Canon eos 10d: Anyone using one??
19 October 2003, 07:19 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 9,781
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re: 300d metering. Yes, it does tend to over-read by 1/3rd of a stop - but that's easily accounted for. Interestingly, it doesn't do this in the 'preset' modes, only the 'creative modes' (which is all I use)
19 October 2003, 08:23 PM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't bother trying to get the images from the camera - just take the card (CF, probably) out and stick it in a USB reader. Much faster and possibly more reliable.
Even the firewire link to my DSLR is desperately slow for downloading many images compared with taking the CF card out and putting it in a reader - it's great for tethered shooting mind
Even the firewire link to my DSLR is desperately slow for downloading many images compared with taking the CF card out and putting it in a reader - it's great for tethered shooting mind
19 October 2003, 09:56 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Contax G1 with the Zeiss 45mm
Cheers
19 October 2003, 10:24 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My father-in-law has a 10D. It is an excellent piece of kit, unless you want to shoot landscapes (effective 1.6x multipler means that the best wideangle you can get is the equivalent of a 22.4mm lens on a 35mm film camera, and the 14mm Canon lens required to do it will cost you £1,500!).
I have picures shot with it blown up to A3, and they are fantastic. Whilst the sharpness/resolution does not compare with shooting on transparency film like Velvia 50, it is easily as good as a quality print film like Superia 200. At higher ISO setting (i.e. 1600ASA), it is probably better than the film equivalent. Also, build quality and handling are superb too. I would thoroughly recommend it. After using his camera, I nearly ordered one myself. Then I remembered that I mainly shoot landscapes!
I have picures shot with it blown up to A3, and they are fantastic. Whilst the sharpness/resolution does not compare with shooting on transparency film like Velvia 50, it is easily as good as a quality print film like Superia 200. At higher ISO setting (i.e. 1600ASA), it is probably better than the film equivalent. Also, build quality and handling are superb too. I would thoroughly recommend it. After using his camera, I nearly ordered one myself. Then I remembered that I mainly shoot landscapes!
19 October 2003, 10:29 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tip: Sigma 15-30 f3.5-4.5 DG EX lens, £420. I use one on my D30 (same 1.6x crop) and it's indispensible. It's somewhat prone to flare, but that's not too much of a problem in this country
19 October 2003, 10:37 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Gloucestershire, home of the lawnmower.
Posts: 4,531
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andy, I looked at the 15-30 but went for the 17-35 instead. Still prone to flare mind. Very fast focusing though on my 10D.
Cheers
Ian
P.S. Some flare, yesterday:
[Edited by IWatkins - 10/19/2003 10:37:54 PM]
Cheers
Ian
P.S. Some flare, yesterday:
[Edited by IWatkins - 10/19/2003 10:37:54 PM]
19 October 2003, 10:38 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cheers Toonman,its a great camera,I never use my OM1n anymore since getting it
Luke
you can pick up a G1 for silly money,no more than £150,and you can get a 45mm for £100,£200 brand new from Ffordes.The autofocus is slower,that being the biggest difference.G2s still fetch a premium though.
£250 for a camera that will produce results comparable,some would say better, than Leitz,and over a grand cheaper
Luke
you can pick up a G1 for silly money,no more than £150,and you can get a 45mm for £100,£200 brand new from Ffordes.The autofocus is slower,that being the biggest difference.G2s still fetch a premium though.
£250 for a camera that will produce results comparable,some would say better, than Leitz,and over a grand cheaper
19 October 2003, 10:40 PM
#45
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canon 17-35 or other? Flare when the sun is in the frame is acceptable, the real issue is when the light source is out of the frame, but hits the front element from the side, seriously reducing contrast (lens hood helps).
19 October 2003, 10:41 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice shot, Ian - the joys of manual exposure control, no doubt 
There's always the new 12-24mm Sigma to consider too, it's just been announced. Might be worth a look?
A.
There's always the new 12-24mm Sigma to consider too, it's just been announced. Might be worth a look?
A.
19 October 2003, 10:51 PM
#48
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Worth mentioning though that the 12-24mm Sigma and Nikon lenses only work with the digital bodies with under-size sensors (can't remember the dimensions). The image circle does not encompass the whole 35mm frame, so thay cannot be used on a film SLR body (other than APS), or a digital body with a full size sensor (like the Canon D1s for example). Even the Sigma 15-30mm shows pretty bad vignetting (darkening at the corners) on a film / full size sensor camera.
[Edited by dr_ming - 10/19/2003 10:54:53 PM]
[Edited by dr_ming - 10/19/2003 10:54:53 PM]
19 October 2003, 10:56 PM
#49
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that's true of the Nikon, but not the Sigma that was announced a few days ago. The Sigma comes in all the usual mounts and is quoted as having a 122 degree FoV on 35mm. We'll have to wait and see what the vignetting is like.
I've occasionally used the 15-30 on my EOS 33 and been very happy with the results, especially stopped down. Perhaps I should scan and post an example.
I've occasionally used the 15-30 on my EOS 33 and been very happy with the results, especially stopped down. Perhaps I should scan and post an example.
19 October 2003, 11:02 PM
#50
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
digital bodies with under-size sensors
19 October 2003, 11:05 PM
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was talking about wide open. As you say, stopping down usually cures / reduces vignetting problems. Interesting what you say about the Sigma 12-24. I had heard differently, but if what you say is true, I'd be very interested in buying one.
19 October 2003, 11:13 PM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AndyC, Just taken a look at the Sigma website and you are quite correct. Any idea of the price? 122 degrees FOV is quite something.
WRT the Nikon 12-24. Seems unwise to use this on a film camera. It is difficult to see vignetting in the viewfinder unless it is very severe, would result in a lot of ruined shots I'm sure.
WRT the Nikon 12-24. Seems unwise to use this on a film camera. It is difficult to see vignetting in the viewfinder unless it is very severe, would result in a lot of ruined shots I'm sure.
19 October 2003, 11:23 PM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Andy was referring to overall levels of sharpness/contrast.
It increases the problem, due to greater DOF. Potential problems on the outer edges of the lens area, become more noticable, due to the larger zone of apparent sharpness. Filters, lens hoods etc, can get in the way, and whilst there may not be a problem wide open, once stopped down, trouble can reveal itself. The fall off on the CCD, whilst always noticable, would have a crisper edge to it. Both of course, would be unacceptable to most.
As for the 12-24 Nikon not working on 35mm SLRs; don't knock it till you try it! I have (as have many others), and providing you don't overstep the limits, there's no vignetting. Take it from me; no wasted film! 
Cheers
stopping down usually cures / reduces vignetting problems
As for the 12-24 Nikon not working on 35mm SLRs; don't knock it till you try it!
I have (as have many others), and providing you don't overstep the limits, there's no vignetting. Take it from me; no wasted film! Cheers
19 October 2003, 11:27 PM
#55
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It increases the problem, due to greater DOF.
As for the Nikon lens, I'll take you word for it, since I use Canon gear (no criticism of Nikon though, it's equally good stuff).
19 October 2003, 11:40 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
19 October 2003, 11:48 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ming
I don't have the time or inclination to argue with you. If you think stopping a lens down helps to stop vignetting, then shoot away. Wack on loads of filters and nice big lens hoods to your wide angle lenses, and stop down till your heart's content!
http://www.tanchung.com/canon/ef20mmf28u.htm
Night!
I don't have the time or inclination to argue with you. If you think stopping a lens down helps to stop vignetting, then shoot away. Wack on loads of filters and nice big lens hoods to your wide angle lenses, and stop down till your heart's content!
One conclusion that I reached was that stopping down the lens, going from f2.8 to even f 11 with the 20mm wide angle lens did not decrease the vignetting one bit. Vignetting is strictly related to focal length.
Night!
20 October 2003, 12:05 AM
#59
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, now I see what you're getting at. With vignetting due to a filter/hood etc. (as per the URL you gave), you are totally correct. Stopping down just gives a sharper black circle, i.e worse.
However, the term vignetting is also used (incorrectly) to describe the light fall off at the lens edges (usually in wide-angles), which is what I was referring to above. This phenomena IS reduced / eliminated by stopping down the lens.
Sorry for the misunderstanding
However, the term vignetting is also used (incorrectly) to describe the light fall off at the lens edges (usually in wide-angles), which is what I was referring to above. This phenomena IS reduced / eliminated by stopping down the lens.
Sorry for the misunderstanding
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post