|
BetterLekNextTime posted:probably $500 MSRP sadly true  eh w/e i'll still keep on rocking the 70-200 f/4 non IS that i use maybe twice a year
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 00:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 07:06 |
|
|
InternetJunky posted:I'd love to see what they can add to the f/2.8 model. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMSV4OteqBE&t=84s
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 00:37
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:probably $500 MSRP Oops. Totally misread that.  Do they still make the first gen?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 00:54
|
|
|
The chatter I saw said the main motivation is to improve resolution for bodies with 50 MP sensors. Probably gonna cram another ten pounds of glass in there to pull it off too.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 01:02
|
|
|
Hopefully prices on the current 2.8s will drop enough that I can finally pick one up.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 06:35
|
|
|
Wow. Canon came so close to making close to my ideal camera in the 5D Mark IV. My 5D3 died last Friday so I had to rent a body for the next weekend's wedding, and figured I'd try out the 4. The focus system is great, and the live view focusing is unreal. The bump is resolution, the improvements to the senor, and the incremental upgrades to frame rate and autofocus are so welcome, but then they go and cock up the 4K video capture completely with this motion JPG nonsense, and couldn't (or wouldn't) squeeze in 120fps for the 1080p capture. It's still a hell of a camera.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 14:02
|
|
|
I'm really glad I don't shoot video cause reading about all these arbitrary limitations they impose on their dslr line seems pretty frustrating.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 14:10
|
|
|
hope and vaseline posted:I'm really glad I don't shoot video cause reading about all these arbitrary limitations they impose on their dslr line seems pretty frustrating. Same here. It absolutely sounds frustrating.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 16:06
|
|
|
magic lantern?”
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 18:27
|
|
|
suck my woke dick posted:magic lantern?”
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 19:31
|
|
|
InternetJunky posted:Does magic lantern allow the 5d4 to record in a different video format? Well it's magic innit
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 21:38
|
|
|
There only appears to be a ROM dumper for the 5D Mark IV, there's no developer working on a port, only one I see that comes close is a build for the Mark III. A recent development: ML hackers have managed to overclock the DIGIC 5 in the original EOS M so that it can capture 2.5K video: https://www.canonwatch.com/the-original-canon-eos-m-can-shoot-2-5k-raw-video-with-magic-lantern-and-its-impressing/ It's 2520 * 1080 video, 24 fps, 12-bit lossless compressed RAW; not bad for a 5 year old camera. Pretty sure it mangles the battery and they warn the experimental build could wreck your EOS M, but it's pretty far out of warranty anyways. Meanwhile, still poking along with the EOS M50; it's not a bad upgrade if you're an original EOS M owner, the built in flash is handy and a lot better to deal with than the dedicated SpeedLite 90 they used to sell with some Ms. Here's something I shot in Program Mode:  Trimmed down from the original 4000*6000 resolution; I'll try to post at original res if there's demand.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 02:53
|
|
|
BTW, just found out Canon dropped the retail price of the EOS M50 by $150, which means you can now get the basic kit (camera body + 15-45mm STM lens) on Amazon for only $699 instead of $899. Sure wish they'd done that a month ago, but I don't mind, needed it for a twice-in-a-lifetime event anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
Binary Badger posted:
poo poo I might just have to try this. I have an original M that I haven't touched for at least a couple of years. I got a scope adapter figuring maybe I'd use it for digiscoping but I never remember to bring it out with me.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 03:32
|
|
|
Speaking of EOS 5Ds, here's what happened to one that got a little too close to a rocket launch... https://twitter.com/PeterKingCBS/status/999085583271170048
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2018 17:16
|
|
|
Binary Badger posted:Speaking of EOS 5Ds, here's what happened to one that got a little too close to a rocket launch... not too close to the rocket launch - it was about 1/4 mile away from the launchpad - but too close to the brushfire sparked by the rocket launch.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2018 12:42
|
|
|
hope and vaseline posted:I'm really glad I don't shoot video cause reading about all these arbitrary limitations they impose on their dslr line seems pretty frustrating. The cinema line is just as bad. Still looking for a decent replacement for my C100 (with video features you'd find in a goddamn mirrorless camera) and the C200 just isn't it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 23:36
|
|
|
I didn't have my peak design camera clip locked this weekend while shooting a wedding. As a result my grey market Tamron 15-30 took a spill. I understand Tamron USA won't touch grey market lenses, is there a 3rd party that might that anyone could recommend? T It focuses fine, but the zoom ring is now stuff, and I can't tell if the VC is working. Thanks in advance
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 14:33
|
|
|
I dun hosed up and bought my  girlfriend and myself a t6 (not the t6i) off Woot for ~370 bucks. I'm excited to dip my toes in the world of photography.I hate pictures of people, so I'm going to be looking for stills or hunting down critters (critter thread, here I come). Are there any glaring, obvious, and immediate issues/faux pas that I should consider when posting on this forum or in dickin' about and taking pics in general? I'm very new. Thanks! Also, any tips/tricks for the t6 from present owners would be lovely. I know it's a intro-level camera so you might have moved beyond it, but I'm excited for my new toy.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 17:09
|
|
|
Nah, just post pictures. If they're bad people will tell you, if they're good they'll probably not say anything. If they're really good you'll hear about it. The t6 isn't great in terms of what is available now, but it would have been a pretty good body 10 years ago and lots of great pictures were taken back then so don't go into it thinking it'll prevent you from taking good pictures. Start reading up on lenses as from this point it's by far the best way to improve your creative options. If you want to shoot wildlife you'll want to start figuring out how to get beyond 300mm so you're gonna have to decide how much you want to invest in it.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 17:17
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Nah, just post pictures. If they're bad people will tell you, if they're good they'll probably not say anything. If they're really good you'll hear about it. I'm going cheap'n easy for now until I've got some experience. Buying lenses is out of the question, I've seen some prices and I've got a wedding to pay for in 3 weeks. I will not be taking my own wedding pictures. I'm not super worried about good/bad pictures. That's all learning curve stuff. Most of my subjects will be inconsequential and I"m not at all interested in trying to side-hustle this. I appreciate that feedback. Now I've got to go learn a bunch of poo poo before it arrives (6/1). These new acronyms are beating me up already. Correction: 1300D, not D3000. vvvvvThanks!vvvvvv Cannon_Fodder fucked around with this message at 18:42 on May 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 17:22
|
|
|
Cannon_Fodder posted:Are there any glaring, obvious, and immediate issues/faux pas that I should consider when posting on this forum or in dickin' about and taking pics in general? I'm very new. If you hang out in the bird thread people are pretty chill as long as you're humble and not a dick. I'm a noob and I've found the posters there to be welcoming and constructive.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 18:23
|
|
|
All the threads here are pretty chill and everyone's open to giving advice. The only one that has specific rules is the photo a day thread, but hardly anyone uses that anymore tbh.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 18:49
|
|
|
Just be open to critique and even if you disagree, try to understand where someone is coming from. Try to avoid getting defensive/taking it personal. The goal is to improve from where you are now and most people are just trying to help.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
hope and vaseline posted:All the threads here are pretty chill and everyone's open to giving advice. The only one that has specific rules is the photo a day thread, but hardly anyone uses that anymore tbh. In general I agree, but I did see some pretty vicious poo poo in the time lapse thread. I'm not a regular there though, so I think there was some history I was missing...
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 19:08
|
|
|
The sharks only show up when someone gets uppity and they smell blood. Be chill and everyone else is chill too.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 19:12
|
|
|
Never look the thread in the eyes. Got it.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 19:21
|
|
|
Cannon_Fodder posted:Never look the thread in the eyes. Got it. Basically. Critiques are how to get better, not attacks on your work, ability, or personality. Take lots of photos, take lots of bad ones. You learn through mistakes more so than successes.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 20:45
|
|
|
Cannon_Fodder posted:I'm going cheap'n easy for now until I've got some experience. Buying lenses is out of the question, I've seen some prices and I've got a wedding to pay for in 3 weeks. Canon is a pretty good system to start out in because you can get some pretty decent used starter lenses for almost nothing. The 55-250mm STM is amazing if you need some range and you can find it for a little over $100. Enjoy your camera and just shoot, shoot, shoot!
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
Thanks for the encouragement, team. I appreciate it.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
Got a used 7D from KEH back in late March. Had around 17,000 shutter actuations. USB port crapped out a few weeks back, so they let me exchange it, no hassle whatsoever. The replacement one only has 6,000 clicks on it to boot! Good experience overall.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 00:56
|
|
|
Cannon_Fodder posted:Thanks for the encouragement, team. I appreciate it. What lens(es) are coming with your camera? Once you start taking photos, keep a loose mental note on what focal length (level of zoom, you can see the markings on zoom lenses) you use and like using the best. I’m going to guess you have a 18-55 basic “kit” lens, which is fine - but the best way to recommend any lenses to step up too (even cheap ones) will be based on what you use a lot and what you want to photograph. Also, don’t be afraid to go into the manual modes, especially full  Manual mode. You pick it up quickly, and so much cheaper with digital than film!!
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 01:11
|
|
|
Cannon_Fodder posted:I'm going cheap'n easy for now until I've got some experience. Buying lenses is out of the question, I've seen some prices and I've got a wedding to pay for in 3 weeks. Keep checking out Canon's refurbished lens selection: https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/lenses-flashes/refurbished-lenses You can snag some pretty good deals when they have sales on, especially around holidays. I got the 40mm f/2.8, the 24mm f/2.8, the 50mm f/1.8, and the 55-250mm STM all from that website at various times for like $100 a piece, and between those and the kit lens, I feel I have most of my learning bases covered for cheap! Viper915 fucked around with this message at 01:31 on May 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 01:29
|
|
|
Viper915 posted:Keep checking out Canon's refurbished lens selection: Solid advice! Thanks, I'll also send this to my actual photographer friend. I'm sure she'll make use of it. harperdc posted:What lens(es) are coming with your camera? Once you start taking photos, keep a loose mental note on what focal length (level of zoom, you can see the markings on zoom lenses) you use and like using the best. I’m going to guess you have a 18-55 basic “kit” lens, which is fine - but the best way to recommend any lenses to step up too (even cheap ones) will be based on what you use a lot and what you want to photograph. I'm very much interested in figuring out Manual mode. I feel there's nothing I can really gently caress up on it (for the most part). The camera arrives tomorrow and I'm working from home that day, so you can bet your rear end I'll be messing around with it. I did get the 18-55mm kit lens. Does anyone have a quick breakdown of what these measurements mean?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 16:59
|
|
|
18-55mm focal length is a handy general purpose lens. Goes from pretty wide angle to somewhat zoomed in. For reference, zooming to 24mm or so will get you an approximation of your typical human field of view.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 17:07
|
|
|
President Beep posted:18-55mm focal length is a handy general purpose lens. Goes from pretty wide angle to somewhat zoomed in. For reference, zooming to 24mm or so will get you an approximation of your typical human field of view. It's a FOV measurement? So that's the range of FOV... ok, sure, seems like degrees might make more sense in that regard. Is there something else to it?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 17:08
|
|
|
Cannon_Fodder posted:seems like degrees might make more sense in that regard. Yeah, that's what I was getting at. You seem to grock this. NB: I'm still a neophyte as well, so others here can likely explain things much more intuitively. President Beep fucked around with this message at 17:35 on May 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 17:32
|
|
|
Cannon_Fodder posted:It's a FOV measurement? So that's the range of FOV... ok, sure, seems like degrees might make more sense in that regard. Is there something else to it? The mm rating of a lens isn’t the literal measurement of the FOV like how a degree measurement is in games. A better way to think of the mm rating isn’t in FOV, but rather in how zoomed-in the lens is, with larger numbers being more zoomed. For example, a 30mm lens will be much more zoomed-out compared to a 300mm lens. You could say this also means it has a larger FOV, but it doesn’t come with the same distortion that adjusting an FOV slider in a game does. It DOES cause some distortion, but it’s a bit different compared to games. Your lens is 18-55mm, which means you can change the focal length from anywhere from 18mm to 55m. So if you want to get a subject to appear larger in frame, you can either zoom in to it by adjusting the mm on the lens to be larger, or you can physically move closer to it. Why move closer instead of just zooming? Because the smaller mm rating will have more of a fisheye effect to it when you’re up close, resulting in a different looking image compared to just enlarging it via a larger focal length. Conversely, zooming in will cause your subjects to appear more flat. Here’s a good example of how zooming in by adjusting the focal length can change how the same objects appear, while keeping the objects the same size in the frame by physically moving the camera closer / father away:  As for what the actual millimeters mean, they’re a measurement of the distance from the point of convergence in your lens to the sensor (or film) in your camera. So when your lens is set to 18mm, the point of convergence (where the incoming light flips through the lens) is 18mm away from your cameras light sensor. When you then change it to 55mm, you are physically moving the lens farther from your sensor. Note: I’m pretty new to photography as well, this is just my understanding of everything. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong on anything! CodfishCartographer fucked around with this message at 17:54 on May 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 17:51
|
|
|
FOV and focal length have a linear inverse relationship (fov goes down as focal length goes up), so we all talk about focal length to save on words. After a few months thinking about it it'll be second nature. The "rule" of the focal distance being the distance between your film/sensor and the point the image is in focus is not absolute as the measurement is based on looking through a single lens. A telephoto lens has several lenses inside it allowing it to have a smaller physical length than its advertised focal length, but we still describe it using the "apparent" focal length as it's the only way to reasonably compare the zoom of two lenses.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 19:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 07:06 |
|
|
Focal length determines the geometry and isn't just the FOV. You can see in the picture above that in the smaller focal length things further away appear relatively smaller than closer things. FOV is also determined by sensor size. A 35mm lens on a smaller crop sensor camera has a comparable FOV to a 50mm on a full frame one, but the geometry is the same as 35mm on a full frame sensor one. The edges are cropped off giving it a more narrow FOV. Focal length (actual not equivalent) also determines depth of field (along with how close you are focusing). Shooting a fast lens wide open might not be desirable if it means you can't get as much of your subject in focus as you'd like. Small aperture (big f number), focusing further away, and wide angle lenses give lots of depth of field, which is desirable in many cases.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 19:56
|
|