|
Do you mean inconsistency as in manufacturing problems? Like some lenses were fine and others have defects.
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 01:57 |
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:Do you mean inconsistency as in manufacturing problems? Like some lenses were fine and others have defects. Yep. slightly misaligned elements and stuff like that , which cause varied performance from lens to lens. Roger @ Lensrentals does a consistency score when he MTF tests a batch of the same lens now, based on how close they all are to each other - the new STM version of the 50 has one of the highest scores of the lenses they've run that metric for. It's remarkably consistent copy to copy with very little variation
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
Because it takes actual effort to gently caress up a double gauss construction?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 04:36
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:Because it takes actual effort to gently caress up a double gauss construction? There are plenty of other double gauss 50's in this group which have consistency scores well below the 1.8/STM (There are also much more complicated designs in the group as well) https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/07/variation-measurement-for-50mm-slr-lenses/
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
I'm going on a few big trips this year - one to the Isle of Skye in Scotland and another for a safari in Kenya. I have an old 20d, the kit lens, and a 55m prime. I'm debating on if I should pick up a new body (7D? 7D II? 80D?) or splurge on a new lens (EF 16-35mm f/2.8L ll? EF 300mm f/4L IS USM?), OR downgrade my lens choices and get both a lens and a new body. I'm trying to spend less than 2k total since I haven't shot a ton in the last few years. Thoughts? Is that even a reasonable budget?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
Do you want to stay with the Canon system? You can get a great mirrorless camera + a few lenses for 2k and they will be MUCH smaller which is really nice for traveling. If you want to stay with Canon you really should upgrade your body. The 80D is really nice (or a use 70D). The Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 is a nice and very affordable upgrade to your kit lens that is great for traveling. The 24mm and 40mm 2.8 pancakes are really cheap and extremely sharp so if you like those focal lengths you can't go wrong with either of them. And they are really small and light which is always nice when you're running around all day. If you need a tele lens you can also grab the 55-250mm STM. It's really cheap, sharp, the AF is really fast and the image stabilization works pretty well. I switched to mirrorless (Olympus E-M10) from Canon (T5i/70D) and I couldn't be happier. I think it would be the right decision for you if you don't mind selling your stuff. If you don't mind hunting around on Ebay/Craigslist/etc for a bit you can get a great setup for under 1k (used E-M10, a few primes and a 40-150 mm tele). If you're willing to go up to ~2k you can get an E-M5 II (or any camera in that price range), Oly 12-40mm 2.8, 40-150mm and another prime lens with a few bucks to spare for extra batteries etc. Popelmon fucked around with this message at 18:01 on Feb 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
I guess I'll play devil's advocate and say that on the FF DSLR side, you can get a 6D body used for around 1000 and probably slap on a 24-105 for ~500 or so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
taco show posted:I'm going on a few big trips this year - one to the Isle of Skye in Scotland and another for a safari in Kenya. I have an old 20d, the kit lens, and a 55m prime. I'm debating on if I should pick up a new body (7D? 7D II? 80D?) or splurge on a new lens (EF 16-35mm f/2.8L ll? EF 300mm f/4L IS USM?), OR downgrade my lens choices and get both a lens and a new body. I'm trying to spend less than 2k total since I haven't shot a ton in the last few years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
taco show posted:the Isle of Skye in Scotland ... safari in Kenya. what focal lengths dobyou foresee needing for both trips? I would imagine Skye would be a wide to semi-long range, while Kenya would be a maximum focal length nature situation? And are you doing 100% photography or a little video as well?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
Popelmon posted:mirrorless InternetJunky posted:sell the lens when you get back for minimal losses/break even mrlego posted:I would imagine Skye would be a wide to semi-long range, while Kenya would be a maximum focal length nature situation? Thanks everyone!
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
taco show posted:I'm going on a few big trips this year - one to the Isle of Skye in Scotland and another for a safari in Kenya. I have an old 20d, the kit lens, and a 55m prime. I'm debating on if I should pick up a new body (7D? 7D II? 80D?) or splurge on a new lens (EF 16-35mm f/2.8L ll? EF 300mm f/4L IS USM?), OR downgrade my lens choices and get both a lens and a new body. I'm trying to spend less than 2k total since I haven't shot a ton in the last few years. Have you considered renting? Either that or buy used and sell what you don't need after the trip.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
Renting for a few weeks could conceivably be less expensive as buying a body and nice lens. Atleast from my own area an 80D go for $280 for a 40 day period. 6D is about the same. 24-70 2.8 II $270 100-400 II $355 Not a bad option to get what you want. I would personally have reservations going for such a period of time keeping the equipment clean/scratch free in unknown circumstances so I guess buying the extra insurance for $90 per item would be smart. Apply for new credit card and buy used would be my move.... mrlego fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Feb 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
Hey I'm looking for a 24mm or less wide angle lens for my gf's 5Dmk3 that's not a huge pain in the rear end to travel with and under $500 or so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 04:31
|
|
|
theflyingexecutive posted:Hey I'm looking for a 24mm or less wide angle lens for my gf's 5Dmk3 that's not a huge pain in the rear end to travel with and under $500 or so. 17-40mm f/4? For a prime or zoom? And what f/stop range?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 07:44
|
|
|
theflyingexecutive posted:Hey I'm looking for a 24mm or less wide angle lens for my gf's 5Dmk3 that's not a huge pain in the rear end to travel with and under $500 or so. https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/ef-24mm-f28-is-usm-refurbished The 24 & 28 IS are very small, sharp, and the IS is great for interiors where you can't use a tripod when traveling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
Seconding the 17-40 unless she really wants something smaller/prime. I also finally got to use the Rokinon 14/2.8 that I bought from Torgeaux. If you don't mind MF it was pretty fun and a nice option for a FF ultrawide.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:Seconding the 17-40 unless she really wants something smaller/prime. I liked it a lot. Skies with a bit of cloud are amazing with that thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
I think I'm doing it wrong  Hambooger-9553 on FlickrI did get some other shots, but I had to laugh at myself and my thinking on a MF wide angle- oh just set it to near infinity focus and f/14 or something- and practically the first thing I shoot is a cow inside the MFD of the lens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:I think I'm doing it wrong Hell, even 5.6 is gonna give all the cow in focus.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:I think I'm doing it wrong
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 16:42
|
|
|
Yes- first time using a manual lens on a dslr so I'm sure I could do better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
Hallo, I am looking for some advice. Few questions: Which canon models are for SURE full frame? I mean obviously it's the more expensive ones. Is it reasonable to buy if I find a used MK2, or is that too risky that someone busted it up? Does Canon or B&H sell refurbished? What do you all think of non-Canon lenses? I've only used Canon ones thus far, and am iffy about off-brand. What is the best Nikon lens-> Canon adapter thing? We had them at art school but I don't remember what it was. Thank yall
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
Canon full-frames are: 1Ds, 1Dx, 5D, 6D. Note that the 1D (and subsequent marks) are crop sensor bodies, only the 1Ds and 1Dx are full frame. A 5Dii will be an ex-pro's camera and, as it's a couple of generations behind has probably been flipped at least once since (5Diii was released in 2011). It will likely be well-used and at the thin end of the shutter lifespan. You might get lucky though and for sure it's probably the cheapest route to a Canon FF. Third party lenses are mostly fine with some caveats. Big zooms that largely cover the same focal lengths and apertures as kit lenses will probably be garbage. Some of the other offerings from Sigma or Tamron are mostly as good as the first-party stuff and occasionally better. Sigma Art glass is generally very good. It very much depends on the lens in question, there's not really a blanket rule. Nikon to EOS adapters exist but they don't support autofocus, image stabilisation or automatic aperture control. You can get ones with a focus confirmation chip but that just makes the in-focus light in the viewfinder work. Most photo supply stores carry them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
Thin Privilege posted:Hallo, 1DS series, 1DX series, 5D series, 6D series (Not 1D series - those were aps-h) Canon USA sells refurbs, and they give you a one year warranty to boot. Sigma and Tamron make some insanely good lenses now (and also some not so great, but a lot of great) No idea what the best F->EF adapters are, sorry timrenzi574 fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Feb 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
the Marks are crop sensors? did I read that right? Also thank you guys so much for your responses <3
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
Thin Privilege posted:the Marks are crop sensors? did I read that right? Star War Sex Parrot fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Feb 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
Ah I looked it up and realized I got the terminology wrong. Sorry. I'm straight out of art school and we just called them "Mark 2" and "Mark 3", which is what we had. Sorry about that. I'll look into better terminology right now.
Thin Privilege fucked around with this message at 23:50 on Feb 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
The table at the bottom of the Wikipedia article on Canon EOS cameras is helpful as it relates to sensor size: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
All that said, it's still probably a good idea to lock up the mirror and look into the lens hole of any Canon DSLR you might buy, just to double check the size of the sensor. You can never be sure what they've put in there. Plus sometimes the sensor will shrink if the camera has been kept boxed up with too many silicon desiccant packets.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 05:39
|
|
|
Erwin posted:The table at the bottom of the Wikipedia article on Canon EOS cameras is helpful as it relates to sensor size: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS I don't trust wikipedia because I've seen some hilariously wrong stuff on there. That's why I asked you smart people. SMERSH Mouth posted:All that said, it's still probably a good idea to lock up the mirror and look into the lens hole of any Canon DSLR you might buy, just to double check the size of the sensor. You can never be sure what they've put in there. Plus sometimes the sensor will shrink if the camera has been kept boxed up with too many silicon desiccant packets. Are you making a joke that's gone over the top of my head, or are you serious?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 09:31
|
|
|
Thin Privilege posted:
Always check out the sensor of a used camera. If you see ants, take $50 off the price. Also, if you can bring along a lens/memory card, take a few test photos at high ISO (1600 or 3200) and see if there are any weird pixels. I had a new SLR with a defective row of pixels that was only obvious at ISO 1600 and above.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 09:46
|
|
|
Thin Privilege posted:Are you making a joke that's gone over the top of my head, or are you serious? Shooting a shot of a mostly uniform surface (like a wall) with high ISO setting is the only remotely legit piece of advice. I've never seen a row of dead pixels, but I have seen a few dead ones. Mostly it's something the camera can fix on its own by digitally masking the bad/hot pixels, but there's a chance you could get a dead row, in which case I might look for a different camera.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 13:47
|
|
|
Has anyone tried the M5? I'm interested in a more compact body for hiking and macro work, but it's kinda pricey.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:Has anyone tried the M5? I'm interested in a more compact body for hiking and macro work, but it's kinda pricey.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:Has anyone tried the M5? I'm interested in a more compact body for hiking and macro work, but it's kinda pricey. For the price of the M5 you could get a M43 body and a few lenses that will be absolutely tiny compared to what Canon offers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:"compact body with all of my nice full-frame glass" sounds nice in theory, but for me it wouldn't have saved a significant amount of weight/size to make it worth it. When hiking the glass still made up the majority of bulk, and an APS-C mirrorless body plus adapter doesn't make significant enough of a size improvement. If you're lugging a 1D body or you have small full-frame glass then maybe there's a benefit, but for most setups adapting full-frame glass to mirrorless defeats the purpose to me. There's no perfect setup, so it all comes down to what you're willing to sacrifice. I just think you're setting yourself up for disappointment if you try to bring a bunch of heavy full-frame glass to a setup that you're trying to make compact. The EOS Ms with the small full frame primes aren't too bad. E.g. the 35mm f2, 50 f1.8. With L glass weight it's retarded though. You'd be better off buying a M mount adapter and Voigtlander glass if you wanted to shave prices off the tiny lenses. But no AF. The sensor used in the EOS Ms is pretty great for an APS-C sensor in the sucks at high ISO category. The EF-M lenses suck.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
mrlego posted:Always check out the sensor of a used camera. If you see ants, take $50 off the price. mrlego posted:Always check out the sensor of a used camera. If you see ants, take $50 off the price. Oh yeah we had one of those at school, it would print out a few red pixels when you uploaded it to the computer. What about this? Good? Or do you think the discount isn't worth it? It's only $140 so I'm a bit iffy. https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/eos-5d-mark-iii-body-refurbished e: boooo the store is out of the 8-15mm lens. And just to triple check, EF-S is the bad one, right? Thin Privilege fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Mar 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
Thin Privilege posted:What about this? Good? Or do you think the discount isn't worth it? It's only $140 so I'm a bit iffy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:You've never actually said what you want to do besides own a full-frame sensor Canon body, so sure? Take good pictures? To build up on my portfolio, because currently it's all art school stuff; which, as many people know, is really weird. Contemporary art and all. For example, I have pictures of me pretending to be dead in various situations. In one, I'm laying on the bathroom floor with "vomit" (split pea soup) spilled all over the EXTREMELY dirty toilet and floor, and I'm surrounded by beer bottles. The set is actually really good visually but the content is.... interesting. Oh and one of me dead wearing an Apple shirt, surrounded by apple products. Thin Privilege fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Mar 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 01:57 |
|
|
Ah motherfucker I'm going to need to get a battery charger and 2 batteries. Moneyyyyyy  Thankfully I already have a speedlite 430!
Thin Privilege fucked around with this message at 18:58 on Mar 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2017 18:55
|
|