dSLR thread

[snowhiker]

Canon patent for a 20 to 1 super zoom. EF 28-560mm f/2.8-5.6. 45-900mm (1.6x crop) equivalent on DDs 7Dii.

There's a rumor the 28-300mm was due for an update, but bumping the long end to 560mm. wow! This in addition to the 200-600mm f/4.5-5.6 lens. Canon is working on some amazing superzooms.

...and their 120MP DSLR is in the works as well.

Interesting times. I'm looking forward to the Nikon D810 successor (D820/D850/D8{whatever}) Friend is thinking of buying my D610. I also want a D500. Sigh.

 

[LunarMist]

It's just a patent. A 28-560 would be a different lens, not a replacement. I do think there will be a new 28-300 or similar. Some PJ and wildlife shooters love that lens for the versatility. Obviously a 2004 lens could benefit from a full optical and mechanical redesign.

A D820 or whatever might have small enough pixels to preclude the need for a D500.

 

[ddrueding]

That sounds pretty epic, but the 100-400II is enough for me

 

[LunarMist]

That sounds pretty epic, but the 100-400II is enough for me

After a 4:1 or 5:1 zoom range the compromises become more severe in FX lenses.
There are high-zoom range lenses for video like the Canon XJ100X9.3B, but they are over 50 lbs., over $100,000, and don't cover a 43mm circle.

 

[snowhiker]

A D820 or whatever might have small enough pixels to preclude the need for a D500.

True, except the 10 fps of the D500. The D8xx{whatever} would need a sensor with 45'ish MP to get its 1.5x crop in the 20mp range of the D500.

Honestly I'd rather have a D8{whatever} with base ISO of 40 than a 45mp ISO 100 camera. Another 2/3 stop improvement over the D810, which already has the 2/3 stop improvement over ISO 100. D8{whatever}=landscape while the D500=wildlife. But my desires <> my $$$.

 

[LunarMist]

True, except the 10 fps of the D500. The D8xx{whatever} would need a sensor with 45'ish MP to get its 1.5x crop in the 20mp range of the D500.

Honestly I'd rather have a D8{whatever} with base ISO of 40 than a 45mp ISO 100 camera. Another 2/3 stop improvement over the D810, which already has the 2/3 stop improvement over ISO 100. D8{whatever}=landscape while the D500=wildlife. But my desires <> my $$$.

I'd use a "D820" for wildlife as much as possible and use a D7200 for reach only when needed. Likewise I'd use a D5 in low light and other specific situations.

 

[snowhiker]

Fun way to carry your 400mm f/2.8 lens.

 

[LunarMist]

Fun way to carry your 400mm f/2.8 lens.

I remember when those goofy things first appeared. The demo on tensile strength isn't particularly relevant either.

 

[snowhiker]

^^^ I'm not interested in the lens carrying gadget, just thought the image of someone swinging a big lens around is not something you see everyday.

New business. My sensor is dirty. D.I.R.T.Y. Laid some copy paper on the ground in the sun, shot at ISO 100, 1/60 @ f/36 and this is the result.



Lunar or DD or SD or ?? how do you go about cleaning your sensor.


Edit: Click image a few time to get full size (6016x4016) image. You can save full size image. Perhaps postimage.org changed the way they display full size images, but for me it's not displaying full-size images? :scratch:

 

[snowhiker]

Another question about photo above ^^^.

White paper shot with direct sun appears purple in color. Exposure or White balance issue?

 

[LunarMist]

^^^ I'm not interested in the lens carrying gadget, just thought the image of someone swinging a big lens around is not something you see everyday.

New business. My sensor is dirty. D.I.R.T.Y. Laid some copy paper on the ground in the sun, shot at ISO 100, 1/60 @ f/36 and this is the result.



Lunar or DD or SD or ?? how do you go about cleaning your sensor.

There are various cleaning kits, but I send bodies in nowadays. I had a bad experience some years ago and the sensor needed to be replaced.
The modern Canon DSLR sensors don't get so dirty with the built-in sensor glass vibrator. Can you take the camera to a local Nikon shop?

 

[ddrueding]

I cleaned a sensor once a long time ago with success, but haven't in years. Now that kid pictures are the norm, I don't change lenses often.

 

[Howell]

What is a good lenses for kid pictures taken with a Canon 30D? If the 50mm 1.4 EF in my hand doesn't say, is it USM?

 

[ddrueding]

I end up shooting from much closer, and my wife likes full-height photos. I use the 24/1.4L.

 

[snowhiker]

Lunar or Tannin would love this. No more fooling around with a 1.4x TC on your 500/4.

 

[LunarMist]

Lunar or Tannin would love this. No more fooling around with a 1.4x TC on your 500/4.

I'm more interested in the 600/4 DO which Canon claims is in development.
The 1000/5.6 DO may or may not ever be produced, but it would be later and quite expensive, essentially an institutional lens.

 

[snowhiker]

The 1000/5.6 DO may or may not ever be produced, but it would be later and quite expensive, essentially an institutional lens.

That's exactly why you'd need three.

 

[LunarMist]

What is a good lenses for kid pictures taken with a Canon 30D? If the 50mm 1.4 EF in my hand doesn't say, is it USM?

There has only been one Canon 50/1.4 EF lens ever. It has a funky type of micro USM that really isn't a normal USM and tends to fail.

If you are planning to stay with EF-S (1.6x crop) Canon, take a look at the newer Sigma Art lenses for DC.
Canon has essentially abandoned high end EF-S lenses as the low end of FF bodies has decreased in price.
Their newer, slow EF-S lenses are generally mediocre and there are still some old models that are just OK, but not so great.
Otherwise, you could look at 24-70 lenses for example.

 

[LunarMist]

That's exactly why you'd need three.

I'd really like a 200-500/4 DO with a built-in 1.4x.

 

[Howell]

I end up shooting from much closer, and my wife likes full-height photos. I use the 24/1.4L.

How far away from subject do you end up? Do you get any feature distortion?

There has only been one Canon 50/1.4 EF lens ever. It has a funky type of micro USM that really isn't a normal USM and tends to fail.

If you are planning to stay with EF-S (1.6x crop) Canon, take a look at the newer Sigma Art lenses for DC.
Canon has essentially abandoned high end EF-S lenses as the low end of FF bodies has decreased in price.
Their newer, slow EF-S lenses are generally mediocre and there are still some old models that are just OK, but not so great.
Otherwise, you could look at 24-70 lenses for example.

Thanks for the info on the lens. This is a gift for my wife, and her main complaint is that a slight change in relative distance between subjects in natural light conditions causes parts to go out of focus. If that makes sense. It has been a long time since high school photography class and I forget the relationship between light, aperture and depth of field.

 

[ddrueding]

How far away from subject do you end up? Do you get any feature distortion?

I'm typically 5-10' away. My wife doesn't complain about feature distortion so long as I stay above 18-20mm.

Thanks for the info on the lens. This is a gift for my wife, and her main complaint is that a slight change in relative distance between subjects in natural light conditions causes parts to go out of focus. If that makes sense. It has been a long time since high school photography class and I forget the relationship between light, aperture and depth of field.

A smaller f-number means that the aperture is larger. This lets in more light, but narrows the depth of field. Putting the camera in Av mode (this lets you set the aperture and the camera figures out the rest) and setting the camera to f/5.6 or higher will probably solve this issue. Lenses with faster autofocus and bodies with more accurate autofocus will probably also help this situation, but it doesn't sound like anything that can't be fixed by upping the ISO one notch (to accelerate the shutter speed) and closing the aperture (to increase the range of stuff that is in-focus).

 

[Howell]

Good info. What is the camera spec that would tell me if the sensor in a newer body would take better low light pictures?

 

[ddrueding]

Good info. What is the camera spec that would tell me if the sensor in a newer body would take better low light pictures?

That is a tricky one. All other things being equal, what you are looking for is a sensor with less noise at higher ISO. There isn't a good metric for this, just have to read the reviews.

The other thing that allows better low-light pictures is to open the aperture, but as we discussed this narrows the depth of focus.

 

[Howell]

Looks like she might be good on the lenses and just have lighting needs. Is there such a thing as pro-sumer off-camera flash to match the level of camera she has. How do you even evaluate them?

 

[LunarMist]

Good info. What is the camera spec that would tell me if the sensor in a newer body would take better low light pictures?

Was the camera released in the last three years? Is the sensor at least APS-C sized? Is there a Sony or Nikon logo on it?

 

[snowhiker]

I'd really like a 200-500/4 DO with a built-in 1.4x.

Sigma makes a 200-500 f/2.8 that comes with a 2x TC. The 34.5 lbs may effect portability though.

 

[LunarMist]

Looks like she might be good on the lenses and just have lighting needs. Is there such a thing as pro-sumer off-camera flash to match the level of camera she has. How do you even evaluate them?

There are numerous cheap flashes like Yongnuo if that is what you are looking at. Lighting technique is one of the most difficult photographic skills to master.

 

[ddrueding]

Flash is tricky enough that I avoid it whenever possible. I prefer LED panel lights attached to Magnetic Gpods. The lights stay on so you can better understand where and how much light you need.

 

[snowhiker]

This video cleared up some confusion on how, exactly, Lightroom works.

Two possible sensor cleaning products:

1) Swab. Wet solution.
or
2) Gel stick. Dry solution.

 

[LunarMist]

This video cleared up some confusion on how, exactly, Lightroom works.

Really, LR's mind? The problem with LR is that it forces use of that awful database (previews, catalog) and can't be used to work in folders without the entire process.
Other image processing software has both database and standalone modes so it can easily be done.
Abode is just like many big companies that treat the users like children and only allow what they feel is best for us.

 

[ddrueding]

I always just considered Lightroom "easy mode" and Photoshop "expert mode". It makes sense in that way.

 

[snowhiker]

As far as Lr goes I didn't know the difference between a "destructive" and "non-destructive" editor or the whole database thing. I'll probably never use Lr, when I actually start getting into photo editing, simply for the lack of a, File|Open {do shit} Save option. I don't want a database and I dislike Adobe.

I haven't done any image editing, other than playing around a bit with paint.net and Nikon's Capture NX-D. I enjoy taking photos far more than editing them.

I'd want to use the easiest to use editor that can open .NEF (Nikon RAW) files, adjust exposure, crop & resize and play with colors/contrast a bit. Not much else. At least for a while. I have to take a few decent photos first before I learn how to edit them properly.

I should also color calibrate my monitor, and verify focus (focus fine-tune) my lenses, especially my 200-500mm before I get into editing.

Besides, it too goddamn hot to do anything outside right now. So I won't be taking any photos till October.

 

[LunarMist]

As far as Lr goes I didn't know the difference between a "destructive" and "non-destructive" editor or the whole database thing. I'll probably never use Lr, when I actually start getting into photo editing, simply for the lack of a, File|Open {do shit} Save option. I don't want a database and I dislike Adobe.

I haven't done any image editing, other than playing around a bit with paint.net and Nikon's Capture NX-D. I enjoy taking photos far more than editing them.

I'd want to use the easiest to use editor that can open .NEF (Nikon RAW) files, adjust exposure, crop & resize and play with colors/contrast a bit. Not much else. At least for a while. I have to take a few decent photos first before I learn how to edit them properly.

I should also color calibrate my monitor, and verify focus (focus fine-tune) my lenses, especially my 200-500mm before I get into editing.

Besides, it too goddamn hot to do anything outside right now. So I won't be taking any photos till October.

NX-D is also non-destructive. It creates the NKSC_PARAM folder with the little .nksc files.
You should calibrate the 200-500 before shooting, not wait until editing potentially OOF images.

 

[snowhiker]

NX-D is also non-destructive. It creates the NKSC_PARAM folder with the little .nksc files.
You should calibrate the 200-500 before shooting, not wait until editing potentially OOF images.

Yes, I need to calibrate my lenses. I won't be going outside for at least 3 more months due to the heat here so anything photo related is on hold for the most part.

Medium Format mirrorless is here. Only $8995.

 

[LunarMist]

You can calibrate lenses indoors. I do it more often than not.

32.9 x 43.8 mm is medium format now? It's only 27% longer than 24x36 on the diagonal. Meh.

 

[LunarMist]

Everyone is saying I should get the 1Dx II and 600 II, arghh.

 

[ddrueding]

Of course, they aren't spending their own money...

 

[ddrueding]

Let me step in and say you should get a Sony a7R II and FE 85/1.4

I can't say that I'm not tempted to switch over to the mirrorless game.

 

[LunarMist]

Let me step in and say you should get a Sony a7R II and FE 85/1.4

I can't say that I'm not tempted to switch over to the mirrorless game.

I'm going to the jungles. Apparently it is dark in there and subjects are often small or at a distance.

I had an a7R for a few weeks. The ergonomics were awful and battery life poor. The II is better, but still not a body I'd want to use in the field conditions I often encounter. The 1D series stands up to the rain, snow, ice, even some sand, etc. Pushing a bunch of dinky menu and control buttons on an a7 series camera while animals are barreling down on you is not the way to go.

I'm fine with the ML concept when Canon and Nikon make them practical.

 

[snowhiker]

For the times when you can only carry one lens and you aren't sure what focal length you'll need.