PHOTOGRAPHERS: Post your photos !

[AllenR]

[monty_GTV]

The 6D is a great transition if you're coming from a low/mid range APSC (think 600D or 60D).

Low light photography is better because you can bump it up to ISO 6400 or even ISO 12800 with acceptable noise levels.

AF is not the best out there, but can easily be rectified by using the center AF point and reframing.

Compared to a 7D, framerate is slower and AF is inferior. So that's the tradeoff - do you want a high end crop-sensor or a midrange full-frame? I rarely shoot sports so I don't need the high FPS, and I always shoot indoors in low light so it was an easy choice to go 6D for me. Added plus is that bokeh is better for a full frame.

Also, if you consider lens costs, a 6D set actually costs roughly the same as an 80D!


Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk

thanks a lot bro for the heads up.

i'm getting 6D too as it is the most affordable full-frame in Canon's line up, enthusiast lang naman ako

for the lenses, i currently have the EF 50mm f1.8 II and EF 85mm f/1.8 which i think are compatible sa 6D.

i'm still deciding which one to get, 24-105mm or the 17-40mm. but i think the former will suit my requirement...

[jut703]

thanks a lot bro for the heads up.

i'm getting 6D too as it is the most affordable full-frame in Canon's line up, enthusiast lang naman ako

for the lenses, i currently have the EF 50mm f1.8 II and EF 85mm f/1.8 which i think are compatible sa 6D.

i'm still deciding which one to get, 24-105mm or the 17-40mm. but i think the former will suit my requirement...

Your primes are good bro. 50mm for a walkaround lens (similar to 35mm in your APSC setup). The 85mm on the other hand can serve as a portrait lens. FOV is similar to a 50mm with an APSC body.

As for which L lens, the 24-105 is obviously the better all rounder. IS is very useful for low light. The focal length is very versatile (15-65mm equivalent in your current setup).

The 17-40 is for UWA needs (landscape, group shots in cramped areas, etc). It's more of a supplementary lens than a walkaround.

Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk

[oj88]

Your primes are good bro. 50mm for a walkaround lens (similar to 35mm in your APSC setup). The 85mm on the other hand can serve as a portrait lens. FOV is similar to a 50mm with an APSC body.

As for which L lens, the 24-105 is obviously the better all rounder. IS is very useful for low light. The focal length is very versatile (15-65mm equivalent in your current setup).

The 17-40 is for UWA needs (landscape, group shots in cramped areas, etc). It's more of a supplementary lens than a walkaround.

Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk

Baliktad yata computation mo jut.

The 50mm and 85mm lenses installed on an APS-Crop Canon body is equivalent to 80mm and 136mm, respectively, on a full-frame camera.

Similarly, the 24-105mm installed on a 60D for example, would be equivalent to 38-168mm.

In other words, those lenses will be in its native focal lengths when paired with a full-frame 35mm body and multiplied 1.6x when paired with a crop Canon body.

[jut703]

Baliktad yata computation mo jut.

The 50mm and 85mm lenses installed on an APS-Crop Canon body is equivalent to 80mm and 136mm, respectively, on a full-frame camera.

Similarly, the 24-105mm installed on a 60D for example, would be equivalent to 38-168mm.

In other words, those lenses will be in its native focal lengths when paired with a full-frame 35mm body and multiplied 1.6x when paired with a crop Canon body.

I am referring to the equivalent focal length and FOV of the lenses in an APSC body. Meaning, a 24-105 in a 6D is like a 15-65 on a crop sensor.

Because majority of SLRs are crop sensors, people are more familiar with focal lengths for those cameras and not their full-frame 1.6x equivalents.

Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk

[monty_GTV]

Your primes are good bro. 50mm for a walkaround lens (similar to 35mm in your APSC setup). The 85mm on the other hand can serve as a portrait lens. FOV is similar to a 50mm with an APSC body.

As for which L lens, the 24-105 is obviously the better all rounder. IS is very useful for low light. The focal length is very versatile (15-65mm equivalent in your current setup).

The 17-40 is for UWA needs (landscape, group shots in cramped areas, etc). It's more of a supplementary lens than a walkaround.

Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk

thanks again bro. yes, i like the 50mm, sort of my go to lens. the 85mm indeed is very good fro portrait. i really like both.

i might go with the 24-105 as an all rounder and its within the confine of my budget. as you said earlier, its hard to justify the more pricey 24-70 for an enthusiast like me.

i have not tried using any UWA lens yet, it should be very interesting to have one though. for landscape and group shots, i am okay with my S7e as back-up

[jut703]

thanks again bro. yes, i like the 50mm, sort of my go to lens. the 85mm indeed is very good fro portrait. i really like both.

i might go with the 24-105 as an all rounder and its within the confine of my budget. as you said earlier, its hard to justify the more pricey 24-70 for an enthusiast like me.

i have not tried using any UWA lens yet, it should be very interesting to have one though. for landscape and group shots, i am okay with my S7e as back-up

Good choice on the 24-105. But you'll enjoy the 17-40 as a backup. 😉

S7E focal length is only 4.2mm, effectively 26mm on a full frame.

Malayo pa yung extra FOV ng 17mm bro. UWA's are very fun to play with. This shot was taken from the base of a windmill in Bangui:



Hindi yan kaya with a phone camera or even the 24-105. The only problem is distortion for objects near the edge of the frame, but this can be fixed with LR/PS.



Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk

[oj88]

I am referring to the equivalent focal length and FOV of the lenses in an APSC body. Meaning, a 24-105 in a 6D is like a 15-65 on a crop sensor.

Because majority of SLRs are crop sensors, people are more familiar with focal lengths for those cameras and not their full-frame 1.6x equivalents.

Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk

Damn millennials! :D

I guess it's how you perceive it.

I grew up in the era of 35mm film cameras (and then some) so a 50mm lens is always 50mm. With that in mind, I always have full-frame/35mm format as my basis for focal lengths when putting the same lens on a crop body. The way I think, a nifty-fity would be a tele at 80mm when installed on a crop body.

[jut703]

Damn millennials! :D

I guess it's how you perceive it.

I grew up in the era of 35mm film cameras (and then some) so a 50mm lens is always 50mm. With that in mind, I always have full-frame/35mm format as my basis for focal lengths when putting the same lens on a crop body. The way I think, a nifty-fity would be a tele at 80mm when installed on a crop body.

Yes bro I guess we're looking at it from different vantage points. My native focal length is the APSC format (i.e. 18-55mm is my normal walkaround). I've only recently adjusted to the full frame focal lengths, but many people I talk to are still used to 1.6x as baseline.

They comment that my 24-105 isn't wide enough compared to their 18-55mm kit lens. What they don't know is that the 24mm is significantly wider. 😂

Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk

[Monseratto]

16-35mm F2.8 lens

Tokyo Skytree





Osaka-Umeda Sky Building