|
King of Bees posted:Thanks again, Ill keep looking. I didn't mean to give the impression it's for me, a bunch of us are pooling money for a new body as a gift to a family member. She talks about a med format but drat that's getting expensive. I thought maybe a big rear end sensor might bridge the gap until a med was more doable. Oh well. Otherwise you can get in and out of a mirrorless film system for not much money provided you don't break anything, which might be fun to try, but I'd talk to the shooter before assembling something like that.
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 15:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 10:48 |
|
|
King of Bees posted:Just spoke with her and asked about Sony on the sly. She's not a fan of the colors compared to Canon or Fuji. So maybe a gfx 50r? Have to dig a bit deeper for one of those. poo poo.... This may not be something you could really bring up to her, but her hangup re: brand "colors" may indicate she uses a lot of SOOC jpegs. While plenty of people do fine with that, if that's the case her photography would probably be lifted much further via learning RAW post-processing (which renders the camera's native "colors science" relatively less important), rather than moving to a larger sensor or more expensive body. Though you did say she's experienced and sells some of her work, so maybe it's just one of those issues with brand-color perception some photographers have (Canon and Fuji are the usual suspects when this particular topic comes up) and she knows how to process just fine. That said, regardless of the case, it seems widely understood that Fuji and their film simulations are probably the absolute best bet for people who do not want to do much post-processing, but do just as well if one does process. I'm of the opinion that if one is willing to manually process their photos, camera features, dynamic range, and lens selection matter a lot more than the "color science" so long as a particular sensor isn't known for obvious color issues, but that helps little if her heart is set on certain brands. While the typical response to Canon's new RF mount offerings on the internet is "just go Sony," that's seemingly not an option here. Since a Fuji gfx 50r would dwarf it in cost anyhow, have you looked into the Canon EOS R? It's basically the mirrorless equivalent of the latest 5D models. Depending on her use case (especially if she tends to use a tripod for her shooting, though its stabilization is no worse than her current camera regardless) it's a solid option from a brand you know she likes, without the mirror issues of the 5DS R, and with her existing L-glass easily adapted to the RF mount via a relatively cheap name brand adapter that Canon offers (bundled in some markets). While the Canon mirrorless full frame lineup is new, their lens roadmap seems to indicate it will grow fast and they've about admitted that they have to prioritize developing their mirrorless system just as the other manufacturers have. It seems like the best set of compromises for her particular wishes at this time. Prude fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Feb 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 17:07
|
|
|
Right on. I'll look into the R
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 17:30
|
|
|
Just found this thread. Been dinking around with an old t3 for a good bit now and I've been having a good enough time that I want to upgrade my body (already got a new lens, shopping for another now). Is there anything bad about the 77D? It's in the price range I was considering for a used camera ($500, give or take), and just seems to have a lot more features than a T7i. Reviews look good too, compared to a lot of other entry level models in that price range.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 17:47
|
|
|
King of Bees posted:Right on. I'll look into the R The advantage of medium format is pretty small. A full frame camera is enough mega pixels now for most size prints, usually more versatile and cheaper. With faster lenses, the portrait advantage for medium is near zero, in body stabilization makes full frame a better on the go landscape camera. I'd suggest whatever Nikon fits the bill since she has a prejudice against Sony, and buy her a true medium format fill camera used to let her experiment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 18:53
|
|
|
I'm looking to upgrade my DSLR, but I'm struggling to decide which camera would be best. I'd be upgrading from an old 20D so anything will be a huge improvement. My two main candidates are a 6D mkii or a 5D mkiii, because they seem to be roughly the same price. If I control myself and try to be patient, theoretically I could try saving up to jump to a 5D mkiv, but that's a big price difference. Because I've been using such an old camera for so long, I'm having a difficult time wanting to upgrade to something that's already itself out of date. This, as well as a higher ISO range, more megapixels, and maybe(?) the articulating screen, makes the 6Dii seem a little more appealing. However, the 5Diii has more AF points, faster max shutter speed, and faster max flash sync. The latter two points really stand-out, as well, because the 6Dii's max shutter speed and highest flash sync speed are both worse than my 15 year old 20D. All of that said, the 5Div blows both of them out of the water, but at a much higher price point. Am I getting hung up over little details here? Are these different specs actually going to be noticeable when using the camera? I've already received a couple replies when I asked a similar question in the mirrorless thread, but I'd really appreciate any other advice. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 22:49
|
|
|
Prude posted:While the typical response to Canon's new RF mount offerings on the internet is "just go Sony," that's seemingly not an option here. Since a Fuji gfx 50r would dwarf it in cost anyhow, have you looked into the Canon EOS R? It's basically the mirrorless equivalent of the latest 5D models. Depending on her use case (especially if she tends to use a tripod for her shooting, though its stabilization is no worse than her current camera regardless) it's a solid option from a brand you know she likes, without the mirror issues of the 5DS R, and with her existing L-glass easily adapted to the RF mount via a relatively cheap name brand adapter that Canon offers (bundled in some markets). While the Canon mirrorless full frame lineup is new, their lens roadmap seems to indicate it will grow fast and they've about admitted that they have to prioritize developing their mirrorless system just as the other manufacturers have. It seems like the best set of compromises for her particular wishes at this time. You still end up adopting your old lenses or having to buy a set of expensive R lenses to go with a lesser sensor. Canon seem to be trying to maximize their profit through lens sales while locking down features for their expensive cameras. There are some comparison showing the a7r ii having similar resolution and slightly more dynamic range in the highlights than the medium format pentax 645z. But the medium format has slightly cleaner image in high iso shooting. https://luminous-landscape.com/sony-a7rii-review-and-hands-on-report/ Also agreed on the personal preference regarding workflow and color preference. But once you learn lightroom enough, you can adjust the HSL sliders individually to make your image look like however you want, including making it more canon-like with the blue sky or skin tone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 22:58
|
|
|
pseudorandom posted:I'm looking to upgrade my DSLR, but I'm struggling to decide which camera would be best. I'd be upgrading from an old 20D so anything will be a huge improvement. My two main candidates are a 6D mkii or a 5D mkiii, because they seem to be roughly the same price. If I control myself and try to be patient, theoretically I could try saving up to jump to a 5D mkiv, but that's a big price difference.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 23:22
|
|
|
pseudorandom posted:Am I getting hung up over little details here? Are these different specs actually going to be noticeable when using the camera? yeah, because either is an absolute rocket ship compared with a 20D. the 6D series is seen as/is a bit of a step down compared with the 5D series, and while the 5D3 isn't the newest of them, it will have more capability than the 6D. If you're leaning that direction, might as well go all the way. if you're interested in switching, it'd depend on how much you have invested in lenses and wanting to stay in Canon's ecosystem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:I think either of those will be leagues ahead of a 20D. What's your lens situation? Are you really wedded to a EF mount camera? I'm not hugely invested in Canon. I've got 4.5 lenses, probably about $1-1.5k worth; all the lower end ones, no L glass. As I mentioned in the reply I made in the Mirrorless thread, I'd still want to keep the lenses, so going elsewhere would require space for more equipment and buying all new lenses.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 23:47
|
|
|
Encrypted posted:You still end up adopting your old lenses or having to buy a set of expensive R lenses to go with a lesser sensor. In a vacuum, I would recommend Sony just as well, given the points about having to adapt existing lenses either way and how Canon seems to always hold back on features. The reason I brought up the EOS R was that the woman he's buying for seems opposed to switching to Sony because of their "colors" of all things, prefers Canon and Fuji's instead, and given that a medium format Fuji (as King of Bees brought up) is a few thousand more than the typical mirrorless full frame flagship, the EOS R or one of the Nikons are the mirrorless options remaining (unless one were to wait for Panasonic) if she doesn't want to use a smaller sensor than what she already has, which is how it sounded (otherwise there's plenty of other excellent and cheaper Fuji options). If she is happy working with a 5Diii, chances are the R wouldn't disappoint her as it's still superior in pretty much every way unless dual card slots are an absolute necessity. If they are - and if she isn't set upon mirrorless - your earlier suggestion about the 5DIV is probably the most obvious upgrade path remaining. Sure there's other options many of us would choose instead, but in a matter of gift-giving like that, I don't think it's reasonable to think that her mindset could be changed. But yeah, I meant to say before that I don't think brand colors matter enough to make or break any decision if a person is intending to shoot RAW and post-process themselves. Prude fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Feb 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
pseudorandom posted:I'm not hugely invested in Canon. I've got 4.5 lenses, probably about $1-1.5k worth; all the lower end ones, no L glass. As I mentioned in the reply I made in the Mirrorless thread, I'd still want to keep the lenses, so going elsewhere would require space for more equipment and buying all new lenses. What kind of pictures do you take? You should narrow the selection based on features that you need.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 00:24
|
|
|
xzzy posted:What kind of pictures do you take? You should narrow the selection based on features that you need. A little of everything, as this is still mostly a hobby and I'm still just trying to get better. Mostly macro, landscapes, wildlife, attempting to learn "street". I generally just carry a camera wherever I go, but I might stick with film for daily-life stuff. I could stay prosumer tier and go with an 80D, but full frame sounds fun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 00:39
|
|
|
Full frame = more glass = more $ and weight.Prude posted:But yeah, I meant to say before that I don't think brand colors matter enough to make or break any decision if a person is intending to shoot RAW and post-process themselves. And being able to manipulate the raws to the sensor's capability is awesome and something Canon DPP couldnt have done eg. using A7R II + EF 16-35 III and boosting the photo's shadow by 5+EV without much noise penalty while exposing for the highlights in a sunset with moving foliage in the foreground. I agree with the R being a decent compromise where you can still get a somewhat ok sensor that's similar to the IV, but then again using the Sony system also opens you up to some ridiculous lens like the 12-24 f4 G 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 01:03
|
|
|
pseudorandom posted:A little of everything, as this is still mostly a hobby and I'm still just trying to get better. Mostly macro, landscapes, wildlife, attempting to learn "street". I generally just carry a camera wherever I go, but I might stick with film for daily-life stuff. I could stay prosumer tier and go with an 80D, but full frame sounds fun. The 80D is a good all-rounder. The main advantage to crop sensors is really good burst rates+buffer for less money. The 7dmk2 is faster but I wouldn't buy one at this point because it's getting long in the tooth. But if you look at the burst rates and buffer size of the 80d vs the 5dmk4 you can see they're very close.. and 80d is over a thousand dollars cheaper. The 5dmk3 has significantly slower burst. I don't mean to sound like full frame is bad for action but that's the main reason crop sensors continue to be a consideration. But if you got a deep wallet it sounds like a 5D is the one you're leaning towards and it will be convincingly better at everything else.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 01:30
|
|
|
pseudorandom posted:However, the 5Diii has more AF points, faster max shutter speed, and faster max flash sync. The latter two points really stand-out, as well, because the 6Dii's max shutter speed and highest flash sync speed are both worse than my 15 year old 20D. Get an 80D and spend the rest of your money on good glass.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 02:17
|
|
|
TheLastManStanding posted:Get an 80D and spend the rest of your money on good glass. 80d + tamron 70-200 g2 is a winner combo. Or a nice 17-55 if you wanna go short.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 03:09
|
|
|
xzzy posted:80d + tamron 70-200 g2 is a winner combo. or the 150-600 g2 for wildlife:  Urban Critters by charliebravo77, on FlickrThat said I kinda want a 7d2 or the inevitable 7d3 for real weather sealing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 03:14
|
|
|
charliebravo77 posted:That said I kinda want a 7d2 or the inevitable 7d3 for real weather sealing. 80d has "enough" sealing.  I've since bought one of those rainsleeves for the next time I get too close to a giant waterfall.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 03:51
|
|
|
Okay, I think my sanity is coming back and the 80D might be a better choice for my actual needs and wallet. I'm glad the conversation has naturally flowed to suggesting lenses, too. I'm assuming that my money is better spent just buying a stand-alone body and avoiding the kit lenses right? Since I've already got a fairly well-rounded set of lenses already, I assume I'd be better off saving the $300-400 and putting it toward a nicer lens like the ones already suggested? charliebravo77 posted:That said I kinda want a 7d2 or the inevitable 7d3 for real weather sealing. This question is not related to my gear search, and will (probably) not effect it, I've just been curious about it: why does the 7D exist? I don't mean this sarcastically or anything, but between the 5D, 6D, and 7D lines, I've found myself confused what niche the latter fills?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 06:22
|
|
|
It’s a cheaper option for sports or wildlife shooters that need high burst rate and good AF performance but can’t afford a $5000 1Dmk-whatever. e: also it gives “pro” body stuff like dual card slots and full weather sealing that canon doesn’t include with their other APS-C bodies astr0man fucked around with this message at 07:03 on Feb 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 06:58
|
|
|
7D is a crop sensor and was meant to be the budget 5D with better fps. Why the 6D exists, who knows. Probably because Canon is terrible at naming conventions and likes coming out with too many product lines. Their decision to come out with the 1000D was where the stupidity started, then they tripled down with the 100D, and it's only getting worse.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 07:01
|
|
|
The biggest advantage of the crop sensor in my mind is also the extra reach. The top end of my 600mm is the equivalent of 960mm on a full frame and the difference isn't trivial.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 15:25
|
|
|
The 18 135 is actually not bad for a kit lens, and has some extra features for video, but yeah I'd still recommend something nicer. Signal or tamron 17 55, signal 18 35, or a prime of whatever focal length you use often. Or the fantastic Canon 10-18 if you shoot wide a lot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 16:02
|
|
|
charliebravo77 posted:The biggest advantage of the crop sensor in my mind is also the extra reach. The top end of my 600mm is the equivalent of 960mm on a full frame and the difference isn't trivial. A FF user can crop to get the same effect if they wanted.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 18:09
|
|
|
xzzy posted:A FF user can crop to get the same effect if they wanted. I hadn't thought about that. I keep trying to tell myself I don't need a FF body and you aren't helping my wallet any 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 18:25
|
|
|
You can use aps-c lenses with the new R mount right? It'll just apply the crop automatically?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
hope and vaseline posted:You can use aps-c lenses with the new R mount right? It'll just apply the crop automatically?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 18:52
|
|
|
Re: Canon, Sony, colors, and video. I shoot professionally - most weddings, portraits and formerly sports - as well as have a full-time position in higher ed involving photography and videography. Personally, I own a 5D3, 6D, 17-35, 24 1.4, 50 1.2, 85 1.8, 70-200, and 2x tc. At my full time job, I had them invest in an A7III, 12-24, and 24-70. My impressions so far are absolutely that the Sony is heads and tails above anything a Canon DSLR or mirrorless body offers in terms of video, and that it definitely keeps up in terms of stills. For video, the flexibility that 4k offers for editing and reframing in post is a huge benefit, as is 120fps at 1080p for slow motion. It also lets you record in log gamma for some additional color and dynamic range wiggle room. The video autofocus is also very quick and accurate, and makes run-and-gun video production a lot easier and more accessible. You can produce some great results without going hog wild on follow focus rigs and gimbals. Next to the footage out of my 5D3 and 6D, there's no comparison. The detail and dynamic range from the Sony are really staggering. Downsampled 4K to 1080p is gorgeous, as well. I will echo the sentiments on color. It definitely does render colors differently than Canon tends to, and I struggled a bit with the Sony RAWs to get back to how I prefer my skin tones to look, especially under mixed color temperature lights (like when indoor lights and window lights mix). In the end, it wasn't impossible - it just took a bit of practice. One massive advantage the A7III has over the 5D3 is ISO invariance. I'm sure I'll get the technical details all wrong if I tried to explain the specifics, but in practice it lets you boost the exposure from a lower ISO image up without introducing significantly more noise than you'd get if you'd shot it a higher ISO and not boosted it in post. What this means in addition to helping preserve a photo you underexposed is that you can expand your dynamic range a good deal by exposing for highlights and then bringing up the shadows, often while preserving a lot of detail in those boosted shadows. Where a 5D3's shadows would get noisy and start to have banding when boosted a fair bit, the A7III (and 5D4's) stayed very clean. This is a characteristic of the 5D4's sensor as well, and probably other Canon cameras. I know the 5D3 and 6D don't have it, and having shot a wedding with a 5D4, the difference was huge in practice and extremely useful for me. When comparing autofocus, the A7III has some advantages with face detection and eye focus for a lot of applications. When you're shooting in dark conditions, I'd put the sensitivity and accuracy on par with the 5D3 and 5D4's cross-type points. The 6D's AF is hot garbage, so it beats the hell out of it, but that's a low bar. I can't comment on sports / action performance like football or basketball with the A7III - the particular challenge here being in tracking fast-moving subjects - because I don't have a typical lens like a 70-200 to use with it, nor do I shoot that sort of thing at my day job with it. I did take it home to learn it though, and the 24-70 did great tracking my running dog. While the Sony certainly feels well-made, I do feel more confident in handling my Canon DSLRs, especially in adverse weather and during all-day shooting. I imagine a Sony battery grip would make the A7 a bit more comfortable, especially with heavy lenses. The one giant missing piece here is evaluating how the Sony performs with adapted Canon lenses. I haven't tried that so I have no idea, but if the autofocus is still on par, I couldn't imagine someone in my situation - shooting stills and expanding more and more into video - sticking in the Canon ecosystem if the goal is to have a hybrid system.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 19:23
|
|
|
xzzy posted:A FF user can crop to get the same effect if they wanted. You can crop from the image from the APSC camera too. I think even cropping from a larger resolution FF model won't give an advantage in reach, and those models are typically not the sports/wildlife oriented anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
dakana posted:Re: Canon, Sony, colors, and video.  Oh hey that's basically me but 5D4 with a stack of L lenses. Like you said the color of skintone or sky on canon is nice but you can replicate it with the HSL sliders in lightroom to get sony to look the same. Also the iso-invariance thing owns on the sony and I also agree with you that the 5D has better weather seal. The C-log on the canon 5D4 is also somewhat half assed compare to s-log2/s-log3 especially without the proper AVC compression. The 800Mbps data rate on their uncompressed MOV format means you will run out of battery really quickly or memory cards. And surprise surprise their $10,000 "cinema orientated" C300 II camera has a better c-log option and AVC compression for reasonable file size while giving users only 8MP  You can see them doing this for the Canon EOS R and RP too by segmenting the system with the lovely sensors and cutting out log recording. But the 35mm 1.4 II is really nice though!
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2019 03:53
|
|
|
I was gonna ask about upgrading my 550D body to either a Sony 6300+adapter or an 80D but it looks like the 80D is what you guys suggest so thanks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2019 05:19
|
|
|
Might depend on your glass? I own one lens total so im not the guy to ask but there ya go
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2019 05:59
|
|
|
I have the kit lenses, nifty 50, a 60mm macro and tamron 17-50. And the 80d just went on sale, and I get sales tax back if I take it on my holiday to Hawaii in a few weeks, making it around $250 off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2019 22:10
|
|
|
Laserface posted:I have the kit lenses, nifty 50, a 60mm macro and tamron 17-50. Where are you seeing it on sale?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 00:18
|
|
|
Locally in Australia. $936aud for body only, after sales tax reimbursement when I take it overseas.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2019 12:55
|
|
|
xzzy posted:A FF user can crop to get the same effect if they wanted.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2019 13:31
|
|
|
I just bought a new 80D!  Can I now take a moment to express my frustration that Canon apparently decided to lengthen their batteries by 1mm so now I can't use with it the four old batteries I already have from my 20D.  Thanks, Canon. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2019 07:34
|
|
|
Buy wasabi's, be gay, do crimes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2019 13:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 10:48 |
|
|
Just file your old batteries down. Don't worry it will be fine, everything will be fine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2019 18:01
|
|
