April 23, 2014, 11:45:34 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Botts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 12
Lenses / Re: Quick decision help: canon 24 vs zeiss 21
« on: January 15, 2013, 04:13:50 PM »
I would qualify Optikus's reply : manual focussing on an slr is much more difficult with wide angle lenses than with longer focal lenses. That's because things don't "snap in focus" in the same way, due to the wider dof. You may see things in focus on your viewscreen, which provides a small enlargment of your picture, but when printed at a significant size, you find out that your focus plane is not where you expected it to be.

Even if you've manual focused with an SLR before it may not be like MFing on a DSLR.  Keep in mind that MF only SLRs had good focusing screens that sacrificed brightness for accuracy.  Things like split prisms are extremely useful.

New SLRs don't have these focusing screens and thus it is extremely hard to nail manual focus.  You could always use liveview to MF in 5 or 10x, but this is slower.

Expect to upgrade the focusing screen (not easy) in your 5D3 to maximize MF lenses.

Lenses / Re: 6D & new lenses
« on: January 15, 2013, 12:06:15 PM »
I'm getting a 6D this week, moving from my Canon XS. I'm 41 and am not a pro, but w/ 2 boys in scouts/soccer/choir/skiing and a lot of travel out West and in the Catskills I have an eclectic mix of photo opportunities, I don't want to miss anything.
  I love the photo-journalistic style of photography. Over the last year, I've shot exclusively the Sigma 30mm f1.4 (50mm equivalent) on my crop camera to better learn this science/art. What I learned best was that I love shooting w/o a flash, but that the 50mm equiv. is often not wide enough, and that I need more iso, hence full frame.
   I can do the 6D and starter lenses now to get a feel for what I really like in Ff, and can do a serious lens @ 1x per year thereafter. I'm thinking about starting w/ 6D and 40mm 2.8 STM, and Tamron 70-300 now, then moving to 70-40 and a 35mm f1.4 the next year. Followed in year 3 by a 70-200L 2.8 IS, year 4 w/ a 24-70 2.8. Somewhere in there getting a 135 F2 as well for indoor events.
   What I could really use is some input on whether this is the right game-plan, or whether I should just get a 24-70 2.8 now, and fill in from there (only hesitation is IS)?
   Thanks for any productive input from a first time poster on this great site!

I would recommend that given what you are going to shoot, you must seriously consider the 135L. The lens is an absolute beast for indoor sports, low light conditions and street photography. Also, this is one of the relatively cheaper L lenses Canon offers and is perfect "value for money".

Many people forget about the 100f/2 USM.  This lens is half the cost of the 135L, almost as sharp, and it tracks action really well.  I'd put the $500 savings from buying the 100/2 instead towards a good normal length zoom.  Or instead buy a 200/f2.8 for the extra length.

I'd say start with the 40STM, and get the 50/1.4 later if you really feel you need that extra stop.  My 50/1.4 only goes on in really special occasions.  (Mostly dark rides in Disneyland).  Otherwise, I use the 40STM.

Also, rather than a 35L, I'd seriously consider a 17-40 or 16-35mm.  Way more versatile, and I don't find I need that fast of glass in a wide angle lens.  I'd just throw on my 50/1.4 instead.  When I was shooting crop, I'd have had a 35L high on my list, now that I've shot FF for a little bit, the 35L has dropped on my lens list.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D + 24-105 vs T4i + 24-70 II
« on: January 15, 2013, 11:22:57 AM »
For $2,699 and $2,499 if you can find a great deal, you can effectively sell the 24-105mm for probably $750 used after you have the cash to go to the 24-70 f/2.8.

Also, I reread the gear you had before.  Did you feel you were lacking normal length lenses back then?  You effectively had a 16-35mm and a 70-200mm before.  Also, how did you find the apertures that you had back then?

The 10-22 was a 3.5-4.5, on a crop sensor.  When you consider the ~2 stop ISO advantage on the 6D vs the T3i, you could effectively shoot a 16-35mm f/7-8.8

You could probably consider buying a used 70-200mm f/4IS due to the ISO advantage on the 6D as well.  If you went used, again, you could sell this for a minor loss when you want to upgrade to f/2.8

Lenses / Re: Lens firmware update
« on: January 13, 2013, 06:50:43 PM »
The firmware update isn't MacOS software.  All the Mac needs to do is mount the .dmg file so you can copy the file to a CF/SD card.

To the OP - hopefully you're aware you can't use any body to update lens firmware, you need a 2012 body (T4i/650D, 5DIII or 1D X).

The 6D will also work.

I have both for my 6D.  However, if I were shooting crop, I'd pick up a Sigma 30, and sell the 50/1.4 to fund a 40STM.

I use the 50mm f/1.4 when I need the low light for events where I can't use a flash, or I want extreme depth of field.

However, at almost every other point, I've got the 40STM on my camera.  I like the slightly wider focal length.  It's also incredibly sharp.  If I'm shooting an event with a strobe, I'll go with the 40STM over the 50mm every time, set it to f/4 and you've got IMO the right amount of DOF, and super sharp images.

I also like that if I want to travel light and without my camera bag, I can throw the 40STM in a pocket, and keep the 70-200 f/4L IS on the 6D.  It covers most of the range I need, and I don't need to worry about bag checks or the weight.

Also, another nice bonus is that the 40STM is cheap enough I don't even bother with a lens cap for it, so it's always ready.

Finally, despite thinking that us Canon owners are the only ones with a "body cap" lens, Olympus M43 users have an even smaller option!  http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/893289-REG/Olympus_v325010bw000_15mm_F8_0_Lens_On.html  Only downside is it's a fixed f/8 with the focus set permanently hyperfocal.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D weatherproofness, tested.
« on: January 13, 2013, 01:47:27 PM »
+1 for insuring your camera gear!  Then you don't have to worry about the weather when you're shooting!

Lenses / Re: 17-40 vs 16-35, which one got the mojo ?
« on: January 12, 2013, 03:52:43 PM »
If the OP does want to purchase a 17-40mm, I have heard of problems until Canon "updated" them, or fixed the production line.

Does anyone know when this fix occurred?

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Reikan FoCal Pro with 40 STM
« on: January 12, 2013, 03:45:58 PM »
I just AFMA'd my 40mm today with FoCal and got "excellent" result confidence.   

What I did notice (and I didn't put this all together til now), the 2nd lens I tried, my 35mm f/1.4 L, couldn't get decent results after 3 attempts.  I'm wondering if the battery (which was at 80% after I was finished with the 40mm) or camera body temp had something to do with the ability to get good results.

When I used FoCal before, the first lens I tried always got "excellent" results (shown on the printout under "result confidence").  but none of the lenses after that ever got that rating (usually good to poor but never excellent).

After boosting my lighting to EV 10.5 it worked like a charm.

I redid my 50mm and got good results again.  I redid the 70-200mm f/4IS and got excellent results that matched the first time.

I also moved my tripod + 30 pounds of weight from carpet to hardwood.  That also really helped it appears.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: whats up with 5d2 used pricing?
« on: January 12, 2013, 03:30:55 PM »
as a 450D user I'm on the hunt for a good deal on a 5d2 or save for 6D or 5d3   

however I always see people selling bodies with 5-25K clicks attempting to sell the 5d2 for 1500 or even more, because they spent 2 grand on it a year ago. 

I dont think I'd pay more than 1400 with body and kit lens.   Is everyone crazy hoping we don't know what the market looks like or just hoping to find a sap.

Considering you can buy a 6D with 24-105 kit for $2,499 and sell the lens for $800 with no questions asked. That makes the 6D a $1,699 camera. 
For the extra $200 you're getting way better AF, and better ISO performance.  You also gain the "silent shooting" which is great for events.

The 5D2 for that price makes no sense at all.  I'm sure it's people who factored in "depreciation" when the bought the camera, and planned to get "x" amount when the sold it.  The onslaught of the 6D was probably unexpected.  Maybe these sellers thought, I paid $2400 new, 25% depreciation in year one takes you to $1800, and 20% depreciation in year two takes you to $1440.
A perfect example is lensrentals.com, they'll have a rental price based on what they paid for the lens new, and then what they expect to get when they sell it used.  That's why occasionally you'll see gear pop up used on LR.com for the same as the current new price.  I.e. they listed the 50mm/1.4 for $300 last week, which is the same as what B&H was asking new.  Strangely enough it sold, but the point is that LR.com likely doesn't want to take a write down on what they expected used gear to be worth.

Lenses / Re: How many times did you return (L) lenses to get a good copy?
« on: January 11, 2013, 01:42:00 AM »
eBay risky? Why? I have sold so much gear lately... How can a place like this be less risky with all the protections eBay have in place? Just wondering. Not looking for a debate.

As long as you meet eBay/PayPal's conditions for seller protection you're pretty much ok.

It'd be way safer than a CR buy/sell area.

Lenses / Re: How many times did you return (L) lenses to get a good copy?
« on: January 11, 2013, 12:23:48 AM »
Of course. You paid for it you have the right to demand what you expect from it. It is just some people expect unreal things. Of course a lens is a +/- 10 has a serious problem. I tested 5 with focal and no one was more than +/- 1 so I stopped because got bored of testing them.

Really?  Every one of my lenses is out by at least 4.

My 50mm f/1.4 is out by +7, my 70-200mm f/4 is out by +5 wide, and -1 tele.  My 40STM is a +4.

My 70-200mm f/4 is tack sharp, and even before the +5 fix, it took fabulous photos.  Some of which grace my office walls at 20x30".  There's no reason I'd send it back for being out by 5.

Similarly, the 50 f/1.4 is a great lens, it just needed a little adjustment.

Lenses / Re: Need an affordable 300mm
« on: January 10, 2013, 11:04:19 PM »
This trip -> race cars, tigers, and airplanes.  -> In good light.

Normally, I shoot landscapes, or portraits.

Just to add to that, didn't the sales indicate that both the lower end (Rebel) and high-end (5dIII & 1DX) categories both belong to Canon?  I would think that photogs in the 'pro' class would of done their homework, not just go out and blindly purchase.

Actually, In the pro market I would expect them to look at the combination of camera and lens..... and I think we all have to admit that Canon's selection of high end L glass makes it onto our "if I won the lottery " list.. This has to be a big factor for a pro deciding which way to lean.

Exactly, couldn't agree more.

As does service centre quality, and ubiquity.
If you're a pro journalist, and the equipment locker at the office is all white lenses, having a Canon body is likely going to be your choice.  Similarly, if you're the owner of the same pro equipment that you need to photograph events, knowing that if it goes down, you'll have it back in a matter of days, is crucially important.

Finally, Canon selling the most DSLRs is a good benefit to us Canon shooters, as it enables Canon to put more money in to R&D, giving us better lenses and bodies.

Lenses / Need an affordable 300mm
« on: January 10, 2013, 01:25:08 PM »
Hello everyone,

I recently upgraded from the 7D to 6D, and am looking to get some length back in my lenses.  I had been using a 70-200mm f/4 IS, and liked the length at 200, so around 320mm on FF.

I will be renting for this go around, and then probably purchasing something in this range.

My thoughts are one of the below options:

Rent a 1.4x TC for my 70-200 f/4.  This will give me a 280mm lens at f/5.6, based on ISO 12233 crops, it still looks pretty sharp, but autofocus may be iffy.
Rent a 300mm f/4 IS.  Less versatility but a stop faster, and sharper.
Rent the 70-300L, good zoom range, sharp, but f/5.6 at 300mm.
Rent a 100-400mm, same speed as the 70-300mm, but the IS likely isn't as good.

If you've had a chance to use any of these options I'd greatly appreciate your feedback!

Lenses / Re: Prime Lens for 6D
« on: January 10, 2013, 12:57:22 AM »
I have both the 40mm f/2.8 and the 50mm f/1.4.  I think the 50mm f/1.4 can do a lot more, but the 40mm is awesome in it's own way (really small, and really sharp).  Actually I find I'm using the 40mm more often than the 50mm on my 6D. 

Of course a lot of that comes down to your style of shooting.  I like the slightly wider 40mm for walking around with (possibly because I grew up with a 38mm film P&S), and the f/2.8 isn't all that limiting with the high ISO of the 6D.  However when I want to shoot people, the 50mm f/1.4 just gives way more options in terms of the DOF control that lens can give you on FF.

Agreed.  I also have the 50/1.4 and 40/2.8 for my 6D.  The 40STM lives on my 6D, the 50/1.4 comes out for special occasions, i.e. darker available light shots, or where I need razor thin DOF.

If I'm using my 430EX at an event or party, I'll keep the 40STM on the 6D without a doubt.  Shoot at f/4 with the strobe, and you're golden.

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 12