Ronin Posted August 14, 2009 Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 FWIW, I checked in with my friend who's camera I borrowed with similar frustration. Guess what, it was also the 75-300. Thanks for this link Andei3000: And I'm sorry to say, but you got one of the worst lenses for the Canon system (according to fredmiranda:). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted August 14, 2009 Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 FWIW, I checked in with my friend who's camera I borrowed with similar frustration. Guess what, it was also the 75-300. Looking at the problems I was having with my 200mm and looking at Freddy's issues, I must say I overstated my problems - what I was perceiving as problems were just minor niggles compared to what you 300mm users have come across. I'm glad I didn't get the 300mm lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted August 14, 2009 Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 Oh, now I've got a bunch of captive Canon 400D users in front of me, if you want a tip, here's mine: Buy the f1.8 50mm lens. It's the best value lens you will ever come across. It's less than $100 and will take better pictures of your kids, pets, large objects, etc. It's also a light bucket. It can be a little tricky getting it to focus on stuff at fully open, but that's because the DoF is paper-thin; learn to use it and you'll be exceedingly happy with the results. Yes, the f1.4 is a better lens, but it's three-times the cost. For the money, you cannot get a better portrait lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted August 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 Pug, even among your library of outstanding pics, these are stand-outs. Wow!!!!!! That engine pic is jaw-dropping (literally, my jaw dropped when I saw it) & exactly the quality I am after. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted August 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 F333- Give this a try- Put your Canon glass back on, and hold your Zeiss lens to the Canon lens inverted. This should allow you the ability to take some close macros as per Pugs' tutorial. This method produces some crazy shallow DoF and vignetting, but you can get some sharp detail as well. Thanks for the tip, Ubi. I will give that a try when either of the 2 Canon lenses (100mm f2.8 macro & EF-S 55-250 f/4.5-6 IS zoom) arrives within the next week or 2 (since returning the 75-300 yesterday, I am photographically Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted August 14, 2009 Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 Heheh. Very common noob reaction to his first DSLR shots... "This thing sucks!! My P&S was better!!" Your DSLR is not going to do the in-camera sharpening, contrast enhancement, color saturation, etc. That handheld P&S pic of the Rolex you showed is definitely oversharpened. With the DSLR, images come out a little soft, dull, and neutral. This is desirable, and is where post processing comes in. You will find that different images will always require different levels of sharpness, and brightness/contrast, levels, curves, etc. There's no one generic group of settings that is ideal for every images. So post processing gives you the freedom to get each image right. But if you want the camera to do it all for you, P&S might be a better option. Or, alternatively, you can use the auto settings in the camera. You can do things like boosting color saturation, sharpness, and contrast. I prefer to keep those settings at 0, and adjust them myself rather than using camera presets which are never ideal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted August 14, 2009 Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 Nice shots Pug. The 50/1.8 is indeed a fantastic bargain. I have the 50/1.4. The main differences are the 1.4 focuses faster, obviously is a ~half stop faster, and has a much smoother bokeh. That first pic would really illustrate the smoothness in the bokeh. If you look at the trees in the background behind the fence, that bokeh is rather harsh in that shot, whereas with the 1.4 it'd be smooth and creamy. For the difference in price, though, these differences don't matter to some people. Oh, now I've got a bunch of captive Canon 400D users in front of me, if you want a tip, here's mine: Buy the f1.8 50mm lens. It's the best value lens you will ever come across. It's less than $100 and will take better pictures of your kids, pets, large objects, etc. It's also a light bucket. It can be a little tricky getting it to focus on stuff at fully open, but that's because the DoF is paper-thin; learn to use it and you'll be exceedingly happy with the results. Yes, the f1.4 is a better lens, but it's three-times the cost. For the money, you cannot get a better portrait lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted August 14, 2009 Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 After seeing Pugs' pic above... I've realized that I need to get a decent zoom lens as well... Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS Lots of bang for the buck in that one. I love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted August 14, 2009 Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 Nice shots Pug. The 50/1.8 is indeed a fantastic bargain. I have the 50/1.4. The main differences are the 1.4 focuses faster, obviously is a ~half stop faster, and has a much smoother bokeh. That first pic would really illustrate the smoothness in the bokeh. If you look at the trees in the background behind the fence, that bokeh is rather harsh in that shot, whereas with the 1.4 it'd be smooth and creamy. For the difference in price, though, these differences don't matter to some people. A friend lent me an f1.4 for a week so I got very familiar with it. It feels less cheap and does as you say give significantly better bokeh, but it was three times the price. Like the L series lenses, I am far too poor and amateur to justify spending that sort of money. One day, though. One day ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted August 14, 2009 Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS Lots of bang for the buck in that one. I love it. That would have to be a stupid amount of bang for $1,600. I couldn't conceive of spending that on a lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted August 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 14, 2009 That would have to be a stupid amount of bang for $1,600. I couldn't conceive of spending that on a lens. Ditto that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 That would have to be a stupid amount of bang for $1,600. I couldn't conceive of spending that on a lens. It's a very versatile lens. And the picture quality is fantastic. Once you get in to the longer zooms to 400mm and beyond, the good ones get very spendy, very fast. And the cheaper ones aren't worth their weight in sand. This price point of $1500 represents a lot of value, all things considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 It's a very versatile lens. And the picture quality is fantastic. Once you get in to the longer zooms to 400mm, the good ones get very spendy, very fast. And the cheaper ones aren't worth their weight in sand. This price point of $1500 represents a lot of value, all things considered. I'm sure it's worth it if you need it, but for that money, I can pay someone to carry me closer to the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 I'm sure it's worth it if you need it, but for that money, I can pay someone to carry me closer to the subject. Haha. Well, not when the subject might run or fly away when you get closer. Or if the subject is on the pitch or baseball field or football field, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 Here are a few I took with my stock lens when I first got my EOS. No idea what lens it is (aside from being an 18mm - 55mm zoom that came with the camera): Not bad for no frills, I suppose... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gioarmani Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 Is that an old Jag straight 6? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 Is that an old Jag straight 6? I have no idea. I found it in the middle of a field in the highlands of Scotland. There was a broken-down Reliant Scimitar nearby, so it was most likely a Ford 2.5l, which looks about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted August 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 Ford, possibly, but not a Jag. Whatever it is, it makes for a beautiful picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted August 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 A couple of(hand-held) RAW shots with Zeiss Planar lens held in front of the 400D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugwash Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 Nice. The non-fixed nature of the lens gives it a tilt-shift feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted August 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 That & the tight dof, which I love. It was also fortuitous that I decided to take those shots because, as you can see above ROLEX, there was a bit of debris stuck under the hour hand that was slowly rubbing against the paint on the dial. It was only after I started viewing these pics that I saw it. Fortunately, after removing the grit below the hand & buffing the mark with a clean piece of Rodico, you cannot see it with the naked eye (though it is slightly visible through a loupe). Talking about dodging a bullet. Here is a new shot (taken with the Zeiss Planar lens held in front of the 400D) I am still not getting the full potential of the lens since the lens is not fixed to the camera body & I am unable to hold (& keep) everything together & aligned by hand. But I think it is clear, now, that once the new Canon lenses arrive, the camera should do just fine. Thanks Pug & All. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 Those close up shots look good. I think you'll benefit greatly with the new lens... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demsey Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 I can pay someone to carry me closer to the subject. OMG! I laughed. I found it in the middle of a field in the highlands of Scotland. How much were they asking? Great thread, I learned a lot. I have always (thought I) wanted a DSLR, but I have no 'real' use for it and it would be a senseless self indulgence. You know, like having $1750 invested in 7 replica Rolex watches. Will be anxiously waiting for Freddy to get up to speed with the new kit. Good things coming for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gliptopolis Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 great shots Freddy. The 75-300 lens is a great lens for an undiscerning eye ;-) I started with one on my first DSLR and loved it...right up until I saw what a great lens was capable of. You have an excellent camera body and don't need to worry about it. I guarantee that you'll be able to take MUCH better pictures with it than a p&s once you get accustomed to using it. I took this with a Canon DSLR and Canon lens and got it on the first try: Shot in RAW and used adobe RAW processor to set white balance in post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted August 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 The Canon EF-S 55-250mm lens just arrived. So, finally, once again, I have a complete, working camera that does not require hand-holding a lens Compared to the SX10IS, what I lost in zoom-ability, the 400D/55-250 combo gains in producing significantly less noise & color fringing This may work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now