The attachment is the same as a 2" push fit eyepiece from what I can tell. It has the bayonet style m43 mount plunked on top of what looks like the barrel on a 2" eyepiece, which if my math is right, means the sensor of an m43 camera (no mirror box)should be sitting in roughly the same plane as the optics on most high magnification lenses.

If all the math lines up, it means I could use a low profile off axis guider as well, as it only adds about 20mm of back focus requirement, and it would save me the Arse ache of flexure on a guide scope.

I really don't want to go with the adapters if I can just plonk the whole this down into a normal focal plane and make it work, and while the Barlow could be cool, that's my backup weapon.

My next purchase is going to be a 107 or 127 apo, and this would help there to, especially with a flattener

Gs:no problem, thought I would ask anyway.

heddleston said:

---

Has mirrorless caught up yet? not seeing a very diverse or affordable glass selection, which makes me want to stay with full body.

---

Glass is actually cheaper at just about every focal length, but you have to remember you're losing stops of light because of the sensor crops. It's nearly impossible to get the same bokeh on a mirrorless system.

That said, something like the Oly 75mm (150mm effective) f/1.8 really gives the Canon 135 f/2 a run for its money in every area except for bokeh at $300 less.

If you're buying m43 gear new, you're doing it wrong. Nearly 60% depreciation on the bodies in 2 years, and 30-40% on the lenses. It's very affordable to find mint condition gear for half of retail.

Quote:

---

If you want it to shoot sports-type stuff, I would get a used Canon 1D Mark III. They can be had in decent condition for under $800. They probably aren't going to depreciate much, so you can buy it, use it for a few years and then sell it again for about what you paid.

Much better autofocus and 10 frames per second. It is 10MP, but that isn't really that important. I shot multiple billboards with it. As long as you don't want to crop a ton and then blow it up to postersize, 10MP is plenty.

---

I agree. I was using the original 5D long after the Mark III of that series came out and got professional quality results.

Depends on what m43 body you're buying to. The GH4 and the latest generation are not at 60% depreciation that I've been able to find.

Bighamp03 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Canon makes a really good 10-22mm wide angle for crop sensors.

---

They also make a 10-18mm EFS now that is half the price and gets really good reviews. But built more cheaply...plastic mount.

I have the 10-22 and love it though. And the extra reach makes it more viable as a walk around/travel lens.

---

I have the 10-18mm and its a fantastic lens. I use it while storm chasing and have gotten some excellent shots even though its not the fastest lens. The 10-22mm is a better lens as its much more open, but for the price the 10-18mm is fantastic.

If you're looking to upgrade your camera body, you have to ask yourself why and once you know that then you need to figure out what body will get the job done. Honestlly, jumpiing form one APS-C Cannon camera to another is probably going to leave you underwhelmed if you're expecting drastic change.

I currently shoot on a T3i, my first DSLR, and I'm not all that happy with its low light noise but nothing in Cannon's crop sensor line is a real upgrade worth the cost. My current plan is to wait for the 6d Mark II to come out later this year and then try to pick up a current 6d under 1,000. I want to make the change to full frame anyway, as most of my shots are landscapes/storms so full frame is better anyway. I only have a couple of EFS lenses, and the next lens on my purchase list is made for the EF mount (which still works on APS-C cameras) so i'm trying to future proof myself (Next lens purchase is Tamron's 70-300mm - gonna be hard to beat at the price point http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/tamron/70-300mm-f4-5.6-di-vc-usd-sp-af/review/).

So complaints about my T3i aside, I've captured some really good images on it, including low light. I don't shoot sports, however, so YMMV if that's your emphasis. Still, there's probably a lot of improvement on technique that can be made to get the most out of the entry level bodies that a lot of us aren't maximizing.

flintdragon said:

---

Have any tips on taking indoor volleyball shots as far as settings go? I've read other blogs about it but my picture always seem not a sharp and also more grainy. Obviously lighting sucks indoors but the place I was at last weekend was ok lit.

Canon 60D - seems to be grainy at ISO 1600+
Canon 70-200 2.8 non-IS

The settings I've been using on full manual: 1/1000 SS, 2.8, 1600-2000 ISO.

---

A couple of things here:

-Shooting the lens wide open is great for letting in light, but you're not going to maximize sharpness so you're going to get softer pictures. Try stoping down a bit here.

-You're shooting pretty fast so maybe the lack of image stabilization isn't hurting you, but maybe it is.

Your 60d isn't much different from sensor wise from my T3i (if at all) and I know that at 1600 I start to get a fair amount of noise in low light situations. I'd try some different settings, but you're not likely to find a faster telephoto lens than what you have. Lightroom can be fantastic with noise in post, though.

Why are all of the lenses my wife want's several thousand dollars?

She has good taste?

Ag_of_08 said:

---

Depends on what m43 body you're buying to. The GH4 and the latest generation are not at 60% depreciation that I've been able to find.

---

The Lumix has the advantage of being 4K, keeping the value higher. They've always been the go-to for mirrorless video too.

The video was why I bought it originally, it's light weight and carries under the big drone better.


Turns out its going to be a good choice astrophotography wise as well

Guitarsoup said:

---

Great lenses cost thousands, not hundreds.

---

**** me. Her mom just got her a new camera and now she's looking for new lenses.

aTm2004 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Great lenses cost thousands, not hundreds.

---

**** me. Her mom just got her a new camera and now she's looking for new lenses.

---

What lenses does she want?

What lenses does she have?

What camera does she have?

What does she want to take pictures of?

What lenses does she want? Another 35mm, a 50mm, and a 105mm macro. Not sure of the brands.

What lenses does she have? Dunno.

What camera does she have? Primary is a D810, not sure of the secondary. I believe it's the older version of that one. MIL #1 on the list to get a D5 at the local camera store.

What does she want to take pictures of? She does birth photography, newborns, etc. Mostly stuff with babies and small kids.

I bought a Sigma 30mm 1.4 a few years back and love it.

Along the way I switched to a 60d. Everything has been fine, but recently I feel like the lens is front-focusing and causing some "not so sharp" photos. Is this something that can happen with a lens and/or body over time, or is it just my hidden, internal desire to upgrade to another lens? :/

Thanks GSoup. Always helpful!

aTm2004 said:

---

What does she want to take pictures of? She does birth photography, newborns, etc. Mostly stuff with babies and small kids.

---

Would have never guessed!

caleblyn said:

---

I bought a Sigma 30mm 1.4 a few years back and love it.

Along the way I switched to a 60d. Everything has been fine, but recently I feel like the lens is front-focusing and causing some "not so sharp" photos. Is this something that can happen with a lens and/or body over time, or is it just my hidden, internal desire to upgrade to another lens? :/

Thanks GSoup. Always helpful!

---

What F stop are you using it at? Wide open that lens is probably gonna have a lot of bokeh or background blur.

MBAR said:

---

caleblyn said:

---

I bought a Sigma 30mm 1.4 a few years back and love it.

Along the way I switched to a 60d. Everything has been fine, but recently I feel like the lens is front-focusing and causing some "not so sharp" photos. Is this something that can happen with a lens and/or body over time, or is it just my hidden, internal desire to upgrade to another lens? :/

Thanks GSoup. Always helpful!

---

What F stop are you using it at? Wide open that lens is probably gonna have a lot of bokeh or background blur.

---

I know what bokeh is. I am talking about the focal point. Whether at 1.4 or 8, I find it to be not as sharp. I did a quick focus check the other day and felt that it was front-focusing about 1-2" at about 4 feet at 1.4. It wasn't an official test...just against a masonry wall inside a gym.

caleblyn said:

---

MBAR said:

---

caleblyn said:

---

I bought a Sigma 30mm 1.4 a few years back and love it.

Along the way I switched to a 60d. Everything has been fine, but recently I feel like the lens is front-focusing and causing some "not so sharp" photos. Is this something that can happen with a lens and/or body over time, or is it just my hidden, internal desire to upgrade to another lens? :/

Thanks GSoup. Always helpful!

---

What F stop are you using it at? Wide open that lens is probably gonna have a lot of bokeh or background blur.

---

I know what bokeh is. I am talking about the focal point. Whether at 1.4 or 8, I find it to be not as sharp. I did a quick focus check the other day and felt that it was front-focusing about 1-2" at about 4 feet at 1.4. It wasn't an official test...just against a masonry wall inside a gym.

---

Gotcha. You can try micro adjustments to the focus distance if your camera body allows it. I'm not sure if the 60d does but I suspect it should. Do you notice this with any other lens?

EDIT: Just looked it up, sadly the 60d doesn't have microadjustments.

After all these years the lens probably just needs to be serviced.

What would a servicing cost?

caleblyn said:

---

What would a servicing cost?

---

No clue. In Houston, call Professional Camera Repair on Richmond. They are straight shooters.

I would try other lenses on that camera and that lens on other cameras to pin point the problem

91AggieLawyer said:

---

Quote:

---

If you want it to shoot sports-type stuff, I would get a used Canon 1D Mark III. They can be had in decent condition for under $800. They probably aren't going to depreciate much, so you can buy it, use it for a few years and then sell it again for about what you paid.

Much better autofocus and 10 frames per second. It is 10MP, but that isn't really that important. I shot multiple billboards with it. As long as you don't want to crop a ton and then blow it up to postersize, 10MP is plenty.

---

I agree. I was using the original 5D long after the Mark III of that series came out and got professional quality results.

---

My only qualm with getting the 1D Mark III is that it will be 10 years old. While I think old SLRs hold up, I'm not so sure about DSLRs. Way too many electronic parts that will start to fail... am I being too paranoid?

The only real moving parts are the shutter and the mirror and both are easily replaceable. 1D bodies are tanks.

Guitarsoup said:

---

The only real moving parts are the shutter and the mirror and both are easily replaceable. 1D bodies are tanks.

---

was thinking more about solder joints and capacitors blowing, etc... cpu dying.

But man, you've got me thinking about it. I don't care about megapixels.

What would I be giving up going from 60D down (up?) to 1DM3? I kind of like the extra reach from the crop.

The 1D3 actually has a 1.3x crop rather than the 1.6x crop you are used to. It will still be there.

What you give up is video and the rear LCD. The 1D3 doesn't have video and the rear LCD isn't as nice. The rear LCD is very accurate on color and exposure, so that is nice. Also, no flip screen like the 60D and no pop up flash (which you should never use anyway.)

Make sure you get one with the battery charger and a good battery. That battery may need replacing after all those years, but the battery is much more significant than the 60D battery.

Following!

aTm2004 said:

---

What lenses does she want? Another 35mm, a 50mm, and a 105mm macro. Not sure of the brands.

What lenses does she have? Dunno.

What camera does she have? Primary is a D810, not sure of the secondary. I believe it's the older version of that one. MIL #1 on the list to get a D5 at the local camera store.

What does she want to take pictures of? She does birth photography, newborns, etc. Mostly stuff with babies and small kids.

---

I wouldn't get a D5 for newborns and birth photography. D810 is great for that.

I have the Nikon 35 1.4G, Nikon 50 1.8 (the cheapo ~$200 one) and the Nikon 105mm 2.8 VR Micro.

I highly recommend the Nikon 35 over any other 35 for her cameras.

I only have the cheapo 50 for some specific sport work and a light/tiny backup lens. In general, I think the 35 and 50 overlap too much and most people that want a 50 want it for portraits. In general, I think the 50 is too short for portraits. Start portraits at 85mm and on to 200mm and beyond.

I would not really recommend the 50 1.4 from Nikon. The Sigma is better, but I don't think the Sigma does as well on color and contrast. The Nikon 58 1.4 is a killer lens, though. That's the true champ of that focal length.

The 105mm micro is a great lens, especially with newborns, because I know she will want to get details of feet, fingers, etc. Just be aware that as you get closer to 1:1 macro (closer to the subject) the aperture does gradually stop down from 2.8 to 4.8 or so.

Ehhh....I thought you'd be hanging around here.

I can't believe you left Kwanon to go to Nikkor. What don't you like about 14 fps of 1DX????

That being said.. I just picked up a 5DS-R. I want to see how much detail I can print with that bad boy 50.6 mp!

heddleston said:

---

Guitarsoup, you've been crazy helpful with this stuff. I remember the OG photography mega thread and it really got me jumpstarted into it.

I'm mulling over either a) upgrading my old canon body (30d) in the next year to a used 70d or b) switching to mirrorless. Has mirrorless caught up yet? not seeing a very diverse or affordable glass selection, which makes me want to stay with full body. I know they make adapters, but i dont know how well those work.

---

Depends on what mirrorless you want to pursue:

Micro 4/3: Panasonic & Olympus: In my opinion, u43 has the 2nd best lens selection behind Canon and Nikon. Between Olympus and Panasonic, there is a phenomenal list of high quality lenses. And they're relatively small and most portable in my opinion. And for the most photography needs, it suffices And the most beautiful thing about u43 is their bodies depreciate quickly. You can pick up a decent Olympus E-M5 for $250 to $300 and now E-M1 are selling around $500.

Fuji: I know nothing about them.

Sony: Ehh... I just sold my A7R, 36mp full frame. Lens selection is tough. The new Sony G-master lens price is outrageous - more expensive than Canon. I know A7RII works better with canon lenses and an adapter. But I didn't want to have 2 Full Frame systems. So no more Sony FF for me.

Now that being said, I did just buy a Sony a6300 for video. Not only does it do 4K video, it can do 120fps at 1080p. This is in addition to my u43 video using Panasonic GH2 and GX7, with Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 lens and Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 lens. I love them.

For a weekend warrior amateur doing kids sports video, I think mirrorless is better, especially Panasonic GH series.. you can pick up a GH3 for less than $500 now.

But for sports stills, I still use Canon 1D Mark III. I have no idea how many shutter actuations it's had.. over 100,000 for sure. And the battery will last more than 1,500 shots per charge with LP-E4. When my 1D3 dies..I may get the shutter replaced...or pick up a used 1DX.. and keep it for 10 years. Canon 1D are tanks. And the AI-Servo focusing works great with 70-200mm 2.8IS and 300mm 2.8. I may one day buy Guitar's 400mm f2.8 lens that's collecting dust. It's a legendary lens.. the one that shot JFF money shot.

I can't believe you switched to Nikon.

flintdragon said:

---

was thinking more about solder joints and capacitors blowing, etc... cpu dying.

But man, you've got me thinking about it. I don't care about megapixels.

What would I be giving up going from 60D down (up?) to 1DM3? I kind of like the extra reach from the crop.

---

I've had my 1D3 for years...

This is what you give up: Video, about 7.8mp, built in flash....

But you gain:

10 frames per second vs. 5
45 focus points vs. 9
Tungsten body vs. plastic
2 memory card slots.
Better high iso performance
Larger sensor
Higher # of shutter actuation rating

And most importantly...1D body with a big white lens impresses the ladies... vs when I would use sigma 120-300mm f2.8 lens, quite large in its own right, didn't impress the ladies as much. But man..there's something about that white Canon L lenses.

VonDownByTheRiver said:

---

heddleston said:

---

Has mirrorless caught up yet? not seeing a very diverse or affordable glass selection, which makes me want to stay with full body.

---

Glass is actually cheaper at just about every focal length, but you have to remember you're losing stops of light because of the sensor crops. It's nearly impossible to get the same bokeh on a mirrorless system.

That said, something like the Oly 75mm (150mm effective) f/1.8 really gives the Canon 135 f/2 a run for its money in every area except for bokeh at $300 less.

If you're buying m43 gear new, you're doing it wrong. Nearly 60% depreciation on the bodies in 2 years, and 30-40% on the lenses. It's very affordable to find mint condition gear for half of retail.

---

I have bought:

Olympus E-P1, E-P2, E-PM2 (still use) & E-M5 (still use).
Panasonic-Lumix GH2 (still use) & GX7 (still use).

I didn't pay more than $350 for any of them. All used.

And I have gone through numerous lenses.. but currently use 12-35mm f2.8, 40-150 f2.8, 45mm f1.8, 20mm f1.7. I would love to get Oly 75mm and 60mm macro. Two very highly rated lenses.

Hi!

AggieDruggist89 said:

---

Ehhh....I thought you'd be hanging around here.

I can't believe you left Kwanon to go to Nikkor. What don't you like about 14 fps of 1DX????

That being said.. I just picked up a 5DS-R. I want to see how much detail I can print with that bad boy 50.6 mp!

---

On my 1DX, I always shot it at 10fps rather than higher anyway. The D4 is a much better camera, imo. No regrets. 1DX2 just came out and I switched 3 years ago.


My FIL has the 5DSR and loves it. I've got the D800. Love the colors and depth. So much shadow detail, it is unreal.