They just came out with a very lightweight lens. It would be my walk around lens, in fact as of now my only lens since I broke my current one.
Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD LD Aspherical IF Macro Zoom Lens with Built in Motor
I have a Canon T2i.
Tamron 18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD is the world’s most compact, lightweight lens with a 15x zoom ratio, featuring a 62mm filter diameter, VC (Vibration Compensation) image stabilization and Tamron’s first standing wave ultrasonic motor system for SLR lenses, PZD (Piezo Drive).
I've always have stayed away from Tamron because of quality control issues, if you get a good copy then they're great for the money. 18-270 is a big range hence the F/ 6.3 f-stop, 6.3 is hard to shoot in the afternoon. From the reviews I've read from their other lenses they also have a problem with dependability.
- I'd rather spend the extra bucks and get something that I can depend on with a better f-stop for 270, in your case Canon, in mine Nikon, I'd pick Tokina as a runner-up. Personally, If I want to be VERY particular about sharpness then I use my primes.
Thanks for your help Watercan! I couldn't wait! Amazon was down to 2 left and no one else has it yet as they just came out at the end of December. I am in need of my camera soon.
The 2 personal reviews looked good. Gee, I hope it is! I really wanted this one because it is so light weight. Even with my small Canon lens, my neck can ache after awhile.
Plus I only want to carry 1 lens. Supposedly this one is a macro and has a big zoom all in one. I hope it is not all too good to be true. I am not sure how the macro works since it says minimum focus distance 0.49m (19.3 in). I am hoping this means I just do not have to bend over so close as I did before but can zoom in standing for a close up.
Will the lens hood help when taking afternoon photos? What you say worries me because that is when I take most of my photos! LOL
My Canon T2i came with a cheap lens that I did like. 18-55m. I just wanted one that had a better long range and a better macro would be nice too. Somehow I broke my lens. I was afraid I had broken the camera too but today I went and tried a different lens on it and it worked. My lens would not auto focus, you can hear the motor straining but the lens does not move and the photo is blurry. Now I am wondering if I broke it by having it on AF but then manually focusing it. Is that a big no no?
Having AF on when manually focusing could strip the gears in the lens, (which nowadays are made of nylon/ plastic). There are lenses which allow you to manually focus while AF is engaged, but I haven't seen too many of them and it's an unusual trait. Best not to develop that habit because as your collection grows you'll have different types of lenses - some will allow you to and some won't, so it can get confusing - and expensive..
- The Tamron 18-270 lens retains the 0.5m throughout the zoom range which is nice. It closes down to 6.3 at 200mm which is where you may start to have problems with AF searching for a lock-on if there is not enough light. I have a 500 f/6.3 which does the same thing, sometimes I have to lock on to an object which is 'about' the same distance as my subject but has higher contrast, then swing over to my target and cross my fingers. I usually use it at F/11 for that reason. It gives me a little leeway with the focus.
- I always use a lens hood, I have them for all my lenses. If it doesn't come standard with the lens I buy it separately when I buy the lens, I consider it as essential as a UV filter. It's amazing how much stray light a lens can pick up, especially in the 18-35mm range. I haven't found it to help increase light, but it has enabled me to get angles I otherwise would have trouble with lens flare. I'm convinced it helps with contrast and color saturation too.
- It sounds like a nice walk around lens, light weight too. I wouldn't use it for a once in a lifetime opportunity like the Great Wall of China or the Sphinx in Egypt, but it's nice for everyday casual use. ☺
Well then I am in luck for the Great Wall if China is not in my future! LOL This lens I will put on MF and see how it works for me. I will let you know how it does.
I have been reading a lot on the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2. Not cheap esp when you buy all the lens it will soon have. Anyone familiar with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 which has been out a year? I think I want the G2 which you cannot find just yet. I was going to get the Canon S95 to replace my Canon S90 I put in my pocket that was full of mini seeds and it has not worked the same since. I tell you from now on I am buying that replace your camera no matter what you did to it insurance. I just need to sell a few more photos this week and I can afford it!
Last night I was reading about the Sony Nex which seemed not to be as good and also the Olympus E-P1. I do not know if Olympus has come out with a newer one. I love the direction these are going. I have trouble carrying a heavy camera etc all day out and about.
Olympus has an E-P2. It also has the E-PL1, and is just releasing the E-PL2. I've pre-ordered the E-PL2, although I was originally interested in the GF1.
After much back and forth, I decided on the E-PL2 due to the in-body image stabilization (vs panasonic's lens stabilization) and the supposedly better jpeg color (I am not going to be shooting raw). Micro 4/3 lenses work on all micro 4/3 cameras, so you can use panasonic lenses on olympus cameras and vice versa. In fact, I ordered a panasonic 20mm f1.7 which olympus E-Px users rave about, especially for low light situations.
Each camera of course has different features and strengths and weaknesses, so for me it really came down to what I features I wanted the most. Here is a thread discussing some of the differences between the GF1 and the E-PL1. The fact that the E-PL2 has some of the "desirable GF1 features" that the last post mentions, such as a dial to control settings instead of just buttons, and a bigger LCD screen, sealed the deal for me. It also comes with a new and improved the kit lens. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1041&thread=37278978&page=1
I briefly looked into the Sony Nex, but the lenses get poor reviews, and there are so few to choose from...
That is so exciting! You have to let us know how you like it when you finally get it.
I see the EP2 is not cheap, as much as I paid for my Ti2! I have such trouble making decisions about cameras. And the fact they keep coming out so quickly with new models makes it even harder. So Canon and Nikon have not moved into this new type of camera?
In one review I was reading they made shooting raw sound so good with such better quality photos resulting. Made me want to try it. What makes you sound so adament you won''t shoot raw? I so need an in house camera teacher.
So if you buy the camera thru Amazon, they do not offer the extended warranty policy that Best Buy does where they will replace it or fix it even if you are negligently culpable for whatever damage the camera has sustained?
Today I get my new lens. I hope it gets here early so I can go out and try it. And I pray my camera works well. I am still unclear how I broke it before and exactly what was/is broken.
That is awesome you get your new lens today. I hope your camera is working well again!
Yes, the EP2 is pretty pricey. There are rumors that an EP3 is coming out this spring, and of course, that will be even more expensive. However, I'm guessing it will drive down the price of the EP2, so that is something. I've also seen rumors that Nikon moving into making these types of cameras, and Pentax has publicly stated that it hasn't ruled it out either. I definitely agree that it is quite challenging picking a camera amid all these quick and exciting developments, and I'm really hoping I choose the "right" one for me at this time.
I didn't see an extended warranty option for the EPL2 through Amazon's pre-order. That is definitely something to consider.
I actually do want to try shooting raw and messing around with post processing, but decided that I don't want it to be a "requirement" for getting good color, especially since I like to take a lot of pics of plants and landscapes. I am coming from a point and shoot only background, so if you find that in-house camera teacher, let me know ;-).
I got my new lens. Too late to do anything but a run around my yard. We are off to San Francisco soon so no time.
1. It was not factory sealed. it obviously had been opened, maybe used. The thin bag around the lens itself had a rip. I paid $650 for this so I am no happy. I got it from Amazon. And sadly, I am not even sure I could tell if it was defective or not. Do I return it?
2. It s heavy. Shoot if this is the lightest, I am in trouble. LOL. I can handle it but it is heavy.
3. It is so quiet compared to my other Canon lens I am wondering if it is doing what it is suppose to do. LOL
4, My shots are not that sharp but I have found with all my cameras it takes awhile for them to get broken in or perhaps time for me to get broken in. I remember when I first got my Canon T2i I was sure it was defective my shots were so bad.
Flowers around my yard, Slim pickings in January.
A vireya. bad and this was the best out of 10 shots
If you're not happy with it return it as soon as possible. For macro or close-up work with a DSLR you just can't beat a dedicated macro lens. Usually a 90 to 150mm F/ 2.8 prime lens will give you good distance & quality. Like I said in my first post, Tamron is not a manufacturer I would buy from, they just don't make the quality I've come to expect. Moreover, I shy away from those 'super lenses'.
Six hundred and fifty dollars is a lot for a used lens with an F/6.3 f-stop at 200mm...
My problem is I do not want more than 1 lens. I go out walking all day on my trips and I just do not want to be carrying anything more than my camera. It would ruin my day. So I am hoping this lens will be a great general lens. We will see!
I hope you or the lens get broken in (however it works), and this is a workable solution for you. I have the same issue with cameras...I've really wanted a dslr for a long time, but I'm very, very petite and tend to go out and hike with my camera for hours on end. I put my boyfriend's pentax around my neck, and I knew within minutes that this is just not a doable thing for me.
I'm drooling over your Lachenalia viridiflora, btw. ;-)
I really do not know how some people do it. I see people all the time, especially at Filoli, with a tripod and a huge bag and big camera with a huge lens hanging down from it. Just setting up for a shot takes them forever! I am not patient enough.
Even though I am big and fat, I can't carry one around my neck either. I hurt my neck a few years back and this year it has been acting up. Plus my back complains if I carry too much. I do not even carry a handbag. I have not owned one for years.
I am so interested in these new cameras. I wonder how big the lens are that come with them. They look small. If so then maybe carrying a couple would not be such a burden to do. I so hope they are a viable alternative to DSLRs. Make sure you come back and let us all know how your camera is doing!
I decided tonight I am not in a hurry for a small one. I mostly want a small camera for my food shots to take to restaurants. I was just looking at my shots from tonight and they are pretty good. I think the mini seeds are slowly coming out of it. LOL. And then what did I do yesterday, stuff my pocket full of seeds from a garden I was visiting and then stuck my camera in the same pocket. Thankfully these were big seeds!
Here is a shot from tonight's dinner with my Canon S90. Already to post to my oyster set. LOL. I have a thing about taking pics of oysters I eat.
I collect Lachenalia. I get them usually from Berkeley Bot but even there they run about $5 to $7 a bulb. A few months ago a guy had about 20 bulbs on eBay with no picture. I knew what they were. I got them for I think $12. So I have a nice little pot of them in bloom right now. Spring is starting here already. Oh LOL, you live in San Jose so you know! No one else bid. I see right now there are 3 bulbs on eBay with great photos and the bids are up to $26. I bet they go for much more.
Yes, it's supposed to be warm, warm, warm. I can't believe it! It's glorious, but I've already got seasonal allergies kicking in today. I spent the day pruning, weeding, and sneezing. How many different Lachenalia do you have?
I'll definitely give an update when my new camera gets here. The 20 mm lens arrived, and now I'm impatiently waiting on the camera.
I think a lot of the micro 4/3 lenses are pretty small; the 20mm pancake I bought appears to be about an inch long, and a lot of people seem to adore it and use it as their primary lens. Here's the camera I bought, along with the kit lens. http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympusepl2/page4.asp
Not enough lachenalia for sure! LOL. Maybe 7 kinds but there are some I really want that I cannot find. Though I have not looked as hard as I should. I got hooked when every year in early spring I would visit a friend and she had a huge pot of Lachenalia aloides quadricolor. It took a few years to even find out what they were. I need to go over there now for mine are in bloom and I bet hers are too. Her pot is really a happy pot.
No new pics. I took a run to Hog Island on Tomales Bay yesterday for live dungeness. I got 3 dozen oysters too. WOW, the crab was so sweet and so good. Makes such a difference if you eat them so soon after they are caught. But the trip took about 5 hours so I did not get much else done. It was a beautiful drive though. The oysters were superb as usual. We downed the mini Kumamoto in a flash. I should have bought many more of those. The Sweetwaters were good too. Tonight my husband will make fried oysters with those left. Sinfully good using so fresh oysters. Though if I get enough sleep I will spend the day off on a photo adventure and we will see! Though I need to do what you did and work on my yard. I pruned 2 roses the other day and only have about 60 to go.
I can't wait to see what your new camera will do. If you love it, I am so there too! LOL I was so lazy yesterday the few pics I did take I used my little Canon. So much easier to walk around Point Reyes with that one. Oh have you noticed California natives are in full bloom so early? I saw beautiful acacias and huge Coast Silk Tassel plants in full glory.
Lachenalia aloides quadricolor welcomes spring with a such pizzazz!
If my lens so sucks today, I may just get your favorite then. Do you use it for macros too?
Thats me, spotlight Kell. LOL
Oh how I hate waking up in the middle of the night and then ending up on the computer playing with my pictures. Before I know it it is morning and I am too tired to do much all day. I was just processing leucadendron shots. Flowers are endlessly entertaining.
That Lachenalia aloides quadricolor is beautiful, and what a great pic! I'm not going to research more, because the last thing I need is another plant obsession. Wow, it sounds like you have an amazing rose collection as well! I have a tiny townhouse yard packed full of plants to the point where my boyfriend complains that there's no place to sit down (the cement patio is now mostly under the above-ground pond).
The crab was so good, Sunnyg! So sweet. It just does not compare to the live crab you can buy from grocery stores. I really think the flavor changes after being starved a few days. Then tonight I saw it for half the price at Berkeley Bowl, fresh line caught from Berkeley. Shoot. I will have to get some this weekend if they get more fresh caught. Plus I got a skein of fresh salmon eggs that my husband will process for Ikura. At Christmas time I searched for this to no avail. Are you a fish eater? The oysters from Hog Island were so good too. Gone in a flash.
I do not blame you for going slow on the lachenalia. Though great for a small yard for they are so small. But I went from the love of the Lachenalia aloides quadricolor to a need for all kinds of lachenalia and then I jumped into the South African bulbs. The good is they are no work since they do not like summer water, so love our climate. But they are spendy bulbs.
OK, I have decided either I suck or my Tamron lens sucks. Still not a good photo. Woe is me. It has so many great features.
So I am now reading about all the Canon lens I just finished reading the praises of the Canon EF-S Zoom lens - 17 mm - 55 mm - F/2.8 - Canon EF-S but everyone says how heavy it is. Also some say poor quality control was done on them so some great and some not so great. What worries me is that they are so old. I hate to spend so much money and have them come out with a brand new and better one within a year.
Next up is Kin's lens for a read, the Canon Zoom lens - 28 mm - 135 mm - F/3.5-5.6 - Canon E. I want a really good walk around lens that does great macros but also will do landscapes too. Any ideas?
Ask me if I have gone nuts! LOL I have been reading reviews for hours and hours!
I am tending now toward the
Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens 20.3 oz (575g) 3.2 x 3.4" (81.6 x 87.5mm) 72mm 2009
Mainly because is is a later model. I can't see buying one much older than that.
I also was looking at Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens 22.8 oz (645g) 3.3 x 4.4" (83.5 x 110.6mm) 77mm 2006 seriouly but it is from 2006. It really has rave reviews. How often do they put out improvement models on these? I do not want to spend over $1000 and then have them put out a better version of the same lens.
I was thinking the 15-85mm will give me a bit more zoom and closer macros. Is this thinking right?
Kin, I looked at yours which would be my 3rd pick but the1998 date is so long ago. I was surprised it had IS. I wonder if that date is typo.
Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens 19.1 oz (540g) 3.1 x 3.8" (78 x 97mm) 72mm 1998
100mm macro, the new 2.8 is pricey
sure makes taking close ups much easier from afar
and the 100mm will take decent landscapes
i have a Nikon D100 with 1/2 doz lens and like the 100mm macro the best
& i have a Canon Eos that i keep a zoom on
i take most of my images with a Canon powershot sx130 point & shoot
because it fits in my pocket
I have the 28-135 which is a pretty good all around lens. I use it the most now since my 17-85 went on the fritz (can't communicate with camera). The 28-135 does slip (not a significant slip but a slip nonetheless) when pointed straight down which can be annoying so I must hold it where I want it for composition.
I preferred the 17-85 since that extra width makes for great landscape shots. Cleaning the contacts with alcohol and a cotton swab allows the camera to communicate with the lens for a few shots and then it quits communicating again. One day I need to send it off to get it cleaned.
Zooms aren't true macro lens but do a decent close up which can be cropped afterwards to enlarge the subject as you wanted.
I have the Canon 100 macro 2.8 (as well plus a non-Canon 50 macro). Great lens for macro and short telephoto but prime lens means you have to move your feet to get the right composition (hard to use 100mm indoors to frame the entire plant without backing up a distance of several feet - wide angle is much better for these photo ops).
From what I have read the all in one lens are great for travel (10x zoom for a DSLR - what's not to love about it). As for Tamron, the reviews give it high marks but quality inspection might let a lemon through so you should test the lens thoroughly in case you have to send it back for another one. A friend of mine has a Nikon and bought the Tamron all in one lens and was disappointed in it so he got the Nikon lens after that and is very happy with it. It boils down to money and if a super zoom is right for your needs.
As for age of the lens design, you can wait and hope a new one comes out (which typically costs a lot more than the older design) or bite the bullet and buy what is available today. New camera bodies come out every few months but the lens line up doesn't change that rapidly.
Mmmm...I do love seafood, and good crab is one of my favs!
Sorry to hear of your continuing lens woes...it sounds like you are thinking of returning it?
I am very excited to report that my EPL2 should arrive on February 2nd, as long as the weather back east doesn't hold it up. Amazon wasn't going to ship until early March, so I got it through another distributor (we're thinking of going to Yosemite in February, and I really want to use my new camera there).
That is so exciting, Sunnyg! And lucky you going to Yosemite. I am ashamed to admit we have never gone! Sinful! Every few years we say we are going then promptly forget. You will have to let us know all about it and post pics with your new camera!
Dick, that is the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM? If I decide I can't live without a macro, that one looks great. I had to laugh when you said you use your point and shoot most. I bet I end up doing that too esp after I buy one like SunnyG is getting, a micro four thirds. I am fast approaching 60 and my moving parts are not moving as they could even just a year ago. I went for years with a tiny Canon and loved the freedom. I am not sure how I got suckered into the Canon T2i, I fought against it for sure.
Well Butch, I went for the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. Though just now looking at Amazon again they title theirs as Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM UD Wide Angle Zoom Lens. Shoot, did I buy the wrong one? What does UD stand for? I just looked at my box and it only says USM. Too funny if I got the wrong one.
I paid way too much at Best Buy which is never the best buy I find. More than Amazon! But easy costs money. $799 plus I paid an extra $139 for 3 years of fix or replace even if I scratch the lens or break it. Since I already broke my kit lens, I figure it is inevitable I do something horrible to this one too. And they got me with California tax too. So much cheaper on Amazon. But oh well. And I get 30 days to return. I also bought a cheap lens UV filter. Does it matter which I buy for that? Or does cheap do as well as expensive?
I need to get a hood cover on Amazon. Also I thought I would get another 32 GB card. I hope this lens will take good video inside for I am going to a big anniversary party and want to video it. A new adventure. Plus I need to get either Watercan's A bino/ cam harness or Kin's Crumpler. Then I should be set! So please pray tomorrow when I try this new lens, I take the best photos of my life.
SunnyG, my husband cleaned and marinated the salmon eggs and made fresh ikura. Oh so yum! When I just got home he served it with a nice glass of wine. If you are into this type food, you should try making it. It really is good. Here is a recipe and great photos. Can be hard to find a skein of fresh eggs though. http://blue_moon.typepad.com/blue_lotus/2007/09/post-6.html
On a side note, spring is already here in Northern California. The weather has just been so beautiful for a couple of weeks now. Today it felt like summer! I listento the East coast weather news and am so glad I am here instead of my birthplace.
I went by my favorite early spring sight, a huge acacia and it did not disappoint. It was in full glory! What a sight. And hardly anyone else that went by it even looked at it.
I took it with my old Sony DSC-H50. It is a great camera esp for capturing good color. I notice it will pick up blue in the sky when my other cameras bleach it out.
I was just talking to a friend on Facebook about a photo I took in 2008. She wanted to know what macro lens I used. I had to laugh, it was taken with my old Canon Powershot SD950IS. I have been looking at a lot of my old 2008 pics and am wondering why I bothered with lugging around a big heavy camera like the T2i when a little point and shoot took such great shots. No fuss no muss, just point and click on auto and then you stick it back in your pocket and walk on..
i have the Canon in my pocket at all times, and it is what i take the most picts with :-)
Kell wrote:wondering why I bothered with lugging around a big heavy camera like the T2i when a little point and shoot took such great shots. No fuss no muss, just point and click on auto and then you stick it back in your pocket and walk on..
I can't wait to see your shots with your new camera. I sure hope it all you hope it to be esp since it is going on your trip! Horsetail Falls is beautiful! So are you going to hike up and down and all around Yosemite? I am too old and fat to do that. I would have a heart attack within an hour. I will have to take the old age tour! I had a friend who took a bus tour thru Yosemite. Her family had come from Japan and evidently they have tours just for Japanese tourists. They drive a bit, get out and look and then back in the bus and drive a bit more. It sounded like my speed! LOL Plus there are bears there and mountain lions, right? I am a wuss. If I came face to fac ewith one I would drop dead right there. Shoot,even if I saw one far off, I would drop dead thinking it was stalking me. I can imagine a bear looking at me and thinking of all that human toro,. LOL
I hate to admit it but I have not boxed up the one I need to return or taken out my new one from its box. I think I overloaded on reading about lenses. Also now I am afraid this one will not be any better. I also had the thought that my camera is really broken in some way and that is why the Tamron shots were not very good! Also it rained all weekend so I was a lump inside.
Speaking of bears and mountain lions, Dick lives in wild animal country himself and has survived. And I hear he just walks around his woodland property armed with just a point and shoot camera in his pocket! LOL I think I am a city girl.
Oh not a good thing. And it is awake in the daylight, that is really bad? And it is just waiting for you to walk under it and then JUMP! Plus you get down on the ground to plant, a very bad thing to do! Do you let your I do dogs run free? And let them go out at night? If I had seen that I would forever more stay in my house. I do not mind dying so much but getting eaten alive freaks me out.
We were at a friend's house up in the Hayward hills and they have a great hot tub that sits looking out over the whole bay area. I tis truly an amazing sight. They like to sit out there at night. While Ray was in it, a mountain lion came by and actually drank from it. He said he could not move, yell or swallow. And poor guy has already had a heart attack.
I actually bought a huge can of bear spray, guaranteed to stop a bear. I asked the guy if it would stop a mountain lion too and he said yes but he said I would never see the mountain lion in time. He said they attack from the back and go right for your neck. After hearing that I read up on how to protect yourself besides walking in constant circles and found an article that said you should wear a hat that has realistic big eyes painted on the back of it. A mountain lion does not generally attack if you are looking right at it.
The moment of reckoning is here. I took 2008 pictures today with my new lens. I am downloading them now. I am so afraid they will suck. I took them near, I took them far, I took them high, I took them low, I took them in sun, I took them in dark.
Eeek Dick, that's quite a sight from your window! One of the reasons I don't go hiking in the hills around here by myself is the mountain lion activity, and the fact that I'm really petite, and would perhaps make a good dinner ;-).
Kell, I don't know how much actual hiking we're going to do in Yosemite. I am a total cold wimp (I freeze here for goodness sakes), and don't have the clothing for snow either. I desperately need to buy some sort of appropriate shoes, as I think my sneakers, flip-flops, etc. that I wear around here won't cut it at all.
I am a wuss to. My one big camping trip to Big Sur was spent in a hotel! LOL. And that was after Tom bought the whole works including hiking boots, tent etc. I disabused my man of doing that again! LOL We did cook out though.
Oh Sunny, I am wondering if it is me. The kit lens was great. This lens is not so great, better then the last but not ready for prime time. And the colors are washed out. Is there a way to fix that? Some photos are sharp and some are not. LOL. My socks are still firmly on! For so much $ shouldn't I be wowed?
Is there a custom setting (Picture Style) in your camera where you can set sharpness, saturation, hue, contrast, etc. to what you what? Not sure if you can but the 40D allows me to do that so it can make pictures eye popping out of the camera. If it doesn't have custom settings then set it on landscape setting (if you have that) and go from there. It may take some tweaking in a photo editor.
Some folks have accused Sony of doing this without any custom settings. That it takes on a "plastic look". I can set my compact Canon(s) on Vivid and they look so good that they look over the top and photo-shopped out of the camera.
Oh yeah, there is absolutely no way I'm camping out in Yosemite in Winter, that's for sure! I still haven't gone on my snow gear search yet. I hate clothes and shoe shopping...nothing ever fits (size 4.5 - 5 shoe size etc).
Shoot, I see what you mean about the images from your new lens. How frustrating! Have you changed any of your settings from when you were getting good results with the kit lens? Like hcmcdole, I'm wondering about a vivid setting, or increasing saturation/sharpening in post processing, but given that I'm such a newbie to all this camera stuff, I don't know what else to suggest. Was the kit lens the one that had issues after spending some time with seeds? If that one worked for you, what about buying another? Given that it's just the kit lens, I'm guessing the price will be decent, and you could probably even pick one up used for a very good price.
My camera is supposed to arrive today. I'm so excited! I need to sign for it, but I'm home and hiding inside fighting a migraine anyhow, so no biggie.
My camera just arrived! I am sooo excited, and can't wait for the battery to hurry up and charge already! The camera itself is pretty light and barely bigger than my point and shoot, and both lenses I now have (20mm 1.7 and the 14-42 kit lens) are small and light as well.
I am curious about the lens kit being the cause of washed out color. I just don't understand how a lens would cause loss or change of color unless it had a filter attached. Do any of the experts have a comment on this (physics) question?
I bought the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di SP macro 1:1 for my Pentax K7 because of the rave reviews. Normally I would stay away from Tamron or Sigma. The deal made for it was sweet. So far I have no complaints. Below is an image made with this lens.
MY QUESTION IS: Does Tamron offer the 18-270mm lens you have, for Sony cameras? I got a new Sony a55 body and have been using all my old Minolta lenses on it. They work good with it, but I still need a good "Walking around lens".
I have been on vacation in Florida for a week and then sick for a few days! My T2i took the worst pics of the 3 cameras I took with me! I was at the Canon site and see they have come out with a T3i and T3. The T3i has a flip out LCD, first one for Canon! Maybe the second. LOL
I finally actually read parts of the manual tonight and changed some setting on contrast and color so tomorrow I will see if it helps! I did go to Picture Style to do it, Butch. Then I wrote down what I did so I can undo it! LOL
Sunnyg, no I didn't change any settings when I used the kit lens. I may need to buy another, they are so cheap at $200. Though a friend told me there was a problem with the lens and they stopped focusing so Canon fixed hers free. I am going to look into that.
So where are your photos with your new camera for us to see? I am dying to know if they are special! Are you back from your vacation? Happy late birthday too! I hope you had a great day! Mine was the 9th! My husband took me to Miami for it. I spent the actual day at the Miami Beach Botanical Garden in the morning and the Miami Zoo in the afternoon and then at a tiny sushi bar for dinner that is supposedly the best sushi in Miami. And best of all, all week my husband did whatever I wanted and not once complained no matter how many botanical gardens we went to or how long I dallied taking photos. It was heaven! How lucky am I?
Paul, I have no clue as you can tell and I guess no one else does either!
Diggo, on the AF18-270MM F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD, the Tamron site says they do not have it for Sony yet.
What kind of filter do you have on the lens? (if you have one)
Have you turned off all your focus points except the center one or at least just have one focused on what you want in focus?
I noticed that all your pictures are shot at f/5.6 and 1/125 shutter speed. If you want greater DOF you will need to go to a smaller f-stop and that may require a tripod too unless you boost your ISO.
As for color of the sky, that is odd. One was washed out (which may be due to what you focused on - this would set the exposure too). The one that is deep blue is a bit much compared to the rest of the picture (you should be able to lighten it with a photo editor). The other two I find pleasant to view.
Bummer that you're still having problems getting the pics that you want. Being a newbie at anything besides point and shoot, I'll leave the troubleshooting to others, but I hope you get this figured out soon.
I had my own set of camera frustrations with both the Olympus EPL2 and also EPL1 (which I tried out, given that my EPL2 was defective). After using both of them, I decided that this type of camera just isn't for me. Perhaps after more time has passed and they've worked out some of the issues, I might try again. I do believe that these cameras are a step up from point and shoots, but for the price for body and lenses, I didn't feel it was enough of one. They do very poorly in low light situations, the auto-focus is incredibly slow (slower than my P&S), and I had a hard time seeing what I was shooting with only a very small LCD screen (an add-on viewfinder is available for an additional several hundred dollars). Essentially, I ended up pretty frustrated.
I now have a Pentax K-R, which is one of the smallest and lightest DSLRs. My boyfriend has a Pentax K-5, so I am able to use his lenses. I've used this new camera for an additional trip to Yosemite (the firefall quest cont.), and shot a bunch of flower macros today, and am very happy with its performance so far (SO much easier to use, and I like the photos much better too...and I know they will improve greatly as I learn how to use this camera). I'm in the process of uploading Yosemite pics and flower pics, and when I get them online, I'll post some links here, so you can check them out. I did shoot a decent amount with the Olympuses, so perhaps those pics will give you an idea of what is possible for a newbie like me.
I went out again today, try try again! LOL. I have not downloaded them yet. I am afraid too! I have got to tell you looking in the viewfinder they look so great. I am always shocked when they suck! LOL
Butch, today I went back to auto. I also took off the filter I had on it, it was a fancy one from Best Buy that cost $50. It was supposed to increase the contrast. I was trying to get life into the photos way back when, pre trip. It didn't seem to do anything when I put it on but I decided to be safe to go back to a plain circular polarizer. I do not have a lens hood yet but since I have never used one, I do not expect one to change things around too much for me. But maybe I am wrong?
Even the ones that look fine, when you zoom in on them, they are out of focus so can't crop.
WELCOME HOME Sunny! Poor you to have a camera that sucked on vacation! At least I had my old Sony with me on mine.
Well too bad on the new fancy cameras! They cost so much too. I am interested in seeing all your pics so don't forget to post the links please. Well shucks is all I have to say. I was hoping for spectacular cameras and even better photos!
Sunny, I may take a lot of pictures but I have no clue! LOL I so need to take a class. I have been reading my manual everyday now and trying things out but as you can see I am failing! LOL
WOW Sunny, I love your flower set. Are those at your house? Looking pretty spring like to me! And the colors are so cheery and bright. Your Bird of Paradise are exceptional. Just lovely. The other sets are nice too, maybe not as much life to them. None suck though.
Your sunset pics remind of the stretch of freeway on 101 N as you pass San Rafael towards Sebastopol. I look out as I drive at all the fields with the great old gnarly oaks growing here and there.
Do you believe were are getting such cold weather Saturday night? Cold and wet, not a good combo. I already have my succulents all covered in plastic now I need to cover all my plants and throw sheets over the plastic. I guess I should take up the plastic and cover with sheets then the plastic. And just last week I succumbed to the real promise of spring in the air and bought huge pots of petunias in flower. I better take them in. And my last year petunias just started flowering too. I will be so unhappy is in the 12th winter hour if they all drop dead of cold after lasting thru winter. In the last few years, the frosts come in November not February! No fair!
My first take last night was way too many sucked. But actually going thru them today, I am happier. I am thinking maybe Butch is on to something. I need to read up on increasing my focused area. I notice in the pics I took with my Sony, my centers of flowers were much more in focus and much less in focus in the T2i pics. So how do you fix that?
I noticed that your f-stop on one of the above photos was f/5 which won't give you a lot of DOF. Good for blurring the background though!
The thing about sharpness from front to back is it is controlled by your aperture (f-stop). Go to Av mode and dial in f/11 at least, maybe more depending on how great you want your DOF (Depth of Field). Focus 1/3 of the way into the subject so the front is sharp and the back is fairly sharp too. For macro it will be next to impossible to get the entire subject sharp.
Yes, LOL, I changed the aperture to get the background blur. I went all the way with it too. But I thought when I went back to auto which I did for the last day of picture taking, that the settings automatically went back to factory ones. I will have to go look. Thanks Butch.
Well shoot. The last day the camera was on AUTO and in looking at the photos, in Landscape the Av goes up to 8 or 9 but in Macro it is always low 4 to 5.6. And the shots are not reliably blurry or reliably sharp. LOL
Here the Av is just 4 yet it gets the whole flower including the center in good focus. I cropped it.
I know it can be confusing but part of the formula is how close (or far the subject) is to the camera. A very close subject allows no room for focusing error. I would not use the "macro mode" on the DSLR camera because you have no control over what you want - the camera does it all. Stick to Av mode most of the time so you control the aperture.
Thanks so much for your kind comments on my photos, Kell! The flower pics were from a walk around my neighborhood. I have a tiny townhouse yard, and tore it up this Winter and gave away many of my plants, so I can try some new stuff this coming year. I'm going to dig some more compost and manure into my (still) clayish soil, and then go wild at Annie's Annuals. :-) I need to cover up a couple of my baby passifloras and succulents tonight, but other than that my remaining plants should be okay. Yes, it is hard to believe that we are headed for snowy weather, especially after such a warm and sunny January and most of February.
I'm still very much in the learning process with my camera, and messed around a bunch with aperture settings while taking my flower macros. I'm reading a book called Understanding Exposure, and it's helpful, as all of this is pretty foreign to me. The author suggested taking photos at different f-stops, to get the hang of how it impacts depth of field. I'll post a couple here...these are straight out of camera jpgs, so you can tell I was pretty close to my subject.
This one is at f/3.2, and pretty much everything except the tips of the petals is blurred out:
Oh Butch is trying to make us real photographers! I refuse, stamping my foot, to get a tripod. First I refused to have a camera bigger than a cigaret pack. I wanted to walk around unencumbered. Then I coveted a friend's great photos, so I got her camera, a Sony which I felt was huge at the time. It is really so small. OK, I survived. Then another year or 2 and I was looking at SLRs with lust in my heart. Oh how I did not want to lug one all over. But I, being of weak resolve, succumbed with the absolute promise to only have 1 light weight lens. Then what do I do, buy this big old heavy thing that sucks anyway! LOL
I too felt your last one was in focus like your SMUGMUG ( I love that name) photo. And now I have a question, what good is it if you have a great bokeh but a terribly focused subject? LOL It is an art Kelley! An art!
Kelly you know photography is all subjective. The tripod is used for dim light mainly but also for HDR (although if you are really good you can probably snap off 3 pictures in a row without moving), macro photography, panoramas, and in this instance - simple testing. It is hard to compare settings (and cameras for that matter) if the view or the subject or the light changes. If you are going to compare DOF then the same subject should be used, same for ISO or shutter speed or exposure compensation, don't you think?
Nothing wrong with a small camera too (I love mine for taking to places I would not take a big old honking DSLR). But a DSLR just has so many controls, accessories, and is just speedy compared to the simpler cameras.
Butch, perhaps I will do a real comparison of depth of field at some point, but this was just a casual walk around the neighborhood messing around with a new camera and lens. As someone just learning about photography, I simply found it interesting how different the depth of field appeared at different f-stops, even though this was hardly a "real" comparison...and in no way was it intended to be.
I believe the Smugmug picture and the one I posted as f/7.1 are the same picture (the SmugMug version is cropped a bit), and was commenting on how much sharper it looks on SmugMug at fullscreen size compared to here on Dave's Garden (at least on my monitor). I believes Dave's Garden re-sizes images, and it just appears noticeable in this instance, at least to me.
Kell, I hear you on the slippery slope of ever better quality cameras and lenses. I think it was just a few weeks ago that I posted right on this thread that I wasn't going to get a dslr or shoot RAW, and here I am doing both. LOL. I do have a tripod, but just as in the past, I think the majority of my pictures will be shot while wandering around on random walks. :-)
I do believe the picture on SM and DG are the same - just different sizes. I didn't expand the one on SM to its largest size but I suppose if I did then I might see a difference too (you tend to lose resolution as you downsize pictures). You are correct on DG resizing a photo (if you don't do it beforehand for them then they do it - max width is 800 pixels if I remember right so I try to downsize pictures to that specification before posting on DG for faster uploads).
Keep on experimenting - that's how we learn to control the camera especially in tricky situations. DOF and the focal point are always subjective but there are some good rules to follow (although rules are meant to be bent if not broken at times).
Tripods are good to have around but most of the time mine sits in a corner collecting dust. Get a remote cable release too or use the self timer when using a tripod, turn off VR or IS (yes it doesn't make sense but it works that way when using a tripod), and enable mirror lockup for the sharpest pictures. Get a quality tripod the first time so you won't have to buy one later on. My first one went to the trashcan after a couple of years so that was money down the tubes.
I didn't mean to give you a hard time Butch! I just hope I have firm resolve never to carry a tripod around! Though I do not think my back would let me anyway!
Sunny, so tell all about shooting raw. Why do you like it?
Well tomorrow is D day, 30 days is up. I have decided to return this lens. And go back to ground ZERO! OH NO! I just do not think it should be so hard to get a good shot esp using auto. And I do recall the great shots I was getting with the kit lens before it died.
I did go out today and give it once last chance to impress me. It didn't. Though I did mean to read up on how to increase the focused area in a photo. It seems only a tiny piece of the picture is focused. I need more. See how just a small bit is in sharp focus.
For close ups you are going to have to set your f-stop as small as you can to get most everything in focus and you should try to keep the entire subject parallel to the "film plane" (kind of hard to do at times).
Does your camera have A-Dep mode? If so set it to this mode and try close ups. The camera will attempt to get everything in focus which means it will stop down to the smallest aperture (more than likely). The problem with a small aperture is your shutter speed is going to drop in half with each full f-stop decrease which might mean a tripod (unless it is a sunny day or you increase your ISO so you can still hand hold the camera).
Also for shooting close ups, your body may sway and breezes can move the subect as well. Put the camera in high speed drive so you can take a burst of shots and hope one is pleasing.
Best solution is still going to be a tripod for close up or macro work. I don't use a tripod that much but if it is something you really want to capture then this is the way to go.
Here is a dime parallel to the film plane - f/16 1.6 seconds ISO 400
LOL Butch! What I am saying is that a lens you pay $800 for should be able to take a decent picture on AUTO without doing all your fixes to try to get a decent picture. And that lens just was not capable of getting a good picture enough of the time. As you recall I was stepping out but had problems and went back to AUTO to see if I could get good photos that way. I think if you pay $900 for a camera and another $800 for a lens you should get GREAT photos even on AUTO! Esp when you got great photos in the past with the cheap $200 kit lens. I do not need professional but I do need great.
Anyway, it is so cloudy today, not good to go out and try my new lens. LOL
I'm not going to try to convince you to get out of your comfort zone but I don't think you are going to get the results you want though by staying in auto no matter how much money the camera and lens cost.
Cloudy weather is perfect for picture taking - nice diffused light on all your subjects and no harsh shadows.
Kell, I've seen my boyfriend work with his RAW files, but so far shooting RAW just means I'm eating up more memory. LOL. My hard drive is failing, and I'm unable to work with the RAW files at all at the moment...so I'm just using the JPEGs. (I'm shooting RAW + JPEG). Here are some advantages to shooting RAW http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2008/05/why-you-should/ We shall see...perhaps I'll go back to shooting strictly JPEGs once I get around to trying to manipulate the RAW files...I just don't know.
It's certainly a gloomy and rainy day here too. I had my sliding door replaced this morning, so everything is open as I'm trying to air out the chemical smell for my parrotlet. Brrrrrrr!
I hope you have a much better experience with your new lens! It's certainly frustrating when you are used to being able to get a certain look...I know I was having quite a time with the Olympus EPs, as even my four year old point and shoot did better in some instances.
Butch, I did get a good tripod, and my boyfriend has a remote cable release. His remote cable release meant that he was "taking pictures" instead of me while we were trying to capture the firefall at Yosemite. Too funny!
WOW Sunny, you are tough to please! I loved all your shots with both cameras. What great shots! I just loved the old car/truck ones with the Pentax! You owned those! Such character! And that bulldog hood ornament was great! And you caught amore eagles! LOL
I was expecting disaster with the Olympus, much like mine with my new lens! But NOOOOOOOOOOOO, yours were great. Funny what you said about the viewfinder. With my Sony all the shots look terrible in the LCD but turn out great when I download them but in my big Canon they all look fantastic in my viewfinder and also on the LCD screen but suck in real life. LOL In the first waterfall ones, what was all that white down both sides of the waterfall. So dramatic! Was it salt buildup? Your lake reflections are so clear and crisp. I think the Olympus did a great job! I clicked fast thru the 2nd water fall ones a few times for it was like I was watching the water fall. I got a great sensation! LOL I think your ice pics had more life with the Olympus than the Pentrax. Was that a manzanita tree? A way cool one! Gosh if my new lens had pics like that, I would have been happy! All I wanted was focused pics! LOL
PS Sunny, you should try Flickr, it is not expensive to rent a booth for a year and you can upload as many as you want. Of course after all the work to upload them and arrange them in sets with commentary, you will want to keep paying each year. I even told my kid to keep paying after I die. LOL
Oh Butch, LOL! I think you did not quite understand what I was doing. I had 30 days to evaluate that new lens before I got stuck with it. When my meanderings off the AUTO trail were not going well, I reverted back to AUTO to give the lens a chance. I figured my playing in manual could be the likely cause of my photos to suck, not the lens. But in AUTO, it was up to the lens to do its thing and impress me and convince me to keep it. I f you can't get mostly decent pictures in AUTO what good is it? Well, my 30 days was up and it so sucked! LOL When I know I am going to keep the lens, I will go back to trying out manual.
On a good note, I finally called Canon today about my so sick kit lens. They will fix it since it is not a year old! So off it goes. And if the kits lens has trouble with taking photos when it gets back, then he said to send in my camera. I told him how I was having so much trouble with the new lens. He said it could be the camera. I wonder what I really did to it. I now prefer taking pics with the T2i for I have much more control over what I am actually photographing.
Kelly, I hope you get it all worked out with the lens and the camera. I know when I started with my first Canon DSLR that I wasn't real happy with the pictures either. The more I read and experimented though the better the pictures became.
Pick up Scott Kelby's books on taking pictures with digital cameras. Volume 1 is a great book with Volume 2 and 3 getting into studio setup and using flash photography. Another good one is Joe McNally's "The Moment it Clicks".
Kell, sorry for the late reply, but thanks so much for your comments on my pics! :-) I actually wasn't that unhappy with the Olympus's pics, but I found spending that much money only to shoot blindly like a point and shoot was a bit frustrating. It also has pretty poor performance at highish ISOs, and is very slow to focus.
I'm so glad you liked the bazillion waterfall pics! I had a hard time narrowing them down, and eventually just gave up. LOL.
The white stuff on the sides in the waterfall pics is actually frozen waterfall spray that sticks to the rocks when it's cool outside. As the temps climbed a bit during the day, we could hear these loud crashes from time to time, as huge patches of the ice/snow fell down. It was pretty neat!
Interesting observation on the icicle pics...I actually wasn't all that thrilled with how they turned out either time, but so it goes. Yep, that bush was indeed a manzanita. It was just randomly growing on this huge rocky area.
I had a hard time choosing between Flickr and SmugMug, but eventually decided on SM. We shall see how that works out...
Hi Butch! So why did you pick those specific lens? I think boys view this stuff more like toys, boy toys! Oh I may sound sexist. LOL! Do you believe I bought the same lens again, Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM? And this time I could tell it had never been opened. I think my last one was a return. It was so bad, I was thinking it had to be a reject so I wanted to try another one of the same.
And today I finally did. Our weather has not been that sunny lately and I hate white skies so I have not gone out. But today I went out for a quick photo foray but it was late so the light was not great. But the photos are so much better than those with my last lens. Lots suck but suck less. LOL However, the zoom ones still really suck.
I am thinking I may just send my camera back while still under warranty to have Canon just look at it. My warranty runs out next month. What is the worst that could happen? They say it is fine and return it. I did send my kit lens in to get fixed. I will wait till I get that one back. But I still haven't ruled out that my camera is to blame. I used to take pictures that I enjoyed with my cheap kit lens.
I never would have guessed ice on the waterfall, Sunny! I forget there are places in California that get ice. LOL Never crossed my mind. I was thinking how could it be salt, that is fresh water but could not think of anything else. Are you getting sick of this weather? It was such a tease a few weeks ago having the perfect weather and now it was been so drab out. I have a full itinerary to get out and take my spring shots but the weather is interfering.
I was just out bringing the garbage to the curb and saw so many huge snails out munching. So some love this weather. My hands got so slimed. I even used Ajax on them but that slime just would not wash off. I grossed myself out.
Here is a plant that I have such trouble photographing. I must have over 1000 pics of it that I have taken over 2 years when it is in bloom which is now. And I have such a hard time no matter what camera I use getting a usable shot. Most today were not great but this one was OK. I just do not know why it is so unphotogenic! The bloom is in decline now.
PS Sunny. I used to love taking shots using the LCD. Now I so prefer the viewfinder. I would have a hard time gong back full time to a point and click so I understand your frustration.
I'm so glad you're getting better images with your new/old lens! Sending your camera in to be serviced sounds like a great idea too.
Ice in CA??? Insanity, I know, when you live around here. LOL. I lived up north almost at the OR border for a few years as a teen, so I've seen my share of CA snow/ice...but weather was definitely one of the reasons why I moved back down here asap! The weather here has been so confusing lately. I guess we were supposed to get a little rain this afternoon, but it ended up quite warm. Go figure.
Is your unphotogenic plant a ribes? There are a bunch of them along a trail I often walk, and I've taken some bad pics of them myself. I do like your pics of it you posted, especially the second one.
Yes Sunny, Ribes speciosum, a California native. The first one is Ribes sanguineum, another native. I looked back and my photos from last year were better. And the color was better. But I had dead grass in the photos.
Geesh, I got so sidetracked watching the video from Japan. I started this post awhile back. What devastation! Watching that water just engulf everything was so scary. And seeing the cars just driving along seemingly going so slowly with the water coming so fast. I felt like screaming to them to go fast. I guess they could not see the water coming at them. Some were driving parallel to the oncoming water instead of taking a crossroad away from it. Just terrible. Time for prayers.
They keep mentioning it will hit the West Coast of California by 8am if it comes this way but they do not say where along the coast. So I guess I need to stay up and see. I have a boy in San Francisco by the Marina. I wish he would leave and drive up to the hills.
Here is a photo from last year. See the better color.
almost the entire town of Crescent City has been evacuated
the predicted time to hit has come & gone and no big surge yet
we are forecast for the worst of the tsunami
i am 60 ft above sea level here at the house, but
where 2 sons live is 2 miles from the beach inside the zone
about 50 ft from the edge of the safe zone, they are waiting and watching