|
I think the OP needs a "Why you should stop worrying (and learn to love the Nifty Fifty)" section, especially after the derail in the last thread.
|
#
¿
May 11, 2013 16:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 00:40 |
|
|
I really wish it was a new, $200 but nicely done 35 mm prime and not 40 mm, but yeah I think I'm going to go with the pancake next month too. I love my thrifty fifty but I want a wider option on the cheap.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2013 04:02
|
|
|
ShutteredIn posted:So are all off-brand DSLR batteries garbage? umm I can't remember the brands but there are some that always pop up on Amazon and eBay that are good and basically the same as the Canon ones. Sterlingtek? Is that one of the good brands? also I was deciding between the ol' 35 f/2 and the 40 mm pancake and pulled the trigger on the 40. And thanks to Amazon and Japan being small, I'll get it with free shipping in two days' time. Perfect.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2013 23:45
|
|
|
Just be sure you buy stuff that's fast. Class 10 is the fastest you can get SD cards (...right?) so look for the circular logo on the front/label of the card. A cheap 64 gig card is nice until you realize it's class 4 and won't handle video or a large buffer of photos terribly well.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
40D used from KEH and a 40 mm f/2.8 "pancake" lens. The thrifty 50 is great, but the build and image quality on the pancake is god damned amazing. To be perfectly frank: the $100 or so difference between a used XTi and a 40D seems like a huge sum when you're getting into cameras. No, it's not nothing, but it's very small once things get serious. And between the higher image quality and much better ergonomics and built-in features, a used x0D is easy to suggest as a starter camera.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 06:04
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:The 70D is the replacement to the 60D, not the 7D. Yup! This exactly. The 7D's autofocus kicks the crap out of what the 60D had, and it's exactly why you bring those features out in a flagship and trickle them down over time. The 60D works plenty well, but the 70D would look weak without an improvement in that regard, wouldn't it? And if the AF has gotten cheap enough to hit your x0D price-point, then it makes perfect sense.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2013 09:07
|
|
|
Wario In Real Life posted:More promising (albeit pretty generic) news about the 70D: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-70d/7 For what it's worth, I saw a 70D ad on Japanese TV during coverage of the World Track and Field Championships last week. Also, a sign in the local camera shop talking about it being due "soon." I'll look again today.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2013 03:01
|
|
|
fivre posted:Aren't most of them non-mechanical now anyway, i.e. AF doesn't turn the ring, and the ring just instructs the motor to change focus by X amount? That's Canon's STM motor, which is in a couple newer crop-oriented lenses and the 40 mm pancake. So, no, not really.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2013 08:33
|
|
|
CarrotFlowers posted:I'm on vacation in Europe right now, and only brought one lens with me, my 24-70. Since I got here it had difficulty getting focus confirm when zoomed out past 35mm. I was able to work around it, but now it's suddenly very sticky when moving the focus ring. I have to put in a whole lot of force to get it to move at all. Still focuses and takes pictures, but the more I turn it, the harder it becomes to move. speaking from experience, having multiple nifty thriftys never hurt nobody. I bought one in Shanghai when I thought I'd broken my lens in China a few years ago. A quick googling tells me Photo Hall, Vanden Borre, and Krėfel are three chains that are throughout Belgium that would hopefully have something to work as a substitute -- maybe not another L-lens, but hopefully a plastic 50 or a 40.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2013 14:12
|
|
|
I love the pancake 40 on my 60D, that's a small enough combination that I can carry it around in my bag along with my wallet, keys, etc. should I desire. I haven't even picked up my thrifty fifty since picking the pancake up, too. Kind of crazy how it got relegated immediately.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 13:14
|
|
|
I just bought the Tamron 17-50 2.8 without VC...for $210 brand new in-box from Amazon Japan. I didn't want to spend more money on stuff (and I'm honestly perfectly fine for photo gear at the moment too) but once I saw that yesterday I spent 20 minutes saying "holyshitholyshitholyshit" to myself and double checking to make sure there wasn't a catch. No catch, just almost 60% off list price for some odd reason. Time to go take more photos I guess! 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2013 03:25
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:I'm looking for a little advice. I've got a T3i with the kit 18mm-55mm, Canon 50mm F/1.8, and Canon 75mm-300mm lens (which was $9 new, or else I wouldn't have bought it). I'm more on the budget/hobby side than the prosumer side of photography, if that isn't apparent. Look at the pancake 40 too -- compare 40 mm and 50 mm on your zoom lens. It's appreciably wider, the pancake focuses pretty quickly (hunts a little at night) and it's really well-made and light. It's also only about $150-200 depending on what deals you find.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2013 03:31
|
|
|
Crivens posted:Looking at it again, it seems as though the 60D is about the same price as the 100D/700D. This camera seems to be a step-up, but a generation-back! Choosing a DSLR is difficult. First: your last point is spot-on. You'll be fine with any of those options (though I suspect the 100D might be hard to hold for some since it's so tiny). They'll all take pictures and take them well and if you like photography you can learn more and in a couple years move to something that suits your goals and what you've learned. That said: save the money and find a 40D, 50D or new cheap 60D instead. They are bigger cameras with better ergonomics that will help as you become a better photographer. And that raising of the ceiling comes at the same price (or cheaper) as the worse option? It doesn't always make sense to jump up to higher-quality gear but I think it does in this case.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2013 02:13
|
|
|
Djimi posted:Are you referring to back button focus with the (AE lock * )? Or something else? probably making use of all of the different points and how awesome that sounds. recently I got the Tamron 17-50, mostly because it's so recommended and I found it for ~$200 brand new on Amazon Japan (from Amazon no less. sorry, gotta keep bragging about that deal.) Since I've been using primes so often for the last few years, it feels like a cheat code to have such wide angles available...at 2.8. It's amazing. If you have a crop body, you must get this lens. I carried my pancake 40 around in my bag while walking around Tokyo and didn't use it once (which is kinda sad, I love that little guy too). I'll have to check the pictures soon but just the feeling from using the 17-50 is pretty stunning.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
That's NOT if you're starting out, it's "If you had unlimited funds," which is a BIG difference. the way access and coverage is for sports, if it's anything big (collegiate on up) you're not moving around much anyways. As well, we'd usually have multiple people covering multiple angles and I'm not sure how much they would move around. Usually there was one person on each sideline who would move but a lot of the time you're stuck in position. I feel like the different distances are for different situations -- shooting the back of an offense in football going to the opposite end zone versus the offense coming at you from the back of the end zone, for instance. The other side of that has to do with lighting. Note how all those are wide aperture, but if you're a poor college student, you might want a cheap prime versus the more expensive slower zoom if you're shooting high school sports with questionable lighting conditions. The professor I had in my one college photo-j class said he would much rather take the 85/1.8 with him versus a 70-200 f/4, for instance, if it's high school and the lighting is bad.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2014 10:06
|
|
|
Soulex posted:It seemed like a decent step. 70-200 is gonna be fine if you're up in the stands and just using shots for personal use. If you're on the field, it'll be even better. The 70-200 4L is a great "baby's first L" and that length and aperture is fine for most outdoor sports (and even for night if it's floodlit well). I'd suggest getting that because it's a good next step up without being too much. You can find one used if you want even, and if it turns out you REALLY like it but need more reach, it's not too hard to sell that on and buy what you know you need. Problem is now you THINK you know what you need and it's tempting to buy too much for now. The best advice in the Dorkroom regarding gear is "go shoot and find out what you need." Take a game or two or even 10 to find what you REALLY need and to hit your head on the gear's ability ceiling. The only way you'll find out what YOU need and what YOU want to shoot is by doing it first, and even if that's with lesser gear, that's fine. It's photography, there aren't many gear absolutes since there are so many use cases out there.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2014 04:33
|
|
|
Waarg posted:Thinking of selling my 550D, 24-105 and 50 1.8 and getting a 6D and a 40 2.8. Good idea or great idea? Which 24-105? If it's the L glass you should hang on to it. If it's cheap, then yeah, no worries. I'd also hang on to the 50 but that's because it's so cheap it probably won't make much of a difference in the grand scheme of things.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 02:57
|
|
|
Tricerapowerbottom posted:Not the same lens, but I've noticed that my 50mm 1.8 has a hell of a time focusing, lots of short stop and go motion even with just one AF point in the center. Is it something about this lens, or what? I like the pictures it takes, but it doesn't lend itself to spontaneity. the thrifty fifty is great for the cost but it's AF is definitely a weak point. It'll hunt around in low light a LOT, and I think it'll hunt around with the aperture more wide open. It sucks, but it's a fact of living with it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
JacobRyan posted:I've been running a Canon Rebel XT for gosh 7 years now, and I've been wanting a 7D for quite sometime. It's hard for me to justify when I don't really do anything in the way of video like you do. I refuse to go for anything that's non-CF as well so a T3i or T4i just isn't plausible, I'm just blindly loyal to Compact Flash. I'm not sure there's much of a reason to if you've got a Rebel XT and not, say, a pro-level amount of old 1D or 5DC gear. I went from XT to 60D a couple years ago and it's suuuuuuuch a good, big improvement. I can't imagine how good a 7D would be from there. Who cares if you don't do video, if it's in your price range it will take a LOT better photos, of that much I am very certain. And even if you don't do any serious video, it's still nice to get even full auto video on a real camera from time to time versus a cell phone or smaller point and shoot.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
Portfolio posted:I guess I'm mostly curious as to what specific situations I'd notice the shortcomings of a Rebel over a 70D. Get a used x0D (60D if you must have video, 40D if you don't) from KEH and invest in a fast walk around zoom. The Tamron 17-50 2.8 is always a recommendation, and that with one of the used bodies would be a good way to start for about $1000 or so. That plus a prime (because the thrifty 50 and pancake 40 are sooooo cheap) is a good place to start. I know guys back in 2007-08 who were able to scrounge pennies and get 5Ds or find L glass, but they were also photo-j students, so it was an investment. If you're curious and want something better than an iPhone or point-and-shoot, the used/cheaper route is a good starting point.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
totalnewbie posted:Thanks for the suggestions; I will have to go through them all on not-my-phone. Then getting a 6D and the 24-105L would be a good place to start. Flexible but high quality and still commands an okay price on the resale market. Just buy a good used one and you'll be able to re-sell it for almost the same price in the future. Or buy a kit if that isn't as big a worry.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2014 02:19
|
|
). My budget is "reasonable" if that makes any sense. I don't want to spend a lot on a niche lens, but if it's versatile then I have no problems with spending a bit extra.
|
Shux posted:Thanks for the replies. The problem is, it's difficult to give advice without details and specifics of usage. It's always nice to surprise people with a gift, but this might be a case (given the cash involved) where taking specific orders may be an improvement. The 70D is good. I haven't read a ton of reviews yet personally, but it's from the same family as the 40D -- though with some advanced technology and capabilities, of course. I get less excited by the 18-135, though. If your dad is used to going on safari with $1,000+ lenses, then he may look down his nose at this cheaper thing; or, if he doesn't have a collection of high-end gear, it may be what he's looking for. It's hard to tell without a list of the lenses he has, knowledge of what he likes to shoot and what his current shortcomings are, and a budget. There could be plenty of lenses recommended that are out of budget, not of interest, or ones he already has. Lastly...bags are even more difficult to recommend. There isn't one "really perfect" bag to recommend to everyone. How much do you want to carry and how much you want to spend are two major factors. Check out the bag/accessory thread for recommended brands, but it's something where form factor is even more important and personalized. Sorry to make things difficult, but if your dad isn't a newcomer, it's not a blank slate. There's more context needed.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
ShotgunWillie posted:Am I the only one who thinks that he shouldn't spend hundreds of dollars on new camera equipment for his dad when all he knows is that the lenses are 'big'? Find out more about what he has and what he uses and we can give you some real suggestions. this is what I was trying to say too. Bring us more information, OP, since it's nice to spring a surprise on somebody, this stuff is expensive and can be at the whim of personal taste. Recommendations aren't always straightforward.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2014 13:38
|
|
|
The pancake 40 is really well built, faster aperture than the kit lens, and really small and light. It's just wide enough to be useful indoors at bars or parties, and the lens is small enough that even on a x0D body it's tolerable to carry around all day. The only reason I'm not using mine on vacation this week is because the Tamron 17-50 is more flexible for the same f/2.8.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2014 09:05
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Having recently sold my 50 1.8 and purchasing a refurb Tamron 60 f/2 macro, should I buy a 40 pancake? I mean I always heard it was awesome and $112 is a crazy good price, but would I even need that anymore? Does it make a strong walkaround lens? It's a nice walk around even if only because it's basically a body cap. When I got my Tamron 17-50 the pancake got tossed in the bag for a bit but I went to a dinner party with friends and put the pancake on, and I had totally forgotten how awesome and tiny the 40 is. Personally it's wide enough on crop, fast enough, and focuses well enough to be the "just gonna toss something on for a quick walk" lens. ("Wide enough on crop" considering I kept the thrifty fifty on my camera for a few years. All things are relative).
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2014 09:27
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:The AF seems a little 'off' sometimes, but I'm also thinking that's my well used primary lens rather than the body. I really could do with a wider main lens that I asked about a while ago.. otherwise I'm really pretty happy with it. The preview window is pretty low res, something will look ok when you check it on the camera and later on a monitor you'll notice it's slightly out of focus or something else isn't right. The 450D and others in the 000D series will all suffer in terms of AF. Put simply, the entry-level bodies just don't have great AF when compared with the 60D/70D level or the highest tier, the 7D/6D/5DII and III. It was one of the things I noticed the most when I went from a 350D to a 60D. LCDs have improved a lot since the 450D, too, but they're still an imprecise tool. But that will definitely be improved by any newer higher-level model, too. Same with framerate -- even if you're not using it to get professional sports shots, it's still helpful to have a better burst, and anything from a 70D to a 6D will feel like a machine gun compared with the older one you have now. What lenses do you have and use a lot? It definitely sounds like you're getting tired of the limitations of the 450D, so improving that is important, but lenses are always a great way to improve things as well. Think about what type of shots you want, what type of pictures you like to take now, what those angles are, and maybe look at a better, faster (wider aperture!) lens to take those types of pictures. If you like landscapes and just need a general lens, a 60D, 70D or 7D with the Tamron 17-50 would be a great step up if all you have is a kit lens.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
EF-S lenses = crop bodies only (or as the Tamron will say, for Canon digital only) EF lenses = any bodies are okay. The Tamron is really good, the autofocus isn't as buzzy as the 50/1.8 but almost. It's a nice lens though, faster than the kit lens while being roughly the same field of view. If you like that flexibility, it's more but better. Tamron 17-50 --> use for a while --> 70D, or used 60D or 7D would be a good path. All are crop, and going used saves money too (time it to when you go to someplace like Hong Kong, Korea or Japan, buy a used body, save massive money over buying it in Australia). Also think about the 40/2.8, the other poor man's favorite.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2014 06:58
|
|
|
Walked posted:edit: I'm dumb; still looking at options. I have the 28-105 and while yes, it will take pictures in that range, it's just reeeeeeeeeeally low quality glass now. It's average. It won't take stunners, per se, but it'll give you okay shots from that range. I'd take more of a look at the 28-135 out of those four, since the 24-85 is never really reviewed (reeeeeeally old), the 28-105 isn't terribly great, and the Tamron 28-75 is (apparently according to reviews) better suited to APS-C crop bodies than the full frame. really the best for full frame at a cheaper level is the 24-105 4L...but that's still a chunk of change.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
The 75-300s aren't too hot. The 55-250 is really the pick of the entry-level telephoto lenses, it's sharp and the IS works alright. How's your lighting in that indoor soccer field? Whenever you're doing stuff at night, you're at the mercy of what lighting is out there. It's especially difficult for sports, with lots of movement and chances for shots to get blurred. If it's really dark, both lenses would struggle, honestly, but so would most of them.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
Check on KEH, too. And depending on your budget, that could be a 30D or 40D too.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
Dalax posted:So, I've got a 60D and I would like to upgrade my general 'tourist' lens. Currently I'm using the 28-105 3.5/4.5 USM. As a 60D owner who used that 28-105 on both my old 350D and my 60D, I know how you feel. It works, but it's just....missing something, you know? I haven't played with the 24-105 myself but it's on my radar for the future. As well, give a look to the Tamron 17-50 2.8, which is amazing on crop bodies. Should be in your price range new or used too.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
AF Servo has been a godsend to me, I keep my 60D in it 24/7. Back button is great if you think about focusing and recomposing, which gets tougher if you're having to hold a button halfway - it's just awkward.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2014 00:39
|
|
|
bolind posted:Except for size and weight, would there any point in getting the 40 2.8 when I already own the Sigma 35 1.4 Art? Size, weight, price and quality for the price and size are the real deals. You're already equipped with a great lens, might not need the 40 in this case. Go peep some pictures with it and see if you like them enough to give it a try.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
BULBASAUR posted:I picked up a nearly brand new 60D on a craigslist firesale. Looking to get a small, fast, prime for street shoots in low light and other general purpose stuff. Is the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 still considered the best option? I've read that the quality control is questionable. There's a newer Sigma 30, and while it's really good it's hardly "small" or "light." The hotness for THOSE traits is the pancake Canon 40 mm f/2.8. Small, light, sharp, good colors, able to be found under $150 if you look.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:What in the? I'm just wondering how one of those lenses wound up in Busan.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2014 08:04
|
|
|
Huxley posted:I shoot mostly a 40D and occasionally an original film Rebel. I have the 50 and the 85, and they're both great on the Rebel, but the 50 is cramped on the 40D, to the point that I never shoot the lens. the pancake 40 2.8 is EF, friend. It's also leagues better than the other two Canon lenses you listed. I think some of the third-party EF-S lenses do work with EF mounts, but with massive vignetting circles because they're designed to fit on EF but take advantage of APS-C image circles. also caberham it's almost like you're in Hong Kong or something. Obsessed with price-tags more so than actual ability? I'm shocked!!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
The one thing I'm super jealous of is the nicer inexpensive 35 and 50 1.8s that Nikon have, and the 40 pancake only fills that gap so well (I absolutely love this lens but still). Other than that, I just have shooter envy -- I want to learn from friends and famous pros to improve my technique.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
Soulex posted:Sell both and get a Tamron 17-50 2.8 non VC Do this and then go get that Tamron 70-300 too and you'll be set. Then think about the pancake 40 because it's soooooo awesome :3 I went to a big camera store today and hefted a Tamzooka around. It is...definitely enormous. No other way to say it. It's also hilarious seeing how many zoom markers you fly past (150...200...300...400...500!...600?!?!).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2014 08:25
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:what in the gently caress Tamron 150-600 which, while not as enormous as the fabled Bigma, is still sizable enough to deserve the nickname "Tamzooka".
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 00:40 |
|
|
Phummus posted:What makes the pancake awesome? I debated on getting it instead of the 50mm 1.8, but chose the 50mm for the extra aperture. Build quality and image quality. Metal mount and better plastics; a little narrower aperture, but 2.8 is still fine (the 50 mm is only really usable after it's stopped down a bit). I'm also happier with the image quality coming out of the 40 mm than from the 50; it just seems to be better glass. I have mine still but I've never been tempted to put it back on since getting the pancake lens.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2014 16:11
|
|