|
Lutha Mahtin posted:lol if any of you think the people buying that will care about nerdy sensor analysis spreadsheets or corporate branding strategy "I think I'll save my money for the next iPhone" <---- that is what is really going to happen
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:50 |
|
|
canon still sells a pretty good amount of soccer mom slr's every year, although it is decreasing
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
But can I get a lens that matches the color of the body, Canon?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 03:06
|
|
|
Schneider Heim posted:But can I get a lens that matches the color of the body, Canon? See this is where canon screwed up, they should have made a desert camo rebel so sales of their L series lenses would skyrocket due to the matching color. The tacticool crowd is thoroughly untapped.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:"I think I'll save my money for the next iPhone" <---- that is what is really going to happen by this logic canon would have been put out of business decades ago by polaroid
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 14:07
|
|
|
Walmart exclusive Realtree Rebel 2-lens kit with matching lens wraps. They'll fly off the shelves. Canon if you're reading, this is a patented idea and u need to hire me if u want to use it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
Ryand-Smith posted:Has anyone in here used the 15-85 EF-S glass? Just asking for idle curiosity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
What was wrong with the replies to the original question?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
I'm going to ask a potentially stupid question here... My partner decided she wanted me to take up a hobby other than gaming and reading, so she decided photography would be great and picked up a Canon 700D for me at a reasonably good price. We picked it up from the guy who'd just upgraded his camera to a 7D, hence getting shut of the 700D... It's been perfect for a few days but over Xmas the live view suddenly started to freeze up for no reason at all, now any time I switch to on it freezes and doesn't work. I have to take photos using the viewfinder which is fine, but obviously I'd rather the camera worked 100%. Does anyone have any ideas what it could be?... It doesn't freeze in the menu, it takes photos perfectly, it's literally just the live view. We changed the SD card shortly before the issue but I can't imagine it's that. I've switched lenses with a friend, it's made no change.. I've changed batteries, reset the menu settings etc.. I'm at a loss. It got gradually worse over the course of a day, freezing after 30 seconds or so till it got to its current state of not working at all the moment i switch to live view. Please help me fellow goons! Here's a link I found to another forum with someone having the same problem, with no help but I figure the photo on there could be helpful: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4075395
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
Sounds strange. This may not help, but it couldn't hurt to make sure you're running the latest firmware.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 02:53
|
|
|
Have you tested it to see if it still takes pictures now that the live view freezes up instantly? How about longer exposures? Can you go into a dark room and make a long exposure (~30 seconds)? Does the make a properly exposed image? Besides updating the firmware, that's all I can expect to do. .. Someone having a problem with their Canon reminded me that I know someone who has a problem with their XTi. The little spring that I think governs the positionof the AF sensor in relation to the mirror, has slipped out of its setting, so now AF doesn't work. The spring just sits loose, but still attached to the mirror/AF unit assembly. Does anyone know if it's possible to just push it back into place, or would it need professional repair, ie time to get a new cheap Rebel, as the cost of repair is probably more? I'm not afraid to mess with this thing myself a little bit either, because there's very little to lose.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
I've updated the firmware, it was the first thing I thought of but it's still doing it unfortunately. It takes photos perfectly, the LCD screen still displays the preview after taking a shot and shows the info fine for the shot on the screen too, I can change shutter speed etc just fine and it's all reflected on the screen fine. It's just when it's being used in live view for taking shots that it dies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 13:48
|
|
|
Also, is the camera recording video even while the screen is frozen? (Assuming the LCD screen is frozen during video recording, too.) If live view doesn't work, long exposures (or any function that has the sensor switched on for more than a fraction of a second) could also be affected. If live view doesn't work, but extended exposures do, then you can have a better idea of what the problem is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
I've seen something similar like that happen with batteries going bad. You've already swapped that out though so I don't know.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
Long exposures work fine, I've just taken a photo with a 30 second exposure that was fine, so it's safe to assume it's not a sensor issue?...
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
Probably not, but what about video?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 02:24
|
|
|
I just managed to pick up a used Manfrotto 294 Carbon with the 496RC2 head for less than the cost of a new headless 290 Carbon - and I mean less than what people actually sell it for, not just less than Manfrotto's 'optimistic' RRP. It's described as being in "as new" condition so if that's accurate I'm counting this as a hell of a bargain. I'm excited to finally have a decent lightweight tripod for landscape/nature photography when I'm hiking and backpacking. rolleyes fucked around with this message at 13:47 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 13:44
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Probably not, but what about video? My bad, I did test that. It wouldn't take video at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Of course the screen would freeze when you go to LV to take video, but it also doesn't record a video file when you press the record button? Is there any way to set the camera so that pressing the LV button goes straight into video recording? You should probably take it to a shop if you want to get it fixed, but if you want to gently caress around and try to diagnose the problem yourself, try to see if you can get it to somehow make a video recording. You could also try setting it up for tethered shooting. If you can get a live view feed to your computer but not the rear LCD, it's possible that your sensor is still good, but that there's something wrong with the feed to the rear LCD. It could be as simple as a cable ribbon replacement in that case, and a broken Canon DSLR of similar spec could possibly supply the parts. Another thing that's maybe worth looking into is Magic Lantern. There may be some kind of diagnostic function you can run from there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 04:20
|
|
|
I have a 5DSR and am thinking about picking up a new lens for shooting while I'm traveling or out with friends. Right now I use a Canon 17-40mm F/4L but I want something with a larger aperture. Thinking the Canon 35mm f/1.4L, not sure if I can justify the extra cash on the newer version. The Canon 24mm F/1.4L is a possibility too. I shoot quite a bit indoors with not so great light and don't want to use a flash. Don't need anything too long, I really enjoy shooting in the range that I do now. Any suggestions?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 07:40
|
|
|
prompt posted:I have a 5DSR and am thinking about picking up a new lens for shooting while I'm traveling or out with friends. Right now I use a Canon 17-40mm F/4L but I want something with a larger aperture. Thinking the Canon 35mm f/1.4L, not sure if I can justify the extra cash on the newer version. The Canon 24mm F/1.4L is a possibility too. I shoot quite a bit indoors with not so great light and don't want to use a flash. Don't need anything too long, I really enjoy shooting in the range that I do now. Any suggestions? If you're shooting on the 5DSR then defnitely look at the Mk. II versions of either of those lenses. The 35mm 1.4 II L is expensive as hell, but quality wise it's Otus level and if you love that focal length then you'll probably be using that lens for as long as you use Canon cameras. The 24mm isn't quite as superior to the competition, but it's a good lens and slightly better than it's 24mm equivalents.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 08:10
|
|
|
prompt posted:I have a 5DSR and am thinking about picking up a new lens for shooting while I'm traveling or out with friends. Right now I use a Canon 17-40mm F/4L but I want something with a larger aperture. Thinking the Canon 35mm f/1.4L, not sure if I can justify the extra cash on the newer version. The Canon 24mm F/1.4L is a possibility too. I shoot quite a bit indoors with not so great light and don't want to use a flash. Don't need anything too long, I really enjoy shooting in the range that I do now. Any suggestions? I think that those lenses are way too wide to be convenient for traveling, unless you're carrying a 50mm or more with you. If you're thinking of a lens for tourism, I'd say 24-70 2.8 is a solid choice (I'm probably fumbling the exact Focal length, sorry).
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 08:39
|
|
|
prompt posted:I have a 5DSR and am thinking about picking up a new lens for shooting while I'm traveling or out with friends. Right now I use a Canon 17-40mm F/4L but I want something with a larger aperture. Thinking the Canon 35mm f/1.4L, not sure if I can justify the extra cash on the newer version. The Canon 24mm F/1.4L is a possibility too. I shoot quite a bit indoors with not so great light and don't want to use a flash. Don't need anything too long, I really enjoy shooting in the range that I do now. Any suggestions? If you can deal with a slower focusing speed, the Sigma 35/1.4 Art is half the price of the Canon, and optically comparable. The Canon version is probably worth it if you're a serious wedding shooter or journalist, but I mostly use mine for travel shots and random poo poo and I'm really happy with the Sigma. Bubbacub fucked around with this message at 18:13 on Jan 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
prompt posted:Please advise me on wide lenses. I really like shooting in this particular focal range Non Serviam posted:Shoot a different focal range.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
I don't know about you guys, but travelling with lenses longer than 35mm is just a pain. Most of the shots I take during travelling are: - wide shots of a thing (famous site, temple, church, ruin, square, etc.) - medium shots of people in front of a thing - food - landscape - sunsets For those purposes, a 35 is perfectly fine, 24 too. A 24-70 is nice but still pretty heavy. Though I suppose if you're bringing a DSLR instead of a mirrorless when travelling then you're OK with the extra weight. EDIT: Actual recommendations Sigma 35 1.4 (kinda heavy though) New Canon 35 F2 (perfect weight and usability, imo)
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
Constellation I posted:I don't know about you guys, but travelling with lenses longer than 35mm is just a pain. Tamron has a pretty workable 24-70 2.8. It's not as good as the Canon version, which is in the L range, but it can do the trick for the road. It's also not prohibitively expensive. I just think shooting everything wide, particularly on a full frame, is going to be inconvenient if you're planning to shoot while traveling.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
prompt posted:I have a 5DSR and am thinking about picking up a new lens for shooting while I'm traveling or out with friends. Right now I use a Canon 17-40mm F/4L but I want something with a larger aperture. Thinking the Canon 35mm f/1.4L, not sure if I can justify the extra cash on the newer version. Spend some money on quality glass for a sensor of that resolution. edit: The Sigma 35 performs very well against Canon's 35 mark II and seems like a good "budget" choice if that's wide enough for you. I usually don't get caught up in DxOMark stuff, but presumably that body was purchased for extreme pixel resolution at which point you need to get glass to support it. Otherwise just switch to a different Canon full-frame body (5DIV) and get more dynamic range, higher ISO support, etc. — the 5Ds R is wasted on average lenses. Star War Sex Parrot fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Jan 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:You have a $4000 50MP body (specifically the variant with low-pass filter cancellation to resolve even more fine detail) and you're using the cheapest L-glass that Canon doesn't even list as recommended for use with that sensor. To be fair they have the 50mm f/1.8 II on their recommended lens list, which is the cheapest lens they make.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
akadajet posted:To be fair they have the 50mm f/1.8 II on their recommended lens list, which is the cheapest lens they make. because when you stop those little double gauss fast 50's down, they will outresolve anything short of a megabux supertele. the 17-40 will still have lovely corners even at f/8
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:You have a $4000 50MP body (specifically the variant with low-pass filter cancellation to resolve even more fine detail) and you're using the cheapest L-glass that Canon doesn't even list as recommended for use with that sensor. I have the 5DSR specifically for product photography for my business and use the Canon 100mm f2.8L Macro for that. I'm still learning about photography though so I just went with the recommendation of the guy at the camera store for a hobby lens. Which is why I want to get new glass as I realize he didn't know as much as he liked to think. Why would the 35mm f/2 be recommended by Canon for this body and not the 35mm f/1.4 II? At half the weight and 1/3 the price I'm more leaning towards the f/2 now, but I'll go rent each and spend a few days playing around. The 24-70 is tempting as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 03:42
|
|
|
prompt posted:Why would the 35mm f/2 be recommended by Canon for this body and not the 35mm f/1.4 II? I think it's just because at the time that Canon published the original list the 35mm f1.4 II didn't exist yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2017 04:06
|
|
|
Non Serviam posted:Tamron has a pretty workable 24-70 2.8. I own the Tamron 24-70. It's heavy as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
Constellation I posted:I own the Tamron 24-70. It's heavy as gently caress. It's lighter than the Canon L version though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 05:55
|
|
|
I got a T6i for Christmas, and my brother a Nikon D5500. Between then and now, he picked up a 35mm 1.8, and I'm jealous as gently caress about how great that lens is compared to the kit for so little money. Is there anything comparable on the Canon side? It seems the closest I can get is the 24 and 40mm 2.8 pancakes, or more than twice the price for a 35mm f/2 or 28mm 1.8. Do I just suck it up and spend more? How much of a difference will I see between 1.8/2/2.8?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 05:52
|
|
|
Sigma 30 1.4 is a great little lens of you can find one, they usually run around 200-300 used. The one I have is tack sharp and great for crop bodies. The fast 1.4 allows you to shoot in lower light and creates a shallower depth of field (blurry background). It isn't the greatest lens but for the money it's hard to beat. The canon 50 1.8 is also one of those hard to beat lenses for the money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 07:31
|
|
|
Pretty much any lens will look great compared to a kit lens. Doubly so when you are comparing a prime to a cheap zoom. the 50mm f/1.8 as mentioned is a pretty good lens. Its main weakness is slow autofocus but if you're looking for something to shoot fairly static subjects then it's hard to beat. It's also the cheapest Canon lens (usually runs about $120 new). Another good option is the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8. It's not as good as a bag of primes but it's close. Again autofocus (especially on moving subjects) is a bit weak but it's a lovely wide lens that gives you a variety of focal lengths with a constant aperture. You can buy one new for about $350. As for the difference between f/1.8 and f/2.8, mathematically the difference is 1.3 stops which is almost 3x the amount of light. Ignoring all other concerns, it means that shooting at f/1.8 instead of f/2.8 would let you use a ~3 times faster shutter speed or one and a half stops of less noisy ISO (e.g. 240 instead of 640). That's not the only effect of wider apertures though and the depth of field for the larger aperture will be much narrower than for an f/2.8 lens. A quick calculation tells me that with a 50mm lens and at 1m from the subject, the DoF at f/2.8 is ~4cm while at f/1.8 it's 2.5cm. So the wider lens will be better for selective focus but not massively better, and realistically you probably will want to shoot stopped down by one or two stops anyway. Unless you have some niche photography interest that requires a razor thin depth of field then I'd suggest that you won't notice a lot of difference between those two options. I have the Sigma lens I mentioned above and it's fine on my 70D in lowlight as well as for selective focus effects.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 08:11
|
|
|
Verman posted:Sigma 30 1.4 is a great little lens of you can find one, they usually run around 200-300 used. The one I have is tack sharp and great for crop bodies. Go look in the used gear thread, too. My 24mm i'm selling isnt a great fit, but always consider used. Keh.com, adorama, lots of resources for used gear.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:46
|
|
|
Get the 50/1.8 STM & the 24/2.8 STM pancake. Both cheap as chips, both very compact, and both will serve you well. The 50 isn't the sharpest thing in the world wide open, but even at f/2 the center is pretty good, and as you stop it down it will get sharper than just about anything. At equal apertures to the kit lens, it will stomp it into the dirt. The 24 is pretty sharp right from go as well as being even smaller than the 50.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
No 40mm pancake love? I know it competes with the 50 and isn't as fast but I think its better across what usable apertures it does provide. Not to mention if you move up to a full frame body, the extra high ISO capability you'll gain from doing so means you won't NEED the f1.8 aperture nearly as often as you think.  Shot with a 40mm wide open on my old 60D, just so you can see the possibility when everything comes together for the shot, even on a crop body. My 5D3 with a Tamron 150-600mm has yet to get a shot this nice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:50 |
|
|
Seamonster posted:No 40mm pancake love? I know it competes with the 50 and isn't as fast but I think its better across what usable apertures it does provide. Not to mention if you move up to a full frame body, the extra high ISO capability you'll gain from doing so means you won't NEED the f1.8 aperture nearly as often as you think. Also a good lens - better FF corners @ 2.8 than the 50, but by 4, the 50's corners are right there again and it opens up 1 1/3 stop wider to boot. So you're trading the faster lens for better performance only at 2.8. Note: I am referring specifically to the 50 STM which is one of the most consistent lenses canon has ever manufactured performance wise, not the 50 II which suffered from a lot of inconsistency problems.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 17:17
|
|