I am a beginner in photography and i got a sony A35, and now i am realizing that most photographers on youtube are using a Canon or a Nikon. I just bought the camera and i have time to switch to a different brand. Should i move to Canon or Nikon? before i start buying lenses?
@bangla246 I would go to Canon or Nikon before you spend any money on lenses. They just have more and you can buy and sell used. Sony has fine cameras IF you don't get into photography much. In my opinion.
@ravenoftheredsky Thank you for the comment. I AM passionate about photography. I would love to find a better way to share what I know and learn more.
@nevergive7 Thanks for chiming in Jason. That 2.8 is a bit bigger than your F/4. That F/4 is a nice lens man. It will work out for you I'm sure. I would love a 2.8 Canon. I can't believe my 24-105 has actually stopped me from getting a 70-200. I like using it so much I have stopped thinking about the 70-200 for now. I will probably do the same this summer. Depends on whether the 5D3 comes out or not. I hear we may hear something by Sept. Who knows.
Good video Nate... IS is great for longer focal lengths, and certainly for studio or off camera lighting situations as you ca be limited by your camera's sync speed. Must admit though I am enjoying getting to know my 85mm F1.8 (prime lens with no IS) on my crop sensor (136mm f1.8 :) ) Got to have a steady hand for slower shutter speeds. Personally I would stay away from the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 generation 1 (is soft wide open, really soft) . Hopeing the next gen is better. Rick
@rickjbradbury Thanks for the comment Rick. I had a chance to use the Sigma 70-200 2.8 for an hour or so. I really liked the results I got with it. I wish I had done a video on it. I would consider buying one. I have seen the reviews. It's not the best but I think for most people it would satisfy them. Not all. I had a bunch of close up shots and portraits at 2.8 and they looked rather good.
I have the 70-200 F4 non is, I would really wish for IS, I mean it'll help when it's zoomed in. and it has better optics as well. but for short lens I picked the 24-70 over the 24-105 because that extra stop is fast enough for me
@mindwaveESEA The 70-200 Canon non IS has better IQ in most reviews I have read. read them for yourself. People love the 70-200 Canon non IS lens. That 24-70 is one of the best. I passed it up for the 17-55 F/2.8. Choosing lenses is not easy. haha Fun though.
@mindwaveESEA Maybe I was looking at a different site. Maybe they had a bad copy of the IS lens. photozone does a good job with reviews. If it's a Canon and an "L" series it will satisfy most people.. Thanks for the comment.
Nate, I unfortunately disagree about the "IS". I am just learning, but so far I have noticed a huge difference with the IS, especially with the 70-200mm. Also I find myself shooting down 2-3 stops a lot, so the IS is a must...unless your on a tri pod. Just yesterday I went out to a national park and shot all day, many times I was in low light situations and lowering the shutter speed by 2-3 even 4 stops was what I needed to get the shot. Mainly this was in heavy wooded area's and at sunset
@WestCoastMods unless you have TODAYs DSLRS such as 7D who performs well with high ISO. no need for IS if you just bump your ISO on lowlight situation.(ISO can freeze the action)
@forgethefancyname i was thinking the same thing. With today's sensor noise handling abilities just bump the ISO up. This is what I do and it works fine. When I use my 50mm and shoot with shutter speeds between 1/15-1/60 I just bump the ISO and make the shutter 1/125-1/150 and they come out great.
@forgethefancyname yeah I agree, if you shoot moving objects which I usually do, lower aperture or just using a higher iso is much better than the IS because IS doesn't raise the shutter speed.
@forgethefancyname I try to shoot with as low as a ISO as possible...Sure the newer Canon DSLR's handle noise well, maybe not as good as the Nikon's, but still better than they once did. However start bumping your ISO up and you will start introducing noise, especially noticeable on large prints. Trying to remove it in post also works, but it will make everything else a little soft too. I try to shoot with the lowest ISO I can, so having a IS lens and dropping the shutter speed works for me.
@WestCoastMods true however, you can always denoise em on lightroom for ex. but you are right it's still a better choice with a lower ISO as possible. i hope i got some steady hands so i can shoot without an IS on Low light though. IS cost much HAHA
@forgethefancyname Yeah, I use Lightroom....and it is a great program. if you have any problems with having a steady hand, then I would suggest using a tri-pod. Just don't drink to much coffee...lol
@WestCoastMods I used to think this way too. I have changed my opinion. It's good to have don't get me wrong, but I have done too many tests with it on and off. The results I have seen have surprised me. Like I said..if you shoot in that small area where IS helps you....then it's worth it. I must not, because my pics are just as sharp with IS turned off most of the time. I love IS lenses because when looking through the VF it 's not shaky. It depends. Your situation is apparently different.
@nate42nd Oh, don't get me wrong, I shoot many pics with the IS off, and they are as sharp as a nail. But when I need to drop the shutter speed the IS is really handy. I personally try to keep the ISO as low as possible, of course sometimes I need to bump it up. However the higher ISO's will introduce noise, especially on large prints, and in a photo with a lot of detail removing the noise in post will soften the entire picture. Anyway, me being new to serious photography, I am learning as I go
@WestCoastMods Good points Lazyman. It's best to have IS. I was trying to make the point to budget conscious people not to base their purchase on IS completely. You can easily do without it. Like I say, my 50mm and 100mm do not have it and I have few problems with image quality. I hope everything is going well with your new kit! You should be getting some good experience!
@nate42nd I didn't know the 50mm 1.8 had IS? My 50mm 1.4 only has the USM motor...no IS. Also did you end up getting the 100mm 2.8 "L" lens? I believe the 100mm 2.8 non "L" doesn't have IS or the USM motor.
I am a beginner in photography and i got a sony A35, and now i am realizing that most photographers on youtube are using a Canon or a Nikon. I just bought the camera and i have time to switch to a different brand. Should i move to Canon or Nikon? before i start buying lenses?
bangla246 4 months ago
@bangla246 I would go to Canon or Nikon before you spend any money on lenses. They just have more and you can buy and sell used. Sony has fine cameras IF you don't get into photography much. In my opinion.
nate42nd 4 months ago
It's great to find someone such as yourself who is so passionate, knowledgeable and eager to share that knowledge.
ravenoftheredsky 5 months ago
@ravenoftheredsky Thank you for the comment. I AM passionate about photography. I would love to find a better way to share what I know and learn more.
nate42nd 5 months ago
@nevergive7 Thanks for chiming in Jason. That 2.8 is a bit bigger than your F/4. That F/4 is a nice lens man. It will work out for you I'm sure. I would love a 2.8 Canon. I can't believe my 24-105 has actually stopped me from getting a 70-200. I like using it so much I have stopped thinking about the 70-200 for now. I will probably do the same this summer. Depends on whether the 5D3 comes out or not. I hear we may hear something by Sept. Who knows.
nate42nd 1 year ago
Good video Nate... IS is great for longer focal lengths, and certainly for studio or off camera lighting situations as you ca be limited by your camera's sync speed. Must admit though I am enjoying getting to know my 85mm F1.8 (prime lens with no IS) on my crop sensor (136mm f1.8 :) ) Got to have a steady hand for slower shutter speeds. Personally I would stay away from the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 generation 1 (is soft wide open, really soft) . Hopeing the next gen is better. Rick
rickjbradbury 1 year ago
@rickjbradbury Thanks for the comment Rick. I had a chance to use the Sigma 70-200 2.8 for an hour or so. I really liked the results I got with it. I wish I had done a video on it. I would consider buying one. I have seen the reviews. It's not the best but I think for most people it would satisfy them. Not all. I had a bunch of close up shots and portraits at 2.8 and they looked rather good.
nate42nd 1 year ago
I have the 70-200 F4 non is, I would really wish for IS, I mean it'll help when it's zoomed in. and it has better optics as well. but for short lens I picked the 24-70 over the 24-105 because that extra stop is fast enough for me
mindwaveESEA 1 year ago
@mindwaveESEA The 70-200 Canon non IS has better IQ in most reviews I have read. read them for yourself. People love the 70-200 Canon non IS lens. That 24-70 is one of the best. I passed it up for the 17-55 F/2.8. Choosing lenses is not easy. haha Fun though.
nate42nd 1 year ago
@nate42nd I'm pretty sure you're wrong here, all the reputable reviews and charts i've seen says that the IS has better optics.
For example:
look at the ISO 12233 crops from the digital picture . com
and from photozone . de if you look at the MTF values the IS is clearly the winner.
mindwaveESEA 1 year ago
@mindwaveESEA Maybe I was looking at a different site. Maybe they had a bad copy of the IS lens. photozone does a good job with reviews. If it's a Canon and an "L" series it will satisfy most people.. Thanks for the comment.
nate42nd 1 year ago
Nice video nate enjoyed it as always!
carperpaul 1 year ago
Nate, I unfortunately disagree about the "IS". I am just learning, but so far I have noticed a huge difference with the IS, especially with the 70-200mm. Also I find myself shooting down 2-3 stops a lot, so the IS is a must...unless your on a tri pod. Just yesterday I went out to a national park and shot all day, many times I was in low light situations and lowering the shutter speed by 2-3 even 4 stops was what I needed to get the shot. Mainly this was in heavy wooded area's and at sunset
WestCoastMods 1 year ago
@WestCoastMods unless you have TODAYs DSLRS such as 7D who performs well with high ISO. no need for IS if you just bump your ISO on lowlight situation.(ISO can freeze the action)
forgethefancyname 1 year ago
@forgethefancyname i was thinking the same thing. With today's sensor noise handling abilities just bump the ISO up. This is what I do and it works fine. When I use my 50mm and shoot with shutter speeds between 1/15-1/60 I just bump the ISO and make the shutter 1/125-1/150 and they come out great.
nate42nd 1 year ago
@forgethefancyname yeah I agree, if you shoot moving objects which I usually do, lower aperture or just using a higher iso is much better than the IS because IS doesn't raise the shutter speed.
mindwaveESEA 1 year ago
@forgethefancyname I try to shoot with as low as a ISO as possible...Sure the newer Canon DSLR's handle noise well, maybe not as good as the Nikon's, but still better than they once did. However start bumping your ISO up and you will start introducing noise, especially noticeable on large prints. Trying to remove it in post also works, but it will make everything else a little soft too. I try to shoot with the lowest ISO I can, so having a IS lens and dropping the shutter speed works for me.
WestCoastMods 1 year ago
@WestCoastMods true however, you can always denoise em on lightroom for ex. but you are right it's still a better choice with a lower ISO as possible. i hope i got some steady hands so i can shoot without an IS on Low light though. IS cost much HAHA
forgethefancyname 1 year ago
@forgethefancyname Yeah, I use Lightroom....and it is a great program. if you have any problems with having a steady hand, then I would suggest using a tri-pod. Just don't drink to much coffee...lol
WestCoastMods 1 year ago
@WestCoastMods I used to think this way too. I have changed my opinion. It's good to have don't get me wrong, but I have done too many tests with it on and off. The results I have seen have surprised me. Like I said..if you shoot in that small area where IS helps you....then it's worth it. I must not, because my pics are just as sharp with IS turned off most of the time. I love IS lenses because when looking through the VF it 's not shaky. It depends. Your situation is apparently different.
nate42nd 1 year ago
@nate42nd Oh, don't get me wrong, I shoot many pics with the IS off, and they are as sharp as a nail. But when I need to drop the shutter speed the IS is really handy. I personally try to keep the ISO as low as possible, of course sometimes I need to bump it up. However the higher ISO's will introduce noise, especially on large prints, and in a photo with a lot of detail removing the noise in post will soften the entire picture. Anyway, me being new to serious photography, I am learning as I go
WestCoastMods 1 year ago
@WestCoastMods Good points Lazyman. It's best to have IS. I was trying to make the point to budget conscious people not to base their purchase on IS completely. You can easily do without it. Like I say, my 50mm and 100mm do not have it and I have few problems with image quality. I hope everything is going well with your new kit! You should be getting some good experience!
nate42nd 1 year ago
@nate42nd I didn't know the 50mm 1.8 had IS? My 50mm 1.4 only has the USM motor...no IS. Also did you end up getting the 100mm 2.8 "L" lens? I believe the 100mm 2.8 non "L" doesn't have IS or the USM motor.
WestCoastMods 1 year ago
im getting that 100mm macro 2.8 Thanks for the vids on it!!! - J.Perk Productions
Eightpspi 1 year ago