|
For very basic understanding of the primary camera controls, Canon have a fun website that lets you play with a virtual camera and compare the different images you get when you change aperture and shutter speed. http://canonoutsideofauto.ca/
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 15:18 |
|
|
The flip out touch screen is awesome for composing a shot where it's not easy to look through the viewfinder (e.g. holding the camera over the heads of a crowd or when the camera is at floor level). The touch screen isn't otherwise massively more convenient than using the wheel and back buttons to set options.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
For what it's worth, I never had a problem seeing the back screen on my 70D in midday Madrid sunlight. Also, if the amount of camera shake from pressing the shutter button is an issue, then you're probably on a tripod already and so you can use the $20 wired remote or the free cellphone app to take the shot without touching the camera at all.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2016 12:06
|
|
|
That 80-200 should be fine for zoo and bird stuff. You might need to push the ISO up a bit to get fast enough shutter speeds in less ideal lighting conditions but it's fine for that. IT's not really a walk-about taking pictures of the park kind of lens because it's a tele lens. On your 20D, it's actually a 128-320mm lens because your camera has a smaller sensor so the image is cropped by about 1.6x. A 35mm lens on your camera will give you about the same field of view as human eyes (~50mm) which is why 50mm is a common focal length for everyday photography. For landscapes you definitely want a wider lens (less than 50mm) but this is a very well served segment of the market. You should be able to find very cheap 18-55mm lenses (they are commonly bundled with new cameras) and, with the longer lens you already have will give you a very good range of photography options. Unless you plan on doing a lot of fast, lowlight shooting, then you aren't going to see a huge benefit from more expensive glass at the moment. Your camera can make up for a lot of the difference by boosting ISO. You should be able to run up to 1600 or so on that body without significant noise being added and maybe 6400 if you are fairly creative in post-processing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
blowfish posted:$500 body If we're just pulling numbers out of our rear end, then I submit: $300 older gen body + kit lens second hand. $100 Nifty fifty $100 for assorted poo poo including a beginner's tripod, cleaning kit, basic bag. $0 for a fast lens for action shots as a Christmas or birthday gift from a relative who wants to encourage her creativity. She needs another $69.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 14:29
|
|
|
When I decided I wanted to try photography with something better than a compact, I bought a second hand 450D with an 18-55 kit lens on eBay for about $150. Was in fine condition apart from normal signs of wear and I used it for two years until I upgraded to a 70D. She can probably get a 60D for similar money these days.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
Dren posted:windex i am thinking about not buying a new camera or even reading about new gear that comes out, can you make some recommendations in the neighborhood of $0? You should buy an FT-One 4k cine camera. At $128k plus another $20k for the SSD, a view finder and a lens, it's a bit more expensive than your $0 budget but I don't see how you can make it work for less.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
To expand on the correct but not terribly useful answer above, it's hard for us to answer that question without more context. What do you expect to be able to do with the camera? What are your plans for it? How invested are you going to be in the hobby of photography? $450 for that bundle isn't a bad price and the elements you have there are decent for their purpose, but you need to know more about what you want from it to answer your own question. It's a solid, all-round kit that will get you up and running with the ability to explore photography at a level beyond phone and compact camera use. Whether it's good value for you is the wrong question to ask us.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2016 12:38
|
|
|
Yeah, $1500 should get you an 80D body with just about enough left over for a nifty fifty and a Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8. That lot will rock your world compared to the XSi. B&H have the 80D body for $1099 right now, the 50mm f/1.8 for $110 and the Sigma 17-50mm for $369.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2016 14:07
|
|
|
windex posted:I concur this is a good option but if you can splurge and want something 50mm like, the 80D at $1099 and EF 35mm f/2 IS USM at $550 is a nice option if you like the 50mm field of view and the 35mm f/2 IS USM is a great lens for APS-C or FF bodies (e.g. you will keep it for as long as Canon supports the EF mount). The nifty fifty is a little telephoto-esque on APS-C. But the 17-50 will shoot 35mm at f/2.8 as well as giving you a wide option and a little bit of tele.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:Thanks for the replies. I should clarify that I'm fine with buying something, even if I'd prefer free. However, I can't justify going for software that rents for $120 per year, for what is a very very casual part-time hobby of mine. And yes, I'm aware you can go monthly and there are free trials and sales and whatnot, so no need to start a derail about Adobe licensing. If you care enough about photography that you shoot in RAW and you post to a photography forum, then just get Lightroom. There's also the chance that not using some lovely freeware hack will encourage you to take more photos too.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
MrBlandAverage posted:Look, you don't understand. A power user like Lutha Mahtin already doesn't need to use a mouse Lol at you amateurs editing your photos. I just tell everyone who looks at my photos what they are supposed to look like. If they can't use their imaginations then I don't want them anywhere near my art.  With this one, imagine that the background continues in the area where my thumb is. Also that the girl is in focus and I cropped it properly. Also there's a totally sick compositional element right on the line of thirds behind my thumb and it's lit so amazingly.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 18:27
|
|
What kind of pleb do you think he is?
|
Manual focussing in low light is hard as gently caress even with focus assist features. Autofocus in lowlight is often not terribly reliable depending on the lens and body you have. I shoot a few things similar to what you are describing and mostly what you want is something that can shoot at high ISO with the least possible noise. That 5D2 will be fine for that but so will many other options. Basically if you can get usable pictures at ~6400 ISO then you'll be fine. The reason for that is because ISO is the trade-off you're going to have to make for having reasonably fast shots (1/125 or faster) at the sort of apertures you'll have on long lenses. If you can be right up against the stage, you can use a shorter lens which generally have wider apertures available, but if you aren't then you'll need something in the 70-200mm range and, unless you can drop a couple of grand on a single lens, you'll be shooting at much narrower apertures so you'll be cranking up the ISO to compensate. In general full frame cameras like the 5D have better lowlight capability (less noise at equivalent ISO) than cameras with smaller sensors.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2016 14:24
|
|
|
akadajet posted:You mean you take that off? I'm triggered.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2016 07:21
|
|
|
What do you want to do with your photography? What compromises are you prepared to make with regard to bulkiness vs performance? There are alternatives to a DSLR for serious photography and maybe your specific needs might be better served with a mirrorless system. The T6i is a reasonably good entry level camera. If you are just starting out, it will take a while before you reach its limits. I doubt that it will be too much to start with, it's aimed at beginners and casual photographers. In general the Rebels/triple digit number cameras like the 750D are aimed at beginners, the double digit models are 'prosumer' hobbyist bodies and the single digit numbers are pro-level. If you're going to buy it new, then you could probably get a better camera for the same price by looking at second hand 70Ds. This site is pretty good for giving you an overview of the exposure triangle, but nothing will beat just going out and taking a bunch of photos, experimenting and seeing what differences you get from moving your settings about. Also look at photos that people post and check the settings that they used for them, a lot of platforms like Flickr, 500px, etc display those by default.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
InFlames235 posted:Thank you both for the feedback. In terms of this question, I really would just be doing it for a hobby and to have a nice camera for vacations and new areas as well. Definitely wouldn't be doing anything like trying to make money with photos. I absolutely love nature shots and getting really cool shots of things like that was my absolute favorite in Highschool. It used to be that the serious cameras were DSLRs and mirrorless digital meant compact point and shoots. These days though with improvements in sensor miniaturisation, battery capacity and a market for good cameras that are also small, mirrorless cameras have grown into a viable alternative to the traditional DSLR. The downsides will be much worse battery life and possibly worse low-light performance. The upside is a camera that weighs a third of a DSLR with lenses that are small enough to fit in your pocket. For the sort of generalist stuff that you are talking about I doubt you'd have an issue with either choice to be honest. The mirrorless thread in here is full of people (including some pros) who have sold off their full-frame DSLRs and converted to mirrorless systems without feeling like they have lost out on anything. There's nothing wrong with going for a mid-range DSLR, and if you start to build up a gear collection, then most of it will be migratable to your next body upgrade. Just be aware that the choice isn't as obvious as it was ten years ago.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
Don't get too OCD about cleaning your gear, often you'll do more harm through over-cleaning than you'll benefit from having a dust-free camera. You'll be amazed at how much poo poo you can have on the front element before it becomes visible on photos. Don't leave the camera with the lens off for longer than it takes to reasonably switch a lens. If you need to demount all your lenses for some reason then put the lens mount cover on the camera. Likewise with the lenses, while they are demounted or not in use, have the caps on them. Use the lens hood while you are shooting with the camera to protect the end of the lens from damage, rain and fingerprints. You can leave the lenscap off while you are walking about with the camera so long as you have the hood on it and are taking reasonable care not to get poo poo all over it. Buy a few lenspens (they are cheap), a blower brush and some microfibre cloths. Spread them around so that you have a couple in your bag or in your pockets no matter where you are. If it does need cleaning then use the brush or cloths and lenspens carefully and sparingly. I don't recommend compressed air cans as they can be too rough and can spray liquid into the inside of your camera, which is bad. Never use a circular motion to clean a lens, never apply too much pressure and be super loving careful about using any kind of cleaning fluid. You're quite likely to take the coating off or create permanent cleaning marks if you get too happy with the cleaning stuff. Wash your microfibre cloths from time to time and especially if you've been anywhere that got your camera particularly dirty like the beach or a powder run. The last thing you want is to be grinding grit particles into your lens when you clean it. Like I said, poo poo on the front of the lens will barely be visible most of the time. poo poo on the rear of the lens however shows up instantly, especially at narrow apertures. Keep the back end of the lens protected as much as you can. If you get crap on your sensor (can happen, even if you always have a lens mounted as the camera isn't completely airtight), then there's probably an option in the camera menu that lifts the mirror and opens the shutter for cleaning (I don't have a Nikon but my Canon has this setting and I imagine it's standard). DO NOT loving TOUCH THE SENSOR WITH ANYTHING. Use the blower brush carefully to blow whatever is on there loose. Repeat if necessary but don't let anything except gentle puffs of air come into contact with your sensor. Blow around inside the camera while the lens is off to clear out any other poo poo that's landed in there too.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 10:24
|
|
|
RedMagus posted:What do you use to protect the back of the camera lense? Mine came with a lense, but no caps other than the one that goes over the front part. If your lens didn't come with a rear cap, you can buy them for a couple of dollars each. They'll be universal for any lens that fits the mount on your camera, so, if you buy a second lens that comes with a rear cap, you can swap it to whichever lens isn't currently mounted.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Seconding the Rocket Blower. I use mine for other stuff besides my camera, like blowing the crumbs out of my keyboard, and freaking out the cat. "Hey, does this smell weird to you?" "Wha... AAAUGH!" Yes, I'm going to die alone. Also, about microfibre cloths, anything labelled for photographers instantly attracts a 50x markup over regular stuff. It's like musical equipment, even if it's the exact same poo poo that you can buy for non photo/music applications. Go to your local cheap sunglasses shop and buy a pile of them for like 50c each instead of getting the ones with some photogear brand name at ten bucks a pop in the camera store.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
You have two options really when it comes to bags. Look at camera bags and find something that fits what you want to use it for. It's best to do this in person as it can be pretty hard to eyeball the size and bulk of a bag from pictures on a website. There are loads and loads of really great bags at all sizes but only you will know what size, form factor and other features you really need. The other option is to use a bag that you already have and like that isn't a camera bag and fit padded inserts into it to make it a part-time bag. This is fine if you only carry a spare lens or two and a few small accessories. If you're hauling multiple bodies and lots of gear then you'll need a dedicated bag.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
77mm will be the maximum diameter you should need, there aren't any first party lenses with a filter thread larger than that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2017 07:53
|
|
|
I thought there were some 82mm threads too (and, very rarely some 95mm ones), but then I found this list which says both of those lenses use 77mm filters.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2017 08:41
|
|
|
A Consider getting a circular polarising filter in whatever size your kit lens uses (probably 58mm). Get a sling strap because neck straps suck. Cleaning stuff (lenspens, blower brush, microfibre cloths) Lightroom subscription.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
iSheep posted:Is it the same price Body Only as the T6i with the kit lens? Yes. $750 on Amazon gets you an 800D body or a 750D with an 18-55mm kit lens. If you want the 800D with that lens (cheapest body/lens bundle) then it's $900. The 800D has a better sensor and the dual pixel AF from the 70/80D as well as a slightly newer image processor (DIGIC 7). All of that isn't really going to be a dealbreaker and you definitely won't notice any difference in image quality as a new photographer. If the extra $150 isn't a big deal for you then I'd go for it, otherwise stick with the 750D. Bear in mind that a 70D with the 18-55 lens is $100 more than the 800D bundle and is a whole lot more of an upgrade than the 750D - 800D comparison.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
tater_salad posted:This was my first dslr, decent choice I upgraded kind of quickly to a 7100 because I wanted to waste the money from my bonus this year. An 80D is not the same thing as a D80.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2017 12:16
|
|
|
Well the Nikon D80 is 10 years older than the Canon 80D to be fair.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
The Photo a Day thread is the official 'give me crit' thread but it can be a bit intimidating. Usually people post pictures in the relevant subject thread (landscapes, portraits, pets, film, etc) but you don't usually get crit there unless you ask for it or your pictures are unusually bad. Having said that, your Flickr looks exactly like an archetypal 'just got my first DSLR' feed. You've got some decent images and some that I guess only have meaning for you (not that there's anything wrong with that, 90% of my Flickr will be pointless for anyone who isn't me). Technically your pictures are mostly ok although your cityscape with the square crop has a wonky horizon. Take a bunch more and see how they come out.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Does the type of 560 matter? It looks like they're all around $60. If you have a tripod already, this can double as a light stand for a separate flash unit. Most flashes come with a removable foot that has a thread for standard tripod mounts. If you are going to use an umbrella you can either cobble it to the flash with duct tape or you can buy a bracket for about $10 that will have a socket for a flash on top, a clamp for an umbrella in the middle and a thread for a tripod/lightstand on the bottom. You can trigger the off-axis flash in a number of ways. You can slave it to your popup flash so that when the on-camera flash fires, the second flash will also fire. This is the easiest and cheapest way to do it but it does mean that you will have the harsh on-camera flash still. You can connect it with a cable, this is fairly easy and cheap but it limits you in placing the other flash because it's physically tethered to your camera. The best way is with a wireless trigger. Some Yongnuo flashes have built in wireless receivers and there are Amazon bundles that include one or more flashes with one or more wireless transceivers. You put the transceiver on your camera hot shoe and set the flash to the correct wireless mode and then when you press the shutter, the flash will fire in sync. It sometimes takes a bit of trial and error to find the correct combination of transceiver and flash modes that get them to work but there's a very limited number of options so it won't take more than a couple of test shots. Just be aware that your flash won't fire if your shutter speed is set too high (more than 1/180th I think for your camera) and it also won't fire if your camera is in live view mode. If you put the flash on top of your camera, then bouncing it off a wall or ceiling is a possibility, you can also buy a diffuser hood for not much money that is basically a squared off cone that attaches to your flash at one end with elastic and has a translucent bit of fabric at the other end to soften the light output. It's not as good as an actual soft box but it will fit on top of your camera with the flash unit while an umbrella or a big soft c=box definitely won't
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
Usually you're going to use a single focus point (most often, but not always the centre one). I don't think I've ever used any of the other grids on my 70D. Like the others said, put your focus point over the thing you want the camera to focus on either by selecting a focus point that happens to be on it anyway or by centring the viewfinder on it, half-pressing the shutter to autofocus and then holding the focus lock button down while you recompose the shot and take the picture.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 09:23
|
|
|
Submarine Sandpaper posted:Can that do more than 30 mins sequential? No and the restriction is mostly to do with EU rules rather than tech limitations. Any camera which can record video for more than 30 continuous minutes is a video camera under EU import rules and is subject to different tariffs. That's why most (all?) still cameras with video capabilities are limited to 30 minute captures.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
Excellent! Now go and take a lot of desaturated pictures of car parks and lone chairs juxtaposed with industrial plumbing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
Also it can be worth getting a Flickr account and uploading your finished, edited pics there. Not only does it make it easier to share them to places like here or Fb, it also provides a convenient way to keep track of your progress as a photographer. If you organise your uploads into sensible albums, you can see the difference over time as you get better at composing, editing and experimenting with new techniques.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
I link this site every few pages it seems, but it is a really cool way to visualise the exposure triangle and to see what the different settings do to a final image.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2017 13:41
|
|
|
Lightroom plus Photoshop is free for 2 weeks and then  a month thereafter - less if you can qualify for the educational discount.Also 'professional amateur photography'?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2017 09:02
|
|
|
The only real IQ related reason to go FF for landscapes is wider angles. Unless your current camera is more than about 10 years old, there shouldn't be a marked difference in image quality under most conditions. Sure a modern FF will have better dynamic range and better lowlight performance but, if you stick your camera on a tripod and either bracket shots or take longer exposures, then you can avoid that problem, a $150 tripod is a better upgrade than a $3000 camera for that particular task. Even with an older camera, you are going to need exceptional glass to outresolve the sensor. Landscape photography is pretty low-impact on body performance, its all about the glass and the post.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
One of the important things with Lightroom, isn't just the editing capabilities but the fact that it's a workflow and file organiser too. Start out with a good methodology in Lr even if you don't understand what all the sliders do, and you'll be set up for ever while you grow as a photographer. There are two important concepts with Lightroom's file handling - Catalogues and Collections. Catalogues are databases of your files and the edits you've made to them. Lightroom never changes your original files. If you import a photo, you can gently caress about with it as much as you like but if you go to where that photo is stored and open it in a different app, you'll see the original version, not the one with your edits. When you export a photo from Lightroom (either just saving it locally or publishing it to an online service), Lightroom applies all the edits you've made to that exported version. Catalogues also aren't the physical location of your files. You can have the catalogue on one drive and import all the photos in that catalogue to a completely different one. You can have multiple catalogues but switching catalogues requires restarting Lightroom. If you have the same photo in different catalogues, then those photos will not share edits. Collections are basically albums and are a way to thematically group pictures however you want - by subject, by date, by event, or whatever. A photo can belong to multiple collections at once but there's only one instance of the photo no matter how many collections it belongs to. If you edit a photo in one collection, those edits will appear on the same photo in all the collections. If you want to have different versions of the same photo, you need to create a virtual copy of the image and this creates a new version that can be edited separately. Photos do not need to be in a collection, but you'll find it easier to locate files and organise them if they are. So, to start with, you need to import your pictures to Lightroom. Here's what I do. My photos start out either on the SD card from my camera or in a Scans folder on an external hard drive for my film shots. I open the Import window and there are three main areas. A left explorer pane, a central file preview pane and a right settings pane. In the left pane, I navigate to where my original photos are - the SD card or the Scans folder. In the right hand pane starting at the top, I select a location to save the files to. This can be anywhere and it's not connected to where your catalogue happens to be. I generally organise my photos into folders by month or by event to make it easier to find originals. So I'll either create a new folder for the photos or navigate to an existing one here. Just below that is an option to make a second copy of them as a back up on a different drive. I make a folder on that drive with the same name as the folder where the originals are being imported to. Next I get the option to add them to a collection. You can create a new collection or add them to an existing one. Again, I have collections that have the same names as the folders where the originals and the backups are. If you want to add them to multiple collections, it's easy to do that either now or later on after you have imported them. There's a useful checkbox that ignores already imported files. If you have imported some of the files on your card already to the same catalogue, then this will remove the ones that it recognises from the preview pane. There are also options in the right pane to batch rename files as you import them, add tags, add various contrast curves etc. Select the photos that you want to import by checking their boxes in the preview pane and hit the Import button. Once you've imported them, you can see your recent imports as well as the collections in the left hand explorer bar of the Library Pane. By default, they'll be open as soon you've finished importing but it can be handy if you are importing several sets of photos at once to different places to know how to get back to a previous import. Switch to the Develop pane and this is where you can start working on the photos. Again, you can switch between different collections and previous imports in the left hand bar while all of your editing tools are in the right. A useful thing to do here is to use the filters to do a first pass on your pictures and cut out all the ones you aren't going to work on. Select the first image in the import, turn on caps lock and then you can apply a numerical rating from 1-5 to each picture just by pressing the appropriate number key. I rate all the pictures that are interesting and worth editing at 4, all the similar ones or boring ones at 3 and all the lovely ones that have technical problems at 2. Then I go to the filter dropdown right of centre at the bottom of the screen, choose 'Rated' from the dropdown, then click on the 4th star and suddenly I've cut out all of the photos that I don't care about. As far as the editing goes, there are a lot of options to you, I recommend just playing with them to see what happens. If you gently caress up, you can always hit the Revert button to undo all your changes and start again. There's also a poo poo-ton of useful tutorials and advice on the web, just type in 'How do I <thing> in Lightroom' and you should see all kinds of useful resources.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2017 13:05
|
|
|
RedMagus posted:Thanks Helen for that little rundown, it's gonna be saved for when I have time to play with my copy of LR I delete the bad ones, the ones with obvious technical flaws that are never going to get published, there's no good reason to keep those at all. I save the ones that are technically ok but that don't make the cut for editing. Say I've shot a bunch of pictures that are very similar - like a burst or some different exposure settings of the same scene - I'll pick the one or two that I think are best and rate them at 4, then rate the rest at 3. While I'm editing, I'll get a better idea of which of the similar photos is the better one to use and rate the other down to 3 as well. Because of my filter, the one that's rated down will disappear from the editing pane, but it's still there in case I want to return to it later and use it for some reason, I just need to search amongst the 3-star photos in that collection to find it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2017 14:14
|
|
|
Annath posted:So if I move them within LR, it will move them on the disk as well? I just want to make sure a bunch of huge RAW (or, well, DNG?) files arent going to eat up my SSD. Yes. Move them using the explorer strip on the left of the Library module. It will move the originals and update the location in the catalogue so that you won't get any orphaned images. If you move them in Windows, then Lightroom will tell you it can't find them and you'll have to relink the new location with the old photos. It's not hard to do but it can take a while and a lot of clicking if you have a lot of files in multiple folders. Moving them using the Lightroom interface is just as easy and avoids all those issues.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:
How the gently caress is Photoshop® an adjective? It's a loving proper noun or it's a verb. You can't say 'that's a very Photoshop® image!' Now, if you'll excuse me I'm off to Lightroom® the poo poo out of some Photoshops.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 15:18 |
|
|
President Beep posted:While I’ve enjoyed learning how to shoot with a Canon, the idea of having two wheels sounds really loving good to me. Canons beyond the scrub tier systems also have two wheels.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2017 12:06
|
|