|
Is there a way to get a 7dii to autofocus with the RC-6 remote in any camera mode other than auto?
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 00:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 12:21 |
|
|
Bubbacub posted:Is there a way to get a 7dii to autofocus with the RC-6 remote in any camera mode other than auto? Turn off bbf. It's just a shutter button
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 00:59
|
|
|
drat! That wasn't explained anywhere in the manual. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:drat! That wasn't explained anywhere in the manual. Thanks. No prob. Best thing to do is set one of your c modes to be 'M with bbf off' so you can just switch that that when you want to use a remote shutter. Or Av if you prefer to roll that way
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
I have a question about higher ISO noise; does it only ever significantly improve by going from crop-sensor to full frame, or do the more advanced crop sensor cameras cope better? I have a 500D (a.k.a. Rebel T1i) and noise starts to make photos iffy around ISO800. I'm curious whether moving up the range without going full frame would do anything about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
rolleyes posted:I have a question about higher ISO noise; does it only ever significantly improve by going from crop-sensor to full frame, or do the more advanced crop sensor cameras cope better? yes, the 70d for example would be a giant improvement over that. i'm sure full frame is even better though
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
And it depends on the full frame sensor brand and model. The Canon 6D is one of the better ones out there. On the Sony side, the A7s is supposed to have crazy good high ISO quality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
rolleyes posted:I have a question about higher ISO noise; does it only ever significantly improve by going from crop-sensor to full frame, or do the more advanced crop sensor cameras cope better? As always it depends on what and how you shoot. If you make huge prints or are doing a lot of action shooting in bad lighting and cropping the results heavily (ie wildlife or sports) then there isn't going to seem to be much improvement in APS-C noise performance in more modern cameras. A little, but not remarkable. If you don't crop heavily or at all, modern APS-C high ISO is pretty great, especially so with good use of noise reduction at web sizes. Its actually pretty hard to see noise in uncropped pictures that have been downsampled for web viewing until you get to insane ISO's. But if you are really picky about noise, absolutely nothing is going to beat a bigger sensor. There is no amount of technological improvement that is ever going to bridge that gap. Also, consider a flash or faster lenses so you don't have to push ISO as hard in the first place. That said, a T1i is pretty old and even if you find the improvements to high ISO are minimal for what you want to do, the improvements in all of the other aspects of a newer camera (AF, fps, buffer, metering/exposure, dual pixel AF, control layout, flash control, etc) might make it worth looking into an upgrade. Cameras aren't just sensor boxes with lens holes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
A Saucy Bratwurst posted:Yep that was my thinking. Glad I don't have to drop big bucks on something I'm not sure how much I'll use. I wasn't going to pay $200 cause I saw 2 for 130 a few days ago that already sold. I'll see about getting a refurb in Australia. I have a 55-250 if you want it, $100. Ive used it twice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
rolleyes posted:I have a question about higher ISO noise; does it only ever significantly improve by going from crop-sensor to full frame, or do the more advanced crop sensor cameras cope better? Yeah, FF makes a huge difference. It depends on what you're doing, but the 5d3 starts feeling iffy for me around like 6400, and maybe somewhere around 3200 for the 7d2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
Laserface posted:I have a 55-250 if you want it, $100. Ive used it twice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
So am I.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2015 07:05
|
|
|
I'm in Brisbane, where you at? I'm looking at one elsewhere for 80 but he's not gunna be able to sell it until Friday.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 02:25
|
|
|
A Saucy Bratwurst posted:I'm in Brisbane, where you at? I'm looking at one elsewhere for 80 but he's not gunna be able to sell it until Friday. Sydney. I can post and use Paypal and all that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 02:37
|
|
|
This other guy is in North Brisbane so I might see what he does and get back to you Friday or Saturday? Just cause he's nice and convenient.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 02:50
|
|
|
That is fine. I have PMs if you need to get in touch.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2015 03:00
|
|
|
Any recommendations for a wide-angle walk-around lens to complement a 24-105L for a Canon 7D? 24mm can be a bit tight on a cropped sensor for interiors. I was thinking the Canon 10-22 but also open to suggestions for third-party lenses as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 13:46
|
|
|
I've heard real good things about the sigma 18-35 f1.8, but I've never personally tried it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 14:44
|
|
|
Just go full frame so your 24-105 can become wide enough. I did.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:Any recommendations for a wide-angle walk-around lens to complement a 24-105L for a Canon 7D? 24mm can be a bit tight on a cropped sensor for interiors. I was thinking the Canon 10-22 but also open to suggestions for third-party lenses as well. I LOVED my 10-22 when I was on crop. I bought a BGN condition one off KEH - the front trim piece fell off a lot but otherwise it was perfect. I took WAY too many pictures with that thing!
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:Just go full frame so your 24-105 can become wide enough. I did. I second this, but it does depend if you are already heavily invested in EF-S or EF glass. Also whether you plan to move to full frame in the future or will you stay on crop bodies for a good long time. I feel like I've broken every EF-S lens I've owned just from general use. But my EF lenses are rock solid and have paid for themselves many times over.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
astr0man posted:I've heard real good things about the sigma 18-35 f1.8, but I've never personally tried it. Do this and let us know.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 04:31
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:Any recommendations for a wide-angle walk-around lens to complement a 24-105L for a Canon 7D? 24mm can be a bit tight on a cropped sensor for interiors. I was thinking the Canon 10-22 but also open to suggestions for third-party lenses as well. I own a 10-22 on a 7D and it is my favorite thing to shoot with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 05:06
|
|
|
The Canon EF-S 10-18 came out recently and received favorable reviews, and is cheap. That said, I owned a 10-22 when I shot crop and it's a pretty rad lens.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 10:13
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:Do this and let us know. Shot with it on my crop body canon for about a year. #1 favorite lens, very sharp and that constant 1.8 aperture is amazing. Would never have sold it if I hadn't moved to full frame. If I did it again, I probably would have upgraded to a prosumer crop body and kept it. Build quality is solid and it comes with a hood, too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:Just go full frame so your 24-105 can become wide enough. I did. I hate you. According to Craigslist I can score a 6D for $1000 and the 10-22 goes for $400. If I sell my 7D for the average going price of $800 then I'm actually making money in a weird degenerate way...
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 07:48
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:I hate you. According to Craigslist I can score a 6D for $1000 and the 10-22 goes for $400. If I sell my 7D for the average going price of $800 then I'm actually making money in a weird degenerate way... Yes!
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 08:22
|
|
|
Could be worse, I just ponied up the money for my wife to get a 5Ds as she's starting to get a little bit of kid shoot/casual wedding gigs now. We get that next week so if anyone wants me to try something specific and post results let me know. (So broke... so very very broke...) I seriously considered the sony A7 alternative but in the actual pictures that I've been seeing I think the canon is just more appropriate for what she/we will use it for. Keeping the 70D around as a backup/wildlife camera, though. Anyone know a good deal on a 70-200L II or an off brand that's equivalent for semi-pros?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
Anubis posted:Could be worse, I just ponied up the money for my wife to get a 5Ds as she's starting to get a little bit of kid shoot/casual wedding gigs now. We get that next week so if anyone wants me to try something specific and post results let me know. (So broke... so very very broke...) The tamron 70-200 2.8 Di VC is good and compares favorably to the canon 70-200 http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/892851-REG/Tamron_20_200mm_F_2_8_DI_VC.html I think the sigma one is poo poo. What made you choose the 5ds? It's basically a camera made for the studio (controlled lighting situations) and it might under-perform in natural low-light situations. (like churches) That is a great camera for product photography though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
KinkyJohn posted:The tamron 70-200 2.8 Di VC is good and compares favorably to the canon 70-200 If you are downsizing it to 5d3 size files, the noise performance is about the same or slightly better afaik. It just doesn't let you set as high ISO's in camera to start with (6400 is the highest with H1 of 12800). So you can get nice 20-24MP files when you have low light, or huge 50MP files when you have good light.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Anubis posted:Anyone know a good deal on a 70-200L II or an off brand that's equivalent for semi-pros? You can get a used Canon 70-200L IS II for a little over what the Tamron costs new and the Canon will be better + hold its value. If you've got the money, I think that's the way to go. That said, a used Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC is almost half what they cost new and seems like a very good lens. Agreed that the current Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS HSM is poo poo. Somehow they managed to make it worse than their older, non-OS versions. It really needs a Sport update.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
KinkyJohn posted:
Most of what she does (beyond vacation pictures) is controlled lighting. Kid/family/senior picture portraits are usually done with pretty controlled lighting conditions. The churches out here in the midwest mostly have stage lighting and don't suffer badly from that old world cathedral gloom you are referring to. I've also seen the reviews featuring outside photography with it and it has appeared to be very solid there. As a bonus, I have a small interest in macro photography and I'm pretty interested in what I can get out of this thing in crops compared to our current 70D. One of the biggest complaints about the 5Ds that I've seen people say is the post processing time and space requirements but my day job is computer programming and the server rack in the corner of my living room with like 12tb raided along with really current computers makes that completely moot. I wasn't about to go swap over to nikon and try to have us both learn a whole new system and swap out our existing lenses so this made a lot more sense to me than trying to find a good deal on a, say, used 5diii. Oh, and I really wouldn't mind her taking more of an interest in product work since it typically won't involve me walking around behind her in uncomfortable clothing on my weekends carrying gear. Thanks for the advice on the 70-200 everyone. Anubis fucked around with this message at 04:25 on Aug 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 04:18
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:You can get a used Canon 70-200L IS II for a little over what the Tamron costs new and the Canon will be better + hold its value. If you've got the money, I think that's the way to go. That said, a used Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC is almost half what they cost new and seems like a very good lens. Where are you seeing this as a comparable price? The lowest I see on ebay it $400 more than the Tamron. Close to that on Amazon and Adorama. I guess I wouldn't consider 30% higher cost "a little over"
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 07:15
|
|
|
"[ts posted:xenophobe" post="449026365"]
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 08:38
|
|
|
The Tamron runs $1500 new at B&H: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/892851-REG/Tamron_20_200mm_F_2_8_DI_VC.html Same at Amazon and Adorama. This is the first three results for Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS II on ebay completed listings:  So, like 10-12% more. Not sure what you guys are seeing  If there's a Tamron for $1100 new somewhere, I'd say that's a great deal and go for that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 08:51
|
|
|
I'm having some problems with the SD card slot on my 5d Mark III. I have to press down on the card really hard to get it to pop back out, and there's no clicking sound anymore. What are my options? Can I send it in to Canon for them to fix it? I'd rather have it replaced before it goes completely bad.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:
Already did. I got it for $975 on some sale a shortly after it came out. I got lucky I guess.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
I got a 5D1 very recently and.... guys............ full frame..... holy poo poo...... I'm never going back to APS-C I shot with a shitload of FF bodies in college, but owning one is a whole different ball game. I am loving it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
Checking out flickr's 'explore by camera' feature is my favorite way to find out just how green the grass always is on the other side. One thing I've noticed when comparing photos from the two camera models that I own (5D2 and a6000) is that the majority of posted photos taken with a 5D2 are resized down so small that they hardly ever reach the edges of my monitor when I click over to the full screen view. A6000 photos on the other hand are generally p66osted at such large sizes that the magnified view takes up the whole screen and then some; you end up having to scroll around to view the entire picture. I know that the a6000 has a few extra megapixels, but to my eye there doesn't seem to be much of a difference between images out the respective cameras in terms of resolution, i.e. by the time I've cropped and run them through LR, they both look about the same size, and both hold up well too a close inspection, in my opinion. So why are so many people resizing their images so dramatically? Also, has anyone else noticed that the keyword search in the 5D2 section of Camera Explorer is broken, or its it just me?
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 12:21 |
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Checking out flickr's 'explore by camera' feature Many people who take their photography "seriously" deliberately upload down-sized images to flickr to help combat people stealing their work. It happens a lot that pro photographers' work gets used without permission in billboards, signs, ads, etc. Sometimes they even leave the author copyright image on it! So, it's often recommended to just not upload a billboard-printable image to flickr. That also supports your later claim in court that you have the original, since you have a higher res file (or a raw file) which nobody else has. This fits into and overall caveat about looking at the flickr "explore by camera" feature. Most of what you are seeing there is actually differentiating by photographer skill level, not by equipment. When you look at images at web resolution it would be pretty hard to tell an photo taken under studio lights using an iphone from a hassleblad. That's not to say there are no differences, but that those differences don't show up much on flickr. What I think you see is just that pros (and serious amatereurs) are attracted to certain types of camera. In your example, I think the image resolution difference is just that people shooting an older full frame camera are more likely to be "taking themselves seriously" and not uploading full resolution images, while people shooting the sony will include more casual shooters who don't care about that stuff. Not to say there aren't great shooters using the sony, or people who take it seriously with the sony. But at this point I think people shooting a 5D2 are generally a different type of shooter than someone with an a6000, and they will take different types of pictures and treat them differently online.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 16:26
|
|
