rundll

Photography Equipment & Software Thread

9,148 posts in this topic

Yeah, I've got the 24-105 too. That's the one that I took and got fixed and now has broken again - not massively impressed and it's not perfect even when it's working. But IS is useful, loads of the time spent using the wide end won't be done wide open but despite low light. I'd probably still pick it for that reason (and size).

Gots to have my DOF man. F4.0? Bleurgh. My shots don't look nearly expensive enough unless 95% of it is out of focus.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting quote from Dpreview on the new Canon lenses: "Ultimately, the most interesting thing about these launches is the fact that Canon feels the need to update various full-frame lenses, almost as if something likely to test the quality of its existing versions was in the offing." They stopped short of adding a knowing wink.

Have they got a high MP (30+) model in the offing?

Basically, yes. They made some mention of Canon being 'perfectly able to produce a 30+ megapixel camera' when quizzed about it in relation to the D800. It would make sense that they let Nikon shoot first, get a good look at the specs and innards, and then make sure they've got some sort of marketable advantage over the D800 before launching whatever they're prepping.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The start of this year I came to the conclusion that the vast majority of my photos tends to be landscape stuff. So I've decided to go for a wide angle lens to complement - managed to snag a second hand Canon 10-22mm this week for a good price.

Reading around it seems that a variable nd filter, which would be my first choice for long exposures, is out because of the problems it will cause with irregualritues from the filters close proximity to the lens. Then again, other places seem to suggest it's less of a problem on crop sensor cameras (like my 60D).

Am I just better off getting something like a Cokin filter holder, adapter and some filters to avoid any complications / faffing about?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers, will take a look at those. It probably will be better to go for something a bit more expensive. More reading around shows lots of mixed impressions about the Cokin holders not being up to much.

But seems any purchase is going to have to wait a little while longer - the 10-22mm turned up and it seems there was a reason it's so cheap.

The lens keeps throwing up err01 messages (clean the contacts) and when it does decide to work the image via Live View or the viewfinder is so dark you can't really see anything, even when wide open.

It won't autofocus at all.

There's a massive blob of grit or something in the mid-left section.

The focus ring sounds like it's got grit or sand in it.

Yeah, it's going back :(

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Save up for a set of lee's... I've been trough cokin and hi techs and basically, they're shit.

Hi techs aren't shit.

I've posted this before :

I don't get colour casts from the Hi-Techs at all. The only issue with them is they being resin will scratch (obviously glass won't). I'm sure I've posted this before in this thread - a certain landscape 'tog pro who lives down here switched me onto Hitechs. They're a lot cheaper to replace every few years than a single Lee filter which you've dropped or cracked. He endorses Lee for the money but uses Hi-Techs. Their 0.3,0.6 & 0.9 grads are superb.

Cheers, will take a look at those. It probably will be better to go for something a bit more expensive. More reading around shows lots of mixed impressions about the Cokin holders not being up to much.

But seems any purchase is going to have to wait a little while longer - the 10-22mm turned up and it seems there was a reason it's so cheap.

The lens keeps throwing up err01 messages (clean the contacts) and when it does decide to work the image via Live View or the viewfinder is so dark you can't really see anything, even when wide open.

It won't autofocus at all.

There's a massive blob of grit or something in the mid-left section.

The focus ring sounds like it's got grit or sand in it.

Yeah, it's going back :(

That sucks :(

I wouldn't buy anything second hand. I've had enough new kit fuck up (40D, 24-105 TWICE, Sigma 10-20). At least with "new" you get a warranty. I'm sure with second hand prices being almost the same as new for lenses that a lot of people keep all the boxes etc immaculate and put them up on ebay once the warranty runs out.

What did condition did they say the lens was in ? If it was anything other than for spares/repair then that's clealry fraudulent.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi techs aren't shit.

I've posted this before :

That sucks :(

I wouldn't buy anything second hand. I've had enough new kit fuck up (40D, 24-105 TWICE, Sigma 10-20). At least with "new" you get a warranty. I'm sure with second hand prices being almost the same as new for lenses that a lot of people keep all the boxes etc immaculate and put them up on ebay once the warranty runs out.

What did condition did they say the lens was in ? If it was anything other than for spares/repair then that's clealry fraudulent.

It depends who you're buying from, really. For Sigma lenses I've bought them all second-hand as it's an easier way of getting a decent version - plus they don't hold their value at all. And firmly touching wood, I've not had any problems at all. The 5D2 and 24-105mm bought new have both broken though.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends who you're buying from, really. For Sigma lenses I've bought them all second-hand as it's an easier way of getting a decent version - plus they don't hold their value at all. And firmly touching wood, I've not had any problems at all. The 5D2 and 24-105mm bought new have both broken though.

Fair enough for cheaper kit like Sigma or Tokina that don't hold their value, plus like you say its a good way of getting a decent copy of a Sigma. Their QA is still shocking. Paying £600+ for a second hand 24-105 though is madness.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That sucks :(

I wouldn't buy anything second hand. I've had enough new kit fuck up (40D, 24-105 TWICE, Sigma 10-20). At least with "new" you get a warranty. I'm sure with second hand prices being almost the same as new for lenses that a lot of people keep all the boxes etc immaculate and put them up on ebay once the warranty runs out.

What did condition did they say the lens was in ? If it was anything other than for spares/repair then that's clealry fraudulent.

It did say it was in good external condition (which it was) and good optical condition (which it wasn't).

To be fair to the seller he got back to me straight away when I emailed him and was really, really apologetic. Told me to send it back straight away for a full refund. Bit of a pain to sort out (as the post round here is arse-backwards), but rather that than a "not my problem" response.

While I've bought second hand lenses on occasions before and not had any bother, I think this is a bit of a lesson learned and proof of the old adage that if something seems to good to be true, then it usually is.

Just have to source another one now. Having only managed to take two or three (very crappy) shots with the thing when trying it out, I really liked the effect the ultra wide gives. Can see me using it a fair bit so I think I'll just pony up for a new one off Amazon (which seem to be the cheapest place at the moment).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a cracking lens. For some reason despite it costing pretty much the same as the 17-40L Canon don't bother to include the lens hood. Well worth picking up a third party one for a couple of quid - makes a difference to contrast and flare especially in bright light.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For Iceland I'm taking (on FF also) 16-35 (rented), 24-105, 50mm and gorillapod. If it wasn't for the landscapes it'd probably be just the 24-105 and the 50, so I think you're probably fine.

And don't worry about people telling you to stop taking photographs. Just tell them what you're doing calmly and confidently and offer to show them on the screen. If they're being aggressive move to a safe distance and phone the police.

sorry a bit late, thanks for the input. If I am a little flush, I may get something wider - will wait and see. I am thinking of replacing the 50 like for like and selling the damaged one on ebay (optics are fine, just the AF that is a bit mangled)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canonrumours are reporting that the specs for the new 5D are locked-in, and confirmed to be:

  • 22mp
  • 61pt AF
  • 100% VF
  • 3.2″ LCD
  • Dual CF/SD Card Slots
  • Price: Around $3500 USD
  • Announcement on February 27 or 28, 2012 (Depending where you are on earth)

There's also a new Canon lens coming in, the 590ex, replacing the 580exII.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw that, I guess at 3500 dollars (which undoubtedly translates to 3500 euros) it's not going to replace my 7D any time soon.... :(

Sounds good if they've actually improved the AF this time, 22MP is more than enough as well for most things I imagine.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got a load of film developing equipment in. But coffee based! "Caffenol" as it goes by. Already exposed some 120 film on a TLR, and going to try out a few 35mm films on an old camera I have lying around. If it is enjoyable enough it might lean me towards the slightly more attainable Leica M6.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My new 10-22mm turned up today.

This one might be brand new, as opposed to second hand like the other one, but it looks... different. It could be a trick of the mind but the external surfaces don't look as cheap as the previous one. I'm hesitant to say it looks more expensive (because obviously it was) but it looks like its made of better quality materials.

While that could be all in my head, one thing that isn't is the gold contacts at the base of the lens are different. On the last one they were solid blocks of around three or four - I thought that was strange at the time. This new one has two larger blocks followed by the smaller ones, like most of the standard modern lenses I've seen.

Was there a previous version of the 10-22mm? Or was the other one a knock off - does such a thing even exist?

Anyway, this one works perfect so far - auto-focuses in a snap too. Can't wait to try it out properly.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not heard of "fake" Canon lenses before - I wonder if it had a dodgy repair job ?

Should look like this :

2393613411_9aba074aca.jpg

Build quality is excellent - it feels like an "L" even though it isn't. Don't forget to look for a hood for it as well :)

Here's the trailcam footage - not bad for a sub £100 piece of kit I think.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=AdNvQ6Aemy8

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hood already obtained :)

The new one looks like that picture, but the other one didn't at all - it had only the wider contacts which are on the left hand side of that picture, rather than any of the single dot types. Wish I'd taken a picture now to show it, but didn't think too much of it at the time as the of guy was happy to take it back.

If the contacts were wrong it would totally explain why the lens and camera wouldn't talk to each other properly.

Oh and nice badger btw :D

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canonrumours are reporting that the specs for the new 5D are locked-in, and confirmed to be:

  • 22mp
  • 61pt AF
  • 100% VF
  • 3.2″ LCD
  • Dual CF/SD Card Slots
  • Price: Around $3500 USD
  • Announcement on February 27 or 28, 2012 (Depending where you are on earth)

There's also a new Canon lens coming in, the 590ex, replacing the 580exII.

I won't be able to justify that at all. I literally only use the centre AF point, I've never really had a problem with the viewfinder. And I don't bother with video, which I presume will get all the 7D stuff at least.

How dull.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't be able to justify that at all. I literally only use the centre AF point, I've never really had a problem with the viewfinder. And I don't bother with video, which I presume will get all the 7D stuff at least.

How dull.

What did you expect from it?!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, now-ish might be a good time to keep an eye out for a used 5DMkII if you're in the market, they should start dropping in price soon.

Here you go:

Looks like they built that full-frame 7D I've been hoping for since about three days after I bought my 7D, ha.

Now to wait for the inevitable 40% price drop within a month or two.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it is just a full-frame 7D. I'm entirely sure I made the right decision between the two back then and I've not missed anything it can't do that the 7D can do. The 5D3 is better in every way it seems, but the only things that could make me spend are the (presumed) two stop improvement in ISO performance. Improved weather sealing, twin card slots and so on are nice but they're not going to draw a couple of grand out of me.

Hopefully this will mean I can get another two or three years out of it. That'd put me to a very satisfying half decade of ownership. I didn't expect to get close to that.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want it I want it I want it. Don't forget the 5DMKII body was £2300 when it came out.

I get a lot of use out of the 7D focusing stuff (the zoning is really useful with fast subjects), but it sounds like you do your focusing differently and aren't much of a video person. Hence no reason at all to upgrade bar the weather sealing and dual slots.

I hope it makes the MKII go down in price, I'd probably PX my 7D for a MKII.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aim centre-point, back button focus, re-compose. When you know the shot you're going for it takes micro-seconds* extra whilst never accidentally focusing on the wrong thing - it's basically automated manual focusing rather than true auto focus. If that makes any sense at all.

I probably could have found the money if they'd done something amazing (I'm not sure what, exactly, they could have done) but I'm quite delighted I don't "have" to spend.

*Add another few micro-seconds if I'm focusing on one thing and taking a light reading somewhere else.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's generally how I compose still shots, but I use the zoning and tracking for moving targets. For example if I know I want my subject in the right hand side of the image, but it's moving about a lot and I'm using a narrow DOF (which is most of the time) it comes in really handy.

The zoning I mentioned is the same principle but narrows your available focus points.

If you don't shoot moving stuff it's not very useful.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking for a replacement for my 50 1.4. I have read some good stuff about the sigma as an upgrade and can't justify the expense of the 50. 1.2, anyone here had any experience of the Sigma? Or am I better sticking with the canon?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the 1.4 not doing for you at the moment?

The 1.2 is great in my experience (insert nicky or rev bringing up back focus issues) but not worth the massive price hike on the 1.4.

The 35mm 1.4 is really nice too if you want something wider. If you have a cropped body it'll function similarly to using a 50mm on a full frame.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't shoot moving stuff it's not very useful.

Unsurprisingly, rarely. Street stuff occasionally, but between manual focus and the normal way I've only dropped two or three shots. I'm not knocking the cleverer stuff at all, I just don't need it.

Looking for a replacement for my 50 1.4. I have read some good stuff about the sigma as an upgrade and can't justify the expense of the 50. 1.2, anyone here had any experience of the Sigma? Or am I better sticking with the canon?

I've got the Sigma. (Assuming you get a good copy and that isn't the easiest thing) the Sigma is better from f1.4 to about f2.8 but then the Canon 1.4 is miles ahead from that point. So it depends what you're going to be doing. I figured for anything f4 and above I might as well have a zoom on, so went for the Sigma.

I'm happy with it.

I'd also say what Morrius said I would say, but I won't. Just to prove him wrong.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.