Support NeoGAF

[Ty4on]

Edit: ^^^^^This too. For one it's a heavy lens and build quality looks a bit 90s.

Guys thanks for your opinions.

I am talking about the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens. - http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000EW8074/?tag=neogaf0e-20

I just got my 70-D so that's APS-C 6 months ago and I love it so I definitely won't be changing that anytime soon. I'm still an amateur anyway

P.S. I tend to only buy canon for now because I really like the in-camera lens correction profiles. I don't shoot RAW yet and never post-process my photos.

Thanks GAF.

Regarding FF I'm just throwing out stuff I find overlooked. I agree that right now with the cheapest FF bodies being 2k it probably doesn't make sense for you, but thinking of FF cameras as having a stop extra of light and DoF made a light turn on as I realized what I could save on lenses.

The 17-55 makes a lot more sense, I was wondering why you typed the 17-35 which is quite outdated
Here's a comparison I saw some time back. The Sigma 17-50 got less favorable reviews elsewhere*, but may be worth a look if the price is tempting.

*DXOMark Canon 17-55 and Sigma 17-50 Bonus: Canon 35 f2 IS and Sigma 18-35
Photozone Canon 17-55 and Sigma 17-50 Bonus: Canon 35 f2 IS and Sigma 18-35

I have the 20 1.8, its excellent.

I do kind of agree with your point though, most r&d and new lenses coming out are zooms. But then you have crazy expensive boutique lenses like the ziess otus line that blow everything away.

Lenses like that make me wish I was wealthier. It is not cheap, but still awesome value.

 

[RuGalz]

Samyang lenses score well but a couple times I tried them I ended up returning them, the color reproduction seem very boring to me. I must be missing something.

 

[SpyGuy239]

Rent it. I had one with my 7d, didn't really love it. Test charts and other peoples opinions can only get you so far, you gotta get your hands on it and really see if it works for you.

Thanks. Can you tell me what about it that you didn't like? Cheers!

Edit: ^^^^^This too. For one it's a heavy lens and build quality looks a bit 90s.

Regarding FF I'm just throwing out stuff I find overlooked. I agree that right now with the cheapest FF bodies being 2k it probably doesn't make sense for you, but thinking of FF cameras as having a stop extra of light and DoF made a light turn on as I realized what I could save on lenses.

The 17-55 makes a lot more sense, I was wondering why you typed the 17-35 which is quite outdated
Here's a comparison I saw some time back. The Sigma 17-50 got less favorable reviews elsewhere*, but may be worth a look if the price is tempting.

*DXOMark Canon 17-55 and Sigma 17-50 Bonus: Canon 35 f2 IS and Sigma 18-35
Photozone Canon 17-55 and Sigma 17-50 Bonus: Canon 35 f2 IS and Sigma 18-35


Lenses like that make me wish I was wealthier. It is not cheap, but still awesome value.

Thanks. I saw the Sigma, and was considering that too. But I think I will shell out the extra and stick with canon.

To be honest I still don't know what to do. They say the best camera/lens is the one you have with you ready to go. The convenience of the 17-55mm is really unparalleled, and most of all the f/2.8 at every focal length, that is just unreal. Then again, the image quality is still a concern for me, and was the primary reason I moved away from zooms and into primes.

Damn it. Any ideas what's the Bokeh like on the 17-55mm at f/2.8 at say 35mm?

 

[sankt-Antonio]

For anyone in the Mirrorless area, how are you all liking your cameras compared to owning DSLR's? I am extremely fascinated with these cameras and really considering purchasing a Sony A7 III or A7S II (If announced in the near future) since the A7 II looks great, but the terrible auto focus bothers me. Sony is SO CLOSE to making 'THE' camera to persuade more to move over from DSLR, but not yet. :S

Battery life sucks major ass, especially coming from DSLR. I would say the e-viewfinder is not "there" yet. And ergonomics are way worse on a small body like the A7compared to a somewhat decent sized DSLR.

BUT. All these cons don't really matter since the camera is so much more "pick up and go" friendly then these large DSLR's. I feel like ill have it with me much more.

Since i don't do Sports coverage the AF on my A7II is fast enough. Actually i would say it feels faster then on my A700 DSLR.

My guess is that in five years time DSLR's are going to be very niche / real pro / pure working tools (akin to the middle format Hasselblad cams). The whole consumer/prosumer marked will shift to mirror lens sooner or later imo.

 

[Flo_Evans]

Thanks. Can you tell me what about it that you didn't like? Cheers!

Well 1st off I am not really a fan of that zoom range. 17-55 crop is equivalent to a 24-70mm. It's not really wide, its not really long. It can be useful for certain situations like event coverage (weddings) but most people covering events professionally go with a 2 body setup, 1 wide zoom and 1 tele zoom body. This is kind of a personal preference, some people love it, I don't think its worth the cost/weight/speed penalty when a 50mm prime equivalent can do most of that work.

I found the build quality pretty poor. It feels like its made of really cheap plastic, but at the same time is heavy. The weight is all glass which is good, but I dropped it once and it confirmed my suspicion the plastic is not strong. I will say though I have dealt with both canon and nikon for lens repairs and canon has clearly better customer service.

AF speed was good but somewhat sloppy, MF (I primarily used it for video) is not great.

Bokeh is OK, not great, not bad. I find the bokeh of any stabilized lens to be not great. Again this is subjective, You may like it.

Distortion is pretty bad, this can be corrected in post (maybe canon has added this to their bodies by now IDK) but at a loss of resolution.

IDK, looking back through old photos with it I don't find many that I really like. That could be my fault though

Here is a pic I found of it on my video rig for no particular reason

 

[Ty4on]

Well 1st off I am not really a fan of that zoom range. 17-55 crop is equivalent to a 24-70mm.

27-85. Canon needs 15mm to get 24mm EQ.

 

[FStop7]

If you don't mind an adapter and manual focus (not an issue if you're shooting vid) then the Nikon 14-24 f2.8 is brilliant on Canon bodies, or at least so I'm told.

 

[alterno69]

I'm a fan of the 17-55, first good lens i bought and still one f the sharpest lenses i have owned. At 2.8 the bokeh is not amazing but that's what faster lenses are for. I think it's well worth it.


Edit: In other news, Sigma just announced a new 24mm 1.4 A lens, no price or release date yet but it should be a winner if the rest of their A line is anything to go by.

 

[ShadowKingpin]

Battery life sucks major ass, especially coming from DSLR. I would say the e-viewfinder is not "there" yet. And ergonomics are way worse on a small body like the A7compared to a somewhat decent sized DSLR.

BUT. All these cons don't really matter since the camera is so much more "pick up and go" friendly then these large DSLR's. I feel like ill have it with me much more.

Since i don't do Sports coverage the AF on my A7II is fast enough. Actually i would say it feels faster then on my A700 DSLR.

My guess is that in five years time DSLR's are going to be very niche / real pro / pure working tools (akin to the middle format Hasselblad cams). The whole consumer/prosumer marked will shift to mirror lens sooner or later imo.

Many thanks for the info!!! Yeah, I can see Mirrorless turning the tide in 5 or so years, but I have yet to be fully persuaded to move over. I don't do Sports, but I do a ton of portraits and really getting into photojournalism, so the AF isn't too bad of a thing, but I still want it. I'll just stick to my 6D for now and upgrade to one more DSLR in the next couple of years before I jump ship to Mirrorless.

 

[f0lken]

Hi guys

I have a question, what would be the best budget option to power studio flashes but on exteriors?, I remember seeing a couple of external batteries that go attached to the tripods on the flashes but can't find them anymore

 

[Flo_Evans]

Hi guys

I have a question, what would be the best budget option to power studio flashes but on exteriors?, I remember seeing a couple of external batteries that go attached to the tripods on the flashes but can't find them anymore

Can your strobes accept DC power? Or do you need an inverter?

 

[f0lken]

Can your strobes accept DC power? Or do you need an inverter?

They accept DC

 

[Rimshot]

So I went with an A7 not too long ago, the first make not the second, and I am just not feeling comfortable holding this camera. Anyone else here with longer fingers feeling that they can't really find a good place for them with this camera? Or is it something you just get over? Thinking about trading it in for an X-T1 that feels a lot better in the hand, but not sure that is a smart move for the image quality.

 

[FStop7]

I feel like one of the biggest drawbacks with the A7 family of cameras is that I'm not entirely convinced that Sony spent much time getting input from working photographers on things like ergonomics, menus, etc.

 

[Ty4on]

So I went with an A7 not too long ago, the first make not the second, and I am just not feeling comfortable holding this camera.

I've only briefly held it, but found it surprisingly comfortable. Have you tried holding the A7II?

 

[Rimshot]

I've only briefly held it, but found it surprisingly comfortable. Have you tried holding the A7II?

Haven't held the A7II, but that body is too expensive (in Sweden) for my budget. So I am not sure I want to see that it feels better

 

[Tablo]

So I went with an A7 not too long ago, the first make not the second, and I am just not feeling comfortable holding this camera. Anyone else here with longer fingers feeling that they can't really find a good place for them with this camera? Or is it something you just get over? Thinking about trading it in for an X-T1 that feels a lot better in the hand, but not sure that is a smart move for the image quality.

If you can't get amazing IQ from Fuji cameras and their lenses... you'll be fine switch to whatever you enjoy using the most

 

[Astral/H3X]

I want an a7 sooooo bad.

But I'm a poor peasant so I have to stick with what I have.

 

[ChopstickNinja]

If you can't get amazing IQ from Fuji cameras and their lenses... you'll be fine switch to whatever you enjoy using the most

I bought a fuji xt-1 late summer last year and have a lot of difficulty transitioning from a DSLR.

I'm still most comfortable using my 5D and can get the 'shot' really quick and efficiently. Whereas on the fuji I am still struggling with the controls and settings. I will say that when I get what I want from the Fuji, the quality is amazing, even coming from fullframe.

 

[tr4656]

Whereas on the fuji I am still struggling with the controls and settings.

What part of the controls?

 

[RuGalz]

well after all, I may actually consider FF (after some price drop)... It looks like the Pentax FF isn't much larger than my K3. While the A7 (I think?) in the background may be thinner and lighter, size difference isn't really large enough to be a bother and ergonomics will be much better for me. (I'm sure weight will be an issue a couple decades down the road but they will figure out all the quirks with MILC by then :lol Luckily, a few primes I have are FF compatible (28mm, 50mm, 100mm macro) and that's all I would bother to carry on a FF anyway. f2.8 zoom will stay with APSC when I travel w/ family.

 

[Ty4on]

Most DA Primes cover FF. Many are old designs in a new shell like FA 35 f2 -> DA 35 f2.4 and some like the DA* 300 and DA* 60-250 have patents showing that they were designed for an image circle with the radius 21.64mm (FF).

Sensor is rumored to be 36MP so I hope that means it won't be too expensive. APS-C crop on that would be ~15MP.

 

[captive]

Crazy that Canon is now doing 50mp, with diffraction and lens quality issues I didn't think 35mm manufacturers would go much above 40mp. They should have focused on image quality not resolution. And I agree with that statement for all manufacturers.

Also Olympus is doing a mode now that produces a 63mp RAW file, but only useful on a tripod and non moving subjects.

Crazy times we live in people. One thing is for sure, no one has ever had as good of cameras as we can get now.


For me, I think I'm going to sell all my Olympus gear, if anyone is interested.
Also going to sell Nikon 14-24 and 300f4 and upgrade to a 400f2.8 or 600f4, can't decide which.

 

[Ty4on]

Crazy that Canon is now doing 50mp, with diffraction and lens quality issues I didn't think 35mm manufacturers would go much above 40mp. They should have focused on image quality not resolution. And I agree with that statement for all manufacturers.

Still captures more detail even when it starts outresolving the lenses and with 50MP you get 12.5MP images with full color value per pixel. The pixel pitch in the 5DS is still smaller than in 24MP APS-C cameras. Sampling rate can't get too high and sensors don't need that big pixels nowadays. I just hope they upgrade the processing.

Lenses like the Otus also laugh at 50MP 35mm sensors (4.14µm pixel pitch).

 

[captive]

Still captures more detail even when it starts outresolving the lenses and with 50MP you get 12.5MP images with full color value per pixel.

Lenses like the Otus also laugh at 50MP 35mm sensors (4.14µm pixel pitch).

I understand that its still going to capture more detail, but at 50mp I would bet diffraction becomes visible right around F8 -f10, to some people

Also as someone that's used the best Medium format has to offer, Phase One IQ180, and the Nikon D800e, the lenses, pale in comparison to that of medium format. I'm talking about edge to edge performance, distortion, sharpness etc.

When you start adding more and more pixels, any and every flaw in the lenses will be magnified.

I think if you did a poll of Canon users and said would you rather have 50mp with the dynamic range that you currently have. Or better dynamic range with 36-42mp sensor. I Think the majority would take the latter option.

Resolution doesn't scale linearly either.

 

[Flo_Evans]

They accept DC

My dad has some sort of battery pack for his strobes but IDK what kind it is. I will ask him.

edit: Paul Buff mini lithium http://www.paulcbuff.com/vm120.php

$230

These are AC obviously, you should be able to find DC only ones cheaper.

 

[Ty4on]

I understand that its still going to capture more detail, but at 50mp I would bet diffraction becomes visible right around F8 -f10, to some people

[...]

If you go 100% and use the resolution that wasn't available at lower res, sure. With more resolution you have more freedom to downscale with less reduction in quality.

Issues with amplified faults feel artificial to me. It'll still look better than a lower MP camera and you can lower the resolution/size to hide imperfections. Even into diffraction territory you're still capturing more detail than before and blurry diffraction looks better to most than pixelation.

I feel 50MP also sounds much higher than it is. 50MP is just over 8k and 12.5MP is just over 4k. You see this from Canon's press material where 22MP pictures don't look as tiny as you'd expect. Like you said with it not scaling linearly I wouldn't mind it being something ridiculous like 200MP if processing, yields and dynamic range were still decent (2µm pixels, almost all phones have 1.1µm) because you'd get pixel perfect 50MP, 33MP, 25MP etc. resolutions.

I've got to add I'm not a professional who needs a lot of detail and am content with 12MP. I just see it as a great tool for those who need it to capture everything from the lens. I feel diffraction is also less relevant (using 6x7 for the 2x crop, I know digital medium format is 645) when a 6x7 camera at f16 has the same DOF and level of diffraction as a 35mm camera at f8 and modern lenses are so sharp.

 

[RuGalz]

Most DA Primes cover FF. Many are old designs in a new shell like FA 35 f2 -> DA 35 f2.4 and some like the DA* 300 and DA* 60-250 have patents showing that they were designed for an image circle with the radius 21.64mm (FF).

Sensor is rumored to be 36MP so I hope that means it won't be too expensive. APS-C crop on that would be ~15MP.

My DA primes are DA Ltd lenses. The 15mm and 35mm don't cover the full image circle unfortunately, but a couple other DA Ltd do. Well, it's still early. Who knows if it even makes sense to move to FF in my case. I'll have to wait and compare the resulting photos and decide if the improvements are worth it. Shallower DOF is useless for me so that takes one FF advantage out of the picture. Assuming the sensor is probably some derivative of D800's, the advantage is about 1stop across the board. So it's is still quite a bit of money for a bit more performance.

 

[HOMEBOY OVER HERE]

is the d610 decent for video? I want a nikon camera to take pictures for commercial/gallery prints and shoot like short documentary films and I think the d750 or d810 would be overkill.

 

[Flo_Evans]

is the d610 decent for video? I want a nikon camera to take pictures for commercial/gallery prints and shoot like short documentary films and I think the d750 or d810 would be overkill.

No aperture control during live view makes it rather annoying. You can use AF-D or MF lenses, or mess around exiting live view, changing aperture, then going back to live view...

I had the 600 and I found the video OK, 610 should be better at compression and downsampling but IDK.

I mostly use an external HDMI recorder now and avoid the compression, nikons downsampling has only gotten better, big jump from the 800 -> 810, I assume the same is true on the 610 series.

 

[Ty4on]

I mostly use an external HDMI recorder now and avoid the compression, nikons downsampling has only gotten better, big jump from the 800 -> 810, I assume the same is true on the 610 series.

I'm pretty sure only the shutter and AWB were changed with the D610. The name change was just so people would be sure they weren't getting an oily D600

 

[Astral/H3X]

Wait... Isn't it insane to use manual focusing for video? Seems like something that's very very very easy to totally mess up.

 

[f0lken]

My dad has some sort of battery pack for his strobes but IDK what kind it is. I will ask him.

edit: Paul Buff mini lithium http://www.paulcbuff.com/vm120.php

$230

These are AC obviously, you should be able to find DC only ones cheaper.

Oh wow, these are exactly like the ones I saw, thanks man, I'll look into them right now

 

[HOMEBOY OVER HERE]

Wait... Isn't it insane to use manual focusing for video? Seems like something that's very very very easy to totally mess up.

well they shot movies before auto focus was a thing

 

[Radec]

That Sigma 24 f1,4 looks amazing for its price.

If its as good as Nikon's 24 f1,4G then I'll probably sell my Sony 35 and get an adaptor for it. (Nikon Mount)

 

[alterno69]

That Sigma 24 f1,4 looks amazing for its price.

If its as good as Nikon's 24 f1,4G then I'll probably sell my Sony 35 and get an adaptor for it. (Nikon Mount)

They announced the price already?

 

[Radec]

They announced the price already?

Yes.

Sigma has attached prices to its very recently announced 24mm F1.4 Art lens, as well as the 150-600mm F5-6.3 super telephoto that appeared at Photokina. The full frame 24mm lens, which supports Canon, Nikon, and Sigma mounts, will be available in March at a price of $849. The 150-600mm - also designed for full frame bodies - will be priced at $1089 and will ship next month for Canon and Nikon mounts.

 

[Flo_Evans]

Wait... Isn't it insane to use manual focusing for video? Seems like something that's very very very easy to totally mess up.

The contrast detect AF when in live view is not as good as a human. DSLR DoF is so narrow it is constantly hunting. It can work OK on smaller sensors because the DoF is so much wider. But on a full frame if you want that shallow look you pretty much need to MF. You can stop down of course (and use wider angle lenses) but that kind of defeats the purpose of using a full frame for video.

MF is pretty difficult with modern AF lenses. The throw range is super short (for faster AF performance) and they usually aren't dampened like quality MF lenses. Almost everyone gets a follow focus, basically it gives you a large dampened knob and reduces the throw through gearing.

Also helpful is focus peaking, sometimes built in, sometimes through firmware hacks (magic lantern) or on external monitors.

My external monitor/hard drive recorder is much higher res and bigger than the rear lcd and has a focus peaking function. Makes it pretty easy. It also has all kinds of histograms and color scopes, awesome for setting WB and exposure.

http://www.atomos.com/ninja-blade/

 

[Astral/H3X]

The contrast detect AF when in live view is not as good as a human. DSLR DoF is so narrow it is constantly hunting. It can work OK on smaller sensors because the DoF is so much wider. But on a full frame if you want that shallow look you pretty much need to MF. You can stop down of course (and use wider angle lenses) but that kind of defeats the purpose of using a full frame for video.

MF is pretty difficult with modern AF lenses. The throw range is super short (for faster AF performance) and they usually aren't dampened like quality MF lenses. Almost everyone gets a follow focus, basically it gives you a large dampened knob and reduces the throw through gearing.

Also helpful is focus peaking, sometimes built in, sometimes through firmware hacks (magic lantern) or on external monitors.

My external monitor/hard drive recorder is much higher res and bigger than the rear lcd and has a focus peaking function. Makes it pretty easy. It also has all kinds of histograms and color scopes, awesome for setting WB and exposure.

http://www.atomos.com/ninja-blade/

Oh, I guess if I had it hooked up to an external monitor that's make it a lot easier. Most times when focusing I usually end up using the MF assist and peaking to make sure its focused juuuust right. I use manual exclusively, but it still takes me a second or two to focus things, particularly at narrower apertures. But if I had a bigger screen I can see it working much better.

Hrm I'm gonna look into that... Maybe I can just use my monitor haha.

 

[SpyGuy239]

Hi GAF, I'm back seeking more advice.

after much thought, I have decided to give up my Canon 35mm f/2 IS for a more functional walk around zoom that I will use while travelling.

I currently use a 70D.

All the while, I have been using lenses with Image Stabilization, so I am quite worried that without IS in the Sigma, (despite the f/1.8) I will get blurry shot. Any ideas on this?

Edit: I will use the lens when travelling and I mostly like to shoot things at the wide angle of things - Landscapes and buildings (75%) - followed by some portraits (15%) and some macro for stuff I have (10% or less). There will occasionally be some indoor photography when I step into a castle or museum or such

Also does anyone know if the Sigma 18-35mm still have auto focusing problems with the 70D? I remember there was quite an issue with it when it first came out.

If the 18-35mm doesn't work out then I might just have to spring for the canon 17-55mm which is supposed to be stellar lens as well. I'm a bit torn on what to pick to be honest, so opinions on this would be really helpful! I don't really need the zoom range between 35mm and 55mm.

Thanks guys!

 

[Flo_Evans]

Wide angle will show less motion blur just aim for 1/250 or higher shutter speed. Work on your release, think like a sniper- breath out and squeeze the trigger.

I would go for the 1.8 personally. Faster lens is better than stabilization imho.

 

[Ty4on]

Wide angle will show less motion blur just aim for 1/250 or higher shutter speed.

I think that's a little extreme for low light photography

If I don't need to capture a moment and need a long shutter speed I take a bunch of shots with delayed shutter. I think I've managed 1/6th handheld. It'll never be as good as with VR where full second shutter speeds can be possible, but pressing down the shutter button is the main cause of shake. Shouldn't need saying, but don't do that with moving subjects unless you want them blurry.

On film it's a different story for me and I like to be double the focal length if I can. 1/250th+ should be great in good light and then you're sure that they're all sharp.
Edit: That one roll of 1600 film was quite liberating.

 

[Kraftwerk]

Sold my X100 and nown i am looking to follow the plan I had a year ago and get myself something for video.

At first I was debating between the 6D and the GH4. Then I saw.the black magic pocket cinema camera. It blew away.

The image quality after color grading is stunning.

BUT....


As someone.who has never done color grading before, is it a bad idea ? Should I just get something else and.learn everything else when it comes to video, instead of adding a difficult process such as color grading?

The.black magic price is amazing, but I will have to get a mic and an image stabilisation lensen for it, which will end.up costing the same as a 6D with a sigma 50 1.4 lens

Budget is 2000

Open to any and all recommendations

 

[alterno69]

As a current owner of a Black Magic Cinema Camera and former owner of a 5D MK III, the quality, sharpness and dynamic range, not to mention the native codec in BM cameras kicks any DSLR's ass. No contest, if you're not shooting in low light often go for it.

 

[SpyGuy239]

Does the Sigma 18-35mm still have Auto focus problems with the Canon 70D?

I really want a hassle free experience after the price I paid and would also appreciate not having to return my first copy for another one because it has AF issues.

I definitely don't want to have to pay extra for a Sigma Lens dock and start learning how to tweak the focus of the lens when I don't even begin to know where to start or have time to go and learn this (photography is just a casual hobby, life takes over everything else)

It seems this issue is hit and miss everywhere I look on the internet. So I reallty can't decide.

Appreciate the help GAF.

 

[FStop7]

I've kind of decided that I need a 35mm film camera in my life. I'm leaning toward a Leica M6 TTL. They can be had for $1,000 - $1,500 depending on how "complete" the kit is, if it's been recently serviced, etc. I think the toughest part is going to be growing accustomed to the lack of instant feedback and a max shutter speed of 1/1,000.

 

[sankt-Antonio]

One question, with lightroom being able to identify my lens, and with a klick of a button, correcting vignetting and barrel distortion, why should i (theoreticaly) spend more money on lenses that are naturally better at these two things?

I mean, the 35mmm lens i bought last week got points deducted in reviews because it is not that good at these two aspects. But isn't that a non issue anyway?

 

[RuGalz]

Correcting distortion means the software is stretching some pixels and squeezing some pixels. Correcting vignetting means edges getting exposure boost become slightly noisier. Does it really matter? Yes and no, depends on what you use the photos for or how much you strive for the perfect pixels.

 

[captive]

Correcting distortion means the software is stretching some pixels and squeezing some pixels. Correcting vignetting means edges getting exposure boost become slightly noisier. Does it really matter? Yes and no, depends on what you use the photos for or how much you strive for the perfect pixels.

Boom, this. I'll take well corrected lenses over software correction every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

 

[thenexus6]

I just got the Canon 18-200mm 3.5 - 5.6 the other week. Anyone here use it much? Seems to have decent enough things said about it online.