Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Gear-Fi: Non-Audio Gear and Gadgets › *Post Lens Comparison Photos* (Previously) I had no idea Camera (Canon DSLR) lenses were that expensive!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

*Post Lens Comparison Photos* (Previously) I had no idea Camera (Canon DSLR) lenses were that... - Page 3

post #31 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L View Post

I've been reading some very nice reviews of the Canon kit lens 18-55 mm like these ones http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EF-S-18-55mm-3-5-5-6-Lens/dp/B000V5K3FG

One of my friends just told me he can't tell much difference in picture quality between his canon 18-55 mm and his Canon 50 mm F1.8.  Could this kit lens be good enough to actually use, at least for around 18-35 mm range, since it's supposed to go soft near 50 mm?  I can't really try my 18-55 mm that just arrived since I put it up on eBay as "new and unused" smily_headphones1.gif


Uh, did you actually sell your 18-55 kit lens already, or just list it? If you didn't actually sell it yet, you might want to just take down the listing if you're considering re-buying the lens you already bought with your camera, and paying more for it the second time. For the money and considering it's a kit, the 18-55 F3.5-5.6 IS (not it's predecessor, the II) is a serious performer. Very sharp, even wide open at 18mm. What it's not is an available light lens, although the IS gives you a bit more headroom in this area.

post #32 of 97
Thread Starter 

I just borrowed a friend's Canon 50mm F1.8 II and snapped a few shots in auto.  50mm is definitely too long for my purposes, and while I liked the PQ with high F (outside shots), the auto shot inside the dim house in F1.8 look too soft.  Since internal shots under dim conditions is what I will constantly run into, does it mean something like Tokina 35mm F2.8 will have even worse time inside dim houses than Canon F1.8?  Does it mean I need to bite the bullet and go with expensive F1.4 or F1.2 type lenses...?  I guess I should look into good 28mm-30mm lenses (Canon 28mm F1.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4?).

 

F/5.6 ISO 100

ImageShack, free image hosting, free video hosting, image hosting, video hosting, photo image hosting site, video hosting site

 

 

F/1.8 ISO 320 

ImageShack, free image hosting, free video hosting, image hosting, video hosting, photo image hosting site, video hosting site


Edited by Jon L - 10/25/10 at 4:18pm
post #33 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L View Post

I just borrowed a friend's Canon 50mm F1.8 II and snapped a few shots in auto.  50mm is definitely too long for my purposes, and while I liked the PQ with high F (outside shots), the auto shot inside the dim house in F1.8 look too soft.  Since internal shots under dim conditions is what I will constantly run into, does it mean something like Tokina 35mm F2.8 will have even worse time inside dim houses than Canon F1.8?  Does it mean I need to bite the bullet and go with expensive F1.4 or F1.2 type lenses...?  I guess I should look into good 28mm-30mm lenses (Canon 28mm F1.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4?).

 

F/5.6 ISO 100

 

F/1.8 ISO 320 

 


What is your shutter speed on these shots? There are a bunch of ways to get more light, F stop being only one of them. Remember your depth of field with F1.8 is going to be very narrow. Going to F1.4 or F1.2 is just going to make it that much narrower, and even more of the shot will be out of focus. If you want the entire room in focus, you can't expect to get that at F1.8. Stop down the lens and increase the ISO and use a slower shutter. You're using an SLR, and depending on the size of the prints you want, ISO 800 is no problem, and 1600 may be usable. If you have a tri-pod and you don't have live subjects, you can keep the shutter open for several full seconds if necessary. Just make sure you get your white balance correct, as that becomes important for longer exposures.

 

Canon's consumer grade 28mm primes are just average, and Sigma's wide angle primes are just plain poor. I wouldn't recommend those. The Tokina is much better.

 

depth-of-field-comparision.jpg


Edited by DaveBSC - 10/25/10 at 5:03pm
post #34 of 97
Thread Starter 

Shutter speed for top photo was 1/250 and bottom one 1/60.  

I just read through the Canon manual, and it doesn't really give you a good tutorials regarding F stop, shutter speed, iso, etc, not in an integrated sense.  Any good on-line tutorials that a DSLR beginner can learn from?  

post #35 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L View Post

Shutter speed for top photo was 1/250 and bottom one 1/60.  

I just read through the Canon manual, and it doesn't really give you a good tutorials regarding F stop, shutter speed, iso, etc, not in an integrated sense.  Any good on-line tutorials that a DSLR beginner can learn from?  


Yeah, you're probably going to have to go way slower than 1/60 if you want to shoot with available light, especially stopped down to F8 or beyond to get the DOF you want. A Speedlite will help of course, but flashguns often create more problems than they solve. For tutorials, I highly recommend the learning section of photo.net, as it focuses not just on the mechanics of setting the exposure, but on the artistic side as well, and "how to do it right". For example interiors: http://photo.net/learn/architectural/interior

 

To learn about the basics of photography, check out the online textbook section: http://photo.net/learn/making-photographs/

 

The camera itself can help you choose your F-stop. Simply press the depth of field preview button after you have focus lock (there's a button for that too, so you don't need the shutter half-pressed) to get an idea of what your image is going to look like, and then you can adjust accordingly.


Edited by DaveBSC - 10/26/10 at 1:35am
post #36 of 97

When you're tackling tough interior conditions, I'd suggest starting by setting the camera to Aperture priority mode. This lets you control the F-stop, and the camera will pick the shutter speed. This may not get you the exact results you want, but it should make things a bit easier while you learn how to do your shots completely manually. In cases where you do want to shoot wide open or close to it, remember that your focal point is critical to getting the shot to come out how you want, and the standard multi-point AF is probably going to get it wrong. You can adjust the points to point the camera in the direction you want, or just go to manual focus and set it yourself. Live view and the ability to zoom way in with the high-res LCD screen makes this task a lot easier than it used to be.

 

Try shooting at several different apertures, and if you're still not happy, you can use exposure compensation to try and help. Exposure bracketing does this automatically, taking several shots both under and overexposed. Assuming you have a static subject, you can string several of these shots together with HDR software to smooth out an image with too much contrast, or you can make colors and highlights pop.

 

seim-hdr-portrait-2.jpg

 


Edited by DaveBSC - 10/26/10 at 1:56am
post #37 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L View Post

Shutter speed for top photo was 1/250 and bottom one 1/60.  

I just read through the Canon manual, and it doesn't really give you a good tutorials regarding F stop, shutter speed, iso, etc, not in an integrated sense.  Any good on-line tutorials that a DSLR beginner can learn from?  


Technical mastery does not an artist make!    If you don't know the basics of photography, you need to get a book or an experienced photographer to learn the basics.  An hour or two shooting side-by-side with an experienced photographer can get you up to speed pretty quickly. Then the best thing to do is practice...after all...practicing is kind of the point...it's all about the journey! smily_headphones1.gif

 

As for online learning material, I really like Luminous Landscape's tutorials. Also, Ken Rockwell's essays are generally spot on.

post #38 of 97

Personally, I feel that Ken Rockwell articles need to be taken with a big grain of salt.

His advice is full of common sense and somewhat well suited to beginners, BUT his advice work for his own personal style of image.

You should always cross reference the information that comes from KR's site, as much of it is conclusions that stem from his own criteria and need, if your criteria and needs are different, his advice are not worth much.

 

The only point I find myself agreeing 100% with KR, and I suspect nearly all photographers do is that what makes or breaks an image is not technique, megapixels... but CLS, or Composition, Lighting and Subject. But nearly all other website take for granted that the photographer already knows that while KR's site puts an emphasis on it.

post #39 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by khaos974 View Post

Personally, I feel that Ken Rockwell articles need to be taken with a big grain of salt.

His advice is full of common sense and somewhat well suited to beginners, BUT his advice work for his own personal style of image.

You should always cross reference the information that comes from KR's site, as much of it is conclusions that stem from his own criteria and need, if your criteria and needs are different, his advice are not worth much.

 

The only point I find myself agreeing 100% with KR, and I suspect nearly all photographers do is that what makes or breaks an image is not technique, megapixels... but CLS, or Composition, Lighting and Subject. But nearly all other website take for granted that the photographer already knows that while KR's site puts an emphasis on it.


On this, I totally agree.  But it is nice that he puts his opinions out there so clearly, since my favorite way to learn is to sample different exemplars of the art...couldn't the same criticism be applied to most any good artist?  The prime reason I referenced Rockwell was for his discussion on the non-technique things...like this one.  Maybe I just like his rants.  Anyway, there are tons of resources online for photography, Luminous Landscape and Ken Rockwell are just two that I have enjoyed.  But the important thing is to get out and make a lot of photos.  Then evaluate those photos to see what you like about them, and apply that feedback in your next outing (this is, IMO, the prime benefit of digital photography...easy immediate feedback).

post #40 of 97

 

Quote:
 I'd recommend the Tokina over the Canon at 35mm. It's more versatile, and the Canon is 20 years old at this point and is past due for a modern replacement with a USM AF drive. I also don't think it's all that great wide open, both in resolution and quality of bokeh, and it has vignetting problems as well. It's performance problems go away at F2.8, but at that point its lost its only edge over the Tokina.

I am not sure about the Tokina, but I had the pleasure of borrowing some of my dad's lenses a week or so ago and could not be more pleased with the 35mm (f/1.4).  It is definitely sharp wide open and a perfect indoor camera for my needs. 

 

I also used the 135 and others mentioned here.  The 135mm f/2 is a great lens, but most of my shots ended up being with the 200mm f/2.8.  The 135 is a one of those in between sizes on the Canon 7D (which I also borrowed) and I usually just went with the 200mm when I wanted something longer than the 35mm.  He also has the 17-55 IS that I am planning on borrowing the next time I go out of town.  He is very fond of that lens and I did not get a chance to use it.

post #41 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by uofmtiger View Post

 

I am not sure about the Tokina, but I had the pleasure of borrowing some of my dad's lenses a week or so ago and could not be more pleased with the 35mm (f/1.4).  It is definitely sharp wide open and a perfect indoor camera for my needs. 

 


There's a big difference between Canon's 35mm F1.4L and 35mm F2. The 1.4L is a pro grade, $1400 lens. The F2 is $300, and it's a little long in the tooth. It's not a bad lens, but I think the Tokina macro has it beat.

post #42 of 97
Thread Starter 

ImageShack, free image hosting, free video hosting, image hosting, video hosting, photo image hosting site, video hosting site

I just played around with someone's Sigma APO 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM, and I definitely do NOT want lenses this large and heavy.  It was a lot heavier and unwieldy than 

I had imagined looking at online pictures.  It seems the Tokina 11-16mm is about the limit for me in terms of what I'm willing to carry around, and I have a new-found appreciation for 

something as light as Canon 50mm F/1.8 and the 18-55mm Kit lens.  Almost decided on the Tokina 35 mm Macro but still trying to research its low-light in-room performance..

post #43 of 97
Thread Starter 

Another thing.  The new Canon t2i takes some beautiful 1080p video, BUT only if you are standing still.  Any walking or moving results in terribly jerky video, unuseable.  Has anyone tried a camera stabilizer such as the one from indiehardware.com?  Cheap and light would be good... The Canon also has issues with "autofocus" during video-shooting.

indiehardware.jpg

post #44 of 97

If you're on a shoestring budget, this $14 stabilizer is easy to DIY.

post #45 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L View Post
 
Almost decided on the Tokina 35 mm Macro but still trying to research its low-light in-room performance..


I really wish somebody would professionally review the Tokina 35 macro as I think a lot of people with the consumer grade Canon and Nikon 35 primes are missing out simply because they don't know it exists. My suggestion would be to just buy one from a place with a good return policy, and try it out. Just about everyone I've seen who's used it loves it. Some examples of what it can do:

 

4665060904_91f9bda9fb.jpg

4665058372_e07bc79e98.jpg

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Gear-Fi: Non-Audio Gear and Gadgets › *Post Lens Comparison Photos* (Previously) I had no idea Camera (Canon DSLR) lenses were that expensive!