Good points windpig!! Even if someone was going out and buying a 1DsIII, isn't that how most people get one in the first place? Seems the OP made up her mind about what she wanted and was asking some advice about lenses and a few accessories for it.
W900 Member 71 posts Joined Oct 2010 Location: wa. state More info | Nov 27, 2011 21:45 | #76 Good points windpig!! Even if someone was going out and buying a 1DsIII, isn't that how most people get one in the first place? Seems the OP made up her mind about what she wanted and was asking some advice about lenses and a few accessories for it.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
melcat Goldmember 1,122 posts Likes: 5 Joined Nov 2010 Location: Melbourne, Australia More info | Nov 27, 2011 21:54 | #77 Apropos 5D Mark II accessories to get, because it probably went unnoticed in the camera body nonsense, I'll just repeat a suggestion I gave before for a $40 accessory: Dee_Ann_2012 wrote in post #13458011 ![]() I'm not a big fan of auto-focus at all. I find it extremely annoying most of the time so I want the ability to shut it off and focus manually. I don't put much value in auto-focus. If you get the 5D Mark II, I suggest you buy and put in the cupboard unopened an accessory called the Eg-S screen. This will allow you to manually focus a fast lens should you buy one in the future. (The reason I suggest buying it now is that Canon discontinued the equivalent part for the previous 5D, at least in the US. They have form.) The f/4 lens you are considering doesn't need it, and it's quite fiddly to fit.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
windpig Chopped liver ![]() More info | Nov 27, 2011 22:38 | #78 Damn, what's with this learning thing. Any camera that you buy is going to have a learning curve. I can't even figure out how to change the aperture on my wifes 610. I would loath changing to Nikon just because of having to figure out where what I was looking for was, granted, I'd know what it was I was looking for, but just the same, you gotta start somewhere. The OP never stated any expectations that I remember. Would you like to buy a vowel?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 27, 2011 23:29 | #79 Well, having spent the last few hours getting my shopping list in order I've found that the big ticket items on B&H vs Amazon are all priced exactly the same, therefore I shifted items from my Amazon list to B&H. EOS 5D mkII, EF 24-105mm f/4L IS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 27, 2011 23:32 | #80 windpig wrote in post #13460857 ![]() Damn, what's with this learning thing. Any camera that you buy is going to have a learning curve. I can't even figure out how to change the aperture on my wifes 610. I would loath changing to Nikon just because of having to figure out where what I was looking for was, granted, I'd know what it was I was looking for, but just the same, you gotta start somewhere. The OP never stated any expectations that I remember. Anyway, lots of good input here, as usual. Agreed, 100%, LOTS of excellent input here! Everyone has been very helpful, even a few that don't feel this is a wise investment for me. They still offered valuable options to consider and lots of excellent general knowledge. EOS 5D mkII, EF 24-105mm f/4L IS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
philwillmedia Cream of the Crop 5,253 posts Gallery: 2 photos Likes: 25 Joined Nov 2008 Location: "...just south of the 23rd Paralell..." More info | Nov 27, 2011 23:45 | #81 Dee_Ann_2012 wrote in post #13455453 ![]() ...I also hope to buy online but from out of state to avoid tax. I know for a fact there are no local camera stores, they have all gone out of business. ![]() I'd suggest buying online from out of state and not supporting local bricks and mortar camera stores has probably done more damage than digital photography itself. Regards, Phil
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 28, 2011 00:20 | #82 philwillmedia wrote in post #13461060 ![]() I'd suggest buying online from out of state and not supporting local bricks and mortar camera stores has probably done more damage than digital photography itself.
EOS 5D mkII, EF 24-105mm f/4L IS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
madberry Member ![]() 83 posts Joined Sep 2008 Location: California At the Moment More info | Nov 28, 2011 00:29 | #83 banks which are inherently evil and greedy. That is why I keep all of my money in an old sock under my mattress. --[mad]Berry--
LOG IN TO REPLY |
LemonScent Senior Member ![]() 343 posts Likes: 1 Joined Jul 2011 Location: Sacramento, CA More info | Nov 28, 2011 00:35 | #84 DeeAnn, you rock. I'm super excited for you to get your camera. Lisa
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 28, 2011 01:08 | #85 madberry wrote in post #13461201 ![]() That is why I keep all of my money in an old sock under my mattress. Me? Small, hometown, local only credit union. EOS 5D mkII, EF 24-105mm f/4L IS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nov 28, 2011 01:10 | #86 Thank you Lisa! It's good to know I'm not the only girl in town... EOS 5D mkII, EF 24-105mm f/4L IS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Kevan Goldmember ![]() 3,125 posts Likes: 17 Joined Dec 2007 Location: Easton, MD More info | Nov 28, 2011 06:19 | #87 Dee Ann,
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ylw Member 38 posts Joined Jun 2011 More info | Nov 28, 2011 06:27 | #88 melcat wrote in post #13460374 ![]() This is true, but then diffraction becomes a problem. At high magnification the depth of field problem can be solved by focus stacking. But I don't think such high magnifications are being asked for here. Focus stacking isn't the easiest thing in the world. It also requires a tripod because the only thing that should change is the focus, everything else should stay the same. An advantage of full frame for garden photography is the choice of lenses. The 90 tilt-shift is apparently popular for the kind of showy big flowers you get up there in the northern hemisphere. An effective 160mm focal length is IMO too long - I'm often at 100mm with camellias and the like. And the shallow depth of field is helpful in blurring away backgrounds. I use up to 300mm on full frame. Blah blah blah. You and many others seem to be forgetting the camera the OP has right now and what she does with that. Any dslr gives you access to high-end lenses and many other things. The problem with all that is that the photographer wants to buy and actually use those. Not everybody wants to climb up the ladder to reach the professional level. Most simply want to take nice pics with equipment that allows for that. For most it's a hobby, not a profession! That's why I'm not really sure about the macro lens advises here. And I don't think there's any doubt that full frame is the easier format to use for people photography, because you can see facial expressions better in the big finder. If you need a viewfinder to see facial expressions you are doing things rather silly. It means you are using 1 eye which is not a great idea. Use both eyes so you can see things like the facial expression of that one person, other people as well as other things (traffic, dogs running around, etc.). That way you see other things coming which is more safe and a much better idea because you can anticipate better. Also stops blurryness in your eye because you are looking way too long through that viewfinder. To recap: you anticipate better, it is more safe and more comfortable. This works with ANY camera, not just a full frame dslr! The only reason why full frame is easier is in calculations, you don't have to account for the crop factor which can make certain calculations easier. I believe the world is still waiting for a decent fast 85mm equivalent for the 1.6 crop format. Overall, the crop lens selection is incomplete. There are many people who already have found such lens. Things like this is quite personal too. The 5D has a diopter adjustment for the viewfinder (equivalent of built-in reading glasses). I'd hope every Canon DSLR does, but if not, don't buy a camera without it. From what I've seen is that all of the dslr's have this diopter adjustment and in all cases it is a very poor solution because it is very limited: only allows for -2 or +2. Luckily there are eyepiece additions from Canon that allow you to go beyond that.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
JohnB57 Goldmember 1,510 posts Likes: 22 Joined Jul 2010 Location: Holmfirth, Yorkshire, England More info | Nov 28, 2011 06:51 | #89 ylw wrote in post #13461861 ![]() The only reason why full frame is easier is in calculations, you don't have to account for the crop factor which can make certain calculations easier. Which calculations would these be?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
melcat Goldmember 1,122 posts Likes: 5 Joined Nov 2010 Location: Melbourne, Australia More info | Nov 28, 2011 07:10 | #90 ylw wrote in post #13461861 ![]() Blah blah blah. (For those ignoring ylw, that's not my interpolation - it's a direct quote.)
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
y 1600 |
Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
Latest registered member is pop2eye 1573 guests, 206 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 |