|
InternetJunky posted:At the risk of exposing myself to further ridicule for not knowing everything about my 1dx -- is there anything that anyone can think of that would cause the camera to severely underexpose each picture? I went out shooting yesterday and every single shot has a histogram like this (auto-iso, so it's not that I'm specifying ISO 100 either): Just picked up a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 A1. (the new version) Tons of purple fringing at 1.4 but otherwise fantastic so far. Build quality is excellent. Auto focus seems great too, but I haven't started pixel peeping yet.
|
#
¿
May 12, 2013 23:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 21:10 |
|
|
My take on the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 DC HSM A1 on my 7D. Take all my opinions with a bit of a grain of salt, though, because I'm not that experienced with lenses, especially primes. - Excellent build quality for the price. The lens feels solid, snaps on my camera snugger than my Canon or Tokina lenses, the focus ring is smooth and well damped. Even the lens hood has a rubber-finish grip around it. (though it is just normal plastic on the inside of the hood, not felt) - This is useless for a review, but the lens simply LOOKS good. Sigma paid attention to the actual visual design of the lens, right down to the markings that line up the lens hood to the lens, and the materials complement each other and look right at home on my 7D. - Great picture quality at f/1.8 through f/8. Sharp in the centre, pretty good in the corners. Won't win awards for it, but it's quite good. This is probably the lens' biggest downfall if you already have a fast prime; pixel peeping it seems like my Canon 17-55 f/2.8 can compete on sharpness, which just feels wrong for a prime lens. - Lack of barrel distortion. (as any prime should have) - Autofocus is quiet but quite slow compared to Canon's. I may have microAF adjustments to do with mine as I was shooting tonight at a party with it open around f/1.8 and a lot of people came in soft looking, even if they weren't moving. I wasn't having those issues in the similar situations the night before at f/1.4, strangely. - Depth of field effects are great, backgrounds are very well blurred out and bright spots come in as tidy circles. 9-blade rounded apertures, yay! - At f/1.4 you get the usual wide-open-aperture issues: --- Vignetting (though I find it manageable for this) --- Very prone to flares --- Almost disturbing amounts of purple fringing if bright spots are anywhere near in-focus (disappears at f/1.8) Overall, I'd recommend this to... me. Because I was looking for a fast prime (for background blurring mostly) that was about equivalent to 50mm on a full frame. It came down to the full-frame Sigma 35mm f/1.4, the Canon EF 28mm f/2, or the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 DC. I'm not going to be upgrading to full frame, I'm on a budget, the sharpness doesn't matter to me too much (my photos only wind up on the web really, it's a hobby not a profession), and the weight and size savings mattered to me quite a lot. The crop-sensor 30mm hit the middle of the road sweet spot for me. If up-front money, weight, or size are less of an issue to people though, I'd imagine it's difficult to consider this lens over the 35mm full-frame Sigma. If people want more photos in addition to what was posted in this thread earlier, I'll have to post those later. LiquidRain fucked around with this message at 19:07 on May 16, 2013 |
|
#
¿
May 16, 2013 19:04
|
|
|
bobfather posted:It has an extra 5mm of range, otherwise the Sigma matches or exceeds it.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2013 17:20
|
|
|
somnambulist posted:Hmm I searched the wiki and nothing really shows up for bootloader :/ "SET pressed at startup: loads vanilla firmware (does not load Magic Lantern)." Is that what we're looking for here?
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2013 06:36
|
|
|
If you're shooting handheld, at night, on an XSi, you'll want that f/2.8. The zoom range is limited but the f/2.8 will allow you to keep exposures firmly in hand-shakeless territory or maybe even on ISO 800. (which saves you from the horrors that are ISO 1600 on an XSi) I used to shoot handheld with the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 on an XSi at night, now I use a 7D for that, and yeah. That f/2.8 goes a long way. It's a great lens, too.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
So I've been using my 7D long enough now, and am just curious: does anyone else find that it completely over exposes outside? I swear every time I step outside I'm shooting at -1 EV just so everything isn't blown out. I have auto lighting optimizer turned off. Maybe I should try a different metering mode?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2013 09:24
|
|
|
Fart Car '97 posted:Which metering mode are you using? The default - evaluative. I know what the other modes do, I'm just not sure they fit the way I use my camera. (maybe I need to change the way I use my camera, or keep doing -1 EV.)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2013 04:47
|
|
|
My Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM has push/pull zoom.  I wish the design wizardry Canon uses for their L zoom lenses could be applied across the entire range. The zoom ring on my 70-200 f/4 L is perfectly smooth, has zero zoom creep, and require less force than my 17-55. (which requires more force, stutters when trying to zoom smoothly, and zoom creeps like a motherfucker)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2013 17:01
|
|
|
Played with a 70D today at Canon's service centre/retail outlet in Osaka today. It's pretty nice.
 In short: this is what the EOS M should have had in the first place. The speed of the live view AF still needs improvement though, if you ask me, as it still falls short of the phase-array/viewfinder AF and Olympus' contrast AF. However, contrast AF (even Olympus') has unreliable subject tracking. LiquidRain fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Aug 7, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2013 11:28
|
|
|
I finally popped on Magic Lantern the other day on my 7D. Seems stable enough as long as I don't play around with the focusing features. Dual ISO, zebras, and live audio levels are dreamy. 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2013 03:47
|
|
|
Get a used 70-300 DO.  (I want to love that lens so bad and considering I've seen it as low as 600 used... Looking at the bokeh from it will change your mind though)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2013 04:19
|
|
|
There was a fellow here earlier in the thread saying his Canon camera was perma-stuck being really slow to wake from sleep after they installed Magic Lantern - even after he wiped ML off his memory card and was back to a Canon firmware. I experienced the same infuriating problem today, and it turns out a normal flashing of your firmware will not disable the bootflag that has your camera attempt to check your CF/SD card for firmware every time it wakes up. Seek out firmware (or make your own) that disables your camera's bootflag and your camera will go back to being speedy. The instructions for doing this on a 7D are here, search for "7dnoboot" on the page.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2013 17:09
|
|
|
The 70D embargo is up, looks like. Here's DigitalRev's rather fluffy review. On the opposite end of the spectrum is DxO's clinical take. Have a handy link on DxO comparing the 70D, 7D, and 5Dmk3 sensors. (don't look at the Sony or Nikon comparisons or you'll kill yourself) If you don't feel like clicking any links: it has the same colour depth, dynamic range, and ISO performance of every other Canon sensor of the last 4 years. It's a smidge better than the 7D. DxO hasn't really tested resolving power it seems though, since the 70D has an extra 2mp. Still waiting on DPReview.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
Manuals are free PDF downloads from canon.com. I keep my camera's manual on my phone at all times just in case. :-)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2013 13:46
|
|
|
It simply added too much work to my work flow to process the dual ISO business. And I agree with you - the extra dynamic range simply wasn't worth the effort. Or the moire effects. It's a fantastic idea on paper but not in practice. The thing keeping my on Canon now is that the only 2 companies with mirror less and DSLRs bodies, and lenses that work on both, are Sony and Canon. I already tried the NEX though and simply didn't like it, had it for 3 months. If Canon comes out with a 70D grade EOS M I will seriously be considering it. I'd like to keep the option to have a full frame SLR on hand for when I want it, and the M for pocketing. (with the option of using full size lenses should I desire better optics) It'd allow for quite a lot of flexibility without having to invest in an entirely new system.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2013 11:28
|
|
|
Wario In Real Life posted:Marginal improvements aren't considered improvements apparently.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2013 22:56
|
|
|
If it's a USM lens, no. If it's a regular old little motor, I don't think it's suggested.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
InternetJunky posted:The 7D isn't weather sealed though. It's got better sealing than the models below it, but you still wouldn't want to be shooting with it in a light rain unprotected.  I believe the official line is "weather resistant." Don't take it out in a hurricane, but light rain shouldn't kill it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2013 19:08
|
|
|
CA and fringing can be fixed automatically in post with Lightroom 5, and I found that CA and purple fringing practically disappears for me at f/1.8 on my Sigma 30mm.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2013 05:23
|
|
|
1st AD posted:...I somehow managed to never take any landscape shots with my 10-22 I use my ultra wide for dense urban shooting and parties, not so much for landscape.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2013 03:20
|
|
|
I honestly just rely on the fact that if AF is not achieved, the 7D (and I imagine any other Canons) will focus seek and put the lens through its entire zoom range. If AF is good, I won't see the hunt. There's also the AF confirmation light in the viewfinder, or yeah, use the beep. It's there for a reason, and I don't see why you wouldn't use it if this is an issue for you.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2014 07:55
|
|
|
Is the kit lens f/2.8 through the whole range? That's always the deciding factor for me. I'll take being able to do shallow DOF and not having to worry about my exposure changing on me than faster/silent AF.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
For taking photos, Magic Lantern is horrible for me simply because of the wake-from-sleep penalty. Having to wait 3-4 seconds from half shutter to auto focus starting was simply too much of a drawback. The graininess and aliasing in dual ISO on top of the post processing requirements also made that too much of a pain. It's great for movies though!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
Canon's cameras are not UHS-1 yet, their SD writing interfaces top out at about 13MB/s last I checked. You can go way faster with an CF card and yes, it DOES make a difference while shooting burst with RAW. Trying to argue anything else is silly, it is a real, measurable benefit. Your Rebel's burst will last you a second or so and then dive down to about .5-.8fps shooting raw. My 7D has a 24-deep buffer (after firmware 2.0) and just like a Rebel, will be writing to the (much faster) CF card while continuing the burst. It gives me 3-4s of higher-speed burst rate, and/or the ability to fire multiple bursts. If I do manage to deplete my buffer I can still shoot 1.5-2fps. It's an actual, tangible benefit to have a faster card and a deeper buffer. Just because it doesn't matter to YOU does not mean it doesn't matter to some of US. One of the deciding factors for me for 7D vs 60D years ago was the fact that I hated my Rebel XSi's buffer as I constantly ran into it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
Wasn't aware the 70D was UHS. Thanks for the heads up. That puts it on par with CF then, with a good card. Write speeds can make a difference, as they can effectively extend your buffer. While you keep snapping, the camera is dumping files out. The faster it can, the quicker the tail end of your buffer frees up.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2014 09:25
|
|
|
For your purposes a 6D would be better, but you have to look at your budget and your existing lenses as said above. The 6D has full frame goodness - better images. Weakest auto focus. The 7D has the buffer and auto focus advantage. The 70D has a video advantage. Auto focus almost as good as 7D.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2014 07:17
|
|
|
He has a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC, which effectively already gives him 40 2.8. The Tamron should be sharp as well.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2014 13:04
|
|
|
SperginMcBadposter posted:Whats the consensus on the 70D? Theres nothing on it in the OP, but it's listed at the same price as the 7D on amazon right now. ($1k)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2014 03:57
|
|
|
Sometimes there is a difference - Canon's USM in general tends to behave faster/better than Tamron's or Sigma's, for example. (but Tamron/Sigma still have USM)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 09:12
|
|
|
Let's not forget that the 70D has a legitimately cool sensor in it that nobody else does. (every pixel in the sensor is a phase detect AF point and is pretty quick at it too) Too bad Canon is too stupid to put it in a mirrorless camera. Nope. It'd work too well.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 15:44
|
|
|
The Tamron 17-50 VC is simply not as sharp as its older brother, it's also not as cheap. That's why the older model gets recommended.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
It'll also slow your camera coming from sleep (powered on but no controls) for a good 3+s. (as opposed to an instant wake up) This may or may not be a turnoff for you, but it was an instant scramble to uninstall all traces for me when I went to shoot motorsports. For "slower" shooting like intervalometer stuff, it has its uses.  n.b. this was my experience on a 7D w/beta ML but it wasn't only the 7D with this issue.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
A used 7D might be up your alley. Much faster shooting and controls, but your image quality won't be any better.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
If you're considering the 24-70L /at all/, why not the 24-70 Tamron? It's way more expensive than the lenses you're looking at right now, but it's by no means bad, and it's a drat sight cheaper than the Canon.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
iSheep posted:6D is best option if you are on a budget and want full frame. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
Full frame dual-pixel-focus mirrorless Canon camera is why Canon fans are upset. They can do it! They can DO IT. But they're not.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2014 10:44
|
|
|
All is moot when you see how much he glossed over the issues over the Samsung's lens. What good is the camera itself if that's the lens you'll have? He forked over all that cash to rent/have the Zeiss but couldn't find an equivalent on the Samsung? Yeah, no, I'll wait until I see something far more comprehensive and less breathless. LiquidRain fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Jan 20, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 21:10 |
|
|
I imagine the actual target audience for this camera (landscape/studio) won't care so much about a lack of high ISO. Either they are finely controlling incoming light during daytime with filters for landscape, or they have total control over all lighting in a studio. If low ISO is a tradeoff for any sort of higher dynamic range, I imagine it'd be well worth it to them.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2015 17:00
|
|