NathanMcMahon
Banned
You can't beat free, so, awesome!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Official Camera Equipment Megathread
- Thread starter demon
- Start date
- Status
Ace Harding
Member
I need some help making a decision:
I'm new to DSLR's, though have some experience with SLR photography (from about 10 years ago).
I'm buying the Canon T3i, but am debating whether to buy the camera with the 18-55 kit lens, or whether to buy the body only and get the 1.4 50mm as my prime and buy a zoom farther down the road.
I'm having a baby soon, and will probably be doing a lot of newborn portrait stuff. I'm hoping the 50mm prime could do the job well, but I'm wondering if we might miss the zoom. There's also the 18-135 kit lens, which is a $100 upgrade.
The prices I'm looking at are:
1) $600 for body + 18-55 kit lens
2) $700 for body + 18-135 kit lens
3) $850 for body + 55mm f/1.4
So is that extra $250 worth it (in the long run especially) for the better IQ of the 50mm fixed lens? Are the Canon kit zooms totally fine and I won't really notice the difference? Am I going to need zoom to take pictures of a baby for the first year or so? Is option 2 with the 18-135 kit lens the best idea to start, then later buy the 50 for my prime?
I'm new to DSLR's, though have some experience with SLR photography (from about 10 years ago).
I'm buying the Canon T3i, but am debating whether to buy the camera with the 18-55 kit lens, or whether to buy the body only and get the 1.4 50mm as my prime and buy a zoom farther down the road.
I'm having a baby soon, and will probably be doing a lot of newborn portrait stuff. I'm hoping the 50mm prime could do the job well, but I'm wondering if we might miss the zoom. There's also the 18-135 kit lens, which is a $100 upgrade.
The prices I'm looking at are:
1) $600 for body + 18-55 kit lens
2) $700 for body + 18-135 kit lens
3) $850 for body + 55mm f/1.4
So is that extra $250 worth it (in the long run especially) for the better IQ of the 50mm fixed lens? Are the Canon kit zooms totally fine and I won't really notice the difference? Am I going to need zoom to take pictures of a baby for the first year or so? Is option 2 with the 18-135 kit lens the best idea to start, then later buy the 50 for my prime?
devon the dude
Member
I posted a while back about shooting a friends wedding and got some good feedback from you guys. The wedding itself is on an orchard in september, so most likey natural light with terrible shadows from the trees, and the reception is in a shop/barn, not sure what the lighting will be there.
Here is what I think I'll be going with.
Nikon D5100-
Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 (rental)
Nikon sb-700 (rental)
nikon d3100
Nikon 50mm f1.8
nikon sb-400
I may also have a friend shoot it with me with another d5100 and maybe 35mm prime or kit lens. Not sure what she has in terms of lenses
Will this suffice for a non-pro who has no experience with wedding photography?
Also have a gopro hero 3 silver that I may find some use for
Here is what I think I'll be going with.
Nikon D5100-
Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 (rental)
Nikon sb-700 (rental)
nikon d3100
Nikon 50mm f1.8
nikon sb-400
I may also have a friend shoot it with me with another d5100 and maybe 35mm prime or kit lens. Not sure what she has in terms of lenses
Will this suffice for a non-pro who has no experience with wedding photography?
Also have a gopro hero 3 silver that I may find some use for
NathanMcMahon
Banned
I'm not a a fan of the 50mm. Not worth the price IMO. I also don't like the standard kit lens or the 18-135mm. But if that's what you've narrowed it down to, I'd go for the 18-135mm as it affords the best overall reach for a variety of circumstances.
devon the dude
Member
I'd go with a 35mm prime over a 50mm, I've got both and prefer the 35mm when indoors. You won't have to "step back" as far
I bought an M from B&H as well.
But it cost US$50 shipping, and then got stung for ~US$100 in customs duties.
Still, It's cheaper than here, but I guess I have kind of warranty issues should it be a dud. Damn it!
The 22/2 pancake is pretty damn good. It is a poor man's X100 with faster AF. Too bad it came with the latest firmware so I couldn't install Magic Lantern on it.
That's good to hear. In future I hope to get the ef adaptor and use my other lenses from time to time.
Chairmanchuck
Member
Hey guys.
My birthday is coming soon and I am looking for new equipment for my camera.
I already have this:
D5100 Body
18-55 VR Kit Lens
55-200 Telelens
Manfrotto Tripod
I already choosed an ambient light filter and finally a camera bag, though I am not sure which one yet. I dont really want to spend that much, like for a new objective.
But I really like landscape-scenery photos and architectural photos of asian temples and such things. So any suggestions?
My birthday is coming soon and I am looking for new equipment for my camera.
I already have this:
D5100 Body
18-55 VR Kit Lens
55-200 Telelens
Manfrotto Tripod
I already choosed an ambient light filter and finally a camera bag, though I am not sure which one yet. I dont really want to spend that much, like for a new objective.
But I really like landscape-scenery photos and architectural photos of asian temples and such things. So any suggestions?
Its a tough call depending on your budget, if you want to go down the landscape route on a budget look at a polarising filter and maybe ND or graduated filters for your 18-55 lens. For a bigger budget maybe look at a wide angle lens like the sigma 10-20mm or the tokina equivalent.
Otherwise I'd recommend to anyone that they try out the Nikkor 35mm 1.8 DX lens, its a fantastic lens for the price and a prime lens like that will teach you allot about framing pictures. this was shot with that 35mm:
Edit: just re-read your post, your on a budget so get a polarising filter and maybe a cheap cokin grad filter set for your landscapes
minasodaboy
Member
I would definitely go with the 35mm for versatility. You can always get closer to someone, but you can't always get further way.
This isn't a baby, but almost everything on my cat blog was shot with a 35mm and my d5100 indoors. So actually a pretty good comparison.
Happy Cinco de Meow
Our wedding was at an orchard in July so the days were longer, but I would definitely recommend getting as fast a lens as possible, a decent prime and a speedlight. You are going to be needing to go in and out of the shadows a lot, plus I'm guessing you'll be indoors too.
I use this for my d5100 inside a messenger bag. It works great and fits a 35mm, 15-55mm and 55-200mm as long as one of the lenses is on the body.
Yes! This lens will take you anywhere, in any light. For the money you can't find a better value.
So playing with the eos m.
It's incredible! Opens up new avenues for photography. The touh screen shutter is something new and provides some new options. Tapping on the screen anywhere to focus there and capture the image in one go means you can quickly move focus and snap.
The af is slightly slow compared to an SLR obviously, but every camera you need to grow and adapt.
My lens came with free dust and they show up in clear areas at f/16-22, but perhaps I don't care since I'll likely use it for f/2. It does bug me but since I already got stung for taxes and duties I really don't want to pay more. And I have to get over my hang ups about this sort of stuff.
The sensor is pretty amazing. Useable ISP to 6400. It's grainier but not crazy bad. Iso25600 is near useless though.
It's incredible! Opens up new avenues for photography. The touh screen shutter is something new and provides some new options. Tapping on the screen anywhere to focus there and capture the image in one go means you can quickly move focus and snap.
The af is slightly slow compared to an SLR obviously, but every camera you need to grow and adapt.
My lens came with free dust and they show up in clear areas at f/16-22, but perhaps I don't care since I'll likely use it for f/2. It does bug me but since I already got stung for taxes and duties I really don't want to pay more. And I have to get over my hang ups about this sort of stuff.
The sensor is pretty amazing. Useable ISP to 6400. It's grainier but not crazy bad. Iso25600 is near useless though.
MagicWithEarvin
Member
I want to upgrade to a better lens. I have the Canon f/1.4 50mm lens with a 60D.
What's the next best upgrade? My budget is around $500-$700. Thanks.
What's the next best upgrade? My budget is around $500-$700. Thanks.
I should be doing hw
Member
So amazon is still selling the Canon EOS M for $299 and I'm thinking of biting, but I live in Australia. Does anyone know if I would run into any power or comparability issues by importing it or would a socket converter suffice? Same thing goes for buying batteries as well I guess.
Chiggs
Gold Member
I can't really answer your question, but I just snagged the Canon EOS M with the 18-55MM lens. The price is just too good, and the new firmware is so much better for AF. Night and day difference.
Please tell me you updated the firmware? AF is muuuuch better.
Jpeg from camera or Raw then post converted?
NathanMcMahon
Banned
Not quite sure what you mean by upgrade? Are you ditching the 1.4?
I'm in New Zealand and I got one from B&H. I just use a socket adaptor, the power adaptor is multi-voltage. I imagine batteries are the same the world over, just the charger is different, but as I said, just an adaptor.
It came with 2.0.2
RAW. Just default conversion via Aperture.
Still considering the return.
NathanMcMahon
Banned
This is a great site that has compiled all of the best photog resources on the internet.
http://www.photostartsheet.com/
http://www.photostartsheet.com/
NathanMcMahon
Banned
Got the Shakes
Member
I second this. I bought one in January and I love it.
Depends on what you are looking for.
Edit: to me this is a steal if you don't mind red
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00BCNWEPS/?tag=neogaf0e-20 (note that lens it comes with is NOT weather sealed)NathanMcMahon
Banned
Incoming worthless 5d Classic recommendation.
Really? Why you have to be hating on the 5D.
NathanMcMahon
Banned
I don't. It's an outstanding camera but not good for a beginner who is looking for an entry level DSLR. When people want to start off with something simple it isn't worth throwing around FF and Crop and all of that junk as they probably won't have a clue about what any of it really means. The basics should be acquired and then expand from there. The t4i is a great beginner camera that is easy to use and offers the most options for someone starting out. Right now deals are always popping up where you can walk-away with the t4i, the 18-55, and the 55-250 for close to $500-600. That's a beginner kit and lets the buyer see what they may or may not like. Just my two cents.
First of all, nowadays there is no bad beginner SLR from any brand (besides that Pentax toy camera).
I think your angst toward the OG 5D is unwarranted.
NathanMcMahon
Banned
No, we just disagree on what constitutes a good beginner DSLR. And there is no angst, just keeping someone from starting out being inundated with useless recommendations.
Disagree on what? I haven't said what is a good beginner SLR yet. What are we disagreeing on?
NathanMcMahon
Banned
Tino, your previous post implied I was wrong in regards to the 5D. You do see that don't you? You falsely imply some sort of angst against the 5D when I clearly stated I have none except for classifying it as a beginners camera which is directly what I referenced and said.
NathanMcMahon
Banned
agreed.
this is surprisingly common. I've run into lots and lots of beginners that have 7Ds(back when they were new, to D800's now. Whatever floats their boat i guess.
Thanks to whomever posted about the clearance EOS-M prices, I also ordered one.
However, I chose the 18-55mm kit. Yes, I'm sure the 22mm pancake is better but I watched a few AF speed comparison videos and the 18-55mm has considerably faster AF. Seeing as my other camera is a 1D3 with L lenses... Well you can see why I am used to faster AF rather than slow.
I also am really enjoying this camera. IQ is great! $349, small size (This is not much bigger than the sx260 I had a while ago). With the 22mm pancake this thing would be miniscule.
AF is not bad (yes, I'm on 2.0.2) Not great either but I was not expecting it. It was a tough choice between this and a Nikon 1-series camera. I've used those as well and they are great cameras. Smaller sensor, true, but they take phenomenal pics.
Just been using the Auto mode until I get a little acquinted with the camera. This thing puts out massive JPG file sizes. I had a couple over 10MB, not really sure what that's from.
Really enjoy the touch to focus and shoot. Nifty feature!
This camera is really slow to take one photo until you can take another, but it does have a burst mode which takes pics pretty fast... Interesting. Not sure what is going on there.
Excited to have something that shoots video too, my 1D3 does not. This also will AF while shooting. You can depress the shutter to initiate it manually just a little bit quicker than it picks up on itself. Seems like it should be a solid camera for video compared to other still cameras that shoot video.
and just a few sample pics from my first evening with the camera, for anyone interested:
Nice pics! Yes, I'm pretty impressed. I'm sending mine back for a replacement for dust in the lens, but I liked it for the short time and can't wait to get the replacement.
The neat thing is that you can one day buy the adaptor for EF lenses, and just have a second body. Sure it's kind of ridiculous to have a minscule body on such a large lens arrangement, but it's better than nothing.
Also imagine the video you can shoot with your L-lenses!
QualityPixel
Banned
For maybe 7 years or so I've been die hard SLR user, and my main camera has been the Nikon D300 with the older Sigma 24-70mm F/2.8 lens. That has been a great setup for everything I do except at mobility. I've been eying mirrorless cameras since their introduction but decided against APC mirrorless because the cameras and lenses would not be too large a combination and against the Nikon 1 due to the lack of depth of field because of the tiny sensor (and I wanted more resolution than 10mp).
Well last weekend I finally had the money and found a (nearly) perfect combo of body and lens. Got a Panasonic GF3 with the 14-42mm power zoom lens. This combination gives me a large 4/3 sensor and a decent range zoom lens that is pocketable (depending on how loose the jeans are). The eBay'er I got it from had been holding onto it since black friday and they listed it for a price that was too good to pass up, and I can justify taking with me on my motorcycle up into the mountains with out too much worry.
The good: I shoot only RAW and the picture quality from the camera is pretty good for a camera that came out in 2011. The image sensor is not quite as sensitive as the D300, but should be quite suitable for what I want. The build quality is quite good for the camera body, and the mechanical shutter sounds and feels nice. The lens sharpness is just fine, it wont win any awards, but it also probably wont disappoint. The auto focus is also super fast in anything other than a dimly lit room (at least with the PZ). The touch screen works pretty well as well.
The bad: The in lens image stabilization is the only thing I found disappointing about the lens. I found it gives only 1 or 2 "stops" of stabilization which would make it the least effective on lens or in body stabilization I've ever used. I've even found the Nikon 18-55 and 55-200mm VR lenses to be 2-4 "stops" effective. The camera UI is also a bit disappointing, and it's taken me since Monday to finally get used to it, and adjusted to my liking.
So for anyone looking for a ultra compact Micro 4/3 setup, I can say for sure, get the 14-42mm PZ lens because of it's compact size, then get the camera body you want. In the future I will probably upgrade the body to one of the newer more "enthusiast" class cameras or when I can get the Olympus OM-D for cheap.
For laughs, here it is next to my D300
Well last weekend I finally had the money and found a (nearly) perfect combo of body and lens. Got a Panasonic GF3 with the 14-42mm power zoom lens. This combination gives me a large 4/3 sensor and a decent range zoom lens that is pocketable (depending on how loose the jeans are). The eBay'er I got it from had been holding onto it since black friday and they listed it for a price that was too good to pass up, and I can justify taking with me on my motorcycle up into the mountains with out too much worry.
The good: I shoot only RAW and the picture quality from the camera is pretty good for a camera that came out in 2011. The image sensor is not quite as sensitive as the D300, but should be quite suitable for what I want. The build quality is quite good for the camera body, and the mechanical shutter sounds and feels nice. The lens sharpness is just fine, it wont win any awards, but it also probably wont disappoint. The auto focus is also super fast in anything other than a dimly lit room (at least with the PZ). The touch screen works pretty well as well.
The bad: The in lens image stabilization is the only thing I found disappointing about the lens. I found it gives only 1 or 2 "stops" of stabilization which would make it the least effective on lens or in body stabilization I've ever used. I've even found the Nikon 18-55 and 55-200mm VR lenses to be 2-4 "stops" effective. The camera UI is also a bit disappointing, and it's taken me since Monday to finally get used to it, and adjusted to my liking.
So for anyone looking for a ultra compact Micro 4/3 setup, I can say for sure, get the 14-42mm PZ lens because of it's compact size, then get the camera body you want. In the future I will probably upgrade the body to one of the newer more "enthusiast" class cameras or when I can get the Olympus OM-D for cheap.
For laughs, here it is next to my D300
StopMakingSense
Member
Had my first lens drop ever. Whoops! Nikkor 35-70mm 2.8d. About 3 feet onto concrete. Filter thread are is bent a bit, and a little friction on the focus and zoom, but none the worse for wear, otherwise. Test shots are clean. Phew.
Switching lenses between d200 and d800, and forgot to screw one of them on! I'll try not to do that again. lol oh my.
Switching lenses between d200 and d800, and forgot to screw one of them on! I'll try not to do that again. lol oh my.
EOS M guys, this is a good price for the EF-M -> EF adapter.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/290909317557?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649
I don't even have any ef lens yet. I am creating a "Canon 70-200mm f/4" keyword alert on a deals site so I won't miss the next Canonn refurb sales.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/290909317557?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649
I don't even have any ef lens yet. I am creating a "Canon 70-200mm f/4" keyword alert on a deals site so I won't miss the next Canonn refurb sales.
Eughhh I dropped my 70-200 is mk ii during a wedding shoot right onto tile from about 3 ft too. It sucks, BAD. Thankfully yours still works! I was lucky too, the mounting ring and hood took all the force.
That's the worst feeling ever. I dropped both my beloved 35mm and camera around 4 feet onto concrete once while switching lenses. I thought I had the camera strap around my neck to swap lenses so I let go of my hands. Luckily just a little scratch on the side of the camera and the lens was completely unharmed, being a small prime lens and full metal construction and landed on its side instead of at an angle helped. I'm always double checking when switching now...
Anyone know this? I'm thinking of getting it on sale tomorrow.
Don't know about this lens in particular, but likely it isn't a true macro lens.
A macro lens just means you can focus closer (shorter minimum focus distance), to the point where the object is 1:1 on the sensor size.
Not sure what the closest distance on that lens is.
Macro lenses also tend to have large range focus rings, to accommodate for minute adjustments in focus, and thus have slower AF mechanisms.
As for 'blurry' backgrounds, this tends to come from wide aperture lenses. That lens is not particularly wide. That said, the normal issue isn't to get blurry backgrounds with macro photography like for insects. Rather, the issue is the exact opposite.
Since you are so close to your subject, the DOF is so narrow, measured in millimetres, the problems is getting enough of the subject in focus with narrow aperture.
QualityPixel
Banned
The Tamron 55-200mm lens does have a pretty decent macro reproduction ratio of 1:3.5 at 200mm
So if you zoom in, then get close you will have a very out of focus background. You don't need a super expensive wide apertured lens to get decent zoom macro images.
So if you zoom in, then get close you will have a very out of focus background. You don't need a super expensive wide apertured lens to get decent zoom macro images.
NathanMcMahon
Banned
Posted this in the pick-up thread but figured you guys would get a kick out of it too. It's Canon's first ever AF zoom lens. The motor is beastly. I've never wanted to convert an FD before but may try it or buy the adapter now as this looks like a blast to play around with. My second white lens!
I was looking around at polarizing filters and noticed that B&H still has stock of the "older" Hoya HD filters and quite a discount (i'm assuming clearing stock for the HD2 filters). Looked up the difference between the two and it appears the only difference is the warranty included with the new Hoya filters, everything else is exactly the same (but $90 cheaper assuming while stock lasts).
If anyone is in the market for one, they are a pretty good deal
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/574287-REG/Hoya_XHD77CRPL_77mm_Circular_Polarizing_HD.html
If anyone is in the market for one, they are a pretty good deal
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/574287-REG/Hoya_XHD77CRPL_77mm_Circular_Polarizing_HD.html
- Status