Myth, Folklore and Subjectivity of Gear Fora

Tom W wrote in post #2290391
Mental image crushed....

....fortunately.

Yeah right, but you probably had lottsa fun with it while it lasted, eh ?

saravrose wrote in post #2290229
oops.. typo.. truly.. I didn't mean waitress I meant Server... sorry....

The man has just come out of the closet, let him bask in his own glory, and be proud of who he is as a man!

Of course this is a thread about photography myths............

:p

rhys wrote in post #2290222
I just saw the other thread entitled "Myth, Folklore and Subjectivity of Gear Fora" and decided that as it was mostly about L glass that I'd start a new thread.

I have heard the following:
1. Canon XT can't focus. Can't take good pictures. It's plastic and flimsy.
2. Tamron lenses are inadequate.
3. Canon 18-55 is useless.
4. Canon 50 f1.8 is brilliant.
5. ProMaster and Tiffin filters are rubbish.
6. Canon BG-E3 is overpriced.
7. Sigma cannot focus.

My experiences:
1. The XT can focus but has problems in low light. A 420EX helps a lot. Focus does seem a little indefinite at times but allowing adequate depth of field should solve that most of the time. A lot of focus issues can be avoided by simply learning how to use the gear you have.
2. I have no problems with my Tamron 17-35 or my 28-75. My Tamron 70-300 doesn't seem to get on too well with my XT. Sometimes it'll work without a problem. Other times I just get endless ERR99. It's not dirt-related but rather -I suspect- light level related. As an example, I put the 70-300 on in order to shoot animals in the zoo. I took 120+ photos without a problem, never removing the lens. Suddenly I had an ERR99. I powered down, powered up and started shooting again. I never had an ERR99 for the rest of the day (I shot a further 100 photos before removing the lens for the first time).
3. The Canon 18-55 is useless. No it's not - as long as it's on a tripod and set at f8-f16. Then it can be amazingly sharp.
4. The Canon 50 f1.8 is brilliant. It might be good value for money but it's still incapable of taking a decent photo. Focussing is always soft - at all apertures and even when on a tripod. I'd rate it on a par with the lens from a throwaway film camera.
5. ProMaster filters are quite decent if you work within their limitations. They're not coated so they really need to be removed for long exposures. They will reflect light so you do need a lens hood and/or shade. Many people mistake camera movement and tiny amounts of flare for softness. It's just not so.
6. The Canon BG-E3 seems expensive but it works. It's made by Canon. It works on my XT. As far as cheaper alternatives are concerned, I always wonder if cheap does not degrade performance. I'm happy with mine. Having said that I bought it more because I could use AA batteries in an emergency than for any other reason.
7. I don't have any Sigma lenses. I had a manual focus Sigma 600mm mirror lens that was widely derided but which gave me excellent photos. Logic dictates that if Sigma and Canon just didn't work, Sigma would stop making Canon mount lenses. I believe this to be an urban myth.

Thank you for that thorough analysis, brother Rhys. I'd subscribe to No.1 as well.....again, contrary to the popular myth, those entry cameras are much better than many folks give them credit for.....particularly now with the advent of the 400D which is an eminently capable and well priced camera in my beady eyes.

PetKal wrote in post #2290998
Thank you for that thorough analysis, brother Rhys. I'd subscribe to No.1 as well.....again, contrary to the popular myth, those entry cameras are much better than many folks give them credit for.....particularly now with the advent of the 400D which is an eminently capable and well priced camera in my beady eyes.

Having worked out the tricks with the XT/350D I'd buy another as a backup body for wedding photography.

Moppie wrote in post #2290651
The man has just come out of the closet, let him bask in his own glory, and be proud of who he is as a man!

Of course this is a thread about photography myths............

:p

Moppie, one is typically proud of a quality one attains after a lengthy and arduous struggle. In my case, no effort, no pride......I have always been there firmly positioned hormonally (and otherwise) as a quintessential mensch. Want a proof....OK, I need not any stinkin IS on my telephoto lenses. There, that hopefully did it.

• The best setting shooting a wedding, during *any* circumstance is 1/250s @ f/22 at ISO 50, especially in dim churches - the minister speaks so fast! All other settings will show you what an amateur you are (an advice I'd love to give sometime when someone ask "what settings do you use for wedding photography?")

• A professional is someone who conduct themselves professionally and know their equipment, and a pro is not a person who work with photography as a profession (I guess those can behave like jerks?).

• Yes, you will take good images if you buy the same equipment as me, as it's the camera that does all the work, and I just hold it up and press a button (I know this has been covered, but I just hate that part - *I* take the pictures *with* the camera).

• Professionals only shoot in RAW (as they think JPEG is an inferior quality)!

• Professionals only shoot in JPEG (as they get it right in the camera and don't need to post process).

• Professionals only shoots with 1Ds Mark II's!

• Professionals doesn't shoot with 35 mm equivalent cameras, Hassy is the way to go!

• Professionals only work in Adobe RGB (even if the labs seldom accepts it).

• PC's are better than Mac's for post processing.

• Mac's are better than PC's for post processing.

• Nikon is better than Canon.

• Canon is better than Nikon.

OK... I think I've covered a few more myths.

PetKal wrote in post #2291020
.............I have always been there firmly positioned hormonally (and otherwise) as a quintessential mensch. Want a proof....OK, I need not any stinkin IS on my telephoto lenses. There, that hopefully did it.

Two classic myths!




I just found another myth too:

You have to be an experianced amature, or a proffesional before you can use an SLR.

CyberPet wrote in post #2291031
•
• A professional is someone who conduct themselves professionally and know their equipment, and a pro is not a person who work with photography as a profession (I guess those can behave like jerks?).

• Yes, you will take good images if you buy the same equipment as me, as it's the camera that does all the work, and I just hold it up and press a button (I know this has been covered, but I just hate that part - *I* take the pictures *with* the camera).

• Professionals only shoot in RAW (as they think JPEG is an inferior quality)!

• Professionals only shoots with 1Ds Mark II's!

•
• Canon is better than Nikon.

OK... I think I've covered a few more myths.

Hey, you honoris causa Canuck ! I especially like those highlited , thanx a lot.

Here are a few popular myths. If I missed any, please fill them in for me, thanks.

*If you can't focus on a line of batteries, your lens is soft. or front focusing, or back focusing, and needs to be recalibrated.

*if your crooked shot of a test pattern is not sharp your lens is soft. or front focusing, or back focusing, and needs to be recalibrated.

*if you cannot get a good shot off no matter how hard you try, it must be a bad lens.

*if you cannot get a good shot off no matter how hard you try, it must be user error.

*there are myths on the internet.

The 300mm f/4L is so much sharper than the 300mm f/4L IS.... that the IS lens is junk.

And yet, the 400mm f/5.6L is no good because it does not have IS...

There are four generations of IS

The tape trick works every time with no harm to your equipment.

Let's NOT discuss the "X-Factor"

Newbs with 1Ds should be tarred and feathered..

The Bigma is just as good at everything as the 100-400mm (dons asbestos suit)

A "new replacement" for the 100-400mm can be f/4 or 500mm @ f/5.6 and still be hand holdable for long periods of time.

* I have enough lenses, I don't need any more
* You have to buy SanDisk Extreme CF cards, otherwise you'll lose all your shots
* We all laugh at people who chimp

Ahh, forgot that one.

Chimpers should be accepted and treated like normal people

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #2293861
The 300mm f/4L is so much sharper than the 300mm f/4L IS.... that the IS lens is junk.

And yet, the 400mm f/5.6L is no good because it does not have IS...

I see what you are labouring to suggest Cyber, here is my comment:

(1) 400-300=100mm.
Thus the 400 f/5.6 begins to need an IS upgrade which however will not kill the IQ.

(2) Real men do not need IS @ measly 300 mm, all the way down to 1/80 sec or so. Now, who the heck is shootin wildlife @ 1/80sec.?

Oh, did I imply that you were contradicting your own bad self from post to post, thread to thread with inconsistent demand for IS on one hand and disdain for IS on the other?

Me?

Never in life dear Sir.
That you drew such a conclusion leads me to ponder your own sense of conscience ..

So based on your updated explanation,. real men don't need IS,...
until we reach 400mm where even the most macho of us all may need a little stability infusion?

I said I would not bring the Myths of the "X-Factor" into this, and yet...

So if 300mm on full frame is fine with no IS, what then on a 1.6x crop?

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #2294095
Oh, did I imply that you were contradicting your own bad self from post to post, thread to thread with inconsistent demand for IS on one hand and disdain for IS on the other?

Me?

Never in life dear Sir.
That you drew such a conclusion leads me to ponder your own sense of conscience ..

So based on your updated explanation,. real men don't need IS,...
until we reach 400mm where even the most macho of us all may need a little stability infusion?

I said I would not bring the Myths of the "X-Factor" into this, and yet...

So if 300mm on full frame is fine with no IS, what then on a 1.6x crop?

I have no problem with it either, however, that's irrelevant. Only she-men need the 1.6 FOVCF because they do not have either the cunning or the requisite agility to approach their subjects. He-men shoot with FF or 1.3 FOVCF.

I am off to the lake now to shoot miself some duck......finally some sunshine today....gotta work on the Cyberduck project. Got my kneepads on as well as the best birding lens ever (next to the 35L)....the mighty 135L non-IS. Mwuahahahaha.