Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 29, 2013, 4:09 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daninmanchester View Post
So having looked at some videos with IS on and off it is clear for video it is essential if you are hand held and I'm guessing that the compromise at the edges of the pictures wont matter too much if I crop or I'm not printing.
When recording video, the image has a maximum resolution of about 2MP (1920x1080), so any corner softness you may see in 18MP stills will be undetectable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by daninmanchester View Post
Is it safe to assume all these lenses are an upgrade to the kit?
Absolutely.
__________________
  • 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 May 29, 2013, 9:01 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Dan,
In one of your responses, you mentioned, that you'd like to try your hand at longer exposures, night scenes and shallow depth of field images. All of which really are ideally suited for the camera to be mounted on a sturdy tripod using a shutter release cable to snap the photo. In these types of situations, lenses with image stabilization offer no advantage since you need to disable IS.

I'm not saying that I.S. isn't any good. It's just that you'll need to evaluate your type of shooting going forward and decide on which lenses and their attributes best fit your needs.

In my situation, I shoot a lot of landscapes, long exposure photographs in low light and floral images. A sturdy tripod is more important to me than having a lens with I.S. I, instead opted for a lens with a fixed aperture of 2.8 (17-50mm Tamron) that is sharp throughout the focal range AND wide open as well. It provides me a great deal more flexibility do my low light work plus floral images having a really shallow depth of field.
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31, 2013, 8:35 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 14
Default

Thanks Zig. I know what you are saying and I agree, but this is my first lens that needs to be a bit of an all rounder until I have a selection. I'm trying to kill too many birds with one stone and need to decide where I can compromise.

Like I said if the 15-85 was an f2.8 I'd buy it in a flash as it gives me the focal lengths i'm used to in my point and shoot.

The other option I considered was a 18-200mm type of lens, which isn't quite as wide as I would like, but it gives me some new telephoto options to explore and is a handy point and shoot range, however the quality suffers on such a large range. I could easily compliment such a range with a wide angle lens and could just about afford the 2 lens setup.

With a wide angle lens I don't think I'd care about IS as the shots are always more considered and composed. Even with my point and shoot 9/10 times for that kind of photography I use my gorillapod. Then again maybe I'll discover I love shooting wide angle video...its an expensive learning curve!

I'm leaning towards the 15-85 initially because of its price, quality and range, but I need to mull it over. Its nothing new or exciting, but it gives me something familiar to work with while I'm getting used to all the other complexities of DSLRs.
daninmanchester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 2, 2013, 6:59 AM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 14
Default

Ok, I've been doing some DoF calculations and having a bit of a think.

I think I will buy the 700D with the 18-135mm kit lens.....

It sort of goes against what I have been discussing, but it gives me a good focal range to get a feel for what I like in the land of DSLR.

I will almost certainly get a Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 as I know I love land/seascapes.

the 18-135mm will act as a reasonable travel lens, something to stay on my camera for wandering around.

Once I have experimented with this and got a better feel for focal lengths I have a feeling that one (maybe 2) fast primes will cover off what I want to achieve with my bokeh'd photography, e.g. Canon EF 35mm f/2 that gives me about a 50mm.

Given the lenses I was talking about this goes off at a bit of a tangent, but does it seem like a relatively sensible approach?
daninmanchester 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 10:41 PM.