|
Combat Pretzel posted:I just found out there's a T5 (without i) now... If Sony had a 14-24, 24-70 2.8, and a 70-200 2.8 for the a7r I would sell off my Canon gear and switch. I don't know how I feel about using an adaptor full time.
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 12:41 |
|
|
The lenses are made for crop so I'm guessing the sensor would have to crop itself or you'd get massive vignetting. If I spend the money on a high end camera I'd rather not have to rely on any work arounds.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
Lenses that would still require adapters. I don't think it's too much to ask for a full frame system with those 3 lenses available for purchase. I'm sure they're working on it, it'll just take a couple years.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:There's a first party A mount AF adapter and there are zillions of full frame A mount AF lenses are you high? I mean native lenses. B&H shows four native lenses for the E mount on sale. I'm not going to spend $2,300 on a camera just so I can jury rig lenses to it with an adapter. I'll invest into your system when you invest into making glass for it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2014 03:37
|
|
|
I wasn't complaining, I was just merely expressing my willingness to defect if conditions were right. I think what Sony is doing is cool and all but to me the most important part of any system are the lenses, not the cameras. I trust that Sony will one day have a good selection of native lenses, however, that day is not today. Haggins fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Feb 13, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
A COMPUTER GUY posted:I shoot with a T3i now and I basically have no reason to upgrade unless I'm going to go to a 5d3 or a 6D. I don't care about the new crop bodies at all. Right there with you, I've been saying the same thing (except I'm on a 50D). I just saw a deal at Adorama today for a 5d3, 24-105, and Pro 100 printer for $3200 and I'm thinking about making the painful financial jump. I think if I hawk all my crop gear (50D, Tamron 17-50, and Sigma 8-16) that will knock the cost down to about $2100. If I want to regain my 2.8 abilities in the 24-70 range, I could probably hawk the included 24-105 for at least $600 and put it towards a $2000 24-70. That would put me at $3500 and without an ultra-wide. I love my Sigma 8-16, but I don't know if I want to replace it with a 12-24. I'm not sure if it's any good and if it'll hold it's own with the 24-70 2.8 II and 70-200 2.8 II. I feel like I never use my Tamron 17-50 because it looks like poo poo compared to my 70-200 and 8-16. Probably better just to do without and save that money burning for next year.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2014 01:24
|
|
|
Lenses like that should really be on tripods.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Does anyone who bought a 6D regret not going with a 5D3? The biggest difference I can see is the better AF, but I do fine with the 50D's AF so I'm sure I'll be ok with the 6D. I would really like the 100% viewfinder (I hate having to crop) but I don't think that's worth $1000 more.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
Yeah I'd really like to use that money towards a 24-70 2.8 II. I'm hoping to pick up the B&H Deal for a 6D, 24-105, pro 100 printer, 32gb SD card and some printer paper for $2100 after a $400 mail in rebate. Hopefully the deal will be there next week when I can afford it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
^^^ Yeah I don't do sports or birds so it's probably not a big deal. I think wifi would be cool since when I travel I'd like to do a quick edit on the iPad and post to Facebook or whatever. It's always silly when I have to take a photo on both the SLR and the iPhone and post one right away and the other few days/week later. Hughmoris posted:Went and bought a Canon T3i today. My first time in the DSLR waters. I'm excited to see the difference in results from my 5 year old P&S. Hopefully I can start posting some shots in here and learning from everyone. Next stop is reading how to use this thing and maybe picking up the much heralded nifty fifty. Are you on a mac or PC? I don't know what's good for PC but if you're on a mac just use iPhoto.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
Huxley posted:So I have the Tamron 17-50 on my 40D and am really enjoying it, but want something faster for portraits and evening light and such. The 50 1.8 is kinda of lovely image quality wise when compared to something like the 85 1.8. I had both and I really miss my 85 and never use my 50. I think I heard the Sigma 50 1.4 is pretty good but I'm sure someone else can chime in. The bottom line is it's awesome for $100 but not so great when you compare it to real gear. timrenzi574 posted:This. This is like the problem with the 28/1.8 and 50/1.4 with haze wide open in bright scenes. I don't shoot them wide open in bright light, I shoot them wide open in dark scenes, so it's not really all that relevant. I guess if you're a narrow DOF junkie, but to me, ultra narrow DOF is a sacrifice I have to make for available light, not a desired trait. I don't want ULTRA DOF where everything is in focus, but conversely I also don't want pictures where nothing but half of someones eyelashes are in focus either. As always, YMMV. Aside from wanting to conduct a limitation exercise to spark creativity, I think the only good reason to use primes in this day in age is for shallow DoF. In fact, the only reason anyone should want fast lenses (zoom or prime) is for the added creative control it gives you over your images. If you're having problems with not getting enough light, you should either add in some strobes or buy a better camera.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
28-75 is kind of a crappy range for a crop camera. It's not wide at all and the extra reach is not a big deal. I'd suggest getting some kind of ultra wide like a Sigma 8-16 (which I use and love).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
Shellman posted:And I am continually amazed that people don't know about it. When I bought mine, the guy said it was the only time anyone had asked about it, much less bought one. It stays on my camera 80% of the time. I keep forgetting about it too but probably because I'm ready to abandon the crop ship. With the Sigma 8-16 I already own and the 18-35 1.8, I almost want to stay crop.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
Been doing that for years. The gods have abandoned us.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
Go for the 85 1.8 since you currently have nothing longer than 50mm
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
Yeah I owned it for awhile and sold it when I bought my 70-200 2.8 IS II. I still wish I had it and would like to eventually buy another copy.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
Well as much as I complain about Canon, I just pulled the trigger on the 6D + 24-105 + Pro 100 Printer + 32GB SD card + Paper + some print order thing all for just $2100 after a $400 mail in rebate. Pretty killer deal. I'm going to sell off all my crop gear (50D, Tamron 17-50, Sigma 8-16) in the thread tonight once I get some photos up. I was going to hawk the kit 24-105 and buy a 24-70 II, but I think I'll play with it a bit before I shell out the money for the 24-70. Who knows, I may just like it enough to keep it and then I can buy some new strobes or something else. I went ahead and ordered an extra battery. I normally buy the el-cheapos for $5 but it seems like that option is $30 with the 6D. I read some reviews and some people said that the knock offs didn't hold as much charge as the OEM. I just went ahead and got another OEM for $60. Now all I need is a SD card. Any suggestions on a good SD card for the 6D? I know it comes with one but I'd like a good 64gb. Combat Pretzel posted:Apparently Canon's considering ditching the P&S camera business. The big thing in the article is "the under $200 P&S market". As evil_bunnY said, the low end is being served well by smart phones and those people aren't interested in carrying around another device just for pictures. I'm still excited about what they're doing their high end point and shoots. The G1X II looks amazing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
B&H says DIGIC 5+.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
Perfect, got the sandisk extreme + 64gb for like $87 off amazon. Should be all I need unless I go on some long trip. Thanks.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
I think the XXD line became pointless after the 50D/when the 7D came out.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2014 15:39
|
|
|
I haven't gotten a chance to shoot with my 6D yet, but I am flying out on a trip tomorrow. Since this is my first full frame I have no idea what a good upper limit ISO is on this camera. Like for example on my 50D, ISO 1600 was the "looks good" upper limit. On my Xti it was 800.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2014 09:14
|
|
|
Thanks for the ISO advice. I'm going to disable 1/3 stops and since I'm just on vacation I'll leave it on auto ISO. So far so good. This wifi feature is a game changer for me, at least on trips like this. Now I can send slr photos to my phone/iPad, edit them, then post them to Facebook or where ever quickly. No more having to wait a week or lug around a laptop (which I'd leave at the hotel anyway) to play with my photos. I still plan on doing proper raw edits when I get home, though it's nice doing quick road edits.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2014 23:45
|
|
|
Well 1/3 stops aren't really a big deal and if they have any negative effect, I may as well turn it off.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
Abandon hope all ye who still shoot crop.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
Maybe I should change hope to canon
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
The 50D is even cheaper and has a comparable sensor.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2014 03:47
|
|
|
Soulex posted:Tax return should be coming soon so Ill be lookin to get my 70D. I vote for sell all your crop gear, forget about the 70d, and buy a 6D+ 24-105 f/4 for $1999.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
Well I don't think anyone else read it either because I don't know who can shoot sports with a 70-200 f4 and an extender.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
Aside from getting straight buildings, why do you guys like the tilt shift? Is it the selective focus? I'm curious because I know little about them and don't know anyone who has bought one for artistic purposes (maybe technical).
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
Turd Nelson posted:I actually just sold my 50d and went full frame with the 6D. 1300 for basically a brand new full frame body is a screaming deal! Yeah I made the same exact jump and I'm glad I did. I normally prefer spending cash on lenses but crop is going no where on Canon. I've been really impressed with the 24-105 that came with it too. IQ seems close enough to my 70-200 2.8 IS II and it's more range than my old Tamron 17-50 2.8. Though it's an f4, dof is effectively the same on a FF as 2.8 is on a crop. Finally, no more angry bee zoom thank god.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
caberham posted:Hey guys, I haven't really been taking too many photos or playing with my photo gear. Just used cellphone pictures with dropbox sync - wish Canon can integrate something like this. The 6D does this with the built in wifi and I love the hell out of it. There is an app for your phone (I use on my ipad too) and you can send it photos from your camera. Now I can post photos online when I'm on the road or out and about and not feel pressured to run home to the computer to do edits. I haven't gotten around to using lightroom mobile yet, but I feel like I could almost get by with just an ipad and my camera. If I was more casual and only cared about retaining good high res jpegs, then I really wouldn't need a computer at all.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
caberham posted:The 6D has wifi transmit like the RX100's? Cooooool. How's the focus compared to 5d3? Too bad we can't make our cameras connect to a pocket Wifi/3g wifi router and auto upload home. Everything I read says that the 5D3 and 6D have the same sensors. The main difference between the two is going to be the super duper autofocus system and being 1.5 fps faster. Great for sports/bird/action shooters but not worth the money for the rest of us. I just jumped from 50D and the AF on it was fine for me, so I have no complaints about the 6D's. To make up for the AF you get wifi and gps, which I love the wifi but haven't messed with the gps much. I think the 6D is a great way to get out of Canon's sinking crop ship with out breaking the bank (or avoid it completely if you're new). The biggest thing holding me back was replacing my crop lenses with lenses that were just as good/better. I figured if I wanted something to cover about the same range and dof as my $400 17-50 2.8 Tamron, I'd have to buy a $2300 24-70 2.8. However, I didn't realize that f4 on a FF camera is the same as F2.8 on a crop. I thought that the included 24-105 f4 was a downgrade, but it's not. This whole time I've been using a 27-80 f4 equivalent and now I got a 24-105 f4 with way better optics and and a way faster and silent focusing mechanism. The image quality seems up there with my 70-200 2.8 is II and I really don't need anything sharper. The only thing I miss is my Sigma 8-16. I'm kinda debating on getting either the Sigma 12-24 or maybe the Canon 8-15. The Sigma has me worried about IQ (doesn't seem as nice as the 8-16) and I worry about the 8-15 becoming too gimmicky since it's a straight up fisheye. Haggins fucked around with this message at 05:52 on May 20, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 20, 2014 05:49
|
|
I take product pictures of metal parts and jagged edges. Maybe I can make everything aligned straight again?
|
BrosephofArimathea posted:It's not really an 'f2.8 equivalent'. You get a similar DoF to f2.8 on a crop, but it's still a stop of light slower. You still need to double your shutter speed or ISO to get an equivalent exposure. The original plan was to sell the 24-105 and buy a 24-70 2.8 with the money I saved over the 5D3. However, I decided to play with it first and fell in love. Stops of light aren't as big a deal to me as DoF. My biggest concern is that I'd lose what I had with 17-50 2.8 but I haven't. I've gained way more IQ, more reach, faster response, and IS. I probably will eventually buy the 24-70 2.8 II, but I'm in no rush now.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
I guess I never looked into it since I was so over my Tamron 17-50 2.8. Don't get me wrong, it's a great lens and excellent value for the money, however it looks like poo poo compared to L lenses. Also, I was over the loud and slow focusing. It's hard to pinpoint, and I may sound a little silly here but I noticed the 24-105L has the same "look" (color, contrast, sharpness, whatever it is) as my 70-200 2.8 IS II L that I've been using for a few years now. I really loved that look and I shot mostly with my 70-200 before I got 24-105. In fact, it made me hate the pictures coming from my 17-50. Now that I switched, I only shoot with the 70-200 when I need the reach and not just for the L look. So with that I said, I don't know much about the Tamron 24-70. I'll take a look into it, maybe test one out.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:Sell your 70-200 2.8 (commit blasphemy) then get a 70-200 f4 IS and the Tamzooka (150-600) from the proceeds. Really though, I carried a 5d3, 24-105 and a 70-200 f4 for hours through 100 degree weather recently and I was at my absolute limit toward the end. Cannot imagine what it would be like with f/2.8 zooms. Hah I couldn't ever give my baby up. I used to carry her attached to a 50d all day in the FL heat. It was fine with the black rapid attached on the lens tripod foot. Then again I'm a pretty big dude and lived in FL most my life so it didn't bother me (in Seattle now). I do still want to get the 2x III extender to turn it into a 140-400 5.6. I don't have a huge need for a super telephoto so I think it will fit the bill for me. My ideal camera bag is a 12(or14) to 24 2.8, 24-70 2.8, and a 70-200 2.8. Throw in a close up lens (which I keep in my bag) and an extender and I've got a lot of capability with just 3 lenses.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2014 04:31
|
|
|
Yeah you pretty much already have a 40 2.8. The 50 will give you shallower dof.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
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. 28 or 24 isn't wide at all on crop bodies and I think that's more important than having more reach on the long end (at least for a good general purpose lens). On the long end, you can zoom in by walking closer to your subject. On the wide end, you can backup and get more things in your frame, but you can't get the wide angle look with out the right lens. 17mm is pretty wide on a crop and will give you a lot more creative capabilities. The Tamron 17-50 2.8 is an excellent walk around/ general purpose lens.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2014 09:00
|
|
|
I focus and recompose a lot and that's very painful to do without back button focusing. Same with metering, a lot of times I have a specific spot I want to meter from. When it's all tied together it feels like auto-dummy mode.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Maybe office life has left me decadent and soft but when I went to spain recently I felt that dragging my XSi around was a chore. Is the Canon EOS M a worthy replacement? The only thing that has me hesitant to pull the trigger is that I would have to buy an adapter to reuse my current lens. If you want to go that route you may as well go with another company that has their mirorless act together and sell off your Canon gear.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 12:41 |
|
|
For the new full frame system, if you want to use adapters you're ok, but if you want native lenses you have basically have 2 primes and 2 zooms to choose from. All pretty slow for what they are (f/4 on the zooms and f1.8 and 2.8 on the primes).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2014 04:23
|
|