PHOTOS PLEASE

[GONNAFISTYA]

Your advice screams of someone who is trying to show how much he knows about cameras.

I've shot ad campaigns for some of the biggest clients on the planet...

lol

[Captain]

lol

[0psys]

Your advice screams of someone who is trying to show how much he knows about cameras.

I've shot ad campaigns for some of the biggest clients on the planet...

lol

Where does that say anything about how much I know about cameras?

My knowledge of them is actually very limited. I've only ever used two Canons and a Hasselblad.

[GONNAFISTYA]

It doesn't matter what you know or don't know. The guy simply tried to give advice and you accused him of essentially bragging right after you did a bit of bragging yourself.

I don't care if his advice was good or not...I simply found your reaction funny.

[obsidian]

Ahem.... I don't mean to interrupt the flame war going on here, but I'm still waiting for some recommendations from people here.... you know... to make a difficult buying decision actually easier... instead of just more confusing. K'thx'bye.

Currently considering a T3i with a Tamron 17-55mm XR Di II VC F/2.8. I can snag the T3i for $599 ($150 off retail) and the Tamron for $498 ($200 off retail). Seems like a pretty good deal for something to start with unless someone else has a better idea. From what I gather, if I ever upgrade to a full frame (5D) the Tamron is still a decent enough lens to match.

[0psys]

You're an interesting person.




Just my opinions. You're welcome to provide yours.

I think quality is good. You know, for images and stuff.

AA filter, true - but there is a difference when you go to 100% crop regardless, which is my concern and why I recommended what I recommended.

Not sure why you so mad but it is my experience with Canon 24-70L that was not as positive as with other better manufactured lenses. And why would I spend $2,000 on a lens that doesn't impress me? I much prefer to go with a used Schneider 50mm 2.8 for $164.00.

Like I said, my opinions.

Peace be with you.

When did you last crop anything to 100% without kicking yourself for not just framing the shot right in the first place? Unless you're shooting billboards?

I'm not mad, this is the internet; the issue is that the guy has money to spend and you're giving him obscure and slightly weird advice based on personal foibles.

Something that always raises my suspicions is a person who apparently just can't accept the 'low quality' of a Canon or Nikon lens, but, for some reason, isn't shooting MF.

Honestly, if you're concerned with ultimate sharpness at 50mm, then the Canon 50mm 1.8 is crazy-sharp, and it only costs $100. Still has the same dogshit 5 blade aperture that the Schneider has, but at least it doesn't need an adapter.

[mrd]

I just bought a Canon Rebel T3i a while ago, with whatever lens came in the box (18-55mm.) Probably not the greatest lens, but I'm a photo noob so it's fine for everything I've thrown at it. The camera also came with a pretty decent suite of software for downloading images, doing edits and batch jobs on the raw files, exporting to JPEG, etc. etc. All the same shit you could do in Photochop but without having to worry about getting the right plugin to support the .CR2 files (seems like some old-ish versions of PS won't jive with the newest plugin.) Plus the software is a bit more lightweight, so I've found that it's easier to load up a ton of photos and do some quick edits to them all.

If you take time learning how to use the manual setting you can get some good stuff. Make sure you read the damn manual, it's pretty well written and will get you up and running on doing something more than "point and shoot."

Also does nice video, 60fps at 720p, which is one of the reasons I bought it. Unfortunately the fuckin' knob at the store sold me too slow of a memory card to handle the higher frame rate, even after I specifically asked him for a card that could keep up with 60fps of output. Speaking of which, does anyone know what kind of memory card speed I would need for smooth action at 60fps/720p? I think the one I have now is 30 or maybe 60mb/s which seems far too low.

[0psys]

It doesn't matter what you know or don't know. The guy simply tried to give advice and you accused him of essentially bragging right after you did a bit of bragging yourself.

I don't care if his advice was good or not...I simply found your reaction funny.

Honestly, if this was a discussion about something in the games industry, and you reacted to some shitty advice relevant to your field with a "I've worked on some of the most advanced games in the industry" comment, I wouldn't accuse you of bragging, because I know it to be true. If you said it while you were arguing with someone and it wasn't about gaming, that'd be a different story.

How else can I speak with authority on a subject unless I lay out my credentials?

[0psys]

Ahem.... I don't mean to interrupt the flame war going on here, but I'm still waiting for some recommendations from people here.... you know... to make a difficult buying decision actually easier... instead of just more confusing. K'thx'bye.

Currently considering a T3i with a Tamron 17-55mm XR Di II VC F/2.8. I can snag the T3i for $599 ($150 off retail) and the Tamron for $498 ($200 off retail). Seems like a pretty good deal for something to start with unless someone else has a better idea. From what I gather, if I ever upgrade to a full frame (5D) the Tamron is still a decent enough lens to match.

60D is a decent camera, and the Tamron 17-55 a decent lens. However, I'd always say stick with Canon. The Tamrons are quite notorious for having bad examples. I know of people who've had to send one or two back or actually test multiple instances in the shop to find a decent example of the lens.

If you upgrade to a full frame, the Tamrom will become a wide angle lens and it's role or use to you will change drastically.

If you do intend to one day move up to full frame, you would be better off just spending your money on a used 5DII. There's some amazing deals on them at the moment.

The thing about modern cameras is that they all produce roughly the same image quality. The difference between Nikon and Canon bodies is noticeable only by hardened nerds squinting at pixels.

If you've held a 60D and it feels nice, and you like the reviews of the Tamron, then go and grab it.

[mrd]

The thing about modern cameras is that they all produce roughly the same image quality. The difference between Nikon and Canon bodies is noticeable only by hardened nerds squinting at pixels.

This!

[GONNAFISTYA]

Honestly, if this was a discussion about something in the games industry, and you reacted to some shitty advice relevant to your field with a "I've worked on some of the most advanced games in the industry" comment, I wouldn't accuse you of bragging, because I know it to be true. If you said it while you were arguing with someone and it wasn't about gaming, that'd be a different story.

Dude I've worked on high and low-tech games so I'd never bring the "most advanced games" argument forward. I have no intention of getting into a back and forth on this retarded string of thought, I simply thought your post was over the top.

How else can I speak with authority on a subject unless I lay out my credentials?

I don't know. I wasn't aware that obsidian was asking credentials before he'd accept advice. You're probably 100% correct in critizing PoofullCrier's advice, but I don't think anyone needs a CV to believe you.

[obsidian]

BTW, 60D is different than T3i. T3i is what EuroCanon calls the 600D. T4i is the 650D. Thought I should clarify since non-North Americans might be confused with our funny naming system.


So I can get a T3i/600D for $600 (sale) body only. T4i/650D body is going for about $825. 60D body is quite a bit more at about $960.

By comparison, a T4i/650D with a 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II lens kit goes for $950. My thinking is that for about the same price, I can get a slightly older body (T3i/600D) with a better Tamron 17-50mm and f/2.8. Fast F/2.8 aperture over its entire focal-length range seems like an advantage for depth of field and darker lighting environments. Someone check my logic, since I'm a noob and might be way off here.

[0psys]

BTW, 60D is different than T3i. T3i is what EuroCanon calls the 600D. T4i is the 650D. Thought I should clarify since non-North Americans might be confused with our funny naming system.


So I can get a T3i/600D for $600 (sale) body only. T4i/650D body is going for about $825. 60D body is quite a bit more at about $960.

By comparison, a T4i/650D with a 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II lens kit goes for $950. My thinking is that for about the same price, I can get a slightly older body (T3i/600D) with a better Tamron 17-50mm and f/2.8. Fast F/2.8 aperture over its entire focal-length range seems like an advantage for depth of field and darker lighting environments. Someone check my logic, since I'm a noob and might be way off here.

Ah, OK, the US names are different; I see.

Lenses are what counts, your logic is spot on.

[0psys]

Honestly, if this was a discussion about something in the games industry, and you reacted to some shitty advice relevant to your field with a "I've worked on some of the most advanced games in the industry" comment, I wouldn't accuse you of bragging, because I know it to be true. If you said it while you were arguing with someone and it wasn't about gaming, that'd be a different story.

Dude I've worked on high and low-tech games so I'd never bring the "most advanced games" argument forward. I have no intention of getting into a back and forth on this retarded string of thought, I simply thought your post was over the top.

How else can I speak with authority on a subject unless I lay out my credentials?

I don't know. I wasn't aware that obsidian was asking credentials before he'd accept advice. You're probably 100% correct in critizing PoofullCrier's advice, but I don't think anyone needs a CV to believe you.

Can't argue with that; fair enough.

[TruthfulLiar]

When did you last crop anything to 100% without kicking yourself for not just framing the shot right in the first place? Unless you're shooting billboards?

I'm not mad, this is the internet; the issue is that the guy has money to spend and you're giving him obscure and slightly weird advice based on personal foibles.

Something that always raises my suspicions is a person who apparently just can't accept the 'low quality' of a Canon or Nikon lens, but, for some reason, isn't shooting MF.

Honestly, if you're concerned with ultimate sharpness at 50mm, then the Canon 50mm 1.8 is crazy-sharp, and it only costs $100. Still has the same dogshit 5 blade aperture that the Schneider has, but at least it doesn't need an adapter.

I've kicked myself a lot for not doing a shot right in the past. I get the point you are illustrating.

I guess my advice was obscure and slightly weird - I did not really think enough about the "audience" aka obsidian. But my initial observations still stand, if the camera feels good in your hands and you know the quality is good then you have what you need right there.

Eh, the focus ring on a Canon 50 1.8 is not as fine as on a Schneider. And the Canon lens is plastic. Mine broke after several years. From what I can tell, Schneider has much better performance when it comes to focusing and DoF - and it is constructed of metal; it is still around decades later. Now, the Canon 50 1.2 is a different story, but it is a bit heavy and, again, the price thing. I have not tried the 50 1.4 yet, looks good.

But yes, I've worked with Medium Format. I like it. I also like DSLRs. It's not just the 'low quality' canon lens, they aren't all bad lenses but I find them soft. And there is a price to quality ratio that I find in a used Schneider lens that I have not found elsewhere. I like manual focus so it's not an issue for me.

Ahem.... I don't mean to interrupt the flame war going on here, but I'm still waiting for some recommendations from people here.... you know... to make a difficult buying decision actually easier... instead of just more confusing. K'thx'bye.

Currently considering a T3i with a Tamron 17-55mm XR Di II VC F/2.8. I can snag the T3i for $599 ($150 off retail) and the Tamron for $498 ($200 off retail). Seems like a pretty good deal for something to start with unless someone else has a better idea. From what I gather, if I ever upgrade to a full frame (5D) the Tamron is still a decent enough lens to match.

The thing about modern cameras is that they all produce roughly the same image quality. The difference between Nikon and Canon bodies is noticeable only by hardened nerds squinting at pixels.

If you've held a 60D and it feels nice, and you like the reviews of the Tamron, then go and grab it.

Totally agree about the Nikon and Canon comparison.

Just make sure you have the lens you want or need. Consider zoom and aperture for what you like to take pictures of first.

When you feel like pushing the camera's limits I suggest looking into Magic Lantern. Btw, you can get the 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM for $380 or so. It is $100 or so less than the Tamron lens and you won't have the 2.8 aperture. I can't speak for Tamron lenses, I don't use them. Having a 2.8 aperture is good if you need it for shooting low light or you want a limited depth of field. Alternatively, having the stabilising motor in the Canon lens will help in low-light conditions and everything else in general. Plus it looks really good for video. I've used this lens several times.

[TruthfulLiar]

It doesn't matter what you know or don't know. The guy simply tried to give advice and you accused him of essentially bragging right after you did a bit of bragging yourself.

I don't care if his advice was good or not...I simply found your reaction funny.

I don't think I gave bad advice.

[GONNAFISTYA]

I honestly wouldn't know. I'm very familiar with photography but I'm not a hardware geek. I prefer a nice photo over a technically perfect image with no blurriness or other lens aberrations. All I see in this thread is 17-55 XR Di II VC F/2.8/5.2/7.3 XDOUIIILLKJLALSNUFFLEUPAGUSFAGG0THUIIILLKJL 21 Di 55 XR II and it's all greek to me.

I have an HP R927 P&S and while I can fully appreciate and afford the quality of hardware that obsidian wants to shoot for (ha!) I'd be happy with an upgrade to a Nikon Coolpix P510.

[shaft]

get a sony

[Doombrain]

@Obs

You'd be better off spending your cash on a top spec P&S if you want image quality. Marrying a low/mid range SLR with low end glass will only leave you wishing you spent more on the lens if you find yourself getting in to photography. If you're set on SLR I would suggest spending more rather than less as you didn't set a budget.

It's not about the camera body it's all about the optics, bodies are almost disposable. Choose a body that ticks all your boxes, like the whateverthere'ssomanymodelsthatdothesameshitnowD and take a look at the EF 24-105 f/4 L IS. It' a costly lens, you may be able to find a preloved version if you're very lucky (Yen vs. euro/dollar has inflated the prices something rotten. I paid £650 for my first 24-105 in 2006). It's the perfect walkabout lens and for day to day stuff. You won't need anything below f/4 unless you own a studio or just want to pull out a f/2.8 and think 'my lens is better than yours' in public. There's also image stabilisation for low light which, they say, takes up to two stops off. I find it's normally around one stop but really helps in dusk type light and I haven't come across any disadvantages from leaving it on.

Another good lens is the 17-40 f/4 L for wide shots. I've had three so far. I sell it and instantly regret it...
Don't fall for the 70-200 f/4 L. it's a massive lens and although PIN SHARP, it's a complete pain to lug around.

PS, lol at 3rd lens adapters. might as well dip your camera in shit then take a shot.
PPS, lol at slagging the Canon 50 1.8 lens. it's like £50.

[plained]

get a sony

when i remember i troll the 'bay for a cheap sony nex

i want to try one

[xer0s]

The fuck are you going on about?

[GONNAFISTYA]

The fuck are you going on about?

Sony NEX camera

[xer0s]

Oh, thanks. Sometimes I need plained translation...

[obsidian]

This is pretty amazing if you're looking for a fixed lens pocket camera:

DSC-RX100B

[TruthfulLiar]