teresa_atkinson

<p>About whether Liveview works better. In my 50D, liveview focusing is quite slow, and Canon even recommends in my manual that it be used only for still subjects and only on a tripod. So I'm wondering if the people who see the tilt LCD in the 60D useful for things like shooting subjects over people's heads while looking at the tilted LCD are really understanding what liveview is capable of or not. If Liveview focuses faster on the 60D than it does in the 50D, then great, but otherwise, it may be fine for video (albeit without continuous autofocus, it will be most useful for cinematographical gear heads), or for macro or other low-to-the-ground tripod work. It may not have much use at all for still photography off the tripod.</p>

<p>I have 2 questions for previewers of this camera, Bob Atkins or other.<br>

1. Does liveview work any better in the 60D than in any other EOS? <br>

2. Is the shutter "feel" more like the T2i or more like the 50D?<br>

Thanks.</p>

<p>Kristen, because you stated you have a learning disability, I wanted to point out that yes, Mike's right about the magnification of camera shake on a 1.6x sensor, <strong>but YOU'RE RIGHT, Mike's wrong about the Math that you said you find so difficult</strong>.<br>

If you have a 50mm lens, you should be able to hand hold 1/50 on a full frame. However, because the crop sensor magnifies the camera shake, you would need 1/80 on a crop sensor, like the 7D, 50D, T2i, etc to hand hold. (not 1/30 as Mike states).<br>

Of course, it all depends on the individual and what they can hand hold. But certainly start at 1/80 and work your way down from there..</p>

<p>I just recently bought a 77 mm Tiffen filter and really like it. It's not multi-coated, but the main reason for multicoating is to reduce flare. I know multicoat is hugely important with UV filters that might stay on a lens all the time and point in the direction of the sun, etc. However, with a polarizer, I typically don't point the lens in the direction where flare would result, since it works best when the camera is pointing 90 degrees from the sun. Nevertheless, I did a flare test today, pointing the camera in the direction of the sun, and found that with my 100mm macro lens (the lens that happened to be on my camera), I got much more flare with the bare lens with no filter than with the circular polarizer attached. Apparently the "sunglasses" positive effect of the polarizer on the lens outweighed the single-coat flare negative effect. My filter does exactly what polarizers are supposed to do so I'm happy with it.</p>

<p>Of course, if your budget is $150, then you might want to opt for multicoated filter, just in case. But don't buy the Canon one....looks like an over-priced single-coated filter. Try B+W, Hoya, others that people recommend.<br>

<br>

How much you can justify spending is greatly about the result you're looking for. I was looking for green landscapes, sparkling snow and blue sky. Ultra-sharp detail in 10mm landscapes wasn't critical to me. I get what i need with a $70 filter. Someday I may need something else, but for now this one is just what I need. And yes, I use the filter on my wide angle lens. I like to break rules.</p>

<p>+1 to those who say to buy the 77mm filter and step up rings so the filter can go on all your lenses. Works great!</p>

<p>Yes, your depth of field will be shallower using f/1.8 and you'll have less of your subjects in focus than with the 18-55mm.. The light will be better, but if you're interested in group shots or room shots, you won't get many of your subjects in the field of focus at f/1.8. </p>

<p>If you want good light indoors and deep depth of focus at the same time, your very best upgrade is a flash. I have the 430 EXII and it's wonderful (the going rate is about $250). If you want sharper pictures, the 50mm f/1.8 MAY give you better results than the 18-55mm depending on the copies of the two lenses you have. (I have both, and I sometimes am happier with the results from the 18-55mm.) However, for good depth of field on indoor shots, a flash will be a much better way to go than a "fast" lens.</p>

<p>The other good upgrade for indoor shots is a tripod....for stable slow shutter speeds.</p>

<p>Hope this makes sense. I'm tired.</p>

<p>Another to consider is the Canon EFS 15-85mm. People like that lens too and it's a bit less expensive than the 17-55 (albeit slower).<br>

I suggest whatever you choose, you try and rent it first and ensure that it really is better.</p>

<p>A really nice introductory camera with both point and shoot automatic modes and full manual controls is the Canon S90. You can even shoot in raw. Unfortunately, Canon took away the viewfinder that it had in the S80, but it does have a nice LCD. The S90 does great in low light and I've even seen daylighted action shots that turn out really nicely. If you go over to Dpreview and the CanonTalk forum, you'll see loads of pics people have posted with the camera that are truly excellent. It also has a movie mode, albeit, it only shoots in standard definition. I love my S80. I'd upgrade but I just bought a new SLR. The lowest price I've seen on the camera is $299 (last week at Newegg.com).</p>

<p>I'd introduce some kind of photo editing capability from the start. I suspect a kid would be really intrigued by it. I've played around with Piknik.com. It's fun and definitely geared toward kids. Picassa.com also has photo editing. Another fun thing worth considering maybe for the next gift holiday is the Wacom Bamboo Pen and Touch tablet. It sells for about $90, has both pen and multi-touch capabilities and comes with Photoshop Essentials 7.0. I just got one from Costco.com today and played with it like I was NINE YEARS old. It is especially geared toward home users, and definitely appropriate for youth, although it's got the sensitivity of the old Intuos3 so it's a productive tool too. The Bamboo Craft is another similar tablet, which packages scrapbooking software with Photoshop Essentials and Painter Essentials....in case she's interested in scrapbooking too.</p>

<p>As far as books? I don't know. I think a visit from an uncle would be much better.</p>

 

<p>Buy the filter and give it a try. But yes, as someone else mentioned, I think you need the 58mm, rather than the 55mm. <br>

Amazon has a return policy. If the filter doesn't do what you think it should do, then return it! Amazon may charge a restocking fee, but it will be a pittance on a $20 item.<br>

Contrary to what some believe the best is not always the most cost effective (although sometimes it is).<br>

And contrary to what some believe, photography is not always a business! For many of us, it's a fun hobby! And I'm so glad I'm not in the business, because some in the business have a tendency to get a bit too serious about things like CPLs for hobbyists!</p>

 

<p>Jessica, as an amateur photographer, you'll be just fine with a crop sensor camera. For your purposes, the upgrade to the 50D would probably be justified in build quality and faster shutter speed (for catching kid pics).<br>

You DO NOT need a full-frame camera. The cost is not justifiable for your purposes. I suggest you absolutely don't go that route, unless you have unlimited cash. If you have $2000 to spend, get the 50D (or wait a few months and see if a "60D" comes out). Get yourself another nice new lens to go shoot.</p>

<p>Don't the folks at DarwinWiggett know that the only camera you can bash without recourse is the 50D?</p>

<p>The internet produces a lot of bogus reviews, the DPR review of the 50D being a case in point! It's no more credible in the end than DarwinWiggett, but it turned the 50D into a whipping boy of the internet!</p>

<p>I thank Gawd I didn't rely on that review to influence my purchase, and wind up with a 7D. I have all the camera I need in the 50D, and am $700 richer for the experience.</p>

<p>The moral of the story is take any review with a grain of salt. They're opinions and can all be biased.</p>

<p>The anger here about the 7D bashing makes me chuckle. Given that I own the stepchild of reviewed cameras and don't get angry (but instead laugh) about 50D bashing, I have to wonder if the sensitivity and anger is driven by something deeper -- could it be buyer's remorse?</p>

<p>I vote for getting a camcorder. I was in your boat and bought a T2I to go with my 50D for video....even though I already had a nice, but inexpensive high definition camcorder (Canon HF200). While I can produce very high quality video with the T2I -- better than the camcorder when it's good -- a great deal of the time my shots are out of focus. Look at the super-duper examples of SLR video, and you'll see. The in-focus subjects are relatively stagnant. Any extreme movement and the focus becomes pretty awful at times. If you view the House episode that was filmed entirely with a 5D, you'll see they cut the video in wierd places, probably because of out-of-focus issues.</p>

<p>Canon DSLR's don't have continuous autofocus yet. I believe the only DSLR that does is the Panasonic G2 (although I could be wrong).</p>

<p>I think that people who believe that DSLRs lacking <strong>continuous </strong>autofocus are as good for shooting kids as a high definition camcorder have never used a great hi-def camcorder for shooting kids. </p>

<p>If you buy an SLR for video, you'll constantly have to work around its issues. The video you get will be hit or miss at least early on in the game until you figure out how to focus really, really fast and constantly -- manually. You can only shoot video in live view mode. Sunlight will make viewing the LCD for focusing very difficult, which will further increase the difficulty in manually focusing (unless you spend another couple hundred dollars for a loupe). </p>

<p>If, instead you get a camcorder, the form factor is designed for video (tilt LCD, etc), continuous autofocus exists, the video quality is amazing, and you'll be able to focus your attention on the kid rather than on working around the limitations of the camera. Oh and it will be small. Mine weighs 14 ounces. I pack mine with my 50D and still feel I'm traveling light.</p>

<p>As I've said my husband and I have the Canon HF200. We went for the low-end, figuring that instead of getting the very best camcorder we could and paying a premium, we'd rather pay a little now for a good camcorder, and then pay a little later on for even better technology than exists in the best consumer camcorders today. But there are certainly better camcorders out there than ours, even though I feel ours is exceptional. </p>

<p>You tube has examples from many of the camcorders.</p>

<p>So another vote for camcorder.</p>

<p>When you were shopping for the tubes, I'll bet people said that with tubes in place you'll "lose infinity". That's what happened in your case, when you "couldn't see anything". You'll be able to see wonderful things up close, but you won't be able to see anything even a few feet away...</p>

<p>I've heard you should use the "shade" white balance if you want to use an automatic setting....just something else to add to the mix.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>--It's the photographer, not the equipment! (How many times has THAT been said!)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I hear this time and again. It may be true when comparing output of cameras/lenses with the exact same capabilities, but the reality is it isn't true otherwise. I compared shots I took with a a point and shoot and with my first cheesie DSLR, and the difference was amazing...and I can't say I'd improved my photography skills THAT much in the weeks that I'd owned that DSLR when I did the comparison.</p>

<p>Don't buy into that myth. It's always better to have better tools whether you're a rookie or an advanced photographer.</p>

<p>I'm glad you clarified that you had the 75-300 rather than the 70-300, because when I saw your original post, I thought WHAT? The 70-300mm and the <strong>75-300mm</strong> which you have are far different lenses. <br>

I have regular use of a 70-200 f/4 non-IS and I find that my 70-300mm lens IS even better than that lens for a couple of reasons. One is that image stabilization is absolutely required in many cases, especially when I'm zoomed. Another is that the extra 100 mm on a crop sensor camera is actually 160mm, meaning it is the difference between gettting and not getting that shot at the zoo (and my 70-300 retains pretty good clarity at 300mm). There are times when the 70-200 comes through with amazing shots, but most of those are in bright light, which I don't always have. In addition, the slight weight difference between the two lenses makes me more likely to carry the 70-300 at the zoo.<br>

Bob Atkins, in one of his reviews of the 70-300mm, referred to it as stealth L-glass, or something like that.<br>

If I were you, before buying, I'd rent both the 70-200 that you want and the 70-300. You may find that the 70-300 gives you a better bang for your buck.</p>

<p>I second the motion to get an HD video cam. </p>

<p>I have the Canon EF-S 10-22mm and all I can say about it is, "do you want mine? I'll sell it!". I unfortunately fell for the hype surrounding the lens. In practice I have plenty sharper lenses that cost less money and I tend not to use this lens unless I want a crazy-distorted 10mm image (I consider it a novelty lens). If I'd had it to do over again, I'd have bought the EF 17-40mm f/4L. 17mm is plenty wide even on a crop sensor camera (which you have) and it's probably a sharper lens.<br>

I do second the motion of those who suggest doing panorama shooting and stitching This is a fun way to go and likely will be very effective for you. However, the fact that you're new to photography is NO reason not to buy a new lens for wide angle. Having additional and better tools is NEVER a bad thing if you can afford them.<br>

Good luck in your search.</p>

 

<p>I'm with you at times, Jay. I use aperture priority when depth of field is my priority. I use shutter priority when stopping action is my priority. However, I've found when taking certain insect shots (e.g. bees) I need a deeper depth of field and fast shutter, so I use manual. I deliberately underexpose my shots so that I get both a stopped down aperture AND a high shutter speed and then I fix my shots in Photoshop.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Sales tax depends on your state. You need to talk to someone at your state Dept of Revenue.</p>

<p>Best for what?</p>

<p>I do remember reading in Canon literature (maybe on the web site) about turning off the camera before changing lenses. It's a good habit to get into (you may be tempting fate if you don't do it), but I like many, have forgotten over and over again. Try and do it, and if you forget, don't stress. It most likely didn't damage anything. If something does go wrong, more likely it's a temporary malfunction that can be resolved by turning off the camera and re-attaching the lens.</p>

<p>And please, go out and shoot. You have a digital camera, a device designed to facilitate great amounts of trial and error. It is rated for 100K shutter actuations. You need to use them up! ;-). You can read books on composition, but the only way you know what YOU prefer in a picture is to take it... When you don't quite get the shot you expected, consider it a learning tool, and an opportunity to try again. I read somewhere that the mark of a good photographer is a person with enough persistence to go back and shoot the same scene until they get it right. That's what you should focus on. Take the shot. If you don't like the shot, decide what you don't like and if it's worth it to you, go out and try and improve the same shot, or use your learning for the next shot.</p>

<p>But have fun! This is a hobby. Hobbies are supposed to be fun! </p>

<p>I'm with those who say get a flash. The 50mm lens at f/1.8 will literaly get one face in focus, while a face that is less than a foot behind it won't be in focus.<br>

The best cure for indoor shots when you want everything in focus AND good lighting is a flash. You can then shoot at f/4 or f/8 and get more in focus.<br>

And probably the 430EXII is the best compromise for your needs.</p>

<p>What everyone else said. <br>

Also, I would start by taking shots with it in autofocus mode. Experiment with how close you can get to your subject....you'll be able to get closer than with other lenses. One drawback of the Tamron is that it will extend during focusing, so you'll have to get used to that. You'll know when you're too close because the lens will stop focusing properly, will start hunting. Start with inanimate objects.<br>

Once you're satisfied that you've mastered what the lens can do in autofocus mode, turn off the autofocus, move the focus ring all the way to the OPPOSITE of infinity and then focus on your subject by moving the camera/lens closer and farther from your subject until focus is obtained. You'll be able to get closer to the subject this way, but getting a sharp image will depend on the capability of your eyes. (I don't do this much because I have poor eyesight).</p>

<p>BTW, XP mode is a feature of Windows 7. It is not something special that Dell is giving you.</p>

<p>I wonder if your lens is out of adjustment, front focusing or something. </p>