DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> i cant decide what to do - new camera.
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 100, (reverse)
AuthorThread
09/14/2012 01:03:32 PM · #26
Originally posted by mike_311:

anyone ever use sigma 15-30?


Stick with the "L" glass, keep the system consistent. 17-40mm will do you just fine. 16-35mm even better, but it's WAY pricier.
09/14/2012 01:13:52 PM · #27
Of course there is the new FF 6D on the horizon but I doubt that will hit your tax year requirements...
09/14/2012 01:24:03 PM · #28
yeah that's the rumor, its supposed to hit in November i was considering holding out for it, but its going to be an entry level FF, will it be cheaper than i can get the 5dii for right now? will the features be more advanced? it surely wont have the weather sealing or durability...

09/14/2012 01:29:02 PM · #29
ok, from canon rumors:

Canon EOS 6D Specs?

A new 20mp sensor
Full Frame
4.5fps
ISO Range 100-25600
DIGIC5+
APS-C Sized body
Weathersealed
SD Card
Built-in Wifi & GPS
11 AF Points, f/2.8 Cross-type in the center.
3″ LCD
Full HD (1920×1080)
Available December 2012
Price: $1999 USD Body Only (Speculated price)
09/14/2012 01:29:43 PM · #30
if that the case, i'll stick with the 5dii
09/14/2012 01:46:56 PM · #31
Originally posted by mike_311:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

The Tamron 28-75mm is a very nice lens on the cropped sensor, but it doesn't stand up well to full frame, unfortunately. I loved it on my 20D, but I almost never used it on the 5D because its performance nearer the edges just wasn't good at all. So be aware of that.


ok, then i sell the 60d, 28-75 and the 10-22 and buy a 5dii net cost to me $0

that leaves me with money to blow for taxes purposes to get a 17-40L

:)

edit unless there is another lens that mounts a FF that will be a 10mm equivalent and i can get a 17-40 later


The Sigma 12-24 is a FF lens. It's the widest rectilinear lens with FF coverage available.
09/14/2012 01:54:05 PM · #32
Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by mike_311:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

The Tamron 28-75mm is a very nice lens on the cropped sensor, but it doesn't stand up well to full frame, unfortunately. I loved it on my 20D, but I almost never used it on the 5D because its performance nearer the edges just wasn't good at all. So be aware of that.


ok, then i sell the 60d, 28-75 and the 10-22 and buy a 5dii net cost to me $0

that leaves me with money to blow for taxes purposes to get a 17-40L

:)

edit unless there is another lens that mounts a FF that will be a 10mm equivalent and i can get a 17-40 later


The Sigma 12-24 is a FF lens. It's the widest rectilinear lens with FF coverage available.


Be warned, it's a somewhat shitty lens optically, I use mine stopped down to f/13 or so most of the time to get decent quality.

With that being said? There's nothing else like it, very much a unique lens on FF.
09/14/2012 01:58:25 PM · #33
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by mike_311:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

The Tamron 28-75mm is a very nice lens on the cropped sensor, but it doesn't stand up well to full frame, unfortunately. I loved it on my 20D, but I almost never used it on the 5D because its performance nearer the edges just wasn't good at all. So be aware of that.


ok, then i sell the 60d, 28-75 and the 10-22 and buy a 5dii net cost to me $0

that leaves me with money to blow for taxes purposes to get a 17-40L

:)

edit unless there is another lens that mounts a FF that will be a 10mm equivalent and i can get a 17-40 later


The Sigma 12-24 is a FF lens. It's the widest rectilinear lens with FF coverage available.


Be warned, it's a somewhat shitty lens optically, I use mine stopped down to f/13 or so most of the time to get decent quality.

With that being said? There's nothing else like it, very much a unique lens on FF.


It's not a "L" lens, but my copy isn't that bad. No UWA lens will be tack sharp corner to corner.
09/14/2012 02:05:27 PM · #34
Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by mike_311:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

The Tamron 28-75mm is a very nice lens on the cropped sensor, but it doesn't stand up well to full frame, unfortunately. I loved it on my 20D, but I almost never used it on the 5D because its performance nearer the edges just wasn't good at all. So be aware of that.


ok, then i sell the 60d, 28-75 and the 10-22 and buy a 5dii net cost to me $0

that leaves me with money to blow for taxes purposes to get a 17-40L

:)

edit unless there is another lens that mounts a FF that will be a 10mm equivalent and i can get a 17-40 later


The Sigma 12-24 is a FF lens. It's the widest rectilinear lens with FF coverage available.


Be warned, it's a somewhat shitty lens optically, I use mine stopped down to f/13 or so most of the time to get decent quality.

With that being said? There's nothing else like it, very much a unique lens on FF.


It's not a "L" lens, but my copy isn't that bad. No UWA lens will be tack sharp corner to corner.


At f/13 + it's not too bad. I'm just a snob and a pixel peeper.
09/14/2012 02:22:17 PM · #35
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by mike_311:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

The Tamron 28-75mm is a very nice lens on the cropped sensor, but it doesn't stand up well to full frame, unfortunately. I loved it on my 20D, but I almost never used it on the 5D because its performance nearer the edges just wasn't good at all. So be aware of that.


ok, then i sell the 60d, 28-75 and the 10-22 and buy a 5dii net cost to me $0

that leaves me with money to blow for taxes purposes to get a 17-40L

:)

edit unless there is another lens that mounts a FF that will be a 10mm equivalent and i can get a 17-40 later


The Sigma 12-24 is a FF lens. It's the widest rectilinear lens with FF coverage available.


Be warned, it's a somewhat shitty lens optically, I use mine stopped down to f/13 or so most of the time to get decent quality.

With that being said? There's nothing else like it, very much a unique lens on FF.


It's not a "L" lens, but my copy isn't that bad. No UWA lens will be tack sharp corner to corner.


At f/13 + it's not too bad. I'm just a snob and a pixel peeper.


I guess that's a bit better than being a measurebator...
09/14/2012 02:24:31 PM · #36
I read the original question.

The 60d is an incredible camera. Its pop-flash and swivel screen also make it more useful in certain scenarios than the "pro" stuff. I had it as part of my kit until i had to give it up to fund of a much much more powerful computer than my current one.

If you want to upgrade to a full frame, just be aware of what you'll be switching into. Your 85mm will become a much more usable portrait lens. You'll gain some more low light freedom, but you may have to have a better handle (with the mkii) on manual focus in low light. You'll lose a handy trigger in your popuflash (important if you don't own radios) and your swivel will no longer be your friend. As i understand it, the lcd from the 5dmkii is older and not as extreme angle friendly either. Comparing the 5dmkiii and the 60d, you get a little more room in shadows to reveal detail, but i don't know how that plays in 5dmkii.

The 5dmkii will allow you to work in a bit more low light conditions, and yea, the bokeh will be a bit different. Here's a biggie though, If youre going to use full frame, you gotta have excellent lenses. You will likely have to invest in something that has excellent corners - otherwise you'll see that vignette especially as you open that lens wider.

I've heard nightmare stories about backup bodies saving/breaking lives and i m sure they do. When i have an event that merits that kind of insurance, i rent a second body now. Otherwise, usually i m at either a studio where i can rent a second body if mine fails, or if its on location paid shoot- my release form includes a ( equipment failure can happen, i m not responsible) plug. While i sorely miss my 60d, i m not superworried about backup issues.

I know I haven't told you which way to go, but i've laid out the pro's and cons the way i see them. Hope that helps?

Message edited by author 2012-09-14 14:27:12.
09/14/2012 02:37:42 PM · #37
You know, the thing about UWA rectilinear lenses is that it's a game of diminishing returns:

35mm: 63°
24mm: 84°
20mm: 94°
16mm: 108°
14mm: 114°

It gets exponentially more difficult (and expensive) to produce a high-performing UWA lens as the focal length decreases (for a given sensor format). Conversely, you don't gain that much in AoV. And you get horrible distortion at the corners, particularly for circular features which get stretched into ghastly oblate caricatures of themselves.
When I want to do *real* WA work, I shoot at 24mm and above and stitch.
09/14/2012 03:45:41 PM · #38
Someone else recommended to me to forgo the WA and just stitch together using my 50mm.
09/14/2012 04:28:09 PM · #39
Originally posted by mike_311:

Someone else recommended to me to forgo the WA and just stitch together using my 50mm.


It's just not the same, though. There's something special about the optical transformation that takes place when shooting a landscape, in particular, with an ultra-wide. Or at least, a landscape with foreground elements. So there's an optimum time for each.

Message edited by author 2012-09-14 16:28:20.
09/14/2012 04:34:25 PM · #40
Originally posted by mike_311:

Someone else recommended to me to forgo the WA and just stitch together using my 50mm.


Yep. You've got nearly 40° of coverage across the frame, so if you go portrait and shoot a single strip at, say 3:1 aspect, you can cover 120° horizontally and nearly 40° vertically. that's more horizontal coverage than a 14mm lens. And you'd wind up with a lot more resolution in the file. The give-back, of course, is that motion in the frame can be challenging, as can parallax for objects close to the camera (for hand-held panos).
09/15/2012 12:28:36 PM · #41
ok, so i have a chance to buy a 5Dc, for those who have used both a 5Dc and 5dii, tell what im going to miss going with a 5dc over a 5dii. im not so concerned with resolution, 12.8mp is plenty for me. im more concerned with ISO and AF ability.
09/15/2012 12:40:24 PM · #42
i shoot with both regularly

5d is a great camera AF is identical, things that are better on mk11, image quality, lcd screen, iso performance 5d classic is about 3200 limit i think, 5d mk2 you can happily shoot at 6400 with not much noise

no video, im not a video guy but it is fun thing to have now and again

but 5d classic takes beutiful pictures with good glass, i feel sorry for mine that it doesnt get as much use now. need to use it more hehe

09/15/2012 12:44:58 PM · #43
Originally posted by mike_311:

ok, so i have a chance to buy a 5Dc, for those who have used both a 5Dc and 5dii, tell what im going to miss going with a 5dc over a 5dii. im not so concerned with resolution, 12.8mp is plenty for me. im more concerned with ISO and AF ability.


Check this page. At base ISO, the 5Dii has very slightly *higher* noise than the 5D. At higher ISOs, the 5Dii has a perceptible advantage. The 5D actually has an advantage in per-pixel sharpness at higher ISO, though that is more than offset by the higher resolution of the 5Dii.
I have not shot with the 5Dii, so take what I say with a grain of salt... the AF reputation of the 5Dii is better, but not a quantum leap better, than the 5D. In seven years of shooting with the 5D, I have never found the AF to not meet my needs. The disclaimer is, I don't push the limits of subject tracking, and I'm almost always using the center point.
09/15/2012 12:55:45 PM · #44
i don't push my 60D with tracking either , its mainly center point and I'll use the outer points when i cant recompose.

will the 5d blow away my 60D in terms of ISO noise?
09/15/2012 01:01:55 PM · #45
give me 2 seconds and ill fire off some test shots with both
09/15/2012 01:06:44 PM · #46
Originally posted by Giles_uk:

give me 2 seconds and ill fire off some test shots with both


hi ISO please. :)
09/15/2012 01:26:07 PM · #47
Originally posted by vawendy:

Plus, you'll miss the 1.6 crop factor when you try any wildlife shots.

2 cameras.

Keep the 60. Buy a 5.


18MP vs 13.2MP (21.1/1.6)... you don't really loose much using a 5DII and just cropping in when required.

mike: If your interest is predominantly in portraits or high iso performance the 5DII will be a huge improvement over the 60D, if on the other hand landscapes are your main focus I don't think you'll notice much difference unless you're printing quite large. This is my view from having upgraded from the 550D to a 5DII earlier this year at any rate.

The 17-40mm is nice for landscapes and is a lot sharper than my sigma 10-20mm, but on a screen the difference isn't really noticeable and the 17-40mm vignettes pretty badly if you want to use anything more than one filter on it (even with ultra-slim filters. The weather sealing is nice though.

For portraits... there's just no comparison, portrait lenses just don't work the same on crop bodies (perspective as well as dof are all wrong) and since getting the 5d2 the sigma 50mm 1.4 and canon 135mm f/2 have enjoyed 90% of the lens time on my camera.

The much better iso performance has also lead me to being much happier with indoor and night shots than I would have been - the wider perspective of my fast lenses also aids this (e.g. you're no longer needing to use a zoom lens at night if you don't want to spend over £1000 on a lens since 50mm give a much more standard pov).

edit: Oh, also if you're wanting to go super wide on a budget remember you have several 14mm primes for FF which will be even wider than 10mm on crop. No filters though and I have no personal experience with any of them. I hear very good things about the Sigma 14mm and mixed (but many good) things about the super-cheap Samyang 14mm though.

Message edited by author 2012-09-15 13:30:04.
09/15/2012 01:54:42 PM · #48
Originally posted by HawkinsT:


mike: If your interest is predominantly in portraits or high iso performance the 5DII will be a huge improvement over the 60D, if on the other hand landscapes are your main focus I don't think you'll notice much difference unless you're printing quite large.


I just have to disagree here. The noise in the sky on crop bodies drives me crazy, sure it's easy enough to fix, but again, there's nothing like they creamy smoothness my 5D delivers.

As per the question about pushing the AF Servo tracking, I've been pretty stunned at how well it works, until I owned a 5Dc I thought they had shit AF, turns out it's not noticeably different from the AF on my 50D, which, believe it or not, has proven to focus in lower light than a 1DmkIV, using the exact same lens, of course I was just puzzled about that result, but it was repeatable, and it was ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/31.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/31.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Schlake's 1D.

A few evenings ago I was using the AFS shooting an outdoor night basketball game, in what was arguably extremely bad lighting, and it still was achieving a hit rate of 80% or so. Pretty impressive IMO, of course, I was helping it by trying to be smart about technique as well, so YMMV.
09/15/2012 02:00:40 PM · #49
' . substr('//4.static.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5DMarkII/Samples/ISO_noise/5D2-Grey.jpg?v=1581', strrpos('//4.static.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS5DMarkII/Samples/ISO_noise/5D2-Grey.jpg?v=1581', '/') + 1) . '

I think that this image probably does the best job of illustrating just exactly how little difference there is between these models.

You're worrying about VERY minor differences here in terms of noise.
09/15/2012 02:14:34 PM · #50
Originally posted by HawkinsT:

Originally posted by vawendy:

Plus, you'll miss the 1.6 crop factor when you try any wildlife shots.

2 cameras.

Keep the 60. Buy a 5.


18MP vs 13.2MP (21.1/1.6)... you don't really loose much using a 5DII and just cropping in when required.


Not quite, it has a 1.6 linear crop factor, and MP are based off area. There is 2.56x more sensor area on a FF vs APS-C which can make a huge difference.

18MP vs 8.2MP (21.1/2.56)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 07/29/2021 07:53:40 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2021 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 07/29/2021 07:53:40 AM EDT.