Board logo

標題: Filters [打印本頁]
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-12 23:40     標題: Filters

I am kinda thinking about getting a filter......
which is more oftenly used?

CPL? ND? or grad ND?
作者: Lik    時間: 2011-5-12 23:58

CPL will be a lot more useful than than ND filters la. Besides, you can think of a CPL as an ND filter as well (usually an ND4).

Unless you are really into shooting waterfalls, bodies of water, etc., I really can't think of very many uses for ND filters (graduated or not). But if those are your type of thing, then only the ND filters will do the trick. But even then, you'd still need to get at least a few of them so that you can pick the right one for situation at hand.

-Lik
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-13 00:05

to tell the truth
I have a 58mm CPL, but don't think I used it much either ^_^;;;
but you are also right that I don't shoot water/waterfall very much (I do like those kind of things, but I don't always find one to shoot at)

just that the lens I use very often now is 67mm, so I do need a new filter
I was thinking about using a CPL as a ND too

but just don't know how many stops would it be equivalent to.......
作者: Lik    時間: 2011-5-13 01:01

本帖最後由 Lik 於 2011-5-13 01:06 編輯

The biggest use of a polarizer is to get that deep blue sky effect. I personally love that colour, even if it may look a little cliche. Besides, the CPL helps with colour saturation, a problem that that is common to my stupid camera. So if I am out shooting non-people pictures, it is always good to carry around.

The thing with regular ND filters is, except for shooting bodies of water where you want the lengthen the exposure time by a sufficiently large amount, I really can't think of any other uses for them. For something of such limited use, you really want to think it over if it'd be worth your while.

For graduated ND filters, I suppose you could use that in more situations than the regular ND filters. But again, how often will you use it?

Last but not least, the last time when I bought a CPL, I simply bought a cheapa$$ eBay one for $10 - $15. It worked well, even though I'm pretty sure it wasn't a multi-coated CPL as the guy had advertised. A true multi-coated CPL of the same size would have costed me nearly $200 from B&H; even a non-multi-coated one was something in the $150 - $160 range. At a 10th of the price, there is no way in hell I'd buy a brand name one from camera stores.

-Lik

p.s. In my experience, CPL's usually soak up ~2 stops' worth of light, but there will likely be some variance depending on the filter. At any rate, it's easy enough to tell if you were to do a simple comparison test, shooting the exact same scene under identical lighting condition with and without the CPL. And when you are doing the comparison test shot, don't forget to adjust the CPL correctly as well.
作者: Look4chrisng    時間: 2011-5-13 04:17

You can also stack 2 CPL filters to make it a 300xND filter by changing the orientations of the each filter.  It gets really crazy.
作者: Look4chrisng    時間: 2011-5-13 04:33



f22/0.8sec

Shooting people with slow shutter is fun.
作者: sheep    時間: 2011-5-13 07:24

The biggest use of a polarizer is to get that deep blue sky effect.
Lik 發表於 2011-5-13 01:01


I rather would say no, because, to my limited knowledge, it is use to reduce the stray lights that exist from different reflection surface. the common use is to reduce the reflection on windows so you can have a  clear shot through the window.

It is a filter with two filters that allows only light coming in one direction. so if you rotate them to reach an angle of 90 degree, then it is suppose to have filter all stray lights. So, you have a few stops drop of aperture.

The richer color saturation is the result of less stray lights.

ND filter only lower the intensity of incident light instead of filtering the reflected light.
作者: Catpiano    時間: 2011-5-13 07:49

Why do you want CPL and ND sin?  for key shift? or blue sky? or reduce reflection?

Well ...  I got tons of filters at home ..  but at the end of the day, other then UV(protection) rarely use other filters ..
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-13 09:18

I rather would say no, because, to my limited knowledge, it is use to reduce the stray lights that ...
sheep 發表於 2011-5-13 07:24


yes this is why I was also thinking a CPL would be handy sometime......
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-13 09:19

You can also stack 2 CPL filters to make it a 300xND filter by changing the orientations of the each ...
Look4chrisng 發表於 2011-5-13 04:17


oh @O@!!
never thought of that
but how do you stack a filter on top of the other?
作者: siumaibb    時間: 2011-5-13 09:39

CPL & ND filters are in very different use wor, do you know what they are for first?
作者: siumaibb    時間: 2011-5-13 09:40

oh @O@!!
never thought of that
but how do you stack a filter on top of the other?
嘉嘉 發表於 2011-5-13 09:19


unless you got very very thin filters, you'll have a LOT of vignette if you stack filters, especially for wide lenses.
作者: Look4chrisng    時間: 2011-5-13 09:59

oh @O@!!
never thought of that
but how do you stack a filter on top of the other?
嘉嘉 發表於 2011-5-13 09:19



the shrew on the top of the other.  I think all filters have thread on both ends.  Kind of like bi-sexaul
作者: Lik    時間: 2011-5-13 10:01

unless you got very very thin filters, you'll have a LOT of vignette if you stack filters, especia ...
siumaibb 發表於 2011-5-13 09:40

I was gonna say exactly the same thing.

At 28mm, I can't stack my CPL on top of my UV filter without getting a bit of vignetting. At 24mm, the vignetting is bad enough that the photo becomes unacceptable.

Also, not that it is a big deal, but in response to Sheep, how often do you need to reduce glare / reflections from windows or bodies of water? I think getting a deep blue sky has more merit (and usage frequency) than glare / reflection elimination wor?

-Lik
作者: siumaibb    時間: 2011-5-13 10:07

I was gonna say exactly the same thing.

At 28mm, I can't stack my CPL on top of my UV filter witho ...
Lik 發表於 2011-5-13 10:01


You do when you're a landscape photographer.
Well, I am not a landscape photographer so I use my polarizer to get better colour & contrast during sunny days.
作者: Look4chrisng    時間: 2011-5-13 10:12

unless you got very very thin filters, you'll have a LOT of vignette if you stack filters, especia ...
siumaibb 發表於 2011-5-13 09:40



I actually never try that myself, but I know another guy use this method.  Maybe he is not shooting wide angles then.

It is handy to know if you ever need to shoot slow shutter under bright sun.
作者: sheep    時間: 2011-5-13 10:41

Also, not that it is a big deal, but in response to Sheep, how often do you need to reduce glare / reflections from windows or bodies of water?Lik 發表於 2011-5-13 10:01



    I am just saying that the filter is design for such purpose. You can do with whatever filter to achieve whatever effect you want. Photography is creativity.
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-13 21:10

CPL & ND filters are in very different use wor, do you know what they are for first?
siumaibb 發表於 2011-5-13 09:39


yes, I know
if i thought they were the same, I wouldn't be struggling to choose which one to get +_+
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-13 21:15

the shrew on the top of the other.  I think all filters have thread on both ends.  Kind of like b ...
Look4chrisng 發表於 2011-5-13 09:59

bisexual.........LOL!!!!!!
作者: Catpiano    時間: 2011-5-13 21:18

On your 70-200? then no worry about Vignetting.
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-13 21:27

I actually never try that myself, but I know another guy use this method.  Maybe he is not shooti ...
Look4chrisng 發表於 2011-5-13 10:12

oh, then what did u use on the picture u showed on the first page?
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-13 22:50

On your 70-200? then no worry about Vignetting.
Catpiano 發表於 2011-5-13 21:18


on my 17-40 +_+
作者: FiChai    時間: 2011-5-14 00:06

Every filter has its own effect, decide what result you want to achieve and use the filter accordingly.
作者: Look4chrisng    時間: 2011-5-14 00:58

本帖最後由 Look4chrisng 於 2011-5-14 00:59 編輯
oh, then what did u use on the picture u showed on the first page?
嘉嘉 發表於 2011-5-13 21:27



    oh,  no filter.  I am talking slow shutter speed.  I was at f22 ISO 160 INDOOR.  For a 1sec exposure outdoor.  you will need a filter.
作者: Look4chrisng    時間: 2011-5-14 01:05

On your 70-200? then no worry about Vignetting.
Catpiano 發表於 2011-5-13 21:18



Vignetting is making a come back.  Lots of kids are shooting LOMO cameras, shoot first and think later. and they make very fun pictures.
作者: siumaibb    時間: 2011-5-14 01:05

yes, I know
if i thought they were the same, I wouldn't be struggling to choose which one to get + ...
嘉嘉 發表於 2011-5-13 21:10


if you know what they are, why do you still need to struggle? Just get the one you need.
作者: Look4chrisng    時間: 2011-5-14 01:11

Also, 17-40 is not happy with 50D.   50D likes 17-55 kind of guy.
作者: Catpiano    時間: 2011-5-14 09:36

本帖最後由 Catpiano 於 2011-5-14 09:39 編輯
on my 17-40 +_+
嘉嘉 發表於 2011-5-13 22:50


Then no worry ..  no vignetting too.
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-15 12:57

oh,  no filter.  I am talking slow shutter speed.  I was at f22 ISO 160 INDOOR.  For a 1sec e ...
Look4chrisng 發表於 2011-5-14 00:58

oh~~~icic, yeah indoor at f22 is good enough for slow shutter speed
for outdoor it could still be too bright
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-15 12:59

if you know what they are, why do you still need to struggle? Just get the one you need.
siumaibb 發表於 2011-5-14 01:05


cuz I was thinking if I could use a CPL as a ND.....
want to "one lift two get" and save money ar ma.....(yes I know it sounds kinda ridiculous +_+)

but I think I am more leaning toward a ND now
is broadway camera a good place to get one?
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-15 13:00

Also, 17-40 is not happy with 50D.   50D likes 17-55 kind of guy.
Look4chrisng 發表於 2011-5-14 01:11


why is it not happy with 50D?
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-15 13:01

Vignetting is making a come back.  Lots of kids are shooting LOMO cameras, shoot first and think  ...
Look4chrisng 發表於 2011-5-14 01:05

I actually tried to photoshop in vignet last time into one of my pictures.....lol
but guess it didn't work too well
作者: Catpiano    時間: 2011-5-15 14:32

ADDING Vignette and vignette from lens/filter is two thing ..

Should say Vignette and "DARK corner" is not the same. Some nice old german glasses have vignette, but not dark corner. (lost of light vs dark shadow)

There is nothing wrong with 17-40 on 50D, actually, it is still slightly nicer then the 17-55 (Bokeh/Colour/Sharpness) however, 17-55 is faster (F2.8 vs F4) better/longer range, and very effective IS, 17-55IS is reasonable close to "L" lens construction, but I guess Canon don't want to call a crop lens "L" (luxury)

I actually use my 18-55/15-85/18-135 etc more then 17-55 or 17-40 on crop bodies .. I guess just habbit.

Back to ND, 77mm filters are not cheap, so I understand you may not want to buy many of them, and nend up not using them much.

There is a kind of ND filter you can adjust the level, I don't have one, but worth to try, and won't add extra thickness as well. (I am old school, use 2x/4x/8x)

^_^
作者: siumaibb    時間: 2011-5-16 08:25

cuz I was thinking if I could use a CPL as a ND.....
want to "one lift two get" and save money ar  ...
嘉嘉 發表於 2011-5-15 12:59


Just curious, what kind photos are you trying to take with the ND filter?
作者: Look4chrisng    時間: 2011-5-16 09:30

why is it not happy with 50D?
嘉嘉 發表於 2011-5-15 13:00


Because it is hard to get cozy up indoor.  You will be shooting at very high ISO sometime.  

Why pay for the large image circle when you can't use them?
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-16 09:55

Just curious, what kind photos are you trying to take with the ND filter?
siumaibb 發表於 2011-5-16 08:25


people moving ar
water ar
flower, tree, grass being blown by breeze ar
and when too bright outside I think the filter would come in handy too?
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-16 09:57

Because it is hard to get cozy up indoor.  You will be shooting at very high ISO sometime.  

Why  ...
Look4chrisng 發表於 2011-5-16 09:30


u mean f2.8 vs f4?
作者: Mr.JPG    時間: 2011-5-16 10:04

回復 37# 嘉嘉

有IS 加埋有多15mm用
不過比我都係選1740
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-16 12:09

本帖最後由 嘉嘉 於 2011-5-16 12:10 編輯
回復  嘉嘉

有IS 加埋有多15mm用
不過比我都係選1740
Mr.JPG 發表於 2011-5-16 10:04

IS對我o黎講唔太重要....自問對石糕手都唔係差~~XD

但你又點解都係揀 1740？
我頭先真係有少少比looing4chris搞到對支1755心動
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-16 12:14

回復 38# Mr.JPG

It very well depends on how you use the lens.
For outdoor shot I will say both 17-40 and 17-55 are roughly the same.
But for indoor shot, the IS and f2.8 on 17-55 certainly boost the performance (17mm @ 1/20sec, handheld @ dim condition, no problemo... the photo is sharp, bright and clean)
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-16 12:17

回復  Mr.JPG

It very well depends on how you use the lens.
For outdoor shot I will say both 17-40  ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-5-16 12:14


tempting tempting........>___<
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-16 12:19

回復 39# 嘉嘉

As compared with the 17-55, I feel a bit disappointed with the 16-35II (at low light) that I'm using...
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-16 12:23

回復 41# 嘉嘉

If you think you will be staying with crops for a while, stick with the 17-55, I promise you will not regret...
Last year when I decided to sell my 17-55 (upgraded to APSC-H), do you know what's my feeling?
I feel like I'm selling my boy away...
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-16 12:26

oh wait...........17-55 is an ef-s lens.....

oh, but 16-35 also got f2.8 bor?
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-16 12:30

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-5-16 12:37 編輯

回復 44# 嘉嘉

No conflict between EF and EF-S if you are using on crops.
EF-S doesn't work on full frame though, and that's probably the main reason why people doesn't choose 17-55.
The IS on the 17-55 helps quite a bit in low light environment.
作者: Mr.JPG    時間: 2011-5-16 13:03

回復 42# lo_pak

撇開個價錢唔講
我覺得個1635幾好啊。起碼個星茫幾掂
最憎個 82mm filter size. 搞到冇得用返之前個 77mm CPL filter
早排都係用左隻 T116 再加錢 係 CL 喥整左隻返黎 。
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-16 13:19

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-5-16 13:25 編輯

回復 46# Mr.JPG

most things will be nice if 撇開個價錢唔講...

BTW, like what you've mentioned, the 82mm filter size is SO annoying...
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-16 13:20

回復  嘉嘉

No conflict between EF and EF-S if you are using on crops.
EF-S doesn't work on full fr ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-5-16 12:30


hehe, but full frame body is my next target
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-16 13:30

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-5-16 13:36 編輯

回復 48# 嘉嘉

When do you think you are going to own a 5D or 5DII?
One thing I don't like Canon full frame body mostly because it has a poor focusing system (compare to the price).
Make sure you know what you are shooting.
For landscape, portriat or non-moving objects, full frame is terrific.
However, for sports or concerts, IMO, it's quite crappy.
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-16 13:33

I still don't know yet

hopefully within a year?
plus I don't want to buy it now then canon announces 5DIII all of a sudden LOL
作者: Look4chrisng    時間: 2011-5-16 13:41

回復 44# 嘉嘉


You can find a cheap tamron 17-55 (no IS) for +-$400.  and sell the 17-40 and put couple hundred back to the bank.  Or buy me lunch.

After 2yr of shooting.  The best advice to me is a used 5D + 50mm prime. (Corp +35mm prime)  50mm used to be the kit lens, and most people learn photography with this, and for very good reasons.
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-16 13:48

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-5-16 13:50 編輯

回復 50# 嘉嘉

One thing I realize most people "JUST" keep talking to upgrade their gears to full frame (like 三年之後又三年... ) without further action taken...

That's why I ask "when" do you "think" you are upgrading...
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-16 14:14

回復 51# Look4chrisng

Shooting prime is always good...
作者: Catpiano    時間: 2011-5-16 14:46

hehe, but full frame body is my next target
嘉嘉 發表於 2011-5-16 13:20



   Ka Ka,  If you are planning on FF, and you already have 17-40 .. then no need to get the 17-55 ... (F2.8 is not that important on wide zoom, if you want fast aperture for smooth bokeh, get a prime, such as 35 F2 .. (or 1.4 if you want to spend $1600)

I can't remember correctly, I think you had experience on film?  Then "IS" may not be that important if you have steady hands, I am used to 1/4 or 1/5 of a second, but of course, people are more picky on sharpness now .

IS is great for low light indoor "FIXED" object, as long as you are taking picture for moving object, (human/dogs/cats) you need faster shutter speed/flash to freeze the object anyway ...

Don't get me wrong, IS is still good to have, just you won't use it as much on wide angle, plus most Camera perform very well at ultra high iso such as iso 1600.

Size is one thing too, the 17-55 is not a small lens, much heavier then the 18-55/15-85 even the 18-200.

And you were looking at some filter to "reduce" light, so I guess extra 1 stop won't benifit you much.

(P.S. for someone want one carry on lens, on crop sensor body with great quality, 17-55IS is still the best. ^_^ )
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-17 21:56

回復  嘉嘉


You can find a cheap tamron 17-55 (no IS) for +-$400.  and sell the 17-40 and put coup ...
Look4chrisng 發表於 2011-5-16 13:41

yeah I heard that the tamron is a good buy too
but I am just too loyal to canon........LOL

I only have a cheap 50 1.8....
which 50mm are u using?
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-17 22:01

回復  嘉嘉

One thing I realize most people "JUST" keep talking to upgrade their gears to full fram ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-5-16 13:48


well yes la
it's easier said than actually doing la
one of the reasons like I said, everyone has been waiting for 5dIII ar ma
the other 2 reasons for me are that first it's expensive, and second I still want to practise more with 400D and learn more before moving on~
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-17 22:04

Ka Ka,  If you are planning on FF, and you already have 17-40 .. then no need to get the 17-55 ...
Catpiano 發表於 2011-5-16 14:46


nope~ I think it was someone else
I have no experience with films

but so far none of my lenses have IS and I don't see how I can't survive without it (but of cuz like u said it's nice to have)

that's interesting......now I wonder why the 17-55 is so expensive?
it's for crop bodies and good thing about it is the F2.8, then pretty much it......
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-18 06:31

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-5-18 06:37 編輯

回復 56# 嘉嘉

It sounds like you haven't made up your mind yet, are you?
Which FF body are you actually "planned" to buy. After you have purchased the FF body, will you still own your 400D as well?... These types of questions are important to know ahead before you purchase new lens.

You are wondering why 17-55 is that expensive? Well, I have the same question before. But I'm glad I have purchased it for my old 40D. They are just perfect match (compare to 17-40, 24-70, 16-35II). I can conclude it's the best walkaround zoom lens made for crop body.

IMO, you need a 7D more than a FF. If you are going to keep both FF and crop, an used 5D is all you need. 5DII is a good body, but it's not that good for you in terms of your usage.
作者: Look4chrisng    時間: 2011-5-18 08:27

yeah I heard that the tamron is a good buy too
but I am just too loyal to canon........LOL

I only  ...
嘉嘉 發表於 2011-5-17 21:56


The tamron 17-55 is very easy to find.  Because Very soon, people find out the kit lens is only so-so.  And they want f2.8.  The Canon one is very expensive and harder to find/sale in used lor.  Since you are waiting for your full frame, no need to drop $1000 ma.

I have the sigma 50.
作者: Mr.JPG    時間: 2011-5-18 08:39

lots of people complain about the yellowish tone from the sigma,
have you ever notice that? I see lots of good review on their 30/50/85mm.
作者: Look4chrisng    時間: 2011-5-18 08:59

回復 60# Mr.JPG


Not me or I haven't noticed it.  I like the contrasty image and the color is rich, these two do it for me.

Color cast is not a really problem for me, i adjust w/b in Lightroom anyway.  The other thing is Canon 50 1.4 is no good at all.
作者: siumaibb    時間: 2011-5-18 09:29

warm color can be fixed in psot production, but the A16 I used to have got back focusing and at f2.8, the focus is kinda soft. For lenses, I really think you got what you paid for.
作者: Catpiano    時間: 2011-5-18 12:00

but so far none of my lenses have IS and I don't see how I can't survive without it (but of cuz like u said it's nice to have)

that's interesting......now I wonder why the 17-55 is so expensive?
it's for crop bodies and good thing about it is the F2.8, then pretty much it......嘉嘉 發表於 2011-5-17 22:04


The Canon 17-55 IS isn't really expensive .. if you compare to the Nikon one.

In general speaking, Canon lens costs slightly more (here) but this case, the Nikon one is more (~ 10%) with NO IS (VR).

Main reason for extra cost is: MORE LIGHT. You pay a big premium for extra light, say 17-40L vs 16-35L, u get more range from 17-40, but the 16-35 is almost 3 times more expensive. Or the 50mm, 3 times more from 1.8 to 1.4, and another 3 times more from 1.4 to 1.2, and almost 10 times more for the 0.95 (Leica)

DON'T sell your 17-40 for Tamron, which the Tamron makes great lens, but the construction, durability is not the same (you sound like you will keep a lens for lens, not like most C hing, swap lens every few week/month) and also the colour/constrast/bokeh, again, not saying Tamron is no good, but different, imagine you are taking few hundred photos in one event, you don't want to see 2 or 3 different "style"

I take both Nikon/Canon system for some event, (Nikon's wide still much better) but kind of confuse sometime when their styles are so different, and I am so old school, I don't know much about photoshop...

Plus, if you sell the 17-40, how much can u get? may be $600? then if u need to spend $400 anyway .. not worth to, and you need to "adpot" a different style lens.

If you are looking for a Macro lens, then it is a different story if you want a third party lens (ie: tamron 90mm is a great lens)

^_^
作者: Catpiano    時間: 2011-5-18 12:03

lots of people complain about the yellowish tone from the sigma,
have you ever notice that? I see lo ...
Mr.JPG 發表於 2011-5-18 08:39



    I have a handfull of Sigma, yes, they are a bit more yellowish, so when I swap to a sigma lens, I will do some fine tune on WB.

To be fair, their newer lens are better, (especially Prime) not as yellowish as before, and depends what system you use, Sigma lens match nikon system a bit better then Canon. (warmer tone from Nikon)
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-18 16:35

The Canon 17-55 IS isn't really expensive .. if you compare to the Nikon one.

In general speaking ...
Catpiano 發表於 2011-5-18 12:00


I wouldn't sell my 17-40 for a tamron
one reason like I said, I am quite loyal to canon
also I HATE the way the tamron lens rotates when zoom in/out is exactly the opposite way of a canon
and I think canon should have a higher chance of reselling than 3rd party lens lor (yes I know tamron is very popular too)

and yes, I don't swap lenses very often. Unless I see a need for that
but for now I am happy with the range of 17-40 and 70-200. I am only lacking a macro lens in my gear, but then I don't do a lot of macros so for now I am good.....
作者: 嘉嘉    時間: 2011-5-18 16:42

回復  嘉嘉

It sounds like you haven't made up your mind yet, are you?
Which FF body are you actual ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-5-18 06:31


I think 5DII would be my choice....
and yes I will still own my 400D for casual use (plus it probably won't be easy to sell a 400D lol)

I am planning on taking photography classes, now just waiting for new semester......
kinda hoping to do more in the future too
so probably not going to think about 7D.....
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-18 18:07

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-5-18 18:10 編輯

回復 66# 嘉嘉

If 5DII is probably your next cam, the 17-40 is already good enough for you as an wide angle and partial walkaround lens. If weight is a concern for you, you don't need to consider 24-70. If you are going to utilize the video function, the 24-105 F4L lens should be a better choice. In the dark, with the help of the low ISO noise on the 5DII, you can earn quite a bit on the F4 lens. For long range, stay your 70-200 F4L with the 400D. What may be good for you though maybe a good quality 50mm prime.

P.S. - In terms of photo quality, I feel like having Zeiss wide angle lens on Canon body (IMO I don't think Canon has any good wide angle zoom). With proper settings they are on par with Nikon system. However, it's quite costly... >.<
作者: elan7e    時間: 2011-5-18 19:55

Out of topic, sorry.

I got this email:

"Greetings
Thank you for your interest in purchasing my items .
Right now you can buy DELUXE KIT Canon EOS 5D Mark II Digital SLR Camera+Lens for only $1,500 .  14 days return policy
My item is brand new sealed in original box and will come with all accessories and 1year warranty .
I have more than one unit ,if you buy more than one ,i will make you a good discount.
You can have this at your door in 3 days after you confirm the payment because the shipment will be made via Ups 3Day Air or Fedex overnighted from europe .
So that's why we use as a payment method Western Union money transfer, the fastest and
also very secure way of sending money because we will close this deal ONLY under eBay,with their protection. The transaction will go strictly according to eBay's RULES and POLICY and will be supervised by eBay Trust & Safety Department..
If you have any question don't hesitate to contact me .bidding is restricted because I want to carefully choose my buyers. is not necessary to bid It is not important who bids or how much...  
If you agree with my terms,  Let me know asap because the items are ready to be shipped
Kind Regards "

Is it a trap?
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-18 20:07

回復 68# elan7e

Brand new 5DII + Lens @ CAD1,500. Go figure how they can make money if it's even cheaper than normal used price...
作者: Catpiano    時間: 2011-5-18 21:43

Suen ba la.. those email are scam ...  

I got phone call all the time .. said I won $million la.. LOL

use your brain + common sense...  

Sadly, 400D is a good camera, but you are not going to get much ..  may be $200? I am going to keep my 400D .. just save it for my son!

I somehow still like 5D over 5DII, unless you are big freak for video ..  using the 5DII for more then 2.5 yr ..  I can tell how many video I took ...  mostly short video .. and end up never viewed again .. (Just me, again, it can take great video, you are are into it)

OR .. get a used 1DsII for about the same cost, still the best COLOUR and closest to film feel Canon DSLR IMO. (but it is heavy)

作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-18 22:43

回復 70# Catpiano

Agree. 1Ds II is a very good body. But I don't think Miss Ka Ka doesn't quite know why it's better than 5D II
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-19 08:20

回復 70# Catpiano

Having the 1D III for a while, very impressed with the reaction time and accuracy. Just not quite satisfy with ISO go over 640...
作者: Look4chrisng    時間: 2011-5-19 09:11

It seems Nikon stuff is more well design and made.  Although, it is slower to adopt to new technologies.  I am surprise you can't shoot ISO 640 with a professional camera.

I heard mirror in 5D actually fell off quite often, and their 85 1.2 fell off from the mount as well.
作者: lo_pak    時間: 2011-5-19 09:37

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-5-19 09:39 編輯

回復 73# Look4chrisng

According to some researches, ID3 should be good upto ISO1000 before noise problem gets annoying, 1DsII is about 1200-1400, and 5D2 can go upto ISO1600...

It just depend on how PICKY... , I am just too lazy to go over the software to adjust the noise level...
作者: Catpiano    時間: 2011-5-19 10:16

回復  Catpiano

Having the 1D III for a while, very impressed with the reaction time and accuracy.  ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-5-19 08:20



    Ha ? weird wor .. I am fine with it @ even iso 6400 wor ...

Not that I will use those ultra high iso ...  I guess depends on how to take the pic la..  if it is under, then boost it .. even low iso, will got high noise..
作者: Catpiano    時間: 2011-5-19 10:21

It seems Nikon stuff is more well design and made.  Although, it is slower to adopt to new technolog ...
Look4chrisng 發表於 2011-5-19 09:11



    To be honest, I hardly notice that much of a different/advantage, no matter D300/D700 to 5D/5DII/1D/1Ds series ..  noise is not what I concern, may be 1 out of 100 pic, need ultra high iso .. ( I am not a news reporter ) and many way to fix .. (software to REDUCE noise, or even ADD more )

However, I hardly stand the noise level on Sony DSLR .. it's FF 25MP sensor is awesome, and those old minolta lens are great and cheap ... but then .. iso 800 and up ..  lots of noise, and not smooth .. and the bigger problem is the flash system isn't as great and flexible.
作者: Mr.JPG    時間: 2011-5-19 11:00

二手 1DsIII 及 1DIV 差唔多價錢
比你選，邊部會好D呢。
兩部唔同年代的科技，D Noise level 邊部比較好D
Full Frame vs Technology.
作者: Catpiano    時間: 2011-5-19 11:36

二手 1DsIII 及 1DIV 差唔多價錢
比你選，邊部會好D呢。
兩部唔同年代的科技，D Noise level 邊部比較好D
F ...
Mr.JPG 發表於 2011-5-19 11:00


1DsIV offers much better high iso performance, a shade/tiny improve AF, hardly noticeable.

1DIV can do video too, which is big thing for some.

Hard to tell which has better value ..  say back then 1DIII was $5K, 1DsIII was 9K ..  HUGE different ...  so you pay $4K more for FF(and more noise)  but back then, not much choice ..  now, more people may prefer to spend $~5K on 1DIV + 3K on 5DII, rather then spend $8K on a 1DsIII (5DII IQ is almost as good as 1Ds3, with better high iso control)

Now, used 1Ds3 (mint/low SC) is around/just under $5k, 1D4 is about the same ...  so depends you want FF or movie la...

1Ds4 has been postpone ... As Canon needs to re work on it's marketing position. (as Nikon offers a $5K range FF pro body)


Opps... anyway, back to topic ..  see what Ka Ka wants ..
作者: Look4chrisng    時間: 2011-5-20 11:30

Regarding class.  I tried the Langara one.  It is not bad at all.  

After playing with power pack and light modifiers.  You will have basic understanding of light and how to control/use it.  It is way more empowering than a new camera. Even you may not be interested in flash photography, but understanding light is the most important thing on the technical side of photography.

Just pass Sat. I went to a restaurant, a waiter chat with me about cameras.  He asked how to use a flash, so the foreground and the background are both bright.  I explained to him shutter speed controls ambient and aperture control the flash.  I demo it with my canon, but found out he uses P mode at all   He told me he is thinking to buy 1ds.  I suggest him to take a class or google on how to expose properly.

So my money will be spending on taking a class first.



歡迎光臨 溫哥華老友記討論區 (http://loyaukee.com/forum/) Powered by Discuz! 7.2