• Post your camera gear/gear discussion thread
    2,407 replies, posted
[img]http://img.notebooksbilliger.de/images/products/60000/63331/middleUnbenannt-1_G.jpg[/img] I ordered this today and plan on starting my 52 (I don't think I'd be able to complete a 365 challenge) once I get it :dance:
[thumb]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/9038221/Mobile%20uploads/20120125_190612.jpg[/thumb] Sigma 30mm f/1.4, Canon EOS 600D body and the 18-55mm kit lens, soon I'll have the Sigma 18-250mm too. Dat lens flare from my Galaxy S2's LED flash. :v:
18-250? whyyyyyyy
edit: Nevermind, figured it out.
[QUOTE=cueballv2themax;34392712]18-250? whyyyyyyy[/QUOTE] What's so bad about it?
Long zooms tend to have bad reputations as being unsharp and just not as good. It's true that they do sacrifice some quality for the fact that it has such a wide range of focal lengths, but honestly I love my nikkor 18-200mm. Though the bad part is the fact it's f/3.5-5.6 which can be kinda limiting at times.
I guess kind of as bad as a 75-300mm? I have that and I found images aren't really sharp.
probably worse quality, f/6.3 is beyond the AF limit for most DSLRs
[QUOTE=cueballv2themax;34392712]18-250? whyyyyyyy[/QUOTE] Because I can, and because I need something with such a huge zoom range that won't cost me a bomb. They wouldn't make such a lens if it weren't useful, and I think it'll be very useful for me.
[QUOTE=Legend286;34415745]They wouldn't make such a lens if it weren't useful[/QUOTE] That's not entirely true, because if it sells, it sells, no matter how useful it is, and that's what matters to the people selling it.
canon 18-200 would be better
[QUOTE=cueballv2themax;34417468]canon 18-200 would be better[/QUOTE] Well it's mostly for video anyway, so it's not going to make much difference if it's a bit soft.
I'm finding myself using Liveview a lot more now that I have a camera that has one.
liveview is so great no guessing the exposure, you can see exactly what the final product will look like
[QUOTE=Trogdon;34425718]liveview is so great no guessing the exposure, you can see exactly what the final product will look like[/QUOTE] I have a cropmark for liveview that looks like a crosshair. Had someone walk behind me when I was taking photos of people a while back and I turned around to see this man giving me the most awkward look ever haha!
Live view is sometimes really helpful, i've times where i could see in the viewfinder so i just hold up my phone camera to the viewfinder so i can actually frame the shot. :v:
[QUOTE=notlabbet;34290490]I got a 35mm 1.8 and let me tell you, it is the absolute shit. (shit in a good way) I love that lens so much. The only downside is if you run around with your lens at 1.8 all the time in aperture mode (as i sometimes do) sunny areas become to much for even 100 iso and then you gotta settle for a deeper dof.[/QUOTE] You know, that's one thing I've never understood. Why is 100 ISO the lowest you'll find on a digital camera? Besides from the few odd compacts I've seen that have 80 (which really isn't a huge difference), they all seem to have 100 as the lowest. Is there a reason they can't go lower...? And speaking of that, the ISO button on my 450D is kinda jammed. It still works, it's just a bit...weird. Anything I can do about that? [editline]herp derp[/editline] Oh wait, several of the Canon 1D series cameras have a simulated 50 ISO mode, don't they? :v:
because chances are we don't need less sensitivity
i think iso 50 is there to show you who doesn't know shit about the exposure triangle like this professional photographer who gave a seminar at my school, he had his exif on the screen and one shot was like 1/10s, f7.1, iso 50 and i was like 0.o because it was a portrait picture and he could have raised the iso (or opened up the damn lens) to get a better shutter, he was shooting FF anyways so the iso was irrelevant
While I'm waiting for my wide-angle to arrive I'm trying to decide what to save up for next. I thought about a standard prime, 28-35mm (450D's 1.6x crop factor), and read some reviews and stuff. My main concerns are that apparently primes in this range seem to have rather soft borders (Canon 28mm, Sigma 30mm), or that the bokeh looks [url=http://www.photozone.de/images/8Reviews/lenses/canon_35_2_50d/bokeh.jpg]awful[/url] (Canon 35mm f/2). The Sigma with its excellent center sharpness wide open (and the fastest aperture) currently looks like the best choice even with the soft borders, but it's still a lot of money. As soon as I'd get to f/4.5 my 18-55mm would "outperform" it because of the borders. But while the difference is rather big on paper, I don't know how noticable it would be in real use, only proper example shots I could find are [url=http://www.kenrockwell.com/sigma/30mm-f14-sharpness.htm]these[/url]. I actually wouldn't mind it that much and just go for it if it wasn't 450€. Does someone have that Sigma and can tell me if the border-softness is an actual problem or only noticable if you compare the shot to one from another lens? Canon kinda misses the equivalent of the Nikon 35mm 1.8 (the 35mm 2.0 is from... long ago). While searching for primes I found [url=http://www.aputure.com/blog/2010/08/06/canon-35mm-1-8-rumors/]this rumor[/url] from just before the last Photokina, maybe they'll release one this year? I have to save up anyway, so I guess I can wait until September
[QUOTE=Fake-XM;34452824]While I'm waiting for my wide-angle to arrive I'm trying to decide what to save up for next. I thought about a standard prime, 28-35mm (450D's 1.6x crop factor), and read some reviews and stuff. My main concerns are that apparently primes in this range seem to have rather soft borders (Canon 28mm, Sigma 30mm), or that the bokeh looks [url=http://www.photozone.de/images/8Reviews/lenses/canon_35_2_50d/bokeh.jpg]awful[/url] (Canon 35mm f/2). The Sigma with its excellent center sharpness wide open (and the fastest aperture) currently looks like the best choice even with the soft borders, but it's still a lot of money. As soon as I'd get to f/4.5 my 18-55mm would "outperform" it because of the borders. But while the difference is rather big on paper, I don't know how noticable it would be in real use, only proper example shots I could find are [url=http://www.kenrockwell.com/sigma/30mm-f14-sharpness.htm]these[/url]. I actually wouldn't mind it that much and just go for it if it wasn't 450€. Does someone have that Sigma and can tell me if the border-softness is an actual problem or only noticable if you compare the shot to one from another lens? Canon kinda misses the equivalent of the Nikon 35mm 1.8 (the 35mm 2.0 is from... long ago). While searching for primes I found [url=http://www.aputure.com/blog/2010/08/06/canon-35mm-1-8-rumors/]this rumor[/url] from just before the last Photokina, maybe they'll release one this year? I have to save up anyway, so I guess I can wait until September[/QUOTE] I do have the Sigma 30mm and yes corner softness is there but I don't think you'll have to worry about it a lot. It's about two stops softer than the center. For portraits it doesn't really matter because the softness adds to the nice bokeh. For landscape stuff you'd stop it down anyway so again, you don't have to worry about it. That's my personal oppinion. I really like mine
Theres a Zorki 4k for sale near me and its in my rangefinder camera budget at £27 it comes with an ever ready case. Should I get it? [IMG]http://www.classicphotographics.co.uk/sites/default/files/imagecache/stock_image/stockimages/e-bay%20063.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=communistcat;34462600]Theres a Zorki 4k for sale near me and its in my rangefinder camera budget at £27 it comes with an ever ready case. Should I get it? [IMG]http://www.classicphotographics.co.uk/sites/default/files/imagecache/stock_image/stockimages/e-bay%20063.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] Get it, price looks very good.
I will it works with some signs of use, I'll go for it on friday, and I'll take my TTL down for them to have a look at.
Does anyone have any recommendations for a good field monitor?
[QUOTE=Fake-XM;34452824]While I'm waiting for my wide-angle to arrive I'm trying to decide what to save up for next. I thought about a standard prime, 28-35mm (450D's 1.6x crop factor), and read some reviews and stuff. My main concerns are that apparently primes in this range seem to have rather soft borders (Canon 28mm, Sigma 30mm), or that the bokeh looks [url=http://www.photozone.de/images/8Reviews/lenses/canon_35_2_50d/bokeh.jpg]awful[/url] (Canon 35mm f/2). The Sigma with its excellent center sharpness wide open (and the fastest aperture) currently looks like the best choice even with the soft borders, but it's still a lot of money. As soon as I'd get to f/4.5 my 18-55mm would "outperform" it because of the borders. But while the difference is rather big on paper, I don't know how noticable it would be in real use, only proper example shots I could find are [url=http://www.kenrockwell.com/sigma/30mm-f14-sharpness.htm]these[/url]. I actually wouldn't mind it that much and just go for it if it wasn't 450€. Does someone have that Sigma and can tell me if the border-softness is an actual problem or only noticable if you compare the shot to one from another lens? Canon kinda misses the equivalent of the Nikon 35mm 1.8 (the 35mm 2.0 is from... long ago). While searching for primes I found [url=http://www.aputure.com/blog/2010/08/06/canon-35mm-1-8-rumors/]this rumor[/url] from just before the last Photokina, maybe they'll release one this year? I have to save up anyway, so I guess I can wait until September[/QUOTE] The sigma 30mm 1.4 is an awesome lens, the edge softness isn't even a problem because 99% of the time when shooting something with it at 1.4 you won't be wanting definition at the edges, because it'll be background. As DoubleDD said, the edge softness just adds to the bokeh.
sure, wide open it wouldn't bother me but apparently it doesn't get better if you stop down. but since neither of you seemed to have a problem with that I'm not really concerned anymore, I mean, I only saw some charts and you're actually shooting with it :v: Gonna start saving up some money then...
[QUOTE=Fake-XM;34485123]sure, wide open it wouldn't bother me but apparently it doesn't get better if you stop down. but since neither of you seemed to have a problem with that I'm not really concerned anymore, I mean, I only saw some charts and you're actually shooting with it :v: Gonna start saving up some money then...[/QUOTE] Here's a photo of my friend on his phone (man did he appreciate me taking this photo) to show how nice the bokeh is with the 30mm 1.4. [t]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9038221/600D_PHOTOS/New%20Lens/College/IMG_0973.png[/t]
So last summer one of my sisters moved/had an adventure(long story). She couldn't take her Camera so I got it, and this is where you guys come in. It's not digital, and may have a light leak. It's an Olympus Om-1. I also have a 133mm lense. Can any of you give me some "homework" so I can improve? [img]http://www.thecamerasite.net/01_SLR_Cameras/Images/Olympus-OM-1t.jpg[/img] Also if any of you know where I can reliably order some 120 film that'd be grand.
For the 120 film, I think B&H is pretty good: [url]http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Format_120&ci=2545&N=4294548524+4130468174[/url] Also: is there anyway to my 550d to activate my 270 EX II wirelessly? Or would I need a trigger?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.