The Official Camera Equipment Megathread

Status
Not open for further replies.
BlueTsunami said:
Leica Mirrorless in 2012?

http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2080688/leica-launch-compact-2012

Would be cool if they develop a system that uses both their M lenses and R lenses. A hybrid of sorts (though some R lenses may dwarf it). Interesting times and would be hilarious if Leica throws down a Mirrorless body without Nikon or Canon making a move.
Click to expand...

M Series Leicas are already mirrorless. That's why they're so compact.

What they're talking about is going with an electronic rangefinder instead of the current system.
 
Bitmap Frogs said:
M Series Leicas are already mirrorless. That's why they're so compact.

What they're talking about is going with an electronic rangefinder instead of the current system.
Click to expand...

Oh, I know this but the system they're probably talking about is mirrorless in the DSLR segment. No rangefinder mechanism to deal with, just a sensor and an EVF. Coming out with such a camera would be great since they've got the X1 which is almost like a Point and Shoot, the future Leica Mirrorless next and then the M9 and future M10 their crown jewel.
 
Instigator said:
You come here boasting about your shiny new lens and you won't even tantalize us with what it can do? Hence why I said post some photos taken with that lens. It's completely on-topic.
Click to expand...
He's not the one who bought it, you quoted the wrong guy.
 
I didn't know this thread existed.

Where do you think I can get polarizing filters for my Canon EOS 450D with 18-55mm lens and 55-250mm lens?

I live in Toronto area, so would be better if I can pick locally.

Are there different kinds that I will have to pick them up? It would be nice if there is a kit sort of thing for a decent price so I can try different ones for my needs.

I'm kinda new to DSLR's but I liked the shots being taken with polarizers, want to try some out.

Thanks.
 
Anyone have any experience with these lenses?

ef50_18ii_1_l.jpg

Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II
http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_171462_-1

ef24_28_1_l.jpg

Canon EF 24mm f2.8 Wide Angle Lens
http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_171390_-1

Pretty inexpensive lenses. I've heard great things about the 50mm but am wondering if any gaffers have it.
 
sweetvar26 said:
I didn't know this thread existed.

Where do you think I can get polarizing filters for my Canon EOS 450D with 18-55mm lens and 55-250mm lens?

I live in Toronto area, so would be better if I can pick locally.

Are there different kinds that I will have to pick them up? It would be nice if there is a kit sort of thing for a decent price so I can try different ones for my needs.

I'm kinda new to DSLR's but I liked the shots being taken with polarizers, want to try some out.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Different lenses will take different filter sizes, so you may need to buy different filters for your two lenses or buy an adapter. The lens' filter size is usually printed somewhere on it. Typically they are in the 40-70mm range.

Prices can vary a lot. If you're just experimenting, I would recommend buying something for $10 or less.
 
what do you guys do about storage for your gear? Dedicated shelf space? All the different bits of my gear seem to always endup split amongst several bags, my desk, and a bookshelf
 
Need some advice.

My gf wants a DSLR for taking pictures of her niece and nephew and my niece and nephew along with our vacations to DC , Disney World , Boston and hiking around.

She has settled on the Canon T3i , Her brother in Law works for canon and gets very good discounts . The main question we have is if she should buy the standard kit or get the body only and a better Lense ... or the kit + a better lense .


We are wondering what lense would be best for something like Disney world where you have a lot of vistas but then alot of fast moving events and things like the electrict light parade.


Any help would be great
 
eastmen said:
Need some advice.

My gf wants a DSLR for taking pictures of her niece and nephew and my niece and nephew along with our vacations to DC , Disney World , Boston and hiking around.

She has settled on the Canon T3i , Her brother in Law works for canon and gets very good discounts . The main question we have is if she should buy the standard kit or get the body only and a better Lense ... or the kit + a better lense .


We are wondering what lense would be best for something like Disney world where you have a lot of vistas but then alot of fast moving events and things like the electrict light parade.


Any help would be great
Click to expand...
I recently bought a t3i (first dslr, had it for about a week). The kit I got was with the 18-135 lens. While it's great and will easily do what you're after, I feel it's just a bit too big to be a social, walkaround lens.

For that very reason, I'm trying to get my hands on a sigma 1.4 30mm. It's not big, good in low light/freezing action, and will be very flattering for portraits as it's a "normal" 50mm focal length when attached to the t3i. It's a prime lens, so no zooming, but it'll be fantastic for what you're after.

Note though that I don't actually have this lens yet, so I can't give first-hand impressions.
 
eastmen said:
Need some advice.

My gf wants a DSLR for taking pictures of her niece and nephew and my niece and nephew along with our vacations to DC , Disney World , Boston and hiking around.

She has settled on the Canon T3i , Her brother in Law works for canon and gets very good discounts . The main question we have is if she should buy the standard kit or get the body only and a better Lense ... or the kit + a better lense .


We are wondering what lense would be best for something like Disney world where you have a lot of vistas but then alot of fast moving events and things like the electrict light parade.


Any help would be great
Click to expand...

A lot of people will say learn with the kit. I think that sucks. I suggest going body only, then spending a little extra and getting the Tamron 17-50 non-IS lens. Worth every penny and blows the kit lens out of the water.
 
theusedversion said:
Anyone have any experience with these lenses?
Click to expand...
I have the 50mm 1.8 II. Apart from the flimsy construction, the pictures are amazing. However with a cropped x1.6 sensor, the focal length is too zoomed in for my taste (about 80mm), so I'm going to return it and get the sigma I mentioned above. It'd be perfect with a full frame sensor though.
 
I too have the 50mm 1.8 II, and I use it on my 7D a lot. Pretty much the perfect first lens to go with. Cheap, sharp, and produces some great images.
My only gripe is the focus ring has the lip on it, which I find quite annoying as I mainly use my 7D for video, so I ended up buying a cheap 50mm 1.4 with an M42 mount and adapter.

Other than tat, great lens.
 
theusedversion said:
Anyone have any experience with these lenses?

Pretty inexpensive lenses. I've heard great things about the 50mm but am wondering if any gaffers have it.
Click to expand...


the 50 is the first lens i bought when i got my rebel xt years ago. its great for the money, the focus motor is noisy and it has trouble focusing when it gets dark. It is often the only lens I bring just because its so small.
 
The_Inquisitor said:
A lot of people will say learn with the kit. I think that sucks. I suggest going body only, then spending a little extra and getting the Tamron 17-50 non-IS lens. Worth every penny and blows the kit lens out of the water.
Click to expand...
Took the words right out of my mouth.
 
chaostrophy said:
Getting more and more tempted by the X100 to replace my LX3 since reading that the firmware update fixed a lot of the issues with the camera. At first I thought a m4/3 or NEX would be the better choice because of the interchangeable lenses, but the last thing I want is a compact camera-like interface and they all seem to be moving in that direction. And the X100 carries less of a price premium now that you can't get a fast normal-ish prime in a kit with an M4/3/NEX camera anymore.
Click to expand...

I'd suggest waiting till the end of the month and seeing what the new Olympus E-P3 is like. Should fit the bill of plenty of manual controls, hopefully a good sensor upgrade from the E-P2, faster focus and an every improving range of lenses from Oly & Panasonic!
 
The_Inquisitor said:
A lot of people will say learn with the kit. I think that sucks. I suggest going body only, then spending a little extra and getting the Tamron 17-50 non-IS lens. Worth every penny and blows the kit lens out of the water.
Click to expand...

If you're getting a good discount, and if she doesn't want to be changing lenses a lot (who does, walking around disneyland), the 18-135IS kit is pretty good. Good flexible focal lengths and an improvement over the 18-55 kit. You could manage very well with just that lens permanently attached.
 
mrklaw said:
If you're getting a good discount, and if she doesn't want to be changing lenses a lot (who does, walking around disneyland), the 18-135IS kit is pretty good. Good flexible focal lengths and an improvement over the 18-55 kit. You could manage very well with just that lens permanently attached.
Click to expand...

Very true. However, I found with a crop sensor body that the 17-50 is pretty darn good as a walkaround lens itself. Didn't find myself really needing the extra reach unless I was trying to shoot a bird. In that case, my 70-200mm telephoto was used and is probably vastly superior in image quality (spoiled by my non-IS L, though I may be selling it soon to upgrade to the IS version)

I just think the Tamron lens is a better piece overall. It's sharper and the glass is nicer.

Also, invest in a nice polarizer. Makes a HUGE difference, especially in landscape.
 
The_Inquisitor said:
I just think the Tamron lens is a better piece overall. It's sharper and the glass is nicer.
Click to expand...
It is. Superzooms are generally pretty sucky and the Canon 18-135 is no different. I'd stay well away.

Seriously jump all over the Tamron and if you need more reach, buy a real telephoto lens. Switching may be annoying, but leaning on a superzoom for convenience makes your IQ suffer dramatically.
 
Danoss said:
It is. Superzooms are generally pretty sucky and the Canon 18-135 is no different. I'd stay well away.

Seriously jump all over the Tamron and if you need more reach, buy a real telephoto lens. Switching may be annoying, but leaning on a superzoom for convenience makes your IQ suffer dramatically.
Click to expand...
I have the 18-135 and personally I feel it's fantastic for an everyday lens. If not for myself preferring a smaller, lightweight lens when on the go, I'd use it for just about everything. The ergonomics are great for its price, and the IQ isn't something to laugh at.

Of course I'm not in any way objecting to the Tamron (haven't used it myself), but the 18-135 shouldn't be something people "stay well away" from.
 
ChryZ said:
Yeah, I've seen people like Philip Bloom and Mike Kobal shoot video with that combo. They managed to get great results.

The first few production runs were sold out immediately, but now it seems that Cosina/Voigtländer is able to catch up with the demand. Here in Europe it's pretty easy to find them nowadays. Check out how they're made, awesome peek into production: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-41VOEVqbTM
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link
Pretty cool piece
 
Might be the wrong place to ask but here goes:

Is there any way to send RAW files off of the iPad to an FTP or even email? I can only send the generated JPG files that iPad makes when importing with the official camera connection kit. I want to use the iPad to make backups of some image files when I'm away from the computer.

(EDIT) Nevermind, actually found that you can email RAW files through the Photos app. Slow as hell but it works.
 
Forgive me if I sound like a dunce, but I really want to try some macro photography, and maybe its me being thick, but im getting a little confused by some of the lenses available. Some specifically say "macro lens", while others dont yet are 300mm. Are they both the same thing anyway ?
 
Cdammen said:
Might be the wrong place to ask but here goes:

Is there any way to send RAW files off of the iPad to an FTP or even email? I can only send the generated JPG files that iPad makes when importing with the official camera connection kit. I want to use the iPad to make backups of some image files when I'm away from the computer.

(EDIT) Nevermind, actually found that you can email RAW files through the Photos app. Slow as hell but it works.
Click to expand...

You can also use an Eye-Fi card with an IPad 2 (the Pro card can send Raws). Directions here. I use one on my D80. Pretty nifty.
 
Ogs said:
Forgive me if I sound like a dunce, but I really want to try some macro photography, and maybe its me being thick, but im getting a little confused by some of the lenses available. Some specifically say "macro lens", while others dont yet are 300mm. Are they both the same thing anyway ?
Click to expand...
True Macro lenses allow you to obtain 1:1 magnification of the subjects. You're not alone in being confused as some lenses tagged as "Macro" simply mean it has quite a short focusing distance and will allow focusing close to subject matter.

Now, I'm assuming you shoot Canon as they are by far the best choice for macro shooters.

If you want to give it a try, just run out and grab some extension tubes and use them with your existing lenses. I use the Kenko set myself, but brand doesn't matter too much (except don't buy the Canon one, it's poor value). Then if you like it, go out and buy an actual macro lens (and you can still use the extension tubes for extra magnification).

If you want to jump in and buy a macro lens, probably look at the Sigma 105mm Macro. If you want to spend more, have a look at the Canon 100/2.8 Macro which I have and it is excellent, or its newer, bigger, sexier brother the Canon 100/2.8L IS.

If you REALLY like macro, you can then go for the big daddy pure macro Canon MP-E 65. Damn, I want that lens, but I don't shoot enough macro to warrant it.

Also, you will want a flash to go with it, luckily this can be (and is actually better) done on the cheap if you want. Have you got an external flash like a 430EX?

Sorry, that was very poorly written, but I can't be bothered to go back and fix it.
 
Magnification factor 1:2 = cheap Macro
Magnification factor 1:1 = real Macro.
Some Sigma "Macro" zoom that doesn't tell you the MF = not really Macro.

Cheap Macro lens are 50mm, 60mm; the 100mm range are expensive Macro lenses; real expensive ones are the 200mm ones. Most Macro lenses are f/2.8, and have very long focus ring rotation to fine tune the focus plate.

A very popular Macro lens for the money is the Tamron 90mm, there are many versions, read it up.
 
The Buzz Out Loud podcast has the Lytro guy who is making news with the light field camera on the podcast.

As far as I can tell, it uses 10X10 array of lenses and sensor to capture the scene with 3D matrix information.

If thats the case, the dynamic range and color reproduction is going to lose a lot of steps, maybe 2-3 steps, due to the sensor being 100 times smaller. Unless they put sensor of different sensibility in the sensor array like the old fuji.

The resolution is going shot to hell since the lens is so much smaller, however you can make the camera package very flat, very thin. And the overall sensor can be much bigger for a point and shot.

On their website you can play with the photos, but they are simply faking the out of focus effect with a dumb blur filter, not even making real bokeh. Although I pressure you can do it with a more powerful filter.

It can probably improve video capture, but I don't see it that much more useful for still photography.
 
mrklaw said:
If you're getting a good discount, and if she doesn't want to be changing lenses a lot (who does, walking around disneyland), the 18-135IS kit is pretty good. Good flexible focal lengths and an improvement over the 18-55 kit. You could manage very well with just that lens permanently attached.
Click to expand...


The 18-135IS is $400 I believe so she will get it for around $225 most likely .


I think she might still get the base kit , its only a $50 diffrence apparently with her brothers discount , but she might still get an extra lense
 
theusedversion said:
Anyone have any experience with these lenses?

ef50_18ii_1_l.jpg

Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II
http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_171462_-1

ef24_28_1_l.jpg

Canon EF 24mm f2.8 Wide Angle Lens
http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_171390_-1

Pretty inexpensive lenses. I've heard great things about the 50mm but am wondering if any gaffers have it.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't get the 50 1.8. it's a great lens but it's around $120 right now when it used to be $80!!! I'd save up a little more to get the 50mm 1.4 around $350.
 
HenryGale said:
So two things I wanted to share.

Magic Lantern. Amazing.
Installed this on my T2i still in beta and it works like a charm. no bugs, and not worried about anything gong wrong. Plus I can turn of Auto Gain Control now and get great audio with a Rhode Mic Pro. On board HRD which auto takes the amount of photos I want up to 9 stops of exposure? Amazing. On board intervalometer? Amazing. Zebras for video? Incredible.

Seriously gives me the Audio control of a 5D Mark II and software you wouldn't otherwise get, and that even hardware can't replicate. So amazing. Makes my T2i VERY powerful. Can also double the nitrate of my video recording.

DSLRSolutions Follow Focus. Greatest rig out there for under 100$.
cheapfollow.jpg

Used a Zacuto once before at school, the knob follow focus is a bit more elegant, but this is better than any DIY rig I have ever seen. Also it was only 60$. Just came in today, been having a blast with it. I can set up to 4 stops of focus and rack with it, which gives it features that even 400$ follow focus rigs don't have. If you're not using a follow focus rig, buy this.
Click to expand...

I came across this cheap ($3) follow focus solution;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wr7ODWNcMoY
 
Ogs said:
Very informative, thanks :D I have a Nikon D3100 though. I think i will take your advice and get some extension tubes first, just to give things a whirl :)
Click to expand...
My pleasure. I hope you didn't miss one thing in my post earlier about a flash. When shooting macro, light is quite often an issue. It is a rare occasion when you can shoot using natural light, so a flash is essential and E-TTL or in your case with Nikon, I-TTL is a blessing. Do you have an external flash to use, such as a Nikon SB-600 (had to google to find this models as my knowledge of Nikon is severely lacking)? Basically you want a swivel-head flash with I-TTL for what I am about to suggest.

So, to make your own macro flash on the cheap, without going out and spending money on a macro ring light you will need these things.
  • External flash unit that supports E-TTL/I-TTL.
  • Off-camera E-TTL/I-TTL cord. Choose the appropriate cord from the linked site (cheapest I've found with great service).
  • Hakuba LH1 flash bracket, just search for one of these on eBay. Picture at link.
  • Coke can.
  • Gaffers tape.
  • Heavy duty kitchen toweling paper.
Once these items have been acquired, you can follow this rough guide to make a macro flash that will look like this:

747154011_XCsEg-M.jpg


Looks dodgy, but it is very effective and many prefer it to the "proper" macro ring light options as this light gives more definition and softer shadows. I stole this idea from the forum user LordV on another site. I have a Canon MR-14EX and am still going to use this setup (just waiting on the flash cord).
 
eastmen said:
The 18-135IS is $400 I believe so she will get it for around $225 most likely .


I think she might still get the base kit , its only a $50 diffrence apparently with her brothers discount , but she might still get an extra lense
Click to expand...

If you are getting that kind of discount, definitely buy both lenses. If you find that you don't use one of them or decide to upgrade later, you will easily be able to recoup your costs (and make a profit for the 18-135IS) selling the lens on the used market. An "excellent" condition used 18-135IS sells for $380 on KEH.
 
So I got a D60 last month, and to be honest I am a little lost on all the new features I now have after upping from my XS.

Is there a good website that easily teaches the difference and applications between the different light meter modes (center weight, ect) and other things? THanks!
 
The_Inquisitor said:
So I got a D60 last month, and to be honest I am a little lost on all the new features I now have after upping from my XS.

Is there a good website that easily teaches the difference and applications between the different light meter modes (center weight, ect) and other things? THanks!
Click to expand...

There are some good intro guides to Nikon cameras that are put out by Thom Hogan

http://www.bythom.com/d60guide.htm

and

David Busch

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B002POEQWM/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Congrats on the purchase, btw. You're going to love what a DSLR and Nikkor lenses will do for your photography.

Also, for people who want to upload their photos on the go - Best Buy has the Eye-Fi Pro on sale for $60 this week. Amazon keeps on price matching and then running out of stock and going back up to $90.
 
So it looks like this is the lens I've been looking for - Tamron 28-75mm.

Why on earth is the Tamron lens $350 versus $1,200 for the Canon one though?
 
WanderingWind said:
So it looks like this is the lens I've been looking for - Tamron 28-75mm.

Why on earth is the Tamron lens $350 versus $1,200 for the Canon one though?
Click to expand...

Simplest answer I've been able to determine is this: Lenses are hard to make. It takes a lot of work and good materials to build a good lens. The Canon lenses are expensive because they've perfected the method of construction, they have the best build quality, and they're just better.
 
WanderingWind said:
So it looks like this is the lens I've been looking for - Tamron 28-75mm.

Why on earth is the Tamron lens $350 versus $1,200 for the Canon one though?
Click to expand...

The high quality optical glass itself costs about 1 dollar per gram. You can put your hands on a professional 24-70 and feel how much glass they put into the lens.
 
WanderingWind said:
So it looks like this is the lens I've been looking for - Tamron 28-75mm.

Why on earth is the Tamron lens $350 versus $1,200 for the Canon one though?
Click to expand...
Higher quality glass, USM, weatherproofing. The Canon 24-70 also weighs an absolute tonne.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

NeoGAF Camera Equipment Thread | MK II
146 147 148 149 150
7K
651K
Deleted member 17706 replied
  • Locked
Resetera and the pedo problem (updates)
NSFW  43 44 45 46 47
2K
495K
notkeylime replied
  • Locked
What relaxes you the most?
0
4K
Halo is Back replied
The Crisis in Venezula
2
2K
God Enel replied
  • Locked
What is the most painless way to commit suicide?
3
4K
EviLore replied
Top Bottom