|
Big McHuge posted:It's a k mount bayonet, and yes it is the aperture tab along with another tab right next to it. Nice! Good thing it was only the aperture tabs. I have nearly all of the old M42 Takumars and the 50/1.4, 35/2, 28/3.5 and 24/3.5 all do not work correctly on my 5D2 because at infinity focus the rear lens element sticks back just far enough to interfere with the mirror. You can't exactly file that off
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2020 19:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 11:11 |
|
|
Ihmemies posted:I tried a 6D with 85/1.2 II in low light. AF speed to still targets was around 5-10secs. I have never used anything so slow, even manual focus is faster.. it was excruciatingly slow. I hated every moment of that poo poo rear end camera-lens combo pitifully trying to find a focus. The 6D has one of Canon's worst autofocus systems in recent years, and the 85 1.2 is one of the slowest-focusing lenses in their lineup. I'm not surprised to hear you struggled in low light. Even in the best of light, it's not going to be a super fast-focusing lens. It's made for portraits, and that's where it shines. I adapt a 50mm f/1.2 to my Sony A7R III with the Sigma MC-11, and it works great for almost anything I throw at it. I'm not sure how the 85 1.2 would fare; I adapt the 85 1.8 with great results, but that's known for its speed — I've used it to shoot basketball, even. I think you'd have better luck getting the Sigma 85 1.4 to scratch that itch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2020 19:07
|
|
|
dakana posted:The 6D has one of Canon's worst autofocus systems in recent years, and the 85 1.2 is one of the slowest-focusing lenses in their lineup. I'm not surprised to hear you struggled in low light. Even in the best of light, it's not going to be a super fast-focusing lens. It's made for portraits, and that's where it shines. Yeah, the 6D and using the non-cross points and that's a combo, apart from the slow 85 1.2 that is asking for trouble. The 85 1.8 is pretty fast focusing, and frankly sharp as hell wide open.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2020 19:48
|
|
|
My 100-400 on the the 1.4x at f/8 on my 80D focuses way faster than that, so I feel something was wrong with gear/settings.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
Another question to ask would be, when it does find focus after 5-10 seconds, is it accurate?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2020 20:59
|
|
|
The photos are still on friend's cards. Her HDD broke so it might take a while to sort it out. I will post the results asap! I think the camera sometimes hunted from end to other end of focus range, sometimes it found the general area where to focus quicker. Then it took some time to adjust the focus precisely enough. I understand the 85/1.2L II focuses with front elements which are super heavy (the lens is over 1kg and the first four elements look quite fat together... I haven't used 6D before and I now realize you should really only use the center area in low light, then recompose after focusing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2020 06:45
|
|
|
^^ the problem with that is that it eliminates your ability to shoot wide open, because by recomposing you'll shift the focal plane.jarlywarly posted:My 100-400 on the the 1.4x at f/8 on my 80D focuses way faster than that, so I feel something was wrong with gear/settings. I wouldn't necessarily think so. Especially if you're in low light and not using the center point, it could easily hunt for a while before settling.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2020 17:52
|
|
|
Someone on reddit claiming they called canon, who said they are backordered 18,000 units of the R5 on just their direct store.. so that doesn't include backorders on Amazon, B&H, Adorama, whatever. That camera seems extremely popular! Wonder how many Canon shooters have been chilling with their old body waiting for the company to release a competent mirrorless.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 15:28
|
|
|
If I had the money and/or the need for a professional full frame mirrorless for stills and the video shooting I do (with an external recorder), I know the R5 would be my choice, with a CPS subscription. They’re just well made overheating panic notwithstanding. And the jpeg colors are still nice, which is something I’ve really come to value from using Fuji.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 18:02
|
|
|
xzzy posted:
I'd bet for a lot of people (me) they don't care if it's mirrorless, they just think it's first exciting camera Canon has made for a while. AF, IBIS, better dynamic range, high fps...
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 18:25
|
|
|
Still waiting for my R6 body, nobody even pretends to have a release date here except Amazon. Idiotically, the Canon web shop has the kit in stock but not the body, presumably because nobody wants to pay an extra €360 for that trash 24-105mm f/4-7.1 kit lens.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 19:39
|
|
|
Not that I would preorder an R5 anyway at the moment but I'm kind of hoping for some sort of M7/R7 crop variant with the eye tracking tech. Although the future existence of "pro crop" bodies like the 7Dmk2 bodies seems unlikely. There's just no ideal mirrorless body for my main use of birds and macro where full frame is more of a hinderance, maybe I should just stuff it and get m4/3. I'll probably end up with an R5 eventually and deal with 7MP less croppability buy selling my organs for a 400 2.8 and a 2x.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 20:01
|
|
|
That Whistling Wings guy that shows up in my youtube recommendations every so often loving loves his R5 and all he does is birds, the AF is just that loving good. But he's clearly rich as gently caress because he has the 600mm f/4. For us average joes that have to decide between mortgage or glass that's never gonna happen.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 20:10
|
|
|
xzzy posted:That Whistling Wings guy that shows up in my youtube recommendations every so often loving loves his R5 and all he does is birds, the AF is just that loving good. Yeah I rented one, not only do you have to be rich you have to be dedicated enough to take it seriously, weighs a ton and is very large. The best combo I've seen seems to be R5+2x III+ 400 f/2.8 III it's more easily handholdable and if you get the 1.4x as well you have a choice of 400/2.8 + 560/4 + 800/5.6. They hold the price though so if you buy used and squint really hard it's kind of like just putting 10k in a non interest bank account for a while.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2020 20:20
|
|
|
jarlywarly posted:Not that I would preorder an R5 anyway at the moment but I'm kind of hoping for some sort of M7/R7 crop variant with the eye tracking tech. Although the future existence of "pro crop" bodies like the 7Dmk2 bodies seems unlikely.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 01:12
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:Full frame isn't the hindrance for birds, low density and low FPS is. And the R5 is pretty damned dense and high FPS. poo poo, you can apply the crop in camera if you want to save megapixels. Crop mode on an R5 is what? 30ish megapixels? It's 17mp.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 01:34
|
|
|
I thought full frame was better for macro too, at least with regard to keeping diffraction at bay?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 01:42
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:Full frame isn't the hindrance for birds, low density and low FPS is. And the R5 is pretty damned dense and high FPS. poo poo, you can apply the crop in camera if you want to save megapixels. Crop mode on an R5 is what? 30ish megapixels? 17.5mp, which is...fine, I guess? It's just hard to get excited about a $3900 camera, when the top of the line APS-C cameras have been half that price or less and can do everything you need to them to do.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 01:45
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:It's 17mp.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 04:06
|
|
|
joat mon posted:I thought full frame was better for macro too, at least with regard to keeping diffraction at bay? Full frame loses less detail to diffraction at equivalent apertures when you stop down excessively for DoF. Focus stacking and using reasonable apertures avoids the issue, but as long as you have enough light you can get more detail per frame on FF.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 04:32
|
|
|
out of curiosity, how many of the people taking pictures of birds do it for pay, and how many are independently wealthy amateurs?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 06:55
|
|
|
There's gently caress all money in wilife photography. Supply vastly exceeds demand. "Run photographic tours" seems to be the main income stream these days.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 07:01
|
|
|
loaf posted:Full frame loses less detail to diffraction at equivalent apertures when you stop down excessively for DoF. Focus stacking and using reasonable apertures avoids the issue, but as long as you have enough light you can get more detail per frame on FF. I don't stack as I shoot live insects, FF means getting closer to fill the frame to use the full MP of the sensor which means less DoF at equivalent apertures, which I can counteract by reducing aperture which means diffraction is essentially a zero sum game as I understand it. Maybe the maths are slightly different in favor of one or the other. Also getting closer to insects is an issue with them being flighty and also getting the lighting right in a smaller space. The EVF is really appealing for some things like focus peaking, exposure simulation etc though, the OVF gives me real time feedback about focus point (by looking) which is handy when my DoF is in 1-2mm range. Like I say I'm on the fence about the issue, but it seems that there's no place for high end crop any more, which is going to force the issue at some point especially as the animal eye AF is such an amazing feature. Also wildlife is the realm of richish hobbyists, no-one's getting paid for stills of birds, maybe a handful of people make a small amount of cash from nature sites or charities. People seem to get paid by teaching others or running tours. I'm certainly not quitting my healthcare software dev job to do insect macro courses/safaris at the moment, as much as I'd love to if people would pay for that kind of thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 08:56
|
|
|
No one's making a living off their camera anymore unless they're doing weddings. It's all workshops and selling presets to try and stave off draining the bank account completely and keep the dream going.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 13:47
|
|
|
I like doing the occasional paid gig here and there for some easy money, but doing it for a living? Lol, no.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 14:40
|
|
|
That is where I'm at. Late 2000s early 2010s I thought I'd make a career out of photography. Not only are clients endlessly annoying with how little they know about budgeting for photographers, other "photographers" are constantly undercutting each other all the way to unprofitability. You can't complete with someone who lives with their parents who will do a wedding for $500. I'm sure their photos are poo poo but clients only care about the bottom line, not what you're actually offering. By the time they learn their lesson, the wedding's over and most people won't book another event photographer for the rest of their lives. It's blood money and I won't do it on anything short of my terms. My quotes are built automatically based on what my time is worth and I don't offer deals on them. If a client doesn't want to pay what I quote, then they simply can't afford me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 15:56
|
|
|
Have you tried buying ten thousand dollars worth of equipment to take low angle photos of cars rusting in tall grass, HDR them into an unrecognizable mess, and sell them as oversized art prints at local craft shows? I've heard that's where the big money is. And if that doesn't work out you can always make youtube videos about your journey and growth as a working professional for a while before you discover your true passion, gear unboxings.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 16:17
|
|
|
Fools Infinite posted:And if that doesn't work out you can always make youtube videos about your journey and growth as a working professional for a while before you discover your true passion, gear unboxings. Ted Forbes starts to sweat a little bit and doesn't know why.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 16:19
|
|
|
I’m hoping to get my nature photography to “side gig that doesn’t lose money” status. It’s (usually) fun to talk to people at local festivals and markets, and I’ve been able to partner with some conservation non-profits. But most likely if I buy an R5 or big prime lens it will be from a regular job.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 17:31
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:That is where I'm at. Late 2000s early 2010s I thought I'd make a career out of photography. Not only are clients endlessly annoying with how little they know about budgeting for photographers, other "photographers" are constantly undercutting each other all the way to unprofitability. You can't complete with someone who lives with their parents who will do a wedding for $500. I'm sure their photos are poo poo but clients only care about the bottom line, not what you're actually offering. By the time they learn their lesson, the wedding's over and most people won't book another event photographer for the rest of their lives. It's blood money and I won't do it on anything short of my terms. My quotes are built automatically based on what my time is worth and I don't offer deals on them. If a client doesn't want to pay what I quote, then they simply can't afford me. To actually earn a living with photography, it's like 90% business and marketing savvy — building a name for yourself with your local school districts for senior pictures, mastering the art of in-person sales, catering to high-budget weddings and networking with similarly-positioned HMUAs/venues/florists/etc, getting in with corporate clients with marketing budgets, etc... The people looking for a $500 wedding or $50 family portraits are not interested in paying more for better-quality photography, and that's a side-effect of how accessible photography has become — that the market is saturated with hobbyists and dabblers that can produce semi-competent photography and don't (and shouldn't) charge a lot for it. These clients were never going to pay for a professional in the first place — they were never yours to compete for if your aim is to make a living.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 19:17
|
|
|
Heh.. I just did a 500€ wedding last weekend. My friend wanted a backup photog and I volunteered. I said we split the gas fees and she can keep the rest of the money. I took maybe 700 photos with manual focus Nikkor lenses and some video too. The dances were too hard to photograph without AF so I just took some videos. Now I have to learn to edit it in Resolve, welp. Doing weddings for money? No please. Way too much stress.. it was a lot cooler to hang around as a low effort 2nd photographer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 19:24
|
|
|
gently caress it. Just throw up a bunch of lewd minecraft composite boudoir screenshots on flickr and let the likes and awards roll in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2020 21:44
|
|
|
I found a 85/1.2L II to try out. drat that focuses fast and accurately with Panasonic S1 and Sigma MC-21. Miles better and faster than what I can do with a manual focus lens. Lens felt nice in hand. Well balanced on my camera, good build quality. The amount of glass was very impressive. Manual focus felt fine too, no problems.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 16:04
|
|
|
Holy poo poo there's a used R5 on Wex
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 18:30
|
|
|
I've seen posts from idiots that preordered from every single site on the internet and got 2 or 3 bodies that they now need to unload.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 18:53
|
|
|
And it's gone
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 19:12
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Someone on reddit claiming they called canon, who said they are backordered 18,000 units of the R5 on just their direct store.. so that doesn't include backorders on Amazon, B&H, Adorama, whatever. I have, but im also still considering abandoning it all for Sony.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2020 03:05
|
|
|
The official C70 cinema camera announcement has gone live.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2020 13:27
|
|
|
Fools Infinite posted:Have you tried buying ten thousand dollars worth of equipment to take low angle photos of cars rusting in tall grass, HDR them into an unrecognizable mess, and sell them as oversized art prints at local craft shows? I've heard that's where the big money is. Don't forget carefully staged photos of their new camera body "floating" above their hands and golden hour "BTS" shots of their caged out rig in a field somewhere. I honestly don't understand how with COVID gutting every creative industry people are still dumping thousands on pre-orders for the latest current-gen camera bodies. The creative industry is in the worst shape it has ever been yet camera bros are spending more money than I've ever seen. I listed my Ronin-S for sale because I grew out of that "GiMbAl aLl ThE ThInGs" phase and my mailbox was bursting with people asking if it's available, all offering above asking. This whole industry now revolves around people arguing about specs sheets, unboxing videos, selling LUTs and selling their totally Awesome Filmmaking Masterclass for melon cat fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Oct 4, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2020 00:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 11:11 |
|
|
melon cat posted:Don't forget carefully staged photos of their new camera body "floating" above their hands and golden hour "BTS" shots of their caged out rig in a field somewhere. I think the current world situation has people really bored, more than anything. High earners who might normally spend their summers traveling, doing outdoor activities with friends, etc. have mostly been working from home, not going out at night or on distant vacations dreaming of a future where they can travel and do fun camera things. Younger, less well off people have dreams of becoming a Instagram "influencer" or a running a lucrative Youtube channel to either allow them to quit crappy jobs they hate or allow them to make any money at all in the current world situation. I've read several things about professional wedding shooters selling off some of their gear because the market it hot and they don't have any bookings coming up. The professional photographers and videographers are really only a small slice of the camera market, even in a market shrinking due to smartphones.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2020 02:34
|
|