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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 6, 2011, 10:39 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
wave01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North West England
Posts: 1,749
Default

Weddings think of a backup plan for bad weather, a flash is a must
wave01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2011, 11:25 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Belize & UK
Posts: 463
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ewheeler20 View Post
could you explain this to me? extra reach? to be honest, i have not done too much research into the body.. mostly the lenses.. Does the 7d have a different "frame size"? (did i say that right?)
This is something you need to understand before you lash out any real money. My 5D has a "full frame" sensor, which means the sensor is the same size as a 35mm film negative. My 7D's sensor is markedly smaller, by a linear divisor of 1.6 (ie. it's the same shape as the FF sensor, but each side is smaller by a factor of about 1/1.6). Most Canon cameras have the same sensor size as the 7D. Only the 5D and the 1Ds in their various incarnations have FF sensors. The 1D series also have a sensor smaller than FF, but bigger than the 7D one - smaller than FF by a linear divisor of 1.3. Nikon cameras also have two sensor sizes - the D700 and D1/2/3 are all FF, the rest have a sensor smaller than FF by a linear factor of 1.5m so their sensors are slightly larger than most Canon sensors.

OK. If you mount the same lens alternately on a 5D and a 7D the 5D's sensor will receive the full designed image, but that same image will extend beyond the edges of the 7D's sensor so that part of the image that is outside the sensor won't be captured, only the central part will be. When you look at the images, the 7D will show a smaller part of the subject, magnified, just as if you had mounted a lens with a longer focal length. You can work out that the relationship of focal lengths is also linear, so (for example) my 400mm lens will show a normal image on my 5D, but my 7D will appear as if it had been taken with a lens of focal length 400*1.6=560. This is what I and others mean by "more reach" - any lens mounted on a crop sensor camera appears to have a longer focal length than if it had been mounted on a FF camera. My widest lens has a focal length of 12mm and I use it on my 5D to get an extremely wide angle image, but if I use it on my 7D it's equivalent to only something like 19mm and is only "quite wide".

This becomes critical in certain circumstances. A 50mm lens, the traditional "standard lens", will give the image I'm sure you well know on a FF camera. But when you mount it on most of Canon's crop cameras the focal length will appear to be 80mm, a very different proposition. A traditional standard wide angle lens, 28mm, will appear to be much longer at around 44mm when mounted on a 7D. So if from your film experience you decide you need to use a 28mm lens to capture a wedding group, you'll actually need to mount on your 7D a lens with focal length 28/1.6=c.17.

So the 15-85 lens I recommended above for use on a 7D (it'll only mount on a crop sensor camera, and will damage a FF one - I don't know about using it on a 1-series) is equivalent in FF terms to a 24-136. I use that as my walk-around lens on my 7D; on my 5D I use a 24-105, which covers much the same sort of range albeit a bit light on the long end.

All of these ratios are approximate, but close enough for the real world.

On the subject of flash. I bought a couple of Nissin Di866s specifically for use in the wedding I'll be shooting next month, and I've been playing with them to familiarise myself. Although I like and prefer available light photography these flashes greatly extend the circumstances when I can take good images. I'm not simply mounting the flash on the camera, pointing straight ahead, and then pressing the shutter, as that produces harsh results and flattens profiles. But using a variety of diffusers and reflectors, and using triggers to fire the flashes off-camera, I can get results that appear as if they were taken with available light when in fact that would have been impossible. Or at any rate that's my target. I can't simply shrug my shoulders to the wedding party and say "sorry, the light wasn't good enough to get any pictures". So flash carefully used is the way around that.

Hope that's some help.

Peter
__________________
Canon 5D & 7D (both gripped), 24-105L, 100-400L, EF-S 15-85, 50 f1.8, Tamron 28-75, Sigma 12-24, G10, A1+10 FD lenses, tripods, lights etc
peterbj7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2011, 11:36 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
jdnan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ft. Worth, TX
Posts: 336
Default

I own a sigma 24-70, f2.8 HSM, which has been a good choice for me with a 1D, but agree with others that there may be times when you want a wider angle. For sports action, I just bought a Canon EF 85mm f1.8 USM for those indoor basketball/volleyball shots. While I am able to get some good shots with my 70-200, lighting is so unpredictable and usually poor in high school gyms, I needed an affordable alternative that would still be fast focusing but get me an extra couple of stops in poor lighting situations. I just got it & haven't used it much yet, but my research indicates that it's a very good choice for indoor events where you can get down on the floor, which I've been able to do with no problem at high school events. Now, JohnG has been able to get some amazing shots using his 70-200 indoors, but mine have been pretty hit or miss [lack of skill/knowledge on my part :-)]. I also considered the 7D when I purchased my 1d mkIII used. I went with the 1d because the low light/noise capabilities seemed to be superior, and I mainly shoot sports in those situations, so it was the better choice for me. I had to work through the AF concerns with MKIII (some real and some perceived), but once I was convinced that the AF wasn't an issue, that's the choice I made. I'm not saying it's what you should consider at all, just providing my experience as a frame of reference. I'm not sure that the MKIII is the best choice for weddings, but then again, I haven't shot any weddings since I switched to Canon. It's very exciting to see you go through this process and I can't wait to see what you end up buying and some great pics as a result!
__________________
Jerry
jdnan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2011, 12:01 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Western Ma. USA
Posts: 795
Default

wow, thanks a lot peter. That really did help. I had no idea about the 7D's crop sensor. I think that is good for me because I'm starting to get into shooting sports more seriously.. (hence the change from pentax to canon). This means that the 70-200 that i will buy will actually appear to be a 112-320 (compared to my pentax k-r, which is what i had before)! And with the 1.4x TC i will be getting, that makes the 70-200 actually appear as a 157-448! That's great news!

I really wish i could "turn off" the crop sensor though, lol, for certain shots. And i think im a bit worried about the lack of wide angle (non-fisheye) lenses for canon that dont cost an arm and a leg.

Coming from my pentax, i never shot with anything wider than a 50mm 1.4. So maybe i wont miss the wider lenses? If i still buy the 24-70, it'll seem like a 38-112. that seems ok to me, coming from what i was using. I would say that most of the time, i am using longer focal lengths than wider focal lengths. I dont do landscape photography.
__________________
ewheeler20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2011, 12:12 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Western Ma. USA
Posts: 795
Default

I am thinking of buying the 24-70, and then rent a wider angle lens for the wedding ill be doing. I just cant justify the price of another wide angle lens that i would rarely use except for wedding type photography, which i dont do very often.
__________________
ewheeler20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2011, 12:18 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
jdnan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ft. Worth, TX
Posts: 336
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ewheeler20 View Post
wow, thanks a lot peter. That really did help. I had no idea about the 7D's crop sensor. I think that is good for me because I'm starting to get into shooting sports more seriously.. (hence the change from pentax to canon). This means that the 70-200 that i will buy will actually appear to be a 112-320 (compared to my pentax k-r, which is what i had before)! And with the 1.4x TC i will be getting, that makes the 70-200 actually appear as a 157-448! That's great news!
Just as an FYI, the KR is 1.5 crop factor, so not much difference; you'll have similar resulting focal length on comparable lenses. This is one of many issues that affect high ISO performance; generally, the closer to full frame processor (smaller crop factor), better noise results at high ISO. This is certainly an over simplification, but something to think about.
__________________
Jerry
jdnan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2011, 12:19 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Belize & UK
Posts: 463
Default

Don't mention it. I'd feel very exposed with nothing wider than you are envisaging, and in particular if you are going to be the official photographer at a wedding reception I'd say you MUST get something wider. Presumably the reception will be indoors? Because if so you'll want a lens that's wider, quite fast (low f-number) and you'll NEED a flash with attachments. I'm not the best person to advise on fast wide-angle zooms, but nonetheless I think that's what you'll want. Primes can be very satisfying, but especially in such constraining circumstances it's highly probable that you'll find you haven't got the right focal length.

One other question - your Pentax is digital, isn't it? What is the sensor size? Because it's probably in the region of the 1.5/1.6 crops that Nikon & Canon use, which means that your Pentax experiences will translate closely over to a Canon crop camera. If you're accustomed to film however as I was assuming, then what I said applies with no caveat.

OK, JDNAN has just answered my last point.
__________________
Canon 5D & 7D (both gripped), 24-105L, 100-400L, EF-S 15-85, 50 f1.8, Tamron 28-75, Sigma 12-24, G10, A1+10 FD lenses, tripods, lights etc

Last edited by peterbj7; Apr 6, 2011 at 12:21 PM.
peterbj7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2011, 12:52 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Western Ma. USA
Posts: 795
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnan View Post
Just as an FYI, the KR is 1.5 crop factor, so not much difference
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterbj7 View Post
your Pentax is digital, isn't it? What is the sensor size? Because it's probably in the region of the 1.5/1.6 crops that Nikon & Canon use
LOL, i can't believe I didn't know this! I feel much better now because I was worried that a 1.6 crop sensor was gonna be way different than my pentax sensor size... noooope! only 1/10th difference. that really puts me at ease.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jdnan View Post
the closer to full frame processor (smaller crop factor), better noise results at high ISO. This is certainly an over simplification, but something to think about.
Great tidbit of info! i never did know even one reason as to how one camera is better than others concerning ISO.


Quote:
Originally Posted by peterbj7 View Post
to be the official photographer at a wedding reception I'd say you MUST get something wider.... and you'll NEED a flash with attachments.
Point well taken. after doing some google searches almost everyone out there agrees with you, lol.

I am looking right now at the Tokina 11-16 f2.8. It has gotten some very good reviews, and its relatively cheap at just $600.

Here is my current setup I want to buy all within 4-5 months.:
Canon 7D
Canon 70-200L f2.8 non-is
Canon 1.4x TC II (not III, i think)
Canon 24-70L f2.8
Tokina 11-16 f2.8
Nissin Di866s w/ backets and stuff.

That will cover me on everything from 11mm-280mm except for 17-23.

How's that sound?
__________________
ewheeler20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2011, 1:04 PM   #19
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

I don't think you will want to go that wide (11-16) for a wedding reception. once you get down in the low teens for focal lengths you will get some strange perspective distortion that is less than flattering for shooting ppl. the 11-16 is a great architecture/landscape lens, but is not something you want to shoot ppl with, unless its for some specific creative shot.

something like the aforementioned Canon 17-55IS, Tamron 17-50 2.8 (the non-VC is sharper), or sigma 17-50 2.8 os would do better for a wider lens used for weddings, ppl, etc.
__________________
MyFlickr

Last edited by Hards80; Apr 6, 2011 at 1:06 PM.
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2011, 2:03 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Belize & UK
Posts: 463
Default

I agree. Around 15-50 is the range to get for a crop camera as a general purpose wide angle lens. Below around 15 is starting to get very wide. An f2.8 will be ideal for your wedding purposes. As I said, as a walkaround I find 15-85 to be great, though the lens is significantly slower than f2.8. Of those suggested I'd go for the non-VC Tamron, which is the cheapest and possibly also the best.
__________________
Canon 5D & 7D (both gripped), 24-105L, 100-400L, EF-S 15-85, 50 f1.8, Tamron 28-75, Sigma 12-24, G10, A1+10 FD lenses, tripods, lights etc
peterbj7 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 7:11 PM.