Jump to content
IGNORED

Photography Equipment & Software Thread

rundll

By rundll
in Creative

 Share

Recommended Posts

Dingleberry

Dingleberry

Posted
Posted

Yes, that's why I said 'equivalent', and not 'actual'. We all understand that a focal length is multiplied by the crop factor to produce what can be thought of as an equivalent focal length. I don't know why people keep insisting on wording it differently as if anyone here (besides maybe Fox :lol:) doesn't get it. Nobody is implying that the physical focal length is mechanically changing like a Michael Bay Transformer when you stick it on different sensors.

Though that would be quite cool.

It would be amazing if putting a 200L on my camera caused it to telescope out and become a 300L. Canon must surely be working on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Fox

The Fox

Posted
Posted

(besides maybe Fox :lol:)

I'm doing my best :(

Welcome to DSLR video! That's what it does. At least, if you don't tame it. You have three ways of getting rid of it - manually focus all the time, prefocus your shots, or film with an aperture small enough that everything is in focus and it doesn't need to keep adjusting, but you need a decent amount of light for that. It does look like the guy shooting has just picked it up and doesn't know what he's doing though.

Hmm. I didn't notice it anywhere near that badly in the other videos I saw, of the 550D, NEX-5 and E-PL1. But if they're all going to be a bit spacky without 'taming' then perhaps it'd be best to keep the camcorder regardless. I dunno. Bleurgh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NecroMorrius

NecroMorrius

Posted
Posted

I'm doing my best :(

Hmm. I didn't notice it anywhere near that badly in the other videos I saw, of the 550D, NEX-5 and E-PL1. But if they're all going to be a bit spacky without 'taming' then perhaps it'd be best to keep the camcorder regardless. I dunno. Bleurgh.

Well, that vid is as much to do with the guy not knowing how to use it. He's shooting wide open I expect, so there is probably only a very shallow depth of field and the camera has to keep focusing all the time. Check this out

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alexlotl

Alexlotl

Posted
Posted

Excellent post Cloney, but slight - perhaps admittedly pendantic - correction:

The focal length of a lens is given as the focal length of the lens. It has nothing to do with 35mm/FF terms at all*.

You're right, in that the same focal length figures are used for medium and large format cameras without people saying "Right, let's apply a 0.5x multiplier...". I forgot that 35mm film is still relatively speaking a new kid on the block, and not the alpha of all things photography. Easiest to think of in 35mm terms though, when you're still trying to move from P&S "12x Zoom" into the world of focal lengths.

Other than that, I was careful to say "effective focal length" throughout, so I defend myself from other pedantic charges.

One thing I've never seen a good explanation of though is the perspective part. How does the perspective of a effective-50mm focal length shot on an APS-C body differ from the perspective of a 50mm focal length shot on full-frame? Some visual illustration would be good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zomby

Zomby

Posted
Posted

Just a small update from me to say I got my 20D the other day, I couldn't believe what condition it was in! Not a scratch on it still had all default settings set and judging by the file names only 2000 photos taken on it. Needless to say I'm very chuffed as I'm on a tight budget and I doubt I could of done much better with my 200 notes.

Next purchase is going to be a Canon EF 50mm f1.8 MK2 for portraits and close ups and possibly a budget 70-300mm like the Tamron 70-300mm f4/5.6 DI LD to give me a bit of reach, anyone got opinions on these lenses? I know they are cheap but as I said I'm on a budget I cant be spending shit loads £200 for both lenses absolute max.

I'm currently using the standard kit 17-55mm and to be honest the images do look a little washed out but that may be to do with the lighting when I took it out more than anything.

I need to get myself out in the countryside asap but I don't drive so it's a bit awkward, I don't like taking pictures of concrete :(

Anyway I'm sure I will be asking more technical questions over time but I have the info I need to do basic landscape shots now so it's a case of getting out there!

Thanks.

I've actually ordered the 50mm now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fragglerock

fragglerock

Posted
Posted

The 50mm is an excellent lens which everyone should have (nearly all manufacturers have an equivalent).

The huge range zooms are cheap for a reason, yes they are handy as they give you a broad zoom range (but do you need that range?) however the picture quality is so poor it is hard to recommend them. They are generaly so dark they only work in very bright conditions, or at high ISO further imparing the final image.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
iwan_canobi

iwan_canobi

Posted
Posted

Good choice, you certainly wont regret that anyway! If anyone had answered your question it would have been to say that the 50mm is 100% worth buying!

In terms of the Tamron I'm not sure, I think the Canon equivalent gets better write ups, Napoleon has one so he will be in the best position to answer that, I think it may be a tad more expensive though!

@Fox, thats a nice little camera, I'm sure she'll love it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap

TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap

Posted
Posted

The huge range zooms are cheap for a reason, yes they are handy as they give you a broad zoom range (but do you need that range?) however the picture quality is so poor it is hard to recommend them. They are generaly so dark they only work in very bright conditions, or at high ISO further imparing the final image.

The Canon 70-300mm F/4.0-5.6 IS USM actually gets very good reviews and I get very sharp results with it. It's even called 'the hidden L' occasionally. It's true that it's on the slow side, so you need a decent amount of light for good results, but when you do the pictures are far from poor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zomby

Zomby

Posted
Posted

Is this the canon lens you are talking about? It's quite a bit more than the Tamron, £128.95 more to be precise.. I'm not on a massive budget so I'm afraid cheap and cheerful will prevail for now. I've heard mixed reviews for the Tamron so far but the general consensus is that for the cash it's pretty good :sherlock:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap

TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap

Posted
Posted

No, that's the 75-300mm and apparently it's not very good.

I mean this one: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. I guess it'll be above your budget as it's almost twice the amount of the 75-300 :)

Without wanting to sound flippant, you might consider it's not really worth buying a rubbish lens and rather settle with something decent yet less ambitious within your budget instead. And then save up a bit to buy something decent again in a couple of months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zomby

Zomby

Posted
Posted

Ah right, and yes you are correct that's 4 times my budget haha! I'm only taking pictures for myself to document where I've been and seen etc so I'm sure a budget job will be sufficient for me for quite a considerable amount of time. I'll keep reading reviews as I wont be getting the lens for another month at least.

Thanks anyway!

EDIT: Think I either missed you last comment or you made an edit- Thing is I'm a student with no solid job so it's a case of no income for the foreseeable future so was going to get a budget lens for my birthday so I can at least get some zoom on the go.. hmm tough choice.

Basically I'll have a 17-55mm and a 50mm in my bag and I want something to give me a bit more range for if I say see a squirrel in a tree I want to take photos of :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NecroMorrius

NecroMorrius

Posted
Posted

You can learn to use a zoom lens with a cheapo zoom. I did! There's nothing to be ashamed of if you don't have stacks of spare cash rolling in and you need to be conservative with your non essential spending. As long as the lens you're buying is deemed good value/performance for the budget that you have, there's no sense lamenting that you can't spend two, three, ten times as much on something else. Just don't buy something that represents poor value because it isn't very good (even at a low price).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dingleberry

Dingleberry

Posted
Posted

I had the 75-300 III, considered by the internet hive mind to be one of Canon's worst lenses along with the 18-55 non-IS, which I also had. They're budget lenses and you get what you pay for, but I don't think they're nearly as bad as they're made out to be. Good for beginners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NecroMorrius

NecroMorrius

Posted
Posted

On the flipside, I've got a 55-250mm IS that I want to sell if you're interested.

I've decided, come this September I'll pay my last payment on my camera, car and a few other things (coincidentally). So, I'll have a fuckload extra money coming in. I'll save up for (or convince Mr bank manager to short term loan me the money for) one of these...

71jCuTjSNlS._AA1500_.jpg

Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmnomnomnomnomn

Then it'll really be time to stop dicking around and start putting my name out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap

TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap

Posted
Posted

Anyway, I've decided on my next purchase: it'll be the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. The only drawback is that it's an EF-S rather than an EF (so no full frame use if I ever upgrade to a full frame body), but I can always sell it. I'm pretty certain that this is the best choice for me at the moment when it comes to spec, quality and price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dingleberry

Dingleberry

Posted
Posted

Anyway, I've decided on my next purchase: it'll be the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. The only drawback is that it's an EF-S rather than an EF (so no full frame use if I ever upgrade to a full frame body), but I can always sell it. I'm pretty certain that this is the best choice for me at the moment when it comes to spec, quality and price.

Good choice, it's the best standard zoom for a cropper. (That Canon makes and fits their cameras.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zomby

Zomby

Posted
Posted
On the flipside, I've got a 55-250mm IS that I want to sell if you're interested.

There is a possibility of me being interested, my friend has a 55-250mm I can borrow to see how I get on with it, Will try and get use of it soon.

How much are you be likely to be asking for it, PM me if you like.

Thanks.

Link to comment
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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept