|
Sounds like it's time to block all those lovely shopping channels with a PIN too. One over here was selling refurbished MacBooks from 2009 with a small RAM/HDD boost and didn't once mentioned their age and kept pushing how this was the "best tech this Christmas."!They wanted £500 ($780). Utter crooks.
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 11:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 03:55 |
|
|
Bazanga posted:Welp, that's what I figured. Thanks for the input. I'll start the return process now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 12:18
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:FYI your mother is batshit. Who the gently caress impulse-purchases a grand worth of stuff on a salesperson's advice *for someone else*? To be fair, the intent was well-meant and sweet, but very naive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 13:58
|
|
|
I'm hoping to get some feedback on a few entry-level DSLRs. I was originally sold on the T5i after talking to a couple people and actually fooling around with one at a Best Buy. I also played with a couple Nikons they had there and preferred the feel of the Canon, but I'm still such a beginner I'm sure I can get used to whatever. When I went to Best Buy I had already pretty much decided on the T5i, but after coming home and doing more research I found people online comparing it unfavorably to similarly priced Nikons. The Nikons I'm considering now are the D3300, D5300, and D7000. I'm pretty sure I'd prefer the D5300 over the D3300 just for the bells and whistles (more autofocus sensors, wifi which makes pictures look great) and the difference is only $100. The D7000 is a more recent contender and I'm having trouble deciding between the D5300 and D7000. Since the D5300 doesn't have an autofocus motor in the body, I understand that that restricts the number of lenses that work with it. On the other hand, the D5300 has the previously mentioned bells and whistles, and is a newer product which may or may not matter? I've been trying to get my feet wet in DSLR reviews and breakdowns over the last two weeks. Photography has always been a "maybe someday" type of thing for me, and now that I'm done with my master's degree I think I'll have the time. My wife and I are having our first baby in March, so I'll be able to take pictures of it, which is sort of what made me want to do this. I've been borrowing my dad's old Yashica TL-Electro for the last three weeks or so just to make sure I'm interested in investing the time and money into taking good photos, and I definitely am. I also definitely want to stop paying to have film developed. For what it's worth, my dad has a few decent lenses for his Yashica that he said I can have whenever I buy a DSLR. The Yashica, being a Pentax ripoff, uses the M42 mount so I'll buy an adapter to make them work with whatever I buy. I want to invest in decent lenses that can actually autofocus, though, which is why I'm curious about the differences between having an autofocus motor in-body (T5i, D7000) and not (D3300, D5300). Sorry for the  , and thanks for considering my newbie question.
Seaniqua fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Dec 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 15:56
|
|
|
If you like the feel of the T5i better, go for it honestly. Nikon and Canon are basically equal until you start getting into the higher end and more edge cases, so go with whatever feels nice right now. If you do decide to go Nikon anyway, the D5300 might be the better choice right now. Nikon is rapidly moving away from screw-drive lenses, so there's not too much worry of buying a lens you can't auto focus any more, unless you go dig through a pawn shop's camera section. As for the autofocus motor, it doesn't matter as much now as it used to. The screw drive lenses used to be a bit smaller and faster than Canon's electric motors, but the only company to still make screw drive lenses in 2015 is Sony and maybe Pentax. Any lens you see from Nikon that has AF-S in the name is an electric focus lens, and that's a lot of lenses now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Sounds like it's time to block all those lovely shopping channels with a PIN too. evil_bunnY posted:FYI your mother is batshit. Who the gently caress impulse-purchases a grand worth of stuff on a salesperson's advice *for someone else*?  TheLastManStanding posted:I've never seen any lens with two focusing rings, let alone one for an EF mount. You're probably mistaking one of the rings which controls the focal length.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
Seaniqua posted:preferred the feel of the Canon Seaniqua posted:For what it's worth, my dad has a few decent lenses for his Yashica that he said I can have whenever I buy a DSLR. The Yashica, being a Pentax ripoff, uses the M42 mount so I'll buy an adapter to make them work with whatever I buy. The K-50 is in about the same market segment (features / price) as the T5i. There are differences between those cameras, of course, but for a given budget they're a pair to cross-shop. Elliotw2 posted:go dig through a pawn shop's camera section. Bazanga posted:That's it. I'll talk with him more at Christmas to see what his setup was. He's a semiprofessional photographer so I'm sure I was using some high end poo poo. I'm embarrassed I don't know more about the gear, but I'm slowly learning. Also, any DSLR wearing any lens can be put into manual focus mode. How to do it varies by camera, but it's always possible. Especially for close-up shots, manual focus is much less irritating than autofocus (with the possible exception of really good - really expensive - gear). I'm going to go out on a bit of a limb here and guess your uncle has a 70-210 macro telezoom of some kind. Everybody made one back in the day, and it was very popular to add something like a macro or close-focusing function to those lenses. They're good fun on modern APS-C DSLRs (such as the Canon T5i, Nikon D5300, or any current Pentax) even if the focal length range doesn't make as much sense on a crop sensor as on 35mm film. Whatever, I have a couple such lenses and I enjoy them, and they're cheap and plentiful. Don't be embarrassed by ignorance, enthusiastic learning is a good thing. Go talk to your uncle and take some pictures (on your phone if you have to) of the lenses.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
What exactly does Canon mean when they say the 24-105L requires a front filter to complete its weather sealing? Common sense says something is either sealed from the elements or not sealed. If there's one area where water or dust can get in then the entire weather sealing design is moot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:What exactly does Canon mean when they say the 24-105L requires a front filter to complete its weather sealing? Common sense says something is either sealed from the elements or not sealed. If there's one area where water or dust can get in then the entire weather sealing design is moot. It's sealed, but for the front element. With a filter on, the front element is also sealed. When in circumstances where you need the seal, you put on the most appropriate filter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 03:08
|
|
|
But then what prevents Canon from sealing the front element without a filter?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:But then what prevents Canon from sealing the front element without a filter? I'd expect either cost or mechanics. It's really not a big deal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
Even if the weather sealing isn't complete, intermediate seals still provide protection for the camera body.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
I ended up getting an Olympus O-MD E-M10 instead of a traditional larger DSLR. It's been pretty great so far. Doing the lessons in that Understanding Exposure book you all recommend all the time is also really good. I'm just saying things are really good. I tried using lightroom, and it's really slick but is there anything kind of as good that isn't so expensive/require a subscription? It's not like I ever do anything too complex.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
There's always the RAW converter that comes with the camera, or something like darktable if you run OSX/Linux.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:There's always the RAW converter that comes with the camera, or something like darktable if you run OSX/Linux. Nice, darktable looks pretty interesting. Thanks yah
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
hatesfreedom posted:I tried using lightroom, and it's really slick but is there anything kind of as good that isn't so expensive/require a subscription? It's not like I ever do anything too complex. Lightroom is available for $150 standalone (no subscription)
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
Doctor w-rw-rw- posted:Lightroom is available for $150 standalone (no subscription) Check Slickdeals before you buy, there are a number of lovely printer + LR5 deals for ~$75-80 usually.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
hatesfreedom posted:I tried using lightroom, and it's really slick but is there anything kind of as good that isn't so expensive/require a subscription? It's not like I ever do anything too complex.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
Radbot posted:Check Slickdeals before you buy, there are a number of lovely printer + LR5 deals for ~$75-80 usually. I found Lightroom for $80 on Amazon through secondary sellers. Oh yeah. On the advice of this thread I ended up purchasing the D7000 for $480 and a Nikkor 50mm for about $100. Both were new so I feel I got a pretty good deal. Got Understanding Exposure for xmas and have taken about a thousand terrible photos! poo poo is pretty fun though.  MOS_0533 by sporklift, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
I touched on this before but for a crop sensor camera, does it have any special advantage to get a prime specifically for it vs a prime suited for a full frame camera? Specifically the canon 24mm pancake vs 40mm for a 60d. More usable light vs ?? Most reviews say they just end up with both.. 24mm for everything but low light and specific portraits, etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 02:42
|
|
|
Roundboy posted:I touched on this before but for a crop sensor camera, does it have any special advantage to get a prime specifically for it vs a prime suited for a full frame camera? They only make 2 Ef-s primes, so if you limit yourself to that you'd be stuck with only those two. (24mm & 60mm macro) As far as the pancakes , the only advantage of one vs the other is which focal length is gonna work better for you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
Sorry I was referring to the two pancakes. 24mm seems the more versatile for me but I was wondering if I was locking myself out of features or something with one over the other. 24mm is what I am probably ending up with as a starter lens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
the 24 pancake on a 60d will be equal in field of view to the 40 pancake on a full frame camera (6d, 5d, 1d) the 24 pancake won't work on full frame. the 24 pancake is cheaper than the 40 pancake
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
Roundboy posted:Sorry I was referring to the two pancakes. Nah, they are the same size, same aperture , and pretty much the same optically. The 40 is just longer and a touch more expensive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
Students can buy lightroom for something like $40-50 even if art isn't your major.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:Nah, they are the same size, same aperture , and pretty much the same optically. The 40 is just longer and a touch more expensive. welp, pulled the trigger on a canon refurb 60d and a new 24mm pancake. Can't wait to take horrible shots of my 'understanding exposure' book
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Roundboy posted:welp, pulled the trigger on a canon refurb 60d and a new 24mm pancake. Can't wait to take horrible shots of my 'understanding exposure' book Enjoy!
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
hatesfreedom posted:
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
Roundboy posted:welp, pulled the trigger on a canon refurb 60d and a new 24mm pancake. Can't wait to take horrible shots of my 'understanding exposure' book I have a few of those
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2015 04:59
|
|
|
So I am enjoying the hell out of this 60d and 24mm pancake... and it had me looking at older pics taken with a 50mm 1/8 so i grabbed one of them as well. (its only $90 why the hell not) My question is : Is there a good rule of thumb to tell me which aperture is the proper one for all subjects in focus? For instance f/2 on the 50 works for one face, but barely gets the person next to them. I have a DOF preview button, but I would like to be a little quicker then : Set my f stop, see if it all works, adjust f stop, now adjust shutter, etc for proper exposure. Unless I should leave it at something like f/4 or f/8 for more general usage unless I am setting up a specific shot? Is this a little TOO photography 101 ?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
It varies according to the field of view of the lens, but at 50mm I'd say maybe f/4 or so would be a good one for a small group. This is something that's probably best to learn by experimenting though. Get some stuffed animals or family, go line them up, and play around until you feel more comfortable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
Yup, nothing beats some direct experience. I find that f/8 gets a whole face in focus most of the time, as well as 90% of what's in the frame in a typical landscape shot. If I absolutely need everything to be in focus, f/16 or f/22. In Understanding Exposure, Bryan Peterson suggests using f/22 every chance you get.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
DoF completely depends on the focus distance so practice practice practice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:In Understanding Exposure, Bryan Peterson suggests using f/22 every chance you get. That's because Bryan Peterson lives closer to the sun than we do. (I actually thought he said set it to f/5.6 and forget about it - maybe that's another author.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
right, I love this pic but f/2 was too wide to get them both in whereas is juuuust snuck in here  yep.. gotta take an rear end ton more pics to figure it out
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Yup, nothing beats some direct experience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
To quote that very website,quote:Even when a camera system is near or just past its diffraction limit, other factors such as focus accuracy, motion blur and imperfect lenses are likely to be more significant. Diffraction therefore limits total sharpness only when using a sturdy tripod, mirror lock-up and a very high quality lens. It's really not something to worry about in 99% of cases.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
I've never taken a picture that was diffraction limited. I've taken around 100 000 (seriously) that were not completely in focus, had a too-slow shutter speed, or were simply very poorly exposed (blown highlights are much less common than muddy, ugly shadows that turn into colourful noise when pushed up in LR). What I'm saying is I've got way too many problems to deal with before I start worrying about circles of confusion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 06:46
|
|
|
Roundboy posted:So I am enjoying the hell out of this 60d and 24mm pancake... and it had me looking at older pics taken with a 50mm 1/8 so i grabbed one of them as well. (its only $90 why the hell not) If you've got a smart phone, or maybe there's even a website, you can get yourself an automatic dof calculator. You just plug in sensor size, aperture, and focal length and it'll tell you everything you need to know about dof. Also, always focus on the eyes. Of course this is hard with two subjects.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 14:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 03:55 |
|
|
I know the Tamron 17-50/2.8 non-VC is the consensus recommendation as a replacement for the standard 18-55 kit lens. But what about the Sigma 17-50/2.8 (which has optical stabilization) -- is that worth looking at as well?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2015 23:09
|
|