|
You want aperture much more than reach. Unless you're shooting from pro locations right on the edge of the field on fields that are incredibly well lit, a faster lens will help you make shots you otherwise wouldn't get once it gets dark. Also for indoor gyms, too. I'd also recommend finding what shots or angles work best with that focal length instead of regretting what you can't get from your lens, too. Work to strengths.
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 07:30 |
|
|
IceLicker posted:I'm gonna get a UV filter for my 24-105 but that's only because I'm taking it to Burning Man and gently caress having the front element sand-blasted. I'm gonna rig up some sort of zip-loc bag housing and tape the poo poo out of it to at least try and keep some of the dust out. That and not change lenses, open any of the compartments or anything until I get out of the desert. What can go wrong!? "Going to Burning Man" could go wrong. I feel like that should join the list of places a camera should never go along with those Color Runs (go find the Lens Rentals blog entry on CRs murdering lenses, it's worth a read).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
NaDy posted:I'm going on a week long trip to Iceland in October and will be looking for a good multi purpose walkaround lens for it. I've finally realised my 18-55 kit lens for my 450d just won't be up to the task, as it's a bit poo poo. the 24-105 sounds like a good lens, it is L-glass after all, but it's just a little bit slow (though at least full-time f/4 compared to the kit lens) especially on crop. but it gets a bit of a harsh reputation from some people as the "kit L lens" because they're comparing it to the faster 24-70 2.8 L, which isn't always a fair comparison. It's solid, especially if you can find one gently used. if you are okay with the focal range of the kit lens, go try to find one of the Tamron 17-50 2.8s WITHOUT their VC. it's a much, much better lens than the kit lens while retaining a similar field of view. It's a great walk around lens for crop cameras like yours. That and the Canon 40 mm 2.8 pancake prime lens are all I use on my 60D now.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2014 15:20
|
|
|
There's also apparently a Canon 24 f/2.8 IS pancake coming out in November, and that's supposed to be 38 mm equivalent on crop if the 40 mm pancake is too long. I haven't seen any impressions (I mean, that's hardly a surprise) but if it's a wider pancake built and as good as the 40 then I'll get Really Excited. Amazon and B&H both have it listed for about $150 for preorder too.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2014 12:15
|
|
|
At the very least, stepping from using a Rebel-style entry level body to...well, anything above that (70D, 7D, or the full frame bodies) is a major step up just in terms of controls and layout. The body feels bigger, there are more independent controls (the back wheel helps so much), and it just is a much better tool to do the job.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2014 12:46
|
|
|
If you liked the 24-105, is there any harm in picking that up? Did you want it to go wider? Then think about the 17-40 (or the new 16-35 f4L, which sounds really good but is spendy).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
The AE-1 was on a different lens mount design than the EOS system that Canon uses now. So, those lenses won't just bolt on. Film is fun, but expensive. One good SD card is cheaper than buying and developing a roll of film, unless you make a home darkroom, which may be daunting for a beginner.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
There's no good cheap 35 mm for APS-C, true, but there's now the 40 mm pancake and the 24 mm pancake (which is APS-C only) which are both super cheap and awesome lenses. I used to be jealous of my friend's cheap DX 35 mm prime, but with the pancakes it all seems to even out to me.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:It's a good bit more than a 36/1.8dx. The Sigma might also be more expensive than the 40 and 24 mm pancakes combined. Definitely heavier than both.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2014 04:48
|
|
|
I don't own one yet but I love the 40 and having played with the 24 in a store, it's the 40...but wider. Once I get more spending cash I'll buy one and just have both because they're so cheap and good it's crazy not to. But yeah, the 24 viewing angle on a crop is definitely more normal and wider angle.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
BabelFish posted:I've got a 50 prime I use on a crop body for shorter in stuff, I'd like a little more compression of facial features the 70-200 can give. It would probably be a mix of indoor and outdoor shooting. Budget alternative: 85 mm 1.8?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
The Tamron zoom is amazing, and the perfect step up from the kit lens. It's much higher quality and faster, so it's a good step up. I have the 40mm pancake, and it can be a little tight sometimes - especially indoors. Otherwise, well, I spent years walking around with the plastic 50, so the 40 was nice and wide by comparison. For these reasons, the 24 pancake would be good too - and it's available for less than $200, too. Tl;dr the Tamron 17-50 NON VC is the kit lens plus, and the pancake primes are great and cheap too.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2015 05:13
|
|
|
A Saucy Bratwurst posted:So I should avoid it? What else should i look at? Gently used 50D, 60D, or even 7D. Compared with the Rebel/1000 series, the image quality is similar, but the controls and functionality is much better. The controls you need to use a camera manually are much easier to use. Bodies also depreciate and lose their value a lot more than lenses. I wouldn't recommend buying a new Rebel, because you can find the better ones (50/60D) used for the same or less, or slightly older versions of the Rebel for even cheaper.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2015 11:35
|
|
|
triplexpac posted:Any tips on buying a used lens off Craigslist? I'm not sure how I would be able to test it and really know if there was anything wrong if you're in the U.S. just buy off KEH instead. The thing is: the Rebel cameras are not, by themselves, bad. They will take good pictures. However, there are two things to remember: Like mentioned before, camera bodies in most every level get refreshed so often, it doesn't make much sense to buy new unless you REALLY want to buy new. Considering how expensive it is versus how many used bodies are available, it would probably be best to jump into this really expensive hobby by saving some money where it's not needed. That money saved is better spent on a better lens to start. The other thing? As also mentioned, the Rebel and entry-level bodies have a ceiling for how much you can use. Sure, the 40D is much older, and may not have as high of resolution (the real problem would be ISO anyways), but it probably has a higher frame rate for burst photography and sure as hell has better materials and better controls. The x0D and 7D/5D bodies have additional controls (wheels on the back, extra screen on the top, extra buttons to access settings directly) as well, and once you start learning, those become much more useful. To change aperture on my old Rebel, you had to hold a button down and then use the shutter speed control to adjust it; with x0D and up that's the separate wheel on there. It sounds small, but that's a HUGE thing for usability when you're adjusting everything manually. As well, the bodies are just bigger and more comfortable. So tl;dr save money, raise your ceiling, and save for lenses. Get the Tamron 17-50 2.8 and one of the pancakes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
The article said each standard kit would be worth ~$42,000 each - two bodies, five lenses (two short L zooms, two intermediate teles, plus a 300, 400 or 500 L). Somebody's gonna get mugged.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2016 06:07
|
|
|
Thin Privilege posted:The nikon-> canon lens adapters all have lovely reviews (except ones that are like $200). The main thing they complain about is that they're impossible to remove and/or get stuck to the camera. Some people said they bought an adapter for every lens, but the ones with the better reviews are still $60 and I have 3 Nikon lenses so that's super expensive to buy 3 adapters for $60. In order to really continue with this, you need to accept two things: -$100-200 is nothing in photography gear terms -It's worth more to invest in glass than in bodies Yes, adapters aren't generally considered to be standard operating procedure for most people -- they serve a purpose, but it's definitely a niche. And while I don't remember which lenses were listed previously, if they were each ~$1,000 or more, you really should be looking for Nikon bodies instead and staying in that environment. Or re-selling those expensive lenses if you're set on having a Canon body. I know you've taken some flack in the last few pages but it's because what you're asking for is contradictory. You can get a lot done without insisting on top-of-the-line gear; it doesn't make sense to use bad adapters for (comparatively) cheap lenses that you want to use because "you already have them".
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2017 15:17
|
|
|
xzzy posted:I think someone needs to go dig up the digitalrev pro with a cheap camera series to demonstrate how the gear doesn't define the talent. The series is located here, wherein they give pros not just cheaper DSLRs, but actual toys, etc. Technique and eye matters. Helen Highwater posted:Agreed. this would be a good idea I think.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2017 00:11
|
|
|
Soulex posted:I'll probably end up selling or trading it in pursuit of a 5D mk iii in the end though so hopefully something with a little resale value. Bodies do really poorly w/r/t resale value. As mentioned, look for a 6D, and if you do need a 'better' body that'll become your backup/second.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 01:25
|
|
|
Absolutely. It's a great walking around prime.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
Kilometers Davis posted:I'll have to post an example when I can. With low ISO and in focus it still looks like a cheap camera phone video to me. It's a hard to explain issue but footage should clarify. Are you sure the videos are set to record in the highest definition possible? Could be set lower for some reason.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2017 11:57
|
|
|
Google Butt posted:What's the go-to upgrade from the kit lens these days? -Tamron 17-50 2.8 without VC (their image stabilization) -Either of the Canon 40 mm 2.8 or 24 mm 2.8 pancake primes depending on if you have full frame or crop (24 is perfect for that) -Sigma 30mm Art if you want an upgrade from the pancakes above -55-250 STM is the recommended zoom telephoto for crop (I think I have the version II without STM and it's also not bad and even cheaper) Those are good starting places.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:My experience with the Tamron was bad. Slow to focus, noisy as hell, and it started coming unglued so I got rid of it. Replaced it with the version 1 24-70L and that thing is still my go to. Haven't had any of the issues with over 60,000 photos on it over 6 years. You're also comparing something you can get for $250 to an L lens. Yes, the Tamron isn't super fast, but it's a step up from the kit lenses and is 2.8 throughout the range.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2017 08:23
|
|
|
President Beep posted:This touches on one reason why I won't be transitioning to full frame any time soon. Most of the EF glass is just so damned expensive. That’s not EF, that’s L pricing. And in any case it usually holds the value well.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
I recently got a decent bird shot or two hip-shooting with my 60D and Tamron 17-50 set up for landscape shots and not action, I was laughing hard that I even got a bird in frame with the setup.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2018 01:18
|
|
|
Beverly Cleavage posted:The better half, after learning about manual mode, is really keen on upgrading our t5i for something a bit better. I think we're likely ok to wait for a year or so...but Mother's day is coming and it'd be a neat treat. Is the 80D the next step? We have all the standard kit lenses from the t5i, but also a nifty-fifty and a sigma 30mm f1.4, so they should all carry over nicely. All I'd need is the body, battery(maybe 2) and charger, right? Yep the 80D is the next step, it’s the current model in that advanced amateur spot and it’s quite good. If you want to upgrade, all you’ll need to do is buy the body only kit. That’ll have the battery and charger included. Probably don’t need a second battery right away, they last pretty well on these midrange cameras.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:I feel like a 2nd battery is a good idea. You won’t need it until you do. I’ve done entire sports shooting days (auto races, junior high track and field meets) filling up 16gb SD cards without having to change the battery in my 60D. It’s a good idea if you’re serious, but it’s not necessarily a priority for everyone.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2018 00:30
|
|
|
On the other end of the price spectrum - am I the only one who’s using an EOS-M body of any kind? I bought an M3 and the 22 f/2 prime (for ~¥54,000 all told) to be a small carry-everywhere complement to my bigger but not terribly portable 60D, and I have been very happy with it so far. Image quality is solid, and the controls/feel of shooting is good. Can be kind of a pain to use in bright light, but that’s a problem which can be handled. Also just bought the EF/M adapter mount, which I’ll put to the test more soon.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2018 04:45
|
|
|
I’ve picked up an M3 a few months back, it also sounds like every M since the first has improved and now they’re halfway decent. Slap the 22 pancake on the M50 and enjoy.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2018 00:18
|
|
|
Binary Badger posted:It's kind of unfortunate but the LCD display due to the design must be flipped open to use, I have no use for its selfie angles, I would have preferred the LCD have been embedded rather than flip around. I could always just use the viewfinder of course.. if it's like the more recent x0D bodies you should be able to "embed" it with screen facing out and use it that way. My 60D is that way and I've used the LCD as such for 6 years without any ill effects.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2018 08:43
|
|
|
Binary Badger posted:Speaking of EOS 5Ds, here's what happened to one that got a little too close to a rocket launch... not too close to the rocket launch - it was about 1/4 mile away from the launchpad - but too close to the brushfire sparked by the rocket launch.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2018 12:42
|
|
|
Cannon_Fodder posted:Thanks for the encouragement, team. I appreciate it. What lens(es) are coming with your camera? Once you start taking photos, keep a loose mental note on what focal length (level of zoom, you can see the markings on zoom lenses) you use and like using the best. I’m going to guess you have a 18-55 basic “kit” lens, which is fine - but the best way to recommend any lenses to step up too (even cheap ones) will be based on what you use a lot and what you want to photograph. Also, don’t be afraid to go into the manual modes, especially full  Manual mode. You pick it up quickly, and so much cheaper with digital than film!! 
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2018 01:11
|
|
|
The thrifty fifty and the 40mm pancake are cheap enough to get without much worry on the budget. The 40 pancake may as well just be a body cap too.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2018 23:24
|
|
|
The rumors flying around about the R/RF system are utterly stupid and wonderful in the best way, and next Wednesday will both be happy (to see confirmations) and a bit of a killjoy (because we get confirmations). I’m especially eager to hear about the EF-M prime and what the cost might be.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2018 07:56
|
|
|
xzzy posted:The new mount does seem really clever, you don't have to throw away your old lenses and can buy into the new system too. There’s actually three adapters:
The others are a little more expensive than the standard one, but still. Kinda crazy they have three available so soon.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2018 14:36
|
|
|
Djimi posted:I looked in a few forums and threads but I didn't see any better suited place for this question, and since I've been on this thread for years, I thought why not? Video will take up much more storage, he should look into SD/CF cards bigger than 32gb (64+ IMO for that work), and Flickr is definitely the storage choice for online. Pro is like $50/year for backup that also has pretty solid sharing functionality.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2019 01:11
|
|
|
Somebody made a Choro-Q lens, my goodness.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2019 22:49
|
|
|
astr0man posted:It seems like a decent enough budget option for making the jump to full frame (assuming you don't care about the burst rate), especially if you already own EF glass? This really seems like what they’re going for with the EOS R and RP. Instead of going up to full-frame DSLRs or 80Ds, I feel like within five years they’ll have people who enter with EOS-M and have to move up to EOS-R instead of picking lenses for their Rebels that they can move up with.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2019 04:42
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:One of the downsides to adopting the RF system if I did that would be that the cheapest lens looks to be $450 (a 35 1.8 Macro) and they go way up in price from there. There's only a few available, too, and one of them is over double the price of the RP body. They sell an adapter with the control ring built in, but yeah, the “lots ‘o L lenses” roadmap is a reason I was turned off by where the R mount is right now.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2019 06:39
|
|
|
pseudorandom posted:Am I getting hung up over little details here? Are these different specs actually going to be noticeable when using the camera? yeah, because either is an absolute rocket ship compared with a 20D. the 6D series is seen as/is a bit of a step down compared with the 5D series, and while the 5D3 isn't the newest of them, it will have more capability than the 6D. If you're leaning that direction, might as well go all the way. if you're interested in switching, it'd depend on how much you have invested in lenses and wanting to stay in Canon's ecosystem.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 07:30 |
|
|
It’s cherry blossom season in Japan, so I was out at one of the bigger parks in Tokyo last week (Ueno Park) and there were tons of people taking photos. Was taking shots around a tree near the entrance with a ton of other people. Not surprising. What was surprising was the machine gun sound I heard, turned and saw a dude wielding a 1DX II plus one of those 600 mm L lenses behind me. Link to pic for proof. He also had some kind of good Nikon with a shorter tele/zoom tele hanging off his shoulder.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2019 04:39
|
|