Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 28, 2010, 9:33 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

If your photographer friend is using the 24-70/2.8 on a 'Full Frame' dSLR, then that lens won't give you the same kind of results on your T1i. Your T1i has a smaller image sensor, and therefore a narrower angle of view than the 24-70/2.8 would give on a 'Full Frame' dSLR like Canon's 1D and 5D series. Something like the Tamron 17-50/2.8 or the Sigma 18-50/2.8 would be roughly equivalent and cost a lot less. One of these also might be a better choice than the 24-70/2.8 anyway since you seem to prefer wider angles. You should also note that these lenses aren't stabilized the way that Canon's kit lens and their 17-55/2.8 are, but neither is their 24-70/2.8. But there is a stabilized version of the Tamron.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2010, 11:32 AM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6
Default

I know that the focal lengths will be different if I use a lens on my T1i compared to a full frame, but I paid attention while she was doing her last shoot of the girls and she tended to stick around the 35mm-50mm sections of her zoom, didnt really see her ever go really wide to the 24mm end, so I just figured on my camera i would just stick more closely to the 24mm end to get the equivalent focal length.
Image quality wise, I can still get really great pictures on my camera with a really good lens, just might have to take a couple steps back instead of being quite as close, right?
As far as image stabilization goes, the 50mm f/1.8 II doesnt have it but I have found that with the wide open aperture I can take the shutter speed down so quick that I don't really get much, if any blur for the kinds of pictures I am taking. I am taking pictures of my 18 month old playing with a teddy bear 5 feet away from me, not doing gymnastics 50 yards away or anything. Isn't image stabilization really more important for more long range zoom shots and high speed action type stuff?
uabtodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2010, 11:54 AM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6
Default

Two things that I really like so far as I am taking hundreds of random pictures just to play around with settings and see what different things do since I am totally new to taking pictures with anything other than a point and shoot in automatic mode (or my nokia n95 =p) is blurry background/foreground and whatever you call it when points of light show up as stars (see christmas tree below) dont know why, but I cant get enough of either of these, for some reason I just think its so cool.

Here are a few pictures I have taken so far that I like. They by no means are anything special, but a lot better results than I was getting with my old 5mp sony digicam:








uabtodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2010, 1:18 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by uabtodd View Post
I know that the focal lengths will be different ...
The focal length of a lens doesn't change with the size of the image sensor; the angle of view changes. If she's using the 24-70/2.8 on a 'Full Frame' dSLR, at 24mm, she's getting an angle of view of ~84, but on your T1i, at 24mm, you'll only get ~60. The focal length is the same; the angle of view is different. To match the angle of view she got at 35mm to 50mm, you might need something in the range of 22mm to 32mm.

IF she's using a 'Full Frame' dSLR.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2010, 1:36 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by uabtodd View Post
As far as image stabilization goes, the 50mm f/1.8 II doesnt have it but I have found that with the wide open aperture I can take the shutter speed down so quick that I don't really get much, if any blur for the kinds of pictures I am taking. I am taking pictures of my 18 month old playing with a teddy bear 5 feet away from me, not doing gymnastics 50 yards away or anything. Isn't image stabilization really more important for more long range zoom shots and high speed action type stuff?
Image stabilization is for slow shutter speeds, as compared to the angle of view. A long lens needs a faster shutter speed than a short lens. But a short lens might need a faster shutter speed than you can get with available light, and image stabilization helps there too.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2010, 1:51 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Also if you use a good external flash IS is a moot point. You will be able to use get enough light not at a faster shutter speed with a short lens.

PS like the xmas tree, that is a very cute shot of your daughter. It shirt goes with that pose.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2010, 2:55 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 385
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by uabtodd View Post
We pretty much got the camera just to take pictures of our two daughters, 4 years old, and 18 months old. Enough background, on to the question.
My wife has $400 from christmas and she is trying to decide what to buy with it. She is thinking about buying the speedlite 580ex II flash, but isnt sure if the money would be better spent on a different lens, or something else completely.
Hi uabtodd,
I would recommend going with the 430EX II (or similar third party as some of mentioned - I have only used the 430) and save the balance of the money until you can get a Tamron 17-50 for taking puctures of the kids especially for indoor parties and family gatherings.


Quote:
Originally Posted by uabtodd View Post
Lastly, I want to go ahead and get some lens filters to put on the lenses to keep them clean, which kind of filter should I get for that purpose? I dont want any special effects like diffusion or tinting or anything, just basically looking for something to keep fingerprints and dust away from my lenses. Most of my shots are indoors under artificial light, if that makes any difference.
I started out buying a basic UV filter for each new lens - but found I don't like using them unless I'm in harsh environments like at motocross tracks. Better off using hoods when available (like on the Tamron 17-50) and learning to keep your fingers off the glass.

Andy
__________________
Andy
www.AndyGriffinPhoto.com
Canon 7D
griffina6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2010, 3:09 PM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6
Default

Are there any discernible differences between the Metz 48 and the Canon 430ex? Just wondering cause there is apparently about only $20 difference in price.
Just looking at their specs, the only big difference I see is the guide number, the Metz is [email protected] and the canon is [email protected]
I have no idea what these numbers mean, but I assume the higher number means more powerful flash?
uabtodd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2010, 3:17 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

I have the T1i and the metz 48. There are no issues what so ever. If performs exactly the same as the canon one, and has a little strong flash. And it is easy to upgrade firmware on this flash as metz equipped with a usb port. So if you upgrade your body, you can upgrade you flash when firmware is available.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2010, 9:11 PM   #20
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by uabtodd View Post
Just looking at their specs, the only big difference I see is the guide number, the Metz is [email protected] and the canon is [email protected]
I have no idea what these numbers mean, but I assume the higher number means more powerful flash?
You are comparing apple to oranges...
The Metz 48 guide number is rated in meter, while the Canon guide number 141 is rated in feet

-> 141(ft)/3.28 = 43(m) which is why they called it 430EX (ditto with the 580EX) so actually the Canon is less powerful than the Metz... As a result depending on how they are priced, you may pay more for less!

Last edited by NHL; Jan 28, 2010 at 9:38 PM.
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:11 AM.