Support NeoGAF

[alphaNoid]

The "nifty fifty" is the Canon 50mm f1.8.

Oh? well then, I stand corrected.. thanks. Damn that makes more sense now that I think about it lol.. Because the 1.4 is great and all but not very nifty at the price

 

[Flo_Evans]

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply there was no post-processing on any of those images. I never upload anything without post, I consider it essential on all DSLR shots (probably doesn't need to be as heavy on a good FF like the 5D2 though). My point was just that you can achieve perfectly good final results with the 7D. I'm not trying to say it's better than a 5D2.

The leaves are a bit soft in the wheel shot for two reasons: one, my copy of the 10-22 is abnormally soft at the edges (I should send it in for service really but I use it too much), and two, the FOV stretching effect is occurring on the red leaves at the right as they were quite close to the camera (DOF is likely coming in to play too). The shot is at 13mm.

The moon is heavily sharpened of course, probably over-sharpened, but then it is hundreds of thousands of kilometers away through a whole atmosphere and photographed with consumer equipment by a rank amateur But if you'd told me 10 years ago I could take a photo like that I'd have laughed, it's amazing how much flexibility our equipment can give us now.

/thread

er... /debate?

I think the take away is the 7d is amazing, but the 5dII is more amazinger? One would hope a camera costing 2x as much would have a better AF sensor and take crisper pictures.

All this talk of sharpness, how about some de-focus tests?

My new (to me) 105mm f2 DC!

Both images where focused on the fly statue

With the bias set to rear defocus, the foreground remains sharp while giving a soft focus behind the focal plane.

Set the opposite way, it soft focuses on the foreground objects!

Pretty cool, not sure how ultimately useful this lens will be, unless I want to do weddings or 70's era playboy shoots.

 

[Gabyskra]

Question: I´ll probably buy the Canon 600D (good choice/bad choice for the price range?), and I often heard people say that the kit lense sucks. If so, what lense would you recommend a photographing beginner? thx

It's a very good choice.

What's your budget for lenses?

Depending on the kind of photography you plan on doing:
Sigma 30mm f1.4 is IMO the best affordable lens for cropped sensors cameras.
The best value for your money might be the Tamron 17-50mm.
The Canon 50mm f1.8 is ultra cheap and allows you to learn how to manage the depth of field and the out of focus blur.

 

[Mercutio]

Yeah the Canon 50mm 1.8 is such a good first lens. It does such a wide range of stuff well, and I feel like most importantly forces you to compose your shots without relying on zoom.

My next big purchase is probably going to be a high quality 50 or 85 prime... possibly L. But that's much later on. I have all I need in the 24-105 for the video shoots I'm scheduled for in the coming months, and the 50mm 1.8 is no slouch.

 

[Radec]

That DC lens is a gem when used right.

Play with it till you get what you think is best.

 

[Flo_Evans]

That DC lens is a gem when used right.

Play with it till you get what you think is best.

It's a very nice piece of glass, just seems to have a high learning curve.

I am not sure if I am going to keep it though, its too long (on a DX sensor) for indoor shots, and too short for birds. Seems best suited to a portrait studio...

I dunno, I might trade it for a true tele, or an get a really nice wide prime.

 

[alphaNoid]

My understanding was that the 7D had FAR BETTER AF (19 point, and in general) over the 5DII, but that the 5DII was much less noiser above 1600, upwards to 3200? I mean, I know the other techinical differences but real world reviews basically say that the 7D is rock solid, minus the crop sensor thing and noisy above 1600, right? I mean, for a lot more money the 5DII is a rad camera, and the features it has better than the 7D stand apart but the 7D is a much newer design, and has many features the 5DII does not. Its a more modern camera and has technologies in it, that Canon had not developed for the 5DII.. I think there is no denying that.

This argument is over the day the 5DIII comes out, but until then many people are likely going to continue to debate between the 7D and 5DII because they really are quite close in comparison, say minus a few things.

 

[Hcoregamer00]

I guess everyone has different expectations.

I have the Canon 60D which has the 7D sensor and I think it is just fine.

Pic 1
Pic 2
Pic 3

 

[chaostrophy]

If you want real sharpness at the pixel level just get a Leica M9 with its lack of AA filter :3

I've heard there are places which will mod DSLRs to remove the AA filter and you get better resolution that way. I haven't felt it's needed on my 5DII, but supposedly the 5DII has a weak AA filter. It's frustrating because these filters seem to be responsible for many sharpness issues, so they're important to consider when buying a camera, but they never seem to show up on spec lists. I don't even know if there's some kind of numerical measurement of how strong an AA filter is.

 

[Hcoregamer00]

I've heard there are places which will mod DSLRs to remove the AA filter and you get better resolution that way. I haven't felt it's needed on my 5DII, but supposedly the 5DII has a weak AA filter. It's frustrating because these filters seem to be responsible for many sharpness issues, so they're important to consider when buying a camera, but they never seem to show up on spec lists. I don't even know if there's some kind of numerical measurement of how strong an AA filter is.

Hopefully AA filters will be a thing of the past once the MP's get high enough to toss them away.

I could see Canon and Nikon do it with the high-end full frame DSLR's next generation (I am talking about the Nikon D4 and the Canon 1Ds Mark IV).

 

[tino]

This was literally the first picture I took with my 17-55 with 7d, and the ball with the nifty fifty a bit later on.

Full 1.0 crop and this is one of the sharpest images I've seen, light is key.

Aren't these photos post processed? The second pic looks like it had cross process filter applied to me.

 

[BlueTsunami]

I've heard there are places which will mod DSLRs to remove the AA filter and you get better resolution that way. I haven't felt it's needed on my 5DII, but supposedly the 5DII has a weak AA filter. It's frustrating because these filters seem to be responsible for many sharpness issues, so they're important to consider when buying a camera, but they never seem to show up on spec lists. I don't even know if there's some kind of numerical measurement of how strong an AA filter is.

Get it Hot Rod'ed!

http://www.maxmax.com/hot_rod_visible.htm

The difference is subtle in some cases but I think its a great procedure if you're using a $2000 lens and want to use every bit of its resolution.

I wonder if there will ever be a point where the fear of moire will be quelled and the AA filter will be finally trashed for good. I've read that hitting certain Megapixels actually helps in this regard. Even then I haven't heard that many complaints about moire from the M9. It pops up here and there but it doesn't seem like an issue that requires a blurring of the whole frame.

 

[Sennorin]

It's a very good choice.

What's your budget for lenses?

Depending on the kind of photography you plan on doing:
Sigma 30mm f1.4 is IMO the best affordable lens for cropped sensors cameras.
The best value for your money might be the Tamron 17-50mm.
The Canon 50mm f1.8 is ultra cheap and allows you to learn how to manage the depth of field and the out of focus blur.

Hm, my budget for lenses is basically the price of the 600D+Kit Lense, which is already a lot more than I intended to spend on my future camera anyway. The Canon 50mm f1.8 is the only one of the above that I could justify buying therefore. But is the kit lense (EF-S 18-55mm 1:3,5-5,6 IS II) really so bad? Originally, I wanted to get one of those superzoom compact cams, but people convinced me that those are rubbish. But now to get a camera without any zoom, I don´t know. Zooming is part of the fun, at least imo

But if you think the kit lense is bad even for a total beginner, then I will listen to you. It certainly sounds like the most affordable option for me, though. Thx for your help.

 

[Gabyskra]

Hm, my budget for lenses is basically the price of the 600D+Kit Lense, which is already a lot more than I intended to spend on my future camera anyway. The Canon 50mm f1.8 is the only one of the above that I could justify buying therefore. But is the kit lense (EF-S 18-55mm 1:3,5-5,6 IS II) really so bad? Originally, I wanted to get one of those superzoom compact cams, but people convinced me that those are rubbish. But now to get a camera without any zoom, I don´t know. Zooming is part of the fun, at least imo

But if you think the kit lense is bad even for a total beginner, then I will listen to you. It certainly sounds like the most affordable option for me, though. Thx for your help.

It's really not that bad! I have it myself, I just don't use it anymore. It's just that I bet you that if you buy 600D (or 550D if you don't care about the screen being movable) + kit lens + 50mm, I promise you that you'll find yourself using the 50mm lens all the time.

 

[alphaNoid]

The thing about kit lenses is that once you get something else, you will never use them. They become paper weights.

 

[Flo_Evans]

The thing about kit lenses is that once you get something else, you will never use them. They become paper weights.

The only reason I am hanging on to mine is the off chance that I go somewhere on vacation, and only want to take one inexpensive lens to cover most focal lengths.

I think though if I was even in a situation where I was worried about that, I would just take a P&S...

 

[tokkun]

Kit lens is often your only choice for wide angle on a budget. It's not like they lose that much value either. You pay $100 extra to get the kit version of the camera. In a couple years when you replace it with a high quality wide-angle zoom you sell it for $80.

 

[chaostrophy]

The thing about kit lenses is that once you get something else, you will never use them. They become paper weights.

Sometimes I wish camera companies would offer more choice of kit lenses, to offer better value to people who have money to spend on a good lens with their camera. I still use my kit lens (the 24-105L that came with my 5DII), and buying the lens with the camera in the kit was about $300 cheaper than buying them separately- a decent savings. Why not give crop frame camera buyers the same kind of quality option, like say a kit with the 15-85, or perhaps the 28/1.8? IMO it makes more sense to save up to buy stuff that you'll be 100% satisfied with, rather than going cheap then upgrading all the time.

 

[Mercutio]

Sometimes I wish camera companies would offer more choice of kit lenses, to offer better value to people who have money to spend on a good lens with their camera. I still use my kit lens (the 24-105L that came with my 5DII), and buying the lens with the camera in the kit was about $300 cheaper than buying them separately- a decent savings. Why not give crop frame camera buyers the same kind of quality option, like say a kit with the 15-85, or perhaps the 28/1.8? IMO it makes more sense to save up to buy stuff that you'll be 100% satisfied with, rather than going cheap then upgrading all the time.

Honestly, I don't get why they don't offer the 24-105 L with the 7D in a kit. They offered the 28-whatever with it at first, so it's certainly not a matter of focal lengths... the 7D is advertised as a pro body after all.

 

[Flo_Evans]

I begged the small independent camera shop to let me switch out the kit lens for a 50 or a 35mm prime but they would not budge. They are kind of jerks. IDK why I continue to support them.

 

[Mercutio]

I begged the small independent camera shop to let me switch out the kit lens for a 50 or a 35mm prime but they would not budge. They are kind of jerks. IDK why I continue to support them.

What was the camera, what was the lens? I can understand not breaking up a kit though, I don't think Adorama or BH would do it for me either... they can always sell primes, but they'd be stuck with a crappy zoom (I'm assuming) that might not so easily sell.

 

[tino]

I begged the small independent camera shop to let me switch out the kit lens for a 50 or a 35mm prime but they would not budge. They are kind of jerks. IDK why I continue to support them.

Well you can buy body only and save around 50, are you going to buy a 17-50 third party lens or something?

 

[cbox]

Aren't these photos post processed? The second pic looks like it had cross process filter applied to me.

The second photo is processed, but I applied no sharpening to either.

 

[Flo_Evans]

What was the camera, what was the lens? I can understand not breaking up a kit though, I don't think Adorama or BH would do it for me either... they can always sell primes, but they'd be stuck with a crappy zoom (I'm assuming) that might not so easily sell.

D7000 + the 18-105vr ED

The kit is the kit, it was on sale. I tried to have them match me the kit price with a body + prime but they wouldn't do it.

Then I go in a month later looking for more lenses, they have jack shit. All junk way overpriced. Treat me like a moron. Keep in mind I have spent thousands in this store over the years, bought a large format printer, ink and paper out the wazzo, just recently bought a new camera, tripod, head, and bag from them and they act like I am wasting their time when I go in and want to look at some used lenses.

and yet they wonder why B&H are slowing killing them.

Well you can buy body only and save around 50, are you going to buy a 17-50 third party lens or something?

I just bought the kit, and have been buying used lenses on eBay...

 

[the_log_ride]

aw, dammit... cousine of mine desided to drop test my camera + 50mm

now it's having trouble focusing, and it's a bit harder to rotate the focus ring manually.

gonna have to drive to nikon repair tomorrow AM. DAMMIT

 

[captive]

D7000 + the 18-105vr ED

The kit is the kit, it was on sale. I tried to have them match me the kit price with a body + prime but they wouldn't do it.

Then I go in a month later looking for more lenses, they have jack shit. All junk way overpriced. Treat me like a moron. Keep in mind I have spent thousands in this store over the years, bought a large format printer, ink and paper out the wazzo, just recently bought a new camera, tripod, head, and bag from them and they act like I am wasting their time when I go in and want to look at some used lenses.

and yet they wonder why B&H are slowing killing them.

yea, Houston Camera exchange is just as bad, the prices are typically 20-30% higher than amazon, bh or adorama. I never go in there unless i absolutely need something now.

PS if you only print 4x6 why did you buy a large format printer?

 

[Mercutio]

D7000 + the 18-105vr ED

The kit is the kit, it was on sale. I tried to have them match me the kit price with a body + prime but they wouldn't do it.

Then I go in a month later looking for more lenses, they have jack shit. All junk way overpriced. Treat me like a moron. Keep in mind I have spent thousands in this store over the years, bought a large format printer, ink and paper out the wazzo, just recently bought a new camera, tripod, head, and bag from them and they act like I am wasting their time when I go in and want to look at some used lenses.

and yet they wonder why B&H are slowing killing them.




I just bought the kit, and have been buying used lenses on eBay...

Holy hell. I had no idea Nikon made a plastic mount lens until I looked that one up.

 

[WanderingWind]

aw, dammit... cousine of mine desided to drop test my camera + 50mm

now it's having trouble focusing, and it's a bit harder to rotate the focus ring manually.

gonna have to drive to nikon repair tomorrow AM. DAMMIT

I know the Canon 50mm 1.8's are very fragile. Maybe you'll only be out a lens?

 

[the_log_ride]

I know the Canon 50mm 1.8's are very fragile. Maybe you'll only be out a lens?

Body was completely fine (it was on a D60 for the day). Crossing my fingers that it's covered under warranty for repairs.

 

[Flo_Evans]

yea, Houston Camera exchange is just as bad, the prices are typically 20-30% higher than amazon, bh or adorama. I never go in there unless i absolutely need something now.

PS if you only print 4x6 why did you buy a large format printer?

I have it for work, making presentation boards, banners, trade show displays, stuff like that. Being able to make huge prints of my photos is just a bonus.

 

[XMonkey]

My understanding was that the 7D had FAR BETTER AF (19 point, and in general) over the 5DII, but that the 5DII was much less noiser above 1600, upwards to 3200? I mean, I know the other techinical differences but real world reviews basically say that the 7D is rock solid, minus the crop sensor thing and noisy above 1600, right? I mean, for a lot more money the 5DII is a rad camera, and the features it has better than the 7D stand apart but the 7D is a much newer design, and has many features the 5DII does not. Its a more modern camera and has technologies in it, that Canon had not developed for the 5DII.. I think there is no denying that.

This argument is over the day the 5DIII comes out, but until then many people are likely going to continue to debate between the 7D and 5DII because they really are quite close in comparison, say minus a few things.

Correct, 7D has a lot of great technological advancements over the 5D2. The AF often gets the most mentions, but the 7D also has a much, much better metering system. I personally think the 7D body is built better than the 5D2 also.

 

[Mercutio]

Correct, 7D has a lot of great technological advancements over the 5D2. The AF often gets the most mentions, but the 7D also has a much, much better metering system. I personally think the 7D body is built better than the 5D2 also.

I think I'd personally disagree on that build assessment. I felt as if I was touching a bit more plastic on the 7D, and the bottom in particular seemed to be a little less solid than the way the 5D's magnesium plates wrap underneath.

Really, really close, but having used both I'd give the slight edge to the 5D. I also prefer the movie mode start system on the 5D, mostly because I feel as if I'm moving the camera a little more when I start recording on the 7D as opposed to the SET button.

That said, I think it's very much a YMMV kind of thing; they're both head and shoulders above any other Canon DSLR I've used... particularly in the grip area.

A minor quibble about the 7D's design though... I strongly dislike the flash pop mechanism. I understand it's very interested in giving you flash when the full Automatic system demands it, but come on Canon... this is a Pro body! I much preferred my D200's mechanical flash pop button.

 

[Radec]

Holy hell. I had no idea Nikon made a plastic mount lens until I looked that one up.

Nikon has been doing that since the D40 days. 18-55, 18-105, 55-200, and some low-end starter lenses.

They are cheap. but you get what you pay for.

Investing in high-end glass would benefit more in the future than a great body with a mediocre lens.

 

[equap]

new info on the new Sony A77 http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/10/unreleased-sony-alpha-a77-already-nominated-for-good-design-awar/

very nice.

the A77 will come with a 24 megapixel Exmor CMOS sensor, along with a translucent mirror that enables full-time continuous autofocus. Additionally, with the help of its new BIONZ engine, we have a "world's fastest" burst rate of 12 frames per second, which goes nicely alongside the camera's 60p and 24p video recording modes (presumably in AVCHD). What also caught our eyes was this "world's first" XGA OLED electronic viewfinder, while the A55 and A35 come with just LCD versions.

the next Canon 5D better be good :\

 

[Radec]

Sony going all out with these new cameras.

But I doubt they'll get popular cause their lenses are pretty expensive. :/

 

[Sennorin]

Ah, a question that I had wanted to ask forever: Do you *need* these special filters (UV, etc.) to make good photos or are those for special purposes only?

 

[planar1280]

Ah, a question that I had wanted to ask forever: Do you *need* these special filters (UV, etc.) to make good photos or are those for special purposes only?

you NEED a polarizer

 

[Radec]

Ah, a question that I had wanted to ask forever: Do you *need* these special filters (UV, etc.) to make good photos or are those for special purposes only?

Well if you want to add some drama or you want to make the skies pop out or use a slower shutter on daylight, then you need filters.

Just read anything useful here

For protection, always use a UV or protection filter on your lenses.

 

[luiztfc]

What about photography books for beginners? I plan on buying the following on Amazon, but I'd appreciate if you could list books that taught something to you or your favorite photography books (in the artistic sense).

Scott Kelby's Digital Photography Boxed Set, Volumes 1, 2, and 3 (pack)

Understanding Exposure, 3rd Edition: How to Shoot Great Photographs with Any Camera - Bryan Peterson

Learning to See Creatively: Design, Color & Composition in Photography - Bryan Peterson

The Camera (Ansel Adams Photography Series)

 

[itwasTuesday]

Gh1 died yesterday, think it might be the clock battery that can't be accessed without dis-assembly. The service book says you should be in a clean room to do it. Can't even find a place that sells this specific battery. Sadly I think I have to send to in to Panasonic now.

 

[planar1280]

What about photography books for beginners? I plan on buying the following on Amazon, but I'd appreciate if you could list books that taught something to you or your favorite photography books (in the artistic sense).

Scott Kelby's Digital Photography Boxed Set, Volumes 1, 2, and 3 (pack)

Understanding Exposure, 3rd Edition: How to Shoot Great Photographs with Any Camera - Bryan Peterson

Learning to See Creatively: Design, Color & Composition in Photography - Bryan Peterson

The Camera (Ansel Adams Photography Series)

THE book .....

 

[Gabyskra]

Ah, a question that I had wanted to ask forever: Do you *need* these special filters (UV, etc.) to make good photos or are those for special purposes only?

No, they're for special purposes only.

 

[Sennorin]

Thx for the replies. So would it be a good plan to start with a UV-filter lense (mostly for protection) and then, once I want more from my pictures (and have the money, since they´re pricey as I see), move on to a polarizer filter lense?

 

[cbox]

Yeah I have a UV on all my lenses. Just be careful when filter stacking, can introduce vignetting if you have too many.

 

[Flo_Evans]

new info on the new Sony A77 http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/10/unreleased-sony-alpha-a77-already-nominated-for-good-design-awar/

very nice.


the next Canon 5D better be good :\

OLED viewfinder is interesting... how does that work exactly? is there another C-MOS sensor in there or are they using some wizardry to give you a live view from the main sensor? It still has a mirror right?

 

[BlueTsunami]

OLED viewfinder is interesting... how does that work exactly? is there another C-MOS sensor in there or are they using some wizardry to give you a live view from the main sensor? It still has a mirror right?

I think its like throwing the Live View feed to the LCD but to the viewfinder instead. I'm not sure if the feed can be split between the two. The A77 has pelicle mirror which is very fast, lightweight and transparent.

 

[Borman]

I NEVER use a UV filter, unless Im shooting in conditions that will scratch my lens up, such as dirt or sand (or if my lens isnt weathersealed without one). It just hurts your image quality, and offers little protection. not that there arent situations where it might help take a bump, but there are just as many where, if the UV protector breaks, it might scratch your lens anyway. This goes double if you are shooting with bad UV filters, which most people do. Buy a decent one (Usually 50$ or more), and your image quality usually doesnt suffer too much, buy at cheap one, and you get all sorts of problems.


Edit: I use a lens hood on my expensive lens, which most come with, they provide a layer of protection while helping image quality. Basically, more glass in front of a lens is usually bad.

 

[SRG01]

The thing about kit lenses is that once you get something else, you will never use them. They become paper weights.

I don't find this to be the case with Pentax at all, considering that their kit lenses are very comparable to their high-end lenses.

 

[captive]

Thx for the replies. So would it be a good plan to start with a UV-filter lense (mostly for protection) and then, once I want more from my pictures (and have the money, since they´re pricey as I see), move on to a polarizer filter lense?

No. Most modern lenses are designed with the front element as the protection for the glass inside anyway. UV filters were popular with film because film didnt have UV protection. They aren't needed anymore, with film or digital. Cheap ones are just going to degrade the image quality and more expensive ones aren't worth it. If you bump your lens hard enough anyway with the filter on the front, glass is going to scratch glass. Use your lens hood to protect your front element.

Understand what you want to buy a polarizer for before you buy one. They aren't meant to be used all the time.

Here's what thom hogan has to say about it
http://www.bythom.com/filters.htm
and kirk tuck
http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011/05/keep-your-lenses-clean-dont-keep.html

As a Canonite I was hoping that Nikon would stick with the lower MP's and focus more on dynamic range and ISO to give Canon a little kick in the teeth. Instead, they have jumped on the megapixel race, which will be exacerbated further in the next generation of sensors.

Yea i've been saying this for while, i wish makers would focus on image quality instead of pure megapixels.(check this article out, specifically about tonality suckout) I wonder at 24mp on APSC how much quicker diffraction is going to set in. Also, doubling the mp from 12 to 24 doesn't actually double your resolution, I believe it only bumps it by 25%.

 

[Flo_Evans]

I think its like throwing the Live View feed to the LCD but to the viewfinder instead. I'm not sure if the feed can be split between the two. The A77 has pelicle mirror which is very fast, lightweight and transparent.

So is it like the fuji finepix100 ? (really neat camera!) http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/FujifilmX100/page6.asp

Can you switch between optical and OLED viewfinders?