|
They are out of stock now, but the 100L is ~$750 refurb from Canon. I agree the non-L has great IQ but if there's any chance you'd use it for something other than macro work the L has other advantages (focus limiter, better build quality) apart from the IS. e:\/\/ I totally forgot it had that. When I had the non-L I only used it for macro with MF, so I never used that switch I guess. BetterLekNextTime fucked around with this message at 18:33 on Sep 23, 2014 |
#
¿
Sep 23, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 00:22 |
|
|
The 55-250 refurb is $99 e: not the STM, but a good lens from what I've heard
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ e: price and size. It looks great, and I'm glad Canon finally got this thing made. I think there's been such an influx of superteles recently that it's not as much the "obvious choice" as it was when the mk1 came out and the 3rd party lenses were less exciting. I think i'd want to see how it takes TC's. If it + a 1.4x is noticeably better than the Tamron, I'll start looking harder at it. BetterLekNextTime fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Nov 13, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
I have the Tamron 150-600, and that is pretty big and awkward for me (6' tall dude), and even with what seems to be a pretty good IS you really have to crank up the ISO/shutter speed if you are hand-holding it. I could see for a lot of people, a 100-400 would be preferable even for birds. I'll be curious how the lighter Sigma stacks up. I've got the 70-300L too, which is a 100% joy to use. If the new 100-400L is anything like the 70-300, I think it will find a following even in a fairly crowded market.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
The 60D is a nice camera and plenty tough (don't let the plastic body turn you off). The sensor is going to show it's age a bit with high ISO noise and dynamic range compared to current offerings, but if you can handle using a camera that people really liked a year or two ago, and you have a good price, then go for it. There are certainly a lot of other options out there both for used or new Canon and from other manufacturers. If there are must-have features (e.g. built in wifi/gps, touch screen, good video controls, great AF, etc) then you might be better off with something else.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Thanks for the info. I might be wrong but I thought high-ISO noise is no longer an issue for Canon relative to other manufacturers. Where they lag a bit is the dynamic range at low ISO.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
Dumb question- I'm assuming there's an option to return all menu settings to default (on a 6D). I've been trying to set up my C1 and C2 and have made a big mess out of it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 07:46
|
|
|
I have the Vello grip that came with one of the B&H kits for the 6D, and no complaints. There is a very subtle difference in the feel of the textured plastic compared to the body, but it is hardly noticeable. I've had 3rd party grips for 3 canon bodies now and no real problems. On my 60D there would occasionally be a contact problem but just taking out the cartridge and putting it back in would solve the problem.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
SFH1989 posted:I was looking at the Vello grip but most of the reviews complained about the battery tray lock tab popping out constantly. Has that happened with yours? Never, and I've usually got my camera banging around at the end of a shoulder strap.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
You guys need to hush now- you're making me regret not getting one of those kits when I got my 6D this summer. Maybe I should think about selling my 17-40 and making the switch.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 06:41
|
|
|
dietcokefiend posted:Stuck between getting a new 7d for 1k or shelling out for the 7d mk ii. I'd love the picture quality going FF with the 6d, but the lens options don't play in my favor for wide-angle stuff. Most of the primes would work for either side, but something like the cheap 10-18mm doesnt exist unless you more than double the price. The canon refurb store has the 7D in stock for under 1k right now. Still a great camera, although after getting a 6D this year I'd have a hard time giving up the high ISO performance. What about a 70D? I have an 8-16 mm for my 60D, and I almost always shoot it at 8. Even though its more, I think the 17-40 on a FF is a lot more versatile than a UWA zoom on crop.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
I guess I can imagine them adding it since it is low cost/low opportunity cost to do so, even if it won't be particularly useful to most of the intended audience most of the time. From a PR standpoint it would be worse not to have it since Nikon already has it with their high MP camera, even if nobody's actually going to use it. Either that or it will have really nice frame rate or some sort of bracketing/in camera HDR that would be too hard to pull off with the whole sensor.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
I thought I read somewhere that the 750 is the rebel upgrade, and 760 is more like the XXD line.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
The 70-300L is light and super-fun. Just be aware it can't take Canon teleconverters.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2015 09:03
|
|
|
Chiming in to bitch about something falling off my Canon. The little round label fell off the mode dial on my <1year old 6D a few days ago. Superglued it back on with no problem, but just glad I saw when it fell off.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 16:22
|
|
|
somnambulist posted:This happened to me too, but I......don't think you're supposed to use superglue. You have to use a glue specifically for plastics as superglue combined with the sun/heat can eat plastic (thats what I heard anyway, maybe im wrong) I think it's actually metal on the 6D, although can't remember what the internal part of the mode wheel was made out of. Hopefully I won't wake up with an eroded shell of a camera!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
I always want to like mine, but I don't use it enough to really figure out the menus. Just bought a G7x for an upcoming trip to Europe. Given that it will be in P or auto mode most of the time, probably a better fit for my use. It just arrived today- have to see how I like it or whether I'll return it for an RX100 of some stripe.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
Are you using the Long Exposure Noise Reduction? I don't know that it works miracles but that's what it's designed for.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
Maybe with one exception
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
I have the 70-300L, 400L, and Tamrom 150-600. I use the 400L the least out of those three. The 70-300 is sharp enough that I can usually crop in a bit, and a lot more flexible as a walk-around. The Tamron has been giving me pretty good results from a tripod (with a 6D, often at 800-1600 ISO, occasionally 3200ISO, at f9 or so). You can certainly hand-hold it but it's quite bulky. That said, I let my field techs use the 400L with my backup camera and they were getting killer shots. It really is a super-sharp lens.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
The statement rings true for me. For fun I decided to check through recent photos on my local birder flickr group and see- I'm pretty sure Canon is a narrow majority of the ones with visible EXIF, and of those, almost all are 7D and 7DII. No Rebel.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
So my 16 month old 6D threw an err 20 before Christmas. I sent it in and apparently it's not fixable. New one on the way. Thanks Squaretrade!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
Tony Montana posted:Hello Canon Thread, it's been a while. It's a great camera, and there are some pretty good deals floating around now (check canonrumors or canonpricewatch)- I've seen $999 gray market and under $1200 B&H. I guess think about why you don't want a 70D or 80D, which would let you use all your old lenses. I don't mean to talk you out of FF, but the 70D/80D will have better high ISO than your current camera as well and have the nice dual pixel autofocus for smooth video pulls.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2016 01:06
|
|
|
Have you looked at the 80D? I'm not sure why you'd choose the 7D2 over that if you are considering a crop-sensor camera and weren't mainly taking sports/wildlife photos.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
SmershMouth, I have the Sigma 8-16. I think it's really fun and takes great photos, but it definitely distorts things a bit at the wide end (note- I haven't tried lens corrections in post). Best for non-human subjects imo, especially if the people end up towards the edges of the frame. All of the following are at 8mm  Grand Prismatic Spring-6037 on Flickr Grand Prismatic Spring-6007 on Flickr montana_house_sheeps 228 on Flickr montana_glacierNP 260 on Flickr atv_startrail 062 on Flickr
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
Maybe they're doing some combo upload to twitter/instagram/fb that does really dumb compression? I try to do 100% or 50% jpg. One more thing about the lens- the 8-16 has a crazy convex front element so if you are planning to do a lot with screw-in filters then you might want to look at other lenses. Otherwise, it's a blast. I'm mostly shooting with my 6D now and I miss being able to use this lens all the time, and I haven't really figured out what a good EF equivalent is. Go wide or go home!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2016 02:15
|
|
|
I want to dump all those on a king size bed and roll around in them like they are hundred dollar bills
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
Seconding the 17-40 unless she really wants something smaller/prime. I also finally got to use the Rokinon 14/2.8 that I bought from Torgeaux. If you don't mind MF it was pretty fun and a nice option for a FF ultrawide.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
I think I'm doing it wrong  Hambooger-9553 on FlickrI did get some other shots, but I had to laugh at myself and my thinking on a MF wide angle- oh just set it to near infinity focus and f/14 or something- and practically the first thing I shoot is a cow inside the MFD of the lens.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
Yes- first time using a manual lens on a dslr so I'm sure I could do better.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
I got one of the big David Busch extended manuals when I got my first Canon. I found it pretty helpful for giving examples of what different settings would produce or why you would use them, and also figuring out the custom functions and stuff like that. Not that expensive and way more useful than the little users manual that comes with the camera. I don't see a lot of love for these on here but I found them to be a nice link between the photo technique and actually making the camera do it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
Grab your 18-55 and go to your closest city. Take pictures at the church/park/farmers market or whatever seems kind of touristy there. If you can get away with 24mm, then the lens should be a good bet for you. If you keep finding you want to go wider, then maybe either keep the 18-55 or look at Sigma or Tamron 17-50. The extra stop or two might be helpful if you are in museums or cathedrals that allow indoor photography. Maybe helpful anecdote: my wife and I went to Spain a couple of years ago, me with a G7x with 24mm equivalent at wide end and her with an S95 with 28mm at the wide end. With the narrow streets and alleys, there were actually a few cases where I could get a shot but she wasn't able to because she couldn't back up far enough. Also true of some shots in the big cathedrals. Note that both of these would be wider than the 24 on a crop. It all depends on what you like to shoot.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 21:26
|
|
|
xzzy posted:
You say it like it's a bad thing... I've mostly moved to full frame but drat i still have fun with my Sigma 8-16.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Awesome! Going even wider than the 10-18 means fisheye or super expensive full frame lenses though. There's the Sigma 8-16. It's a super fun lens. e: if you ever want to use filters, stick with the 10-18 though. BetterLekNextTime fucked around with this message at 17:59 on May 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:> be canon in the year 2017 >Sell a poo poo-ton of them? Assuming the price comes down a little I think it will do pretty well.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
Haggins posted:... Maybe also a level in the viewfinder. You probably already know this, but you can get a level below the image in the viewfinder. It's just not superimposed on the image.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
And if you have trump hands, the SL2
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
Djimi posted:I'm thinking about getting the Sigma 150-600mm Sport or maybe the Tamron G2 equivalent. Anybody have experience with either and thoughts? I like my 150-600 G1 Tamron. Definitely a big lens but great reach and pretty and reasonably good AF and IQ (you have to stop down a bit). I can only imagine the G2 is better, and the Sigmas are supposed to be great as well. These lenses perform well and are great values. If money isn't an object and maximizing reach isn't necessarily your goal, maybe look into the new Canon 100-400 which would double your reach in a faster and much more compact package.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
The 7D2 would be a huge improvement over the 7D- do you think you'd use your tele setup more if you updated this set-up? Bonus that you wouldn't have to worry about a mix of CF and SD cards. I don't know how many extra stops the 7D2 will give you in terms of high ISO performance, but I'd guess at least a couple. You could also go 80D if you don't need to max out frame rate and AF points. You didn't mention these as options, but my vote would be a couple of new lenses (maybe Rokinon 14mm and one of the 100mm macros, or get a nice fast prime). Also like the suggestion of the carbon fiber tripod. Every time I pick mine up I'm like "thank you, me" But do what feels good, man.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2017 16:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 00:22 |
|
|
Birds are hard. I've gone 550D -> 60D -> 6D, and now I really really want a 7D2. And probably upgrade my 150-600 to one of the newer ones. When I got my 60D I also went 70-300 USM to 70-300L and that lens made everything so much better.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2018 18:18
|
|