Welcome to the IHoP v.2

[Adrian_D 520]

On 5/15/2016 at 5:32 PM, Tirefryr said:

Times infinity!

 

Yup...

[Adrian_D 520]

On 5/15/2016 at 6:50 PM, MKader17 said:

Can't get it to the big ring

 

Sounds like a stretched or even frayed cable.

I had a few strands break on mine, could no longer shift to the highest ring.

And the rear cable is also stretched, it messed up indexing a bit, so I had to adjust tension. 

[///M5 2,833]

New cables stretch pretty significantly.  I like my derailleur to fire instantly when I hit the change button so I am uber anal about adjusting it.  After a new set of cables I will probably do it 3-4x in the next year and then it tapers off as the cable gets to its permanently stretched length.

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

17 hours ago, sandt38 said:

A good friend of mine just lost his son. OD. This breaks what little heart I actually have.

That's pucking terrible.  My girlfriend just lost a nephew who was walking home after prom well into the grass, and was hit by a drunk driver.

[///M5 2,833]

85mm comparison from a Nikon guy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adQHzNfvzFM

 

Same for the 50mm here – only the 1.8, but pricewise $125 for an awesome lens is an interesting review point in particular for your budget focus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6aF27ldYqA

If you search for the 70-200 you will also find the same.

Canon owns the best low end and the best high end.  To me that is exactly why I own a Canon.

17-55, 50mm, 85mm in Canon budget are near L performance at Tamron prices.

*also by no means is that guy a gospel, in fact I don’t like him; but it is hard to get beyond ridiculous tests that show nothing.

I know I keep harping, but that is because you really should think long term about your glass needs before buying anything.  It will really determine your overall expense and adoption of the hobby.

 

[sandt38 448]

5 hours ago, ///M5 said:

 

 

I know I keep harping, but that is because you really should think long term about your glass needs before buying anything.  It will really determine your overall expense and adoption of the hobby.

 

 

 

I'll watch the videos later tonight, thanks.

I am trying to learn about my glass needs, that is why I keep asking questions about it. I grabbed what I grabbed because I wanted to get an idea of how everything affects the final outcome of the shots. I got enough focal length adjustment to get that. I have played with my aperture enough to understand how it works, but being that my aperture is a bit steep, I don't get the full gist of it, I know.

I asked about the various lenses (the 35, 50, and 85mm) because I want to know what will work best at close range. I don't quite know what focal length will work well with what aperture. When I find reasonably priced glass that is approaching what you guys suggest, I ask about it specifically.

I am not ignoring, nor asking in half measures. I am just trying to understand this more. Many of the things that you and Matt are saying seem very contrary to what I am reading in many other places. I am having to weed out the inconsistencies by trying some hands on and develop some of my own decisions on what works for me. It may not be perfect, but if it makes me happy that is all I care about. I honestly appreciate all the advice and input, so keep it coming.

Now that I have a body, I am figuring out how to make adjustments. I have never fucked with any real cameras before, so for me getting my hands on is a must. I know you guys like Canon, but I have made up my mind on the body. I like the feel and options of the Nikon. It fits well in my hands, albeit a bit small, but it is a crop, so I expect that. It feels better built, more substantial, yet it weighs a shade less. The Canon body is not for me. I am not opposed to adapting the Nikon body to suit Canon lenses, but I never got an answer as to which Canon mount affords the best image/dollar for crops. I have found several different adapters, I'm just not sure which to snag.

[sandt38 448]

7 hours ago, Aaron Clinton said:

That's pucking terrible.  My girlfriend just lost a nephew who was walking home after prom well into the grass, and was hit by a drunk driver.

 

That blows

[nem 2,019]

Got tired of using a shovel and got one of these. No more blisters!

[nem 2,019]

This is where I stopped for the day.

[dem beats 1,223]

21 minutes ago, sandt38 said:

I'll watch the videos later tonight, thanks.

I am trying to learn about my glass needs, that is why I keep asking questions about it. I grabbed what I grabbed because I wanted to get an idea of how everything affects the final outcome of the shots. I got enough focal length adjustment to get that. I have played with my aperture enough to understand how it works, but being that my aperture is a bit steep, I don't get the full gist of it, I know.

I asked about the various lenses (the 35, 50, and 85mm) because I want to know what will work best at close range. I don't quite know what focal length will work well with what aperture. When I find reasonably priced glass that is approaching what you guys suggest, I ask about it specifically.

I am not ignoring, nor asking in half measures. I am just trying to understand this more. Many of the things that you and Matt are saying seem very contrary to what I am reading in many other places. I am having to weed out the inconsistencies by trying some hands on and develop some of my own decisions on what works for me. It may not be perfect, but if it makes me happy that is all I care about. I honestly appreciate all the advice and input, so keep it coming.

Now that I have a body, I am figuring out how to make adjustments. I have never fucked with any real cameras before, so for me getting my hands on is a must. I know you guys like Canon, but I have made up my mind on the body. I like the feel and options of the Nikon. It fits well in my hands, albeit a bit small, but it is a crop, so I expect that. It feels better built, more substantial, yet it weighs a shade less. The Canon body is not for me. I am not opposed to adapting the Nikon body to suit Canon lenses, but I never got an answer as to which Canon mount affords the best image/dollar for crops. I have found several different adapters, I'm just not sure which to snag.

 

Maybe My posts didn't go through. I wouldn't buy an adapter.  A large benefit of matching brands is that the AF works together. 

 

If you want really nice primes, look into Leica or Zies.  They are the best of the best when it comes to sharpness and perfect glass. 

I don't care if you like Nikon or Canon. Especially when it comes to ergonomics. Nikon's cheep bodies are better than Canon cheep bodies. That's a fact, just like Canon glass is better.  I don't care what you choose. I'm only thinking facts here however. My opinion is Nikon focused on short term tech stuff and leaned off the glass tech. They also use Sony for a lot of the critical body parts so they could spend more time on the entry level features. My opinion is that I would like less features and faster ways to use those features. 

 

The touch screen for example is amazing for new shooters to learn on. Training wheels if you will.  Well, once you really learn how to work the settings a touch screen is so extremely slow and inelegant that I would rather not have it if they reduce The amount of direct control options I need for my shooting. That's all opinion.

 

Low cost Nikon bodies are way better, and they all have better dynamic range. Canon lenses are much better. Not opinion.

 

 What have you read that is the opposite of what we are saying?  Maybe I could clarify what I'm saying wrong.

 

Canon has better lenses at the moment. Its not a debate, the lenses are superior.  Some of that is because of AF, some is because of the actually glass inside the lens. And especially the materials in the lenses that are not glass.  

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

UFO: Unidentified Flyin' Oldsmobile

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

...off a cliff...

[///M5 2,833]

57 minutes ago, sandt38 said:

I'll watch the videos later tonight, thanks.

I am trying to learn about my glass needs, that is why I keep asking questions about it. I grabbed what I grabbed because I wanted to get an idea of how everything affects the final outcome of the shots. I got enough focal length adjustment to get that. I have played with my aperture enough to understand how it works, but being that my aperture is a bit steep, I don't get the full gist of it, I know.

I asked about the various lenses (the 35, 50, and 85mm) because I want to know what will work best at close range. I don't quite know what focal length will work well with what aperture. When I find reasonably priced glass that is approaching what you guys suggest, I ask about it specifically.

I am not ignoring, nor asking in half measures. I am just trying to understand this more. Many of the things that you and Matt are saying seem very contrary to what I am reading in many other places. I am having to weed out the inconsistencies by trying some hands on and develop some of my own decisions on what works for me. It may not be perfect, but if it makes me happy that is all I care about. I honestly appreciate all the advice and input, so keep it coming.

Now that I have a body, I am figuring out how to make adjustments. I have never fucked with any real cameras before, so for me getting my hands on is a must. I know you guys like Canon, but I have made up my mind on the body. I like the feel and options of the Nikon. It fits well in my hands, albeit a bit small, but it is a crop, so I expect that. It feels better built, more substantial, yet it weighs a shade less. The Canon body is not for me. I am not opposed to adapting the Nikon body to suit Canon lenses, but I never got an answer as to which Canon mount affords the best image/dollar for crops. I have found several different adapters, I'm just not sure which to snag.

The adapters lose autofocus so none

[sandt38 448]

34 minutes ago, nem said:

Got tired of using a shovel and got one of these. No more blisters!

Killer rig. There are some really nice mower decks available for those units too.

[///M5 2,833]

Ergos on non prosumer bodies all suck.  Touchscreens are stupid for settings as well.  Only reason to have one is to zone zoom.

We just want you to see first hand thedifference before you make a depreciating investment.  So far you can flip what you have.  I assume you are starting to see now why we preached glass over body.  You cant make up for a slow lens.  A cheaper body however doesnt make much difference.  A 10mp pro body from 8 years ago will still rock and do everything you need.  Same can be said about a 10 year old L lens

[///M5 2,833]

I am curious what you read that is different and where. Ought to be easy enough to blast holes in....

[nem 2,019]

16 minutes ago, sandt38 said:

Killer rig. There are some really nice mower decks available for those units too.

My buddy just bought this 2 weeks ago, I think for me to use, but we have been having fun with it.

[sandt38 448]

26 minutes ago, ///M5 said:

The adapters lose autofocus so none

I'm not understanding why you guys love autofocus so much.

Touchscreen is off on mine. I don't care anything for it. I know, almost without looking at the body, exactly where all my manual adjustments are.

[sandt38 448]

11 minutes ago, nem said:

My buddy just bought this 2 weeks ago, I think for me to use, but we have been having fun with it.

I've been eyeballing them. Kitted out how I want it, it is just under $18,000 brand new off the lot. Killer deal for a great rig.

Great friend!

 

[///M5 2,833]

3 minutes ago, sandt38 said:

I'm not understanding why you guys love autofocus so much.

Touchscreen is off on mine. I don't care anything for it. I know, almost without looking at the body, exactly where all my manual adjustments are.

Ill share some of the shots i took ttonight.  100% of them would be out of focus without autofocus.  When you need shutter speed no way manual focus works

[nem 2,019]

25 minutes ago, sandt38 said:

I've been eyeballing them. Kitted out how I want it, it is just under $18,000 brand new off the lot. Killer deal for a great rig.

Great friend!

 

He got this for $19k with a large tiller. It was used and had 15 hours on it when we picked it up. I just rolled it to 24.3 hours today.

[///M5 2,833]

I took out the Tamron 28-300 just to temp myself into buying a 70-200

[///M5 2,833]

And Seth I am actually open too.  Since I need a 70-200 eventually if the Nikon offering was compelling enough all my stuff is easily liquidable since I bought everything but the body used.  That I bought new because I needed to replace my video camera and previous generation DSLR video was lame compared to what came with the 70d.

[///M5 2,833]

My glass:

Tokina 11-16mm 2.8

Canon 17-55 2.8

50mm 1.4

Tamron 18-270 Boo...  I have not used this in 4 years.  To be fair it can do fine as a walk around travel lens, but that is assuming I am shooting at high F's for some depth of field.  It is soft then and lackluster, but the overall range gets the job done.  For shooting people though it sucks donkey.  2.8 or better for that!

[///M5 2,833]

So I am in dire need of a 200mm and an 85mm....but have been jumping back and forth between primes and the L zoom.

The problem being the 2.8 prime is affordable, the 2 not so much.  85 part is easy.