its better built than the 50 1.8. The pancake is viewed more of as the lens you WILL keep if/when you upgrade to full frame than the thrifty fifty. 40mm is closer to "normal" on FF than 50mm, deriving from the diagonal measure of the sensor (43mm). To get the framing and DOF of the 50 1.8 on FF you had with crop, step up the 85mm 1.8 which is another great, great lens. In fact, the 85mm on FF would actually have to be stopped down to 2.8 (its happy zone) to give equivalent DOF of the 50mm wide open on crop. Seamonster fucked around with this message at 16:24 on Jul 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 16:22
|
|
|
harperdc posted:Tamron 150-600 which, while not as enormous as the fabled Bigma, is still sizable enough to deserve the nickname "Tamzooka". Bigma. psh. The sigmonster sneers at these lenses Edit: Also the 40 is awesome. On the SL1 it's like "I can't believe this is a DSLR" tiny as a package. timrenzi574 fucked around with this message at 16:40 on Jul 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:I thought the metering system wasn't coupled to the AF system? For instance, spot metering uses the approximate area of the center point but that doesn't mean its "tied" to that AF point... quote:Metering algorithm
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
Refurb 7D is crazy discounted at $719. http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/cameras/refurbished-eos-digital-slr-cameras/eos-7d-body-refurbished edit: Also not sure it got mentioned already, but Amazon is showing the 7D as "discontinued" Star War Sex Parrot fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Jul 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:I thought in evaluative metering, the weighting gets biased towards the AF points that locked. Here's an excerpt of the 7D manual: Just checked - it does in AF, but not in MF. Edit: 70D tested
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
harperdc posted:Do this and then go get that Tamron 70-300 too and you'll be set. Then think about the pancake 40 because it's soooooo awesome :3 This is the exact set up I have minus the 40. Easily covers all ranges, and Tamron makes amazing lenses for the price.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 18:17
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Refurb 7D is crazy discounted at $719. Why couldn't this been months ago when I had to choose what new camera to buy...
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
I have a Canon 430EZ flash from Ye Olde Filme Times. Is there any reason it wouldn't work with a modern DSLR? Would a modern flash be a significant upgrade or are they all pretty much bright lights?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
It should still work. If you really want to upgrade though, consider trying yong nuo. It's pretty much a knock off Canon but at a much cheaper price and the brand has actually matured quite a bit
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
So, I had a shiny brand new Canon DSLR show up Friday, took a few shots with, but didn't really get a chance to really go crazy until today, when I went down to one of the parks on Lake Washington to watch the Seafair air show including the Blue Angels. Took a bunch of pictures of the classic warbirds flying around, and then the National Guard team started flying; there would be those guys and the Marines before the Blue Angels even got started. At that point the new camera seized up with a disconcerting clacking sound, and displayed an "error 20" message. Ohhhh crap. Tried powering off to no avail. Tried swapping lenses. Tried swapping batteries. Looked it up on my phone's internet in a panic, apparently its a mechanical shutter failure that some people get with new cameras, requiring replacement. Great. Remembered I had tossed my old Powershot in the bag, so I grabbed that. Dead loving battery. Apparently, not only am I the unluckiest motherfucker in the park, I'm the dumbest, too. So, spent the rest of the afternoon just *watching* airplanes like a savage. I can't even post any Mustang or Spitfire pictures because my old card reader doesn't work with this giant new SD card and the camera won't talk to the computer while that error's going on. What a day.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 01:18
|
|
|
I'm in the market for a nifty 50. I've been looking at the 50mm f/1.8 which is pretty drat cheap and seems to have good reviews. However, I've been wondering if the upgrade to the 50mm f/1.4 is worth it. Are there any flaws with the 50/1.8 that somebody that is pretty new to photography will notice? The OP seems to say no. The only difference that I *might* notice appears to be the USM which just isn't as noisy and it focuses faster which is probably nullified by the comparatively slow auto focus of my camera (a t3i). Is this correct? Also, am I just blind or do neither Sigma nor Tamron have any 50mm lenses?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
Is there a reason you're zoned in on 50mm as the lens you want? The 50/1.8 is certainly a serviceable lens for the price, but depending on your actual needs there's probably a better way to go about spending your money. The 40 pancake is probably slightly better optically and just as cheap. The Sigma 30/1.4 is more expensive but a much better lens in both image quality and build quality. The Tamrom 60/2.0 Macro is more versatile if you're gonna do specialized shooting like portraits and dabble in macro.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
The 50mm f/1.4 is a worthwhile upgrade from the f/1.8 if you can get it for the right price. For example, Canon Refurbished had it for $271 two days ago (now sold out) and there's almost always one in the gear trading thread for ~$200-250.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:The 50mm f/1.4 is a worthwhile upgrade from the f/1.8 if you can get it for the right price. For example, Canon Refurbished had it for $271 two days ago (now sold out) and there's almost always one in the gear trading thread for ~$200-250. What? I thought they were a few hundred more easily
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 18:26
|
|
|
Soulex posted:What? I thought they were a few hundred more easily and there's one right now in the gear thread for $260 but the idiot is on probation for no pics. edit: And here's the one last month that never sold at $225 Star War Sex Parrot fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Aug 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
They are if you don't hunt around. Get a 35/2 IS instead. God I wish nikon made something like it. Instead they have 2 different 35/1.8, neither of which are great on top of the FX model being crazy money for what it is. About time sigma starts making compact full frame primes now that they've stolen everyone's lunch in the fast primes segment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 18:37
|
|
|
Nezzar posted:I'm in the market for a nifty 50. I've been looking at the 50mm f/1.8 which is pretty drat cheap and seems to have good reviews. However, I've been wondering if the upgrade to the 50mm f/1.4 is worth it. The 40mm pancake would be a good pick unless you really need the f1.8 aperture. It's currently on sale refurb direct from Canon for ~$112 + tax free ship. The STM focusing on the 40 is a fair bit quieter than the 50 as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 18:39
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:They are if you don't hunt around. Get a 35/2 IS instead. God I wish nikon made something like it. Instead they have 2 different 35/1.8, neither of which are great on top of the FX model being crazy money for what it is. Yeah, the Canon 35/IS is a fantastic lens and way better than their 1.4L and better than any of the Nikon's I've used.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
The 50/1.8 is a great lens for the price, mind you. Definitely feels light and cheap, and it's a little soft below about 2.2, but there's nothing else wrong with the optics. It's sharper and less prone to distortion than the kit lens by a fair bit. Plus wide open you'll feel like you're able to shoot black bears in a cave at night compared to most other lenses. I got a refurb 40mm pancake a little later, though, and that's been my go-to ever since. It's so small it's silly, yet seems even a little sharper than the nifty fifty on my experience. I don't really miss the extra f-stops enough to go back.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
I've done a good bit of reading and asking questions on the 50 vs 40, and as far as I've been able to tell, the 50 is probably the better lens if you have an older body vs the 40 if you have a newer or smaller body. Per about a dozen reviews I've read, the focus speed is very similar, though the 40 is quieter for video. The IQ at 2.8 is close enough to call a draw and the 50 pulls ahead a bit around f8 or so. The difference in field of view between 50 and 40 is about half a step backwards. So the 40 gives you better size, quieter focus, and better bokeh (7 blades). The 50 gives you the option for more speed (at the expense of sharpness), but worse bokeh (5 blades), and around $50 in your pocket. If I had a T3i, I would want the 40 since its size is a better fit, the ISO performance is good enough to make 2.8 plenty fast, and it's inexpensive. Since I have a 40D, I want the 50 since I only go up to ISO 1600 (and begrudgingly at that) and I'm already giving up plenty of size in my body and 2.8 always seems to leave me shooting at 1/30 or so indoors.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
Nezzar posted:I'm in the market for a nifty 50. I've been looking at the 50mm f/1.8 which is pretty drat cheap and seems to have good reviews. However, I've been wondering if the upgrade to the 50mm f/1.4 is worth it. I asked the thread the same question a few months back. Ended up going with the 50/1.8 initially but my wife surprised me with the 40/2.8 a month later for father's day. The 50mm sits there collecting dust unless I'm specifically shooting portrait-style pics, while the 40mm stays on my T1i 95% of the time. My Tamron 17-50 covers everything else.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
Back in January I was in the market for the nifty 50 or the 40 pancake, and ended up settling on the 40. Since I use a crop body, the wider field of view is nice, and things like the 7 blade aperture, modern autofocus motor, and tiny size were all big pluses over the extra stop or so of the 50mm which everyone says isn't all that sharp wide open. The 40mm is a great walk around lens, and has been surprisingly good in other situations. If I end up getting a fast 50mm at some point, I'll spend more money for something that is sharp at its widest, rather than something that I would end up stopping down to what the 40mm pancake already does.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 06:10
|
|
|
Fun fact: you can get a 40mm pancake lens refurbished from Canon for $112 right now if money is your main concern.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 15:39
|
|
|
For what it's worth, I still use my 40 after getting a full frame camera and a bunch of expensive lenses, while my 50 just collects dust.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 16:13
|
|
|
Whoa, thanks for the input everyone. I think I'll be going with the 40mm pancake. I've read about it here before but for some reason did not consider it at all. It being flat is pretty nice if I want to take on some bike tours and there's not a whole lot of room in my backpack. Also, I'm in germany. I think I can't take advantage of refurbished stuff from canon :/
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
You'll be happy with the lens. You do have to be careful and store it with the lens retracted, especially if you're going to travel with it on a bike. When it's on the camera and powered on, switch it to manual focus and turn the ring until the lens is pulled in all the way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
Mirage posted:Fun fact: you can get a 40mm pancake lens refurbished from Canon for $112 right now if money is your main concern.  Maybe I'll put it on SA Mart.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:You'll be happy with the lens. You do have to be careful and store it with the lens retracted, especially if you're going to travel with it on a bike. When it's on the camera and powered on, switch it to manual focus and turn the ring until the lens is pulled in all the way. With the STM you don't have to switch it to manual focus to turn the focus ring. The camera just has to be on and awake. If there is something negative about the shorty 40, this is kind of a half bad thing. It is nice that the STM allows for manual focus at any time without worry that you'll break anything. But that comes with the fact that the focus ring isn't hooked to anything. It has a sloppy feel that takes some getting use to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 18:37
|
|
|
Mirage posted:Fun fact: you can get a 40mm pancake lens refurbished from Canon for $112 right now if money is your main concern. Welp, RIP my money. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:I'm still trying to sell my Tamron 60 Macro on Craigslist so I can use part of the money to buy a 40 pancake but no one has loving messaged me about it How much?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
Soulex posted:How much? I put it up on SA Mart. Here's the thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3655774
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
Base Emitter posted:I have a Canon 430EZ flash from Ye Olde Filme Times. Is there any reason it wouldn't work with a modern DSLR? Would a modern flash be a significant upgrade or are they all pretty much bright lights? A question from a few days ago, but I thought it would be worthy of a quick effortpost for the newbies lurking the thread. The simple answer is that the answer to all three of your questions is: Yes. The flash will work with a modern DSLR, a modern flash will be a significant upgrade, and they are all pretty much bright lights. I bought a used Canon 540EZ flash years ago after I got my T1i. I thought I got a good deal on it, but every time I used it, my pictures came out horribly overexposed. After some research, it turns out the technology changed significantly between the 'EZ' model film camera flashes, and 'EX' model digital camera flashes. I wound up scrapping my EZ, and picked up a used 430EX (mostly because I'm a lazy rear end that couldn't be assed with learning how to use a flash in manual mode). In Ye Olde Filme Tymes, Canon made cameras that had a photocell pointed at the film in the camera. When you took a picture using an 'EZ' model flash, the camera would tell the flash to start firing when the shutter opened, wait for the photocell to reach a certain point, then tell the flash to stop. With Canon DSLR cameras nowadays, the flash fires a 'pre-flash' before opening the shutter. A photocell near the mirror/pentaprism measures the exposure value, the processor in the camera runs the numbers, and then the flash is told how bright it needs to be. Finally, the camera opens the shutter, and the flash fires the calculated value. Of course, all this happens in a fraction of a second, and the pre-flash is pretty much imperceptible. So, yes, an 'EZ' model flash will work on any Canon DSLR. However, the technology for metering is so different that an 'EZ' flash will only work in manual mode. You'll need to take test shots at different flash powers and lens apertures to learn when you're using too much or too little flash, and change setting to zero in on the perfect exposure. After a while, you build up your camera chops and can do it by reflex/intuition/skill. A modern flash is a fairly significant upgrade, as it allows you to run-and-gun with the flash. You can slap an EX model flash on your camera, let it do all the number-crunching for you, and tweak the flash exposure using camera controls on the fly (instead of reaching up and adjusting it on the flash between shots). Like caberham said, modern Yongnuo flashes are kind of the go-to knockoff brand for Canon Speedlites; they have most of the bells and whistles of the Canon flashes, at about a third of the price. And as always, be wary of really old non-Canon flashes. Supposedly, there are a few out there that rely on a switch in film cameras closing a circuit, and will dump the flash voltage through the camera. This was fine in film camera days with no electronics in the camera, but is a real day-ruiner with digital cameras. Unibrow fucked around with this message at 10:04 on Aug 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 09:58
|
|
|
Just a quick update. I took the threads advice and got the tamron 15-70 2.8. It should arrive today. Test shots to follow. I read a couple of reviews on the Tamron 70-300 that said the VC was more of a hindrance than a help. Any experience with that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 14:29
|
|
|
I think you mean 17-50? You'll be pleased. Mine basically lived on my camera when I wasn't using my 30mm.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 14:38
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:I think you mean 17-50? You'll be pleased. Mine basically lived on my camera when I wasn't using my 30mm. 17-50 yes. Curse you multitasking!
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
Phummus posted:Just a quick update. I took the threads advice and got the tamron 15-70 2.8. It should arrive today. Test shots to follow. The VC on mine was rock solid. Maybe they got a dud?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 17:17 |
|
|
I have mine without, you really don't need it to be honest. The 70-300 is good too. I'd recommend it without to be honest. Cheaper, and you really don't need the VC
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:38
|
|