NA6C-Guy

iTrader: (1)

It's not perfect, but it helps a ton when one handing. I do have to sort of tuck my pinky under the camera, and contort my hand a certain way, since I use rear button focus. But once I get my hand into position, it's perfectly comfortable and works well.

I need glass! I'm slowly starting to grow a hatred for standard focal lengths. It's good for some things, but so mediocre for most things. Both not quite wide enough, and in other cases not quite long enough. I always find myself wanting a little of one or the other. Though 40mm on a crop isn't exactly standard, but it's close. I should have just gotten the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 to start for a single lens solution until I can afford more glass, which I hope to god will be soon.

I was actually just watching some reviews of the 70-200 VC last night, trying to psych myself up. Tamron is really making some incredible lenses these days. And to think I was once actually considering the Sigma 24-70 and 70-200 over the Tamron. 95% of the performance and build quality as the Nikon and Canon, for a HUGE savings in cost. And actually, the review I was watching last night showed some pixel peeping shots of the Tamron vs the Nikon and Canon, and the Tamron was actually sharper and showed more contrast in some of the shots. Gotta love it.

As an example, I scouted some pretty cool locations today, but because the 40mm is such a **** length for landscape, I didn't even bother setting up the tripod... or getting out of the car even, lol. A drive-by shooting. I'll have to hit this spot up when I get better glass, and when it's not mid day with **** lighting. I'm still torn between a few different wide zooms. The Tokina 11-16 2.8 is leading currently by a small margin. And to be fair, 40mm isn't ****, it's just really hard to make an interesting landscape with standard focal length lenses. I have not the skill.

NA6C-Guy

iTrader: (1)

Anybody here have a Yongnuo speedlight? I think I'm about to pull the trigger on a set of YN560III's. Performance on par with the SB-600/700, for less than 1/4 of the price. Maybe not quite the build quality, but I've read almost nothing but excellent reviews for it, especially considering the built-in radio trigger/transceiver and the $75 price tag. It's non TTL, but for me that isn't really an issue.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

I have the YN560II.

the build is better than the SB700, I also have.

It's also more powerful, rated at a guide number of 39 vs 28.

I'll buy the YN560III if i ever buy another flash or two or three.

NA6C-Guy

iTrader: (1)

So actually better build quality and performance for 1/4 of the cost. I can't wait to get them. Might as well get a set of RF-603's while I'm spending the big bucks, lol. Less than $200 for two nice big flashes and 2 radio transceivers. Can't beat that with a bag of dead cats.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Nope. Since they have built in triggers you can use the second as a wireless shutter button.

NA6C-Guy

iTrader: (1)

Still need a 603 if I plan to use them both off camera, as I will likely do in caving situations. Though I guess technically I could use them both in optical slave mode and trigger with the built in flash. But I'd rather not use any light from the camera.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

yeah, no. You'd put one on the camera then you can use the other to trigger remotely or as a backup since you have them built into the flashes.

I have (4) 603s.

NA6C-Guy

iTrader: (1)

My point was, I don't want any light source coming from the camera, so I would want BOTH flashes off camera, in which case I would need a way to trigger them without using built in flash, which would mean a 603.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Yeah. One single one on camera. That leaves you with a spare.

NA6C-Guy

iTrader: (1)

Well, got the YN560III and the 603's. The flash is incredible! I already had pretty high expectations, but I'm even more impressed than I thought I would be. Build quality is awesome, the detent in the head is very smooth and firm, and all of the buttons feel great. Good power, good control. I am a bit displeased with the RF-603's however. It took me a good 30 minutes to figure out why I couldn't make them fire the flash remotely. All it ended up being is the pins on the hotshoe. If I fully seat the 603, it doesn't make contact. I have to pull the unit back about 1/16" and wiggle it a bit to make it make connection to light the second light on top. Once I figured that out, it works fine. Both of them do the same thing, so no luck having just one dud. I guess it's to be expected when you make a universal unit like this one. It's not going to fit everything perfectly.

I also seem to have a solid flash sync up to 1/320 instead of just 1/250. At 1/400 I start to see some funky stuff showing up. I wish this thing had HSS capability. I guess I can always buy a cheap flash with HSS and use it to optically trigger the 560.

skidude

iTrader: (3)

I'm bringing this thread back for some discussion.

I think it is about time I replace my aged 20D, and there are currently 3 options I am considering.

Option 1 - 60D. It is a few years old so I can pick one up on KEH for ~500 it looks like. Huge improvement in every way from my 20D, and relatively reasonable price.

Option 2 - 70D. More expensive than the 60D, and not really plentiful on the used market yet (but I'm not in a huge hurry, I could wait a few months before buying for something to show up), but the two things I really want are low-light performance and instant shutter response, both of which are improved from one to the next. How much I would actually notice, I don't know.

Option 3 - Sony RX100. A photo friend of mine just sold off his D90 kit in favor of this portable camera, and loves it because it is easy to take everywhere and produces great pictures. I have read a little bit on it, and it seems the sensor is great, the optics are great, but it just isn't quite the same as a DSLR. I hate the full-auto modes, I shoot almost entirely in aperture priority mode, in RAW, then process in lightroom, but I hear this RX100 would allow me to do that pretty easily. Benefits are obviously portability, but also price as I could buy this for ~600 and sell off a couple lenses and come out a little cheaper than the 60D.

I am going to play around with this friend's RX100 at some point in the next couple weeks, and that will help me decide a little bit, but if anybody here has any thoughts on any of these cameras, I'd like to hear them.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

1" image sensor.
1/2000 max shutter
125 max ISO.
10.4-37mm f/1.8-5 lens

I wouldn't replace my D600 with it...

as for the 60D vs. 70D, I dunno. There's a lot about Canons I don't like.

I'd probably go 70D for the focusing module and processor alone. But between the two, there isn't a big difference in image performance (dynamic range, color depth, etc.)

I'd take 7fps over 5fps anyday as well, and it seems to have better low-light performance and ISO handling.

The 70D would make a much better "sports" lens.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

what body? I can't sync over 1/160 with my YN560ii and RF603 trigger.

skidude

iTrader: (3)

Those are sort of all my sticking points on the RX100 as well, but that small size is appealing.

I am also not entirely set on Canon, could you elaborate on why you prefer Nikon? Most hobbyists friends I know have Nikon, but I have never really played with them much and have had pretty good luck with my Canon so far.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Nikons have better sensors and until very recently, much better auto focus systems (I think the 70D finally fixed that).

Canons are behind the curve in terms of image quality compared to a Nikon. Nikons typically have much better Dynamic Range, Color Depth, Low-Light Performance. As such, almost all Nikon have way more MP when you compare model lines (I don't think Canon has 36MP out yet). Canon stuck with in house for their sensors while everyone else went to Sony sensors.

A lot of Canons still save 12-bit RAW files, not 14-bit (16,384 shades of color vs 4,096).

Then there's things about Canon I don't like. The ergonomics don't make sense: the thumbwheel is hard to reach and the finger wheel on top isn't much better.

and things like Canon's spot metering is center point only.

Canon glass is hella expensive as well (not that I buy Nikon glass).



If I was going for a 1" sensor, I'd look at the Lumix DMC-FZ1000

skidude

iTrader: (3)

I watched an "epic shootout" video last night on the 70D and the D7100, and in a blind comparison I picked the Nikon pictures as my favorite 9/11 times. All were portraits taken in "auto" mode I think, so I wish he had thrown in some other shots, but that alone was pretty telling.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

The D7100 is a great camera. If I wasn't so hard pressed on going FF, that would be my camera of choice.

It really all comes down to personal choice.

But when you compare the two, look at the sensor's DR and color depth differences: Canon EOS 70D versus Nikon D7100 - Side by side camera comparison - DxOMark Between 100-800 ISO, the nikon just collects much better data. That means you have more recovery information in shadows or bright highlights. Let's say you shot on a nice sunny day with your 70D but the sky was blown out; the same shot on the Nikon has almost 2EV extra DR, so there's probably lots of room for recovery to get some sky/cloud detail back instead of just being 255/255/255.

And you've got an extra 4 million more pixels, that collect better data. Alone that's worth a lot of cropping power over the 70D. So if you're shooting telephoto (or anything) and need a little extra "reach" you can crop out 4MP worth of data and still end up with the same image.

The D7100 has a weather sealed magnesium frame, making it a less susceptible to damage from drops/elements. The 7D is just all resin IIRC.

The D7100 has the class leading 51 point autofocus system with 15 cross points. The 70D only has 19 focus points (all are cross points).

The 70D has the flip screen, and coming from a D5100 I really like that feature. Makes selfies easier.

The 70D wins in FPS and buffer size, so it's a good choice if youre shooting wildlife/sports.

The 70D has built in WiFi vs. the Nikon's extra "module". I don't really care about this feature.

The Canon will win for video. Something else I really don't care about.

The D7100 has dual memory card slots, the 70D only one. That's a huge negative for me.

I could go on and on, but when comparing everything, I'd choose this Nikon over the Canon.



But the way my D600 handles low-light and high ISO is redonkulous. I'm very glad I went with it. And nikon was nice enough to replace the shutter for free for me even though I bought it as a refurbished unit

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Oh and since this is the "what do you own thread"

I'm now shooting a D600 with a Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC and 70-200 2.8 VC, Nikon 85mm 1.8G and 70-300 VR. I own two speedlights and two monolights and want to master being strobist.

skidude

iTrader: (3)

If I switch to Nikon, what lens would you recommend to start with? I want something multi-purpose to start. I like the versatility of my current 18-200 IS, though I think the huge range causes some color aberration and distortion in the corners at the wide end that I find annoying. I find that I rarely zoom past ~100mm, but I use the 18mm end quite a lot. I don't know if anybody makes a decent 18-120 or something.

I'd probably sell my four Canon lenses, so I'd like something in the price range of what I could get for them (used on KEH, probably).

Canon EF-S 18-200 IS 3.5-5.something
Canon Nifty 50
Canon Kit Lens - 18-55
Canon Kit Zoom (70-300ish?)

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

honestly, I dunno if I wouldn't switch if I already had that much canon glass; unless you can get a good deal on it all or something.

I think the 18-200 VR and VRII in the Nikon glass is little overpriced. But Nikon also has a 18-105, 18-140, 18-200 and now an 18-300. I liked my Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.

Superzooms sacrifice IQ for convenience. They are all notorious for CA and distortion. That's why primes have so much accolade--the IQ.

I think my 24-70 is a touch short (like your 18-55mm). I sometimes toy with the idea of ditching the 2.8 to get the 24-120mm f/4. I lose a stop of light, but I gain 50mm in reach. That would be like an 18-80mm for your crop. I personally don't shoot wide, it's just not my thing, my 70-200 2.8 is my most used lens.