|
i dunno photographing a chick with a shaved head while smashing someones car window out with a bat in the middle of the night is sort of demanding edit: oops i did it again, a terrible snipe
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2022 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 16:51 |
|
|
You all have some serious Stockholm syndrome on the Canon model names. On one hand, I'm not sure I could come up with something perfect, but having multiple different conventions depending on if its a consumer, prosumer, or "professsional" camera is utterly confusing for a newbie. Then throw in utterly weird poo poo like the 77D and just to really gently caress with people. And don't even get me started on the consumer SLR stuff. Is it a 800D, a T7i or a Kiss X9i? Oh, and there's a T7 which sounds almost exactly the same, but is a huge downgrade in specs. I'm curious to see if they'll just be consistent and do mk2, etc. for all the R stuff, but that seems too sensible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 03:55
|
|
|
I'm always looking at Flickr stuff and it shows photos by a 1200D and I have no idea since they name them all differently all over the world.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 06:44
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:don't try to unvalidate me lol It's okay, you're still valid. The 7D has is ergonomic, built well, and you can set the exposure without the menus. Checks all the boxes!
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 20:36
|
|
|
The 7D is a semi-professional camera with a crop sensor. It's plenty good. Of course, even the 5D is considered to be semi-professional (I read somewhere that only the 1D is considered to be a professional camera), even though it is the workhorse of actual professional photographers. At the last wedding I went to, the photographer was lugging around 2 5d4s with different lenses. Generally, the camera bodies with a single digit are professional or semi-professional and are usually the only ones with any weather sealing. Generally, all of them are full frame except for the 7D. The camera bodies with two digits, like the Canon EOS 60D, are nice cameras but not as good as the ones with single digits. They can be seen as more "Enthusiast" class. The ones with 3 digits, like the Canon EOS 550D, are more "consumer-level" than anything, but can hold their own. In fact, the Canon EOS 550D and the Canon Rebel T2i are basically the same camera, but named differently depending on the market (the latter appears more in the Americas). And then there's stuff like the Canon EOS 300X, aka Canon Rebel T2, that really cheap out on components and are probably not great purchases unless you're getting it for free. Of course, I could be getting any of the above wrong, but I'm pretty sure about most of this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 03:58
|
|
|
Not often mentioned great feature of the 7D is the full coverage and 1 to 1 magnification viewfinder. It is a true WYSIWYG viewfinder you don't get even in the 1D series.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 05:03
|
|
|
I think the true beauty of it, and this is true of a lot of cameras now, is that it's a professional level camera that you can get for very cheap. this is defo a golden age for photography. my 13yo uses my 7D now.. he's so privileged and lucky to be using a camera that is totally capable of amazing photos. We have definitely passed some kind of milestone where the barrier to entry of amazing photography was money. The barrier is now just experience/skill. I started with a 350D and I sold it recently for $40. while it was pretty average, the implication that for $40 someone can buy a DSLR is crazy. I took many good and memorable photos of my kids when they were young with that. Camera technology is weird compared to say ipads or laptops. A decade+ old laptop is worthless with today's websites etc, but a decade+ camera, provided it can still work OK, can still take decently great photos. the 7D came out in 09, it's a fuckin teenager, and it's fine, and in some ways, it forces you to think about exposure in a way you don't need to with a mirrorless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2022 02:59
|
|
|
I'm just about to buy him an OG nifty fifty for that camera (I have one of the newer ones for myself) equiv of about 80mm on crop. but f/1.8.... if you can't take good photos with a 7d and 50mm f/1.8 the problem isn't the gear
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2022 03:02
|
|
|
yeah, the bodies get more affordable with age but the lenses (particularly the professional ones) are always pretty pricey. At least you can swap them around if you trust your buddy enough with 'em!
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2022 03:38
|
|
|
40mm pancake that is all
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2022 03:54
|
|
|
The arrival of RF has had some suppressing effect on EF lenses. Not by a ton, but it is there. The first gen EF 24-105 can be acquired for peanuts and still hasn't been beat optically.. most of the improvements have been autofocus noise and lens coatings.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2022 04:02
|
|
|
IMO the problems, if any, with high-quality older DSLRs like the 7D isn’t in the sensor tech. Even though they have a higher noise floors at base ISO than modern sensors and you have to set ISO more for the shot than just boosting the raw in post, a lot of those older sensors still make images that have great detail and color. I look back at all my 7D and 5DII photos in LR and kind of feel like even the stuff made with my Fujis doesn’t have quite the pictorial quality of those older camera files. Seems to be something about how they reproduce warmer tones especially. The real problem with buying older DSLR gear is the SLR part. Mirror boxes, springs, dampeners, AF modules, etc. … all the little electromechanical components can get loose and inaccurate after hundreds of thousands of actuations, and lubricants can lose their specified viscosity. Be sure to buy cautiously and check shutter counts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2022 04:35
|
|
|
I was just wondering to myself while photo walking around that I think lens tech has been bumped up too. Todays cheap RF lens have incredible image quality. The differences people are showing between their Ls is becoming less and less, while the speed distancing is catching up as well. They just need to figure out how to waterproof everything without making it all weigh twice as much because it's solid metal.
Philthy fucked around with this message at 02:07 on Aug 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2022 02:04
|
|
|
I do a lot of sports photography and video and I'm leaning towards buying the R5C as a much needed upgrade from my current combo of a 5Dmk3 for photography and 80D for video. The only thing putting me a bit off is that they removed the IBIS for the C-model. Now granted, I've never shot with an IBIS camera, so I don't know how much a loss that is on the photography side, but should I settle for the regular R5 instead if I'm like 60/40 photography to video?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2022 11:09
|
|
|
I bought the R5C, so please don't answer the question if it will make me feel bad.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2022 18:02
|
|
|
for what it's worth I've never experienced ibis unless you mean irritable bowel syndrome
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2022 11:32
|
|
|
According to some article I rea, Canon have been leaning on third party lens manufacturers to stop selling RF lenses. Or at least autofocus capable RF lenses, Laowa are still selling manual RF mount macro lenses, but Samyang and Viltrox have pulled all RF lenses and support software for them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2022 22:50
|
|
|
It's a pretty classic move, but hearing that pretty much instantly killed the desire I have to move to an RF camera. My lens collection is roughly 2/3 3rd party lenses (EF/EF-M) and I have zero faith that we'll be seeing a bunch of reasonably priced Canon glass down the line.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2022 23:42
|
|
|
I'm not sure why third party companies would listen, they don't get any tech specs from Canon do they? They've always operated in a weird grey area and I thought first parties ignored them because it wasn't worth the trouble. I guess Canon is bigger and has more lawyers, and I suppose it depends on if any of these lenses violate patents.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2022 00:16
|
|
|
Man this might actually get me to switch to Sony if I go full frame, anticipating eventual Sigma and Tamron RF lenses was a big reason for staying in the Canon universe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2022 02:43
|
|
|
Yeah I don't need a new camera for a few years but I am definitely going to have my GAS tested when the R5ii comes along. If there's no Sigma/Tamron alternative to L glass though it's going to be an easier impulse to resist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2022 14:47
|
|
|
Canon has my bases covered currently, but I'd be lying if I didn't want to try out all those cool looking Chinese lenses coming out left and right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 04:13
|
|
|
Grimson posted:I do a lot of sports photography and video and I'm leaning towards buying the R5C as a much needed upgrade from my current combo of a 5Dmk3 for photography and 80D for video. The only thing putting me a bit off is that they removed the IBIS for the C-model. Now granted, I've never shot with an IBIS camera, so I don't know how much a loss that is on the photography side, but should I settle for the regular R5 instead if I'm like 60/40 photography to video? Any full-frame camera with IBIS that I've ever used has never impressed me. My GH5's IBIS is loving great, but that's only because M43's smaller sensor is known for having better IBIS capabilities in general due to the size of the lens mount. It's the one time where a small sensor is actually beneficial. If you're worried about stabilization just learn how to use 3 points of contact on your camera while shooting. Or just lean against a surface or prop your camera on something steady while shooting, like a desk or nearby pillar. Or bring along a monopod. Monopod is life. Not to go all photobro on you buuuut: history's greatest photographers didn't need IBIS to get award winning shots so chances are you can probably do without it. BeastOfExmoor posted:You all have some serious Stockholm syndrome on the Canon model names. On one hand, I'm not sure I could come up with something perfect, but having multiple different conventions depending on if its a consumer, prosumer, or "professsional" camera is utterly confusing for a newbie. Then throw in utterly weird poo poo like the 77D and just to really gently caress with people. And don't even get me started on the consumer SLR stuff. Is it a 800D, a T7i or a Kiss X9i? Oh, and there's a T7 which sounds almost exactly the same, but is a huge downgrade in specs. I'm curious to see if they'll just be consistent and do mk2, etc. for all the R stuff, but that seems too sensible. Canon EOS Rebel T6s aka the EOS 760D aka EOS 8000D. Canon C100 theeen... Canon C70 which is a supposed upgrade. But C200 is also a slight upgrade over the C300 mk1. Like wat. melon cat fucked around with this message at 06:18 on Jan 10, 2024 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2022 17:32
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:According to some article I rea, Canon have been leaning on third party lens manufacturers to stop selling RF lenses. Or at least autofocus capable RF lenses, Laowa are still selling manual RF mount macro lenses, but Samyang and Viltrox have pulled all RF lenses and support software for them. Apparently it's due to those manufacturers having reverse-engineered the RF autofocus mechanics or otherwise managed to make it work without the licensing fees from canon which I believe make it financially infeasible to do so. which sucks but I have an EF sigma lens and it's excellent on my R melon cat posted:Not to go all photobro on you buuuut: history's greatest photographers didn't need IBIS to get award winning shots so chances are you can probably do without it. I just shoot at 1/500 come at me
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2022 11:48
|
|
|
echinopsis posted:but I have an EF sigma lens and it's excellent on my R
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2022 13:13
|
|
|
It's the 135mm f/1.8 on the R and I use a canon EF->RF adapter
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2022 13:38
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:According to some article I rea, Canon have been leaning on third party lens manufacturers to stop selling RF lenses. Or at least autofocus capable RF lenses, Laowa are still selling manual RF mount macro lenses, but Samyang and Viltrox have pulled all RF lenses and support software for them. That really sucks if it's accurate. The EF/RF converter works fine but I was really hoping that Sigma and Tamron would port some of their nice AF lenses to the R mount in the reasonably near future.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2022 15:42
|
|
|
does “picture style” matter if you shoot raw
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2022 22:54
|
|
|
No, but I've found Lightroom will use monochrome if you shoot in the mono profile. You can select it over to color tho if you want, all the info is there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2022 06:51
|
|
|
Too bad for Canon users. The new Sigma DG DN lenses are all very nice - 20,24,35,85mm 1.4 Art lenses at least. You can't get anything similar in RF mount. 85/1.2 RF is 2.5x more expensive and 2x heavier.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2022 07:17
|
|
|
I've been looking at the RF 24mm 1.8 IS. I really enjoy my EF-S 24mm 2.8 non-IS and can do handhelds at 1/4" currently. Do the Sigmas have IS?
Philthy fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Sep 7, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2022 16:57
|
|
|
I've been doing almost exclusively nature photography but I'm starting to get some paid work shooting humans, like, indoors and stuff. Small venue music stuff plus maybe some normal events photos, group photos, etc. I'm feeling good about the bodies I have (5D4 and R6). The zoom trinity is 16-35 / 24-70 / 70-200, so... The one I really need out of these is the 24-70. I've started reading up and I think I want the 24-70/4 IS. Sharp and cheaper than the /2.8 or the Sigma. Am I crazy for not immediately leaning towards the faster lenses here? Is there some magic reason to have at least one lens that's /2.8? Love to hear your personal experiences or see any useful/practical links you can share. The other two I've got more or less covered with existing lenses (17-40L and 70-300L).
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2022 19:29
|
|
|
Events are always, alwaaaays dark, I would def go for f/2.8. And for me, out of the trinity you mention, 70-200 f/2.8 is in my opinion a must have. 24-70 you can fake with cheaper primes but not that one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2022 20:41
|
|
|
I imagine small venue music stuff is especially dark, so a faster lens tends to be almost always better. And agreed on the 70-200, that's a workhorse. You can also look into renting stuff for the gigs that you get paid for, and then buy the lenses later.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2022 12:03
|
|
|
Thanks for the replies. I appreciate the perspective. Can I ask what the biggest deal is with 2.8 vs. 4? Seems like they would differ in: 1) Total light @2.8 v 4 2) possibly AF ability in low light 3) DOF #1 seems like the most important but also something I can make up for with the sensor in the R6. Am I thinking about this wrong? 70-200 is too long for the small venue stuff I've done so far but I can see how it might be important for other things in the future. A 70-200 + 1.4x would pretty much give me what I have with the 70-300.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2022 19:40
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:Thanks for the replies. I appreciate the perspective. No you are correct but maybe underestimating how high your ISO needs to be. It can be the difference between ISO 4000 and 8000. Or you set your ISO to the highest you can tolerate and then get a stop faster shutter, which will let you capture shots that would have been blurred from subject motion otherwise. The best test might be to go to the venue (or one like it) and see what camera settings you want to use. See if a stop of shutter or ISO is important to you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2022 20:07
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:Thanks for the replies. I appreciate the perspective. In my experience shooting concert stuff my main lenses was a 50 and the 70-200, both for the speed. I've transitioned to mainly shooting sports after that and the 70-200 is the one I keep with me at all times, it's just too useful and it's a must if you shoot anything that involves fast motion and bad lighting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2022 20:15
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:Can I ask what the biggest deal is with 2.8 vs. 4? Seems like they would differ in: Also, about 1 kg in weight! I've used 70-200 f/4 also, it's great outdoors but indoors ... Well I'm happy that R6 lets me push ISO to 25600 with files looking about same as m4/3 looked at 6400.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2022 05:21
|
|
|
I have the 24-70 f/4L and I've shot concerts with it. It's a great lens and I've never found that I'm really missing that extra stop of light to be honest (shooting on a 5Div). I'm fine with opening up the ISO though so YMMV. IMG_9810-Edit.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr Canon EOS 5D Mark IV EF70-200mm f/4L IS USM ƒ/4.0 70.0 mm 1/60 ISO 1000  IMG_9959.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr Canon EOS 5D Mark IV EF24-70mm f/4L IS USM ƒ/4.0 70.0 mm 1/250 ISO 12800
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2022 16:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 16:51 |
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:70-200 is too long for the small venue stuff I've done so far but I can see how it might be important for other things in the future. A 70-200 + 1.4x would pretty much give me what I have with the 70-300. Even if you can get really close, the 70-200 is good for close-ups and detail shots.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 00:17
|
|