Random Photography Stuff

[DibblyDobbler]

RobDickinson said:

If your only shooting base ISO and cant tell the difference anyhow then go for it.

leglessAlex said:

I've been using my mum's 600D for the odd shot here and there, and the main difference between that and the 5D3 I have is ISO performance. 3200 on the 600D is like 12,800 on the 5D3. Well, maybe not quite that extreme but there is a massive gap.

If you never use high ISO then I'd say there are very few drawbacks and none of them very serious...

Thanks for the advice Gents. I will see how I go once I have a try with the Toki

[DibblyDobbler]

LongQ said:

rob0r said:

I'm pondering buying another canon body at the moment as I'm not quite happy with my current kit. I mainly photo my dogs, static cars and holiday snaps, with some occasional motosport. I use either aperture or shutter priority modes.

30d
55-250 is
18-55 is II
50 1.8 II

EOS-M
18-55 ef-m
22 f2 ef-m

I'm not really happy with the photos from the 30d, the image quality doesn't seem great even at iso 100. This is especially the case with the 55-250 which I mostly use. Though I'm happy enough with the IQ of the 50mm. The AF is rapid and is great for the dogs.

I'm very happy with the image quality from the eos-m with either lens. What lets it down from me is the well known AF slowness. It's virtually impossible to focus the dogs on the move! I like the auto iso but I do miss a viewfinder occasionally. I find the eos-m fantastic for static images.

I'm considering what to do next and I've been looking at either buying another body or buying another lens or two for the 30d. In terms of another body I've considered something like a second hand
60d or 7d for around £300-400, but I think I'd still want to replace the 55-250 which may double the budget again (70-200 f4?).

I've also noticed the 100d brand new for around £300 with a highly rated 18-55 stm. I'm not sure I'd gain much with a 60d/7d. The small size should be fine as I don't mind the size of the eos-m at all.

Should I stick with the 30d and buy a lens or two? Or is it so outdated I should buy a different body, if so why not a 100d? Anything else I should consider??

Apologies for the ramble, I really am quite confused!

The 55-250 seems to be well thought of for the price thought things may have moved on for non-Canon lenses in that price range.

Personally I would be looking at updating the body and trying it with the existing lens to see how you feel about it before making a lens change decision. I think there should be much to gain in the body area alone. The decision about which body to move too is really about understanding what the differences are between the xxxD, xxD and xD offerings. Then decide which of the differences are most important to you. How the camera handles may be as important as the feature list. Maybe more important.

Yep - I'd go for a body update as a 30D is pretty long in the tooth now. Also the most recent 55-250 STM version is excellent and can be had for £100ish!

[DibblyDobbler]

Dan_1981 said:

Second - a question: Is there a go to Nikon fit, af-s wide angle?

Siggy 10-20 would be the obvious answer (I had the Canon version a while back and liked it) - however maybe the Toki 11-16 if you don't mind the restricted range (I just bought one of these as part of my downsizing drive ).

[DibblyDobbler]

I'm off up to Torridon tomorrow - nar-nee-nar-nar

That's all

[DibblyDobbler]

Comacchio said:

Enjoy! Want to see some nice wide angle shots.. help me make this decision!

Allan

Cheers - yes I will do just that

[DibblyDobbler]

Comacchio said:

Well DD... what's the verdict on the Tokina? What's the difference between the two 11-16s on

http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Tokina/Tokina-C...

?

Cheers,

Allan

Well. Not done anything too scientific but I did try a test shot out the window of the Hotel at Torridon:

Tammy 16-300 at 16mm
v
Toki 11-16 at 16mm
v
Canon 16-35 F4L at 16mm

I was fully expecting the Canon to be great, the Tammy to be crap and the Toki in the middle somewhere...

However much to my surprise I did some pixel peeping on a distant building and the Tammy and Toki were both pretty good and both 'better' than the Canon

So I need to do further tests but the Toki (original cheaper one) seems perfectly acceptable and has the bonus of going to f2.8. The downside is that it's got so little zoom it's virtually a prime. I'll post up more shots when I get a chance

[DibblyDobbler]

Right - make of this what you will. Three shots at 16mm all out the window of DD towers this evening. Not much in it if you look at the whole images on a screen - the colours are less vivid on the Tokina (maybe more true to life), but it has most detail in the shadows. The Tamron has way more distortion. I had a good old pixel peep and the Tamron is clearly last (no surprise as it's a superzoom) and the other two are pretty close - Tokina by a nose maybe.

It's not that scientific but may be of some interest - comments welcome



Tamron 16-300 @16mm by Mike Smith, on Flickr



Tokina 11-16 @16mm by Mike Smith, on Flickr



Canon 16-35 F4L @16mm by Mike Smith, on Flickr

[DibblyDobbler]

Hi All. I'm selling my 6D - Anybody know a decent method of getting the shutter count? Tried Eosinfo but no joy ...

TIA

[DibblyDobbler]

Right - my back-to-basics downsizing drive is nearly complete!

The Out Column
Canon 6D
Canon 16-35 F4L
Canon 24-105 F4L
Canon MPE-65
Samyang 14mm f2.8

The In column
Canon 100D - 150D soon I hope if they ever get round to releasing it!
Sigma 17-50 f2.8 - arrived today - seems really sharp and nice and compact
Tokina 11-16 f2.8 - wide angle for lanscapes - seems very sharp and again compact
Canon 100mm - new macro lens to be used with Raynox 150 or 250 to give up to 2x mag

Keeping
Canon 400m f5.6 - great birdy lens, best you can do without buying something huge and expensive

Undecided
Tamron 16-300 - Hmm, not sure if I will keep this or use my new 17-50 for walkabout duties... probably sell

Oh and ps - I'm about £1500 up after all this

[DibblyDobbler]

LongQ said:

I'd put it somewhere safe DD.

You'll probably need a Full Frame Fix in the New Year ....

I'm not even going to fight it when the urge comes LQ

[DibblyDobbler]

Good work that man! Us Boys need our toys!

Ps - when are you up here again? Soon isn't it?

[DibblyDobbler]

RobDickinson said:

I must be feeling off nothing I want to buy at the moment.

Well I wouldnt mind an 11-24 or an a7r2 or a 17tse but really I can live happily without them. Oh mebe another good tripod..

I'd like to see what you could do with the 11-24 Rob - it looks like a beast!

[DibblyDobbler]

LongQ said:

The Week after next. Logistics still a little bit of a grey area but I'm working on finding out what the likely plans are.

Of course my thoughts have, obviously, been addressing possible photographic opportunities and I have a shopping list of bits and pieces that might be useful to aid the creative attempts whilst "on location".

Well let me know if you fancy a bridge one evening

[DibblyDobbler]

Mr Will said:

Thought I'd chip in on this one since it never got answered.

Starting with the basics; even if you are in manual mode your flash will still be automatic - the camera will turn it's power up or down to achieve the "correct" exposure. Flash Exposure Compensation allows you to turn the exposure up and down relative to the camera's notion of "correct" in the same way that regular exposure compensation works in Av/Tv mode. You shouldn't need to mess with it just because you are changing other settings.

The other settings can make a difference to the amount of flash power required though. Aperture and ISO both affect the flash in the same way that they affect any other light. The big difference is that the shutter speed does not affect the flash exposure. This allows you to adjust the balance between the flash and ambient lighting by using a longer or shorter shutter speed.

The final factor is distance. Light is subject to the inverse square law and loses half it's power every time you double the distance. This is why bouncing flash requires a much more powerful light - taking the long way round greatly reduces it's effectiveness.

Now why isn't your flash making a difference at f16? You were correct in your assumption that your flash is hitting maximum power and has no more to give. The subject is close, which is giving you an advantage but it's not enough to overcome the tiny aperture. If you don't want to open the aperture (and don't want to buy a bigger flash!) then your options are limited. Extending the shutter duration will allow in more ambient, but that will likely make little difference compared to the extremely bright flash. You can't move closer, you can't turn the flash up any more and so that just leaves the ISO. Moving from ISO100 to 200 will double the effectiveness of the flash, reducing the power required from 120% to 60% (for example). Going to 400 would drop that to 30%.

Apologies for a slightly rambling explanation, but I hope that sheds some light on how it works

Excellent - Thankyou very much!

I am only just now beginning to realise how much I don't know - how the flash works is a particularly grey area. One other thing you might know - for macro I have a MT24-ex twin flash. Quite a fancy thing but I just use it on Manual (camera on manual also: 1/200 + f14 ish). Somebody was saying that if I fire the flash at 1/2 power or 1/4 or 1/8 etc I am increasing the effective shutter speed as the flash is firing for a shorter duration as I dial back the power. Does that seem right? Thanks

[DibblyDobbler]

Mr Will said:

That is correct BUT the flash duration will be very short even on full power. 1/1000 of a second would be pretty typical. Unless you are trying to freeze a hummingbird in flight you probably don't need to worry about it.

Thanks again Mr Will - appreciate the sensible replies. (LQ - 15 minutes on the naughty step!)

[DibblyDobbler]

Simpo Two said:

If you want to try flash photography seriously, get an external Speedlight. You'll have much more power, the ability to operate it manually, off-camera flash, strobe... I was photographing an orchid in a wood a few days ago and used the modelling light function - just enough to cheer up the subject without turning it into a white stick. If you fancy a Nikon SB-800 let me know.

Thanks Simpo - I will do some digging...

[DibblyDobbler]

Simpo Two said:

LongQ said:

Now now Mr. Simpo. Tempting Mr. DD into an entire system change in order to experience the joys of flash photography may break the rules of engagement for the thread.

Ah, it never occurred to me he might not use Nikon

Actually I believe the Nikon SB-800 would work on a Canon Body so not so daft

[DibblyDobbler]

Dan_1981 said:

For used / 2nd hand kit do people just head to ebay?

Or is there a particular forum with a decent for sale section?

Hi Dan

I use eBay, Gumtree and Talk Photography (for TP you need to satisfy various requirements - eg having been a member for a certain time with a certain number of (genuine) posts etc). What are you after ?

[DibblyDobbler]

New? - the used ones on eBay are not massively cheaper so worth considering...

[DibblyDobbler]

Got my new body yesterday.... 760D (Liked the 100D so much I had to sell it.)

Just ordered a 15-85 to go with it - Uncle Ken said 'If you can't shoot it with this lens, it can't be shot.' so how could I not!?

Also Have a Toki 11-16 for wide angle (possible upgrade to Toki 11-20 but 82mm filters is off-putting)

Have a Siggy 17-50 which is great but 50 is just not enough reach and I very rarely shoot wide open so it is for the chop I think.

Still got my 100mm for macro

Still got my 400mm for wildlife

All good fun