I just got my Canon XTI

[randay]

So I picked it up today, and then I went looking for a CF, and there were about eleventy billion different types! Should I be picky? Should I get the biggest one I can find(4GB)?

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

A lot of people really like the Sandisk Ultra IIs, which are very fast. As for size, it depends on your shooting style. If you're adamant about only shooting JPEG, a 1 or 2GB card should be fine. If you're shooting RAW and shoot a lot, multiple 2GB cards would be my choice. With RAW, 1GB isn't enough. You'll be switching out cards often. 4GB is starting to go into the "all your eggs in one basket" realm. IMO 2GB is a good balance.

 

[mb]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820183021

Or cheaper: Text

 

[randay]

About how many raw or jpg could I fit per gigabyte?

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Here you go:

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007

They don't have the Rebel XTi up yet, but I'd assume the performance is similar to the 20D/30D/XT.

With that said, you can't really go wrong with Sandisk Ultra II, Hoodman PRO, ATP Pro, Ritek/Ridata Pro, or Lexar Pro. All of them are so close in write speed that in real life they'd be indistinguishable from each other.

 

[jpeyton]

I wonder why Canon isn't even trying to slowly phase out CF, perhaps by introducing a dual-slot Rebel with CF/SD capabilities.

SD is getting wide acceptance as the standard; everything from pocket digicams to DSLRs, cell phones to PMPs, TVs to Nintendo Wiis. It's significantly smaller, just as fast, offers cross-compatibilty and lets people buy one standard type of memory for multiple uses.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: randay
About how many raw or jpg could I fit per gigabyte?

JPEG: about 250/GB
RAW: about 100/GB
RAW+JPEG: about 70/GB

 

[Oblivionaire]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
I use a Canon Rebel XT with a Sigma 30mm f/1.4, Canon 50mm f/1.8 mkII, Tamron 180mm, Sigma 50-500mm, and Sigma 10-20mm

Hi fuzzybaby, which one of those is sharper? The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 or the Canon 50mm f/1.8?

thx

 

[mb]

(1) Large/Fine: Approx. 3.8MB (3,888 x 2,592)
(2) Large/Normal: Approx. 2.0MB (3,888 x 2,592)
(3) Medium/Fine: Approx. 2.3MB (2,816 x 1,880)
(4) Medium/Normal: Approx. 1.2MB (2,816 x 1,880)
(5) Small/Fine: Approx. 1.3MB (1,936 x 1,288)
(6) Small/Normal: Approx. 0.7MB (1,936 x 1,288)
(7) RAW: Approx.9.8MB (3,888 x 2,592)

- http://www.adorama.com/ICADRXTIBK.html

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: Oblivionaire

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
I use a Canon Rebel XT with a Sigma 30mm f/1.4, Canon 50mm f/1.8 mkII, Tamron 180mm, Sigma 50-500mm, and Sigma 10-20mm

Hi fuzzybaby, which one of those is sharper? The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 or the Canon 50mm f/1.8?

thx

The Sigma 30mm. Both are dead sharp at f/8, with the Sigma being sharper still.

The 50mm is soft from f/1.8 to around f/2.2, therefore I consider it essentially a $50 f/2.2 lens.

The Sigma 30mm is sharp from basically f/1.4 down. On a 1.6x crop camera it's almost perfectly in the "normal lens" range at ~50mm equivalent.

Of course, the price difference is pretty big, and both lenses have their different uses, so it's almost like an apples/oranges comparison.

 

[Czar]

Love my Sigma 30mm f1.4
I also have the Canon 50mm f1.8, very nice lense
But my fav is my new Canon 85mm f1.8, better than the sigma, but most importantly its much much more accurate and faster at focusing.

btw, fuzzybabybunny,
How is your bigma?

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: Czar
Love my Sigma 30mm f1.4
I also have the Canon 50mm f1.8, very nice lense
But my fav is my new Canon 85mm f1.8, better than the sigma, but most importantly its much much more accurate and faster at focusing.

btw, fuzzybabybunny,
How is your bigma?

I really like it, but out of all my lenses it's probably the least sharp, although still very acceptable considering more than half of my lenses are primes. For the price I can't complain at all.

Here are pictures taken with the Bigma:

http://fuzzybabybunny.smugmug.com/gallery/1209998/1/56603565

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: Czar
Love my Sigma 30mm f1.4
I also have the Canon 50mm f1.8, very nice lense
But my fav is my new Canon 85mm f1.8, better than the sigma, but most importantly its much much more accurate and faster at focusing.

btw, fuzzybabybunny,
How is your bigma?

I really like it, but out of all my lenses it's probably the least sharp, although still very acceptable considering more than half of my lenses are primes. For the price I can't complain at all.

Here are pictures taken with the Bigma:

http://fuzzybabybunny.smugmug.com/gallery/1209998/1/56603565

nice, love the gorilla picture

I also own the 10-20mm, which is probably my least sharp lense (only other zoom I have is the 70-300mm which I'm trying to get fixed)

how does the bigma compare to the 10-20?

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: Czar
Love my Sigma 30mm f1.4
I also have the Canon 50mm f1.8, very nice lense
But my fav is my new Canon 85mm f1.8, better than the sigma, but most importantly its much much more accurate and faster at focusing.

btw, fuzzybabybunny,
How is your bigma?

I really like it, but out of all my lenses it's probably the least sharp, although still very acceptable considering more than half of my lenses are primes. For the price I can't complain at all.

Here are pictures taken with the Bigma:

http://fuzzybabybunny.smugmug.com/gallery/1209998/1/56603565

nice, love the gorilla picture

I also own the 10-20mm, which is probably my least sharp lense (only other zoom I have is the 70-300mm which I'm trying to get fixed)

how does the bigma compare to the 10-20?

Thanks!

It's kinda weird comparing an ultrawide to a supertele but as far as sharpness... I'd say maybe a tad sharper than the 10-20mm? I've never really took the time to note the difference actually. My 10-20mm is more than acceptably sharp at f/8, especially considering it has to resolve a lot of details due to its ultrawide nature. Beyond f/16 it becomes unacceptably soft. I pretty much shoot my 10-20mm and Bigma exclusively at f/8.

There really aren't many moderately priced options for a good telephoto. The 50-500mm is one, the 200-500mm is another, or you could do a quality 300mm with a 1.4x TC.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: Czar
Love my Sigma 30mm f1.4
I also have the Canon 50mm f1.8, very nice lense
But my fav is my new Canon 85mm f1.8, better than the sigma, but most importantly its much much more accurate and faster at focusing.

btw, fuzzybabybunny,
How is your bigma?

I really like it, but out of all my lenses it's probably the least sharp, although still very acceptable considering more than half of my lenses are primes. For the price I can't complain at all.

Here are pictures taken with the Bigma:

http://fuzzybabybunny.smugmug.com/gallery/1209998/1/56603565

nice, love the gorilla picture

I also own the 10-20mm, which is probably my least sharp lense (only other zoom I have is the 70-300mm which I'm trying to get fixed)

how does the bigma compare to the 10-20?

Thanks!

It's kinda weird comparing an ultrawide to a supertele but as far as sharpness... I'd say maybe a tad sharper than the 10-20mm? I've never really took the time to note the difference actually. My 10-20mm is more than acceptably sharp at f/8, especially considering it has to resolve a lot of details due to its ultrawide nature. Beyond f/16 it becomes unacceptably soft. I pretty much shoot my 10-20mm and Bigma exclusively at f/8.

There really aren't many moderately priced options for a good telephoto. The 50-500mm is one, the 200-500mm is another, or you could do a quality 300mm with a 1.4x TC.

I have to check out my 10-20mm a bit better. I havent really studdied at what f stop its sharpest. Its usualy dead sharp at the center but not as much near the edges, still I think its within tolarance. My friend also has that lense and his is alot worse, extremely blurry at the right side. Dont know if he has exchanged it.

Somehow I think I'd rather go with a 300mm or 400mm prime and a 1.4x TC, even though zooms are handy I just get more constant results using primes when it comes to sharpness.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: Czar
Love my Sigma 30mm f1.4
I also have the Canon 50mm f1.8, very nice lense
But my fav is my new Canon 85mm f1.8, better than the sigma, but most importantly its much much more accurate and faster at focusing.

btw, fuzzybabybunny,
How is your bigma?

I really like it, but out of all my lenses it's probably the least sharp, although still very acceptable considering more than half of my lenses are primes. For the price I can't complain at all.

Here are pictures taken with the Bigma:

http://fuzzybabybunny.smugmug.com/gallery/1209998/1/56603565

nice, love the gorilla picture

I also own the 10-20mm, which is probably my least sharp lense (only other zoom I have is the 70-300mm which I'm trying to get fixed)

how does the bigma compare to the 10-20?

Thanks!

It's kinda weird comparing an ultrawide to a supertele but as far as sharpness... I'd say maybe a tad sharper than the 10-20mm? I've never really took the time to note the difference actually. My 10-20mm is more than acceptably sharp at f/8, especially considering it has to resolve a lot of details due to its ultrawide nature. Beyond f/16 it becomes unacceptably soft. I pretty much shoot my 10-20mm and Bigma exclusively at f/8.

There really aren't many moderately priced options for a good telephoto. The 50-500mm is one, the 200-500mm is another, or you could do a quality 300mm with a 1.4x TC.

I have to check out my 10-20mm a bit better. I havent really studdied at what f stop its sharpest. Its usualy dead sharp at the center but not as much near the edges, still I think its within tolarance. My friend also has that lense and his is alot worse, extremely blurry at the right side. Dont know if he has exchanged it.

Somehow I think I'd rather go with a 300mm or 400mm prime and a 1.4x TC, even though zooms are handy I just get more constant results using primes when it comes to sharpness.

Definitely. Although keep in mind the lens will be one stop slower with a 1.4x TC, which may affect your autofocus. 300mm and 400mm primes are also expensive because manufacturors always try to make f/2.8 versions of them. I'd be happy with a cheaper but darker f/4 version.

 

[Czar]

yeah I know, I just wish canon made more "disposable" lenses like the 50mm f1.8, expecialy... ahemm... 400mm f1.8 or something

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
The Sigma 30mm. Both are dead sharp at f/8, with the Sigma being sharper still.

The 50mm is soft from f/1.8 to around f/2.2, therefore I consider it essentially a $50 f/2.2 lens.

The Sigma 30mm is sharp from basically f/1.4 down. On a 1.6x crop camera it's almost perfectly in the "normal lens" range at ~50mm equivalent.

Of course, the price difference is pretty big, and both lenses have their different uses, so it's almost like an apples/oranges comparison.

have you used the canon 85mm f/1.8? If so, how's it compare to that sigma? USM is quiet and fast, and I love it. But it's just too long for general use. I was considering a prime to replace my sigma 18-50 f/2.8. it's nice, but hunts a bit with my rebel, and doesn't have FT manual focus. I'd like the canon IS version, but well.. yeah. I don't have a grand to dump on a lens right now

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
I wonder why Canon isn't even trying to slowly phase out CF, perhaps by introducing a dual-slot Rebel with CF/SD capabilities.

SD is getting wide acceptance as the standard; everything from pocket digicams to DSLRs, cell phones to PMPs, TVs to Nintendo Wiis. It's significantly smaller, just as fast, offers cross-compatibilty and lets people buy one standard type of memory for multiple uses.

Because many professional photographers already have/use CF cards so to make them all upgrade to new memory types when they upgrade their cameras isn't something they want to do. I think DSLRs are going to be the last line they change to a new type of image storing technology. Mnay of their P&S cameras already use SD memory.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: Oblivionaire

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
I use a Canon Rebel XT with a Sigma 30mm f/1.4, Canon 50mm f/1.8 mkII, Tamron 180mm, Sigma 50-500mm, and Sigma 10-20mm

Hi fuzzybaby, which one of those is sharper? The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 or the Canon 50mm f/1.8?

thx

The Sigma 30mm. Both are dead sharp at f/8, with the Sigma being sharper still.

The 50mm is soft from f/1.8 to around f/2.2, therefore I consider it essentially a $50 f/2.2 lens.

The Sigma 30mm is sharp from basically f/1.4 down. On a 1.6x crop camera it's almost perfectly in the "normal lens" range at ~50mm equivalent.

Of course, the price difference is pretty big, and both lenses have their different uses, so it's almost like an apples/oranges comparison.

Canon is coming out with a 50mm f/1.2L lens in November. Looks like a great lens but it's expensive!!!

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
The Sigma 30mm. Both are dead sharp at f/8, with the Sigma being sharper still.

The 50mm is soft from f/1.8 to around f/2.2, therefore I consider it essentially a $50 f/2.2 lens.

The Sigma 30mm is sharp from basically f/1.4 down. On a 1.6x crop camera it's almost perfectly in the "normal lens" range at ~50mm equivalent.

Of course, the price difference is pretty big, and both lenses have their different uses, so it's almost like an apples/oranges comparison.

have you used the canon 85mm f/1.8? If so, how's it compare to that sigma? USM is quiet and fast, and I love it. But it's just too long for general use. I was considering a prime to replace my sigma 18-50 f/2.8. it's nice, but hunts a bit with my rebel, and doesn't have FT manual focus. I'd like the canon IS version, but well.. yeah. I don't have a grand to dump on a lens right now

I personally have not used the lens, but Czar up above has. He says it's sharper than the Sigma 30mm, and since my 30mm is already rediculously sharp at f/8...

But I would agree that it's too long for general use on a 1.6x crop camera. On a FF camera it'd be a perfect portrait lens. I had a Tamron 90mm macro at one time, but I sold it for something with greater macro working distance. I couldn't find any other use for it on my 1.6x crop body other than macro. It's too long for portraiture and too short for an emergency tele.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Canon is coming out with a 50mm f/1.2L lens in November. Looks like a great lens but it's expensive!!!

Yup. I saw it mounted on a Rebel XTi and it's just like "BOOM! GLASS!"

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/rebel%20xti.shtml

Second picture down. So beautiful...

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Canon is coming out with a 50mm f/1.2L lens in November. Looks like a great lens but it's expensive!!!

Yup. I saw it mounted on a Rebel XTi and it's just like "BOOM! GLASS!"

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/rebel%20xti.shtml

Second picture down. So beautiful...

Yeah, it's a big sucker. I checked B&H and apparently it takes a 72mm filter and weighs over 1 lb!!! :shocked:

BTW-I'm going to pick up a 30D in a couple weeks. I'm waiting to see if Canon offers any rebates on their cameras next month.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
I couldn't find any other use for it on my 1.6x crop body other than macro. It's too long for portraiture and too short for an emergency tele.

yeah, that 85mm doesn't really get any use from me. I bought it on a whim and it was cheap new (dell deal). I LOVE it... but yeah, it's just a hair too long. I really should sell it, but it's so nice...

Originally posted by: Czar
Love my Sigma 30mm f1.4
I also have the Canon 50mm f1.8, very nice lense
But my fav is my new Canon 85mm f1.8, better than the sigma, but most importantly its much much more accurate and faster at focusing.

Have you used any prime in the 20-30mm range that would match the 85mm f/1.8? Or any zoom in the 20-100 ish range for that matter? The 85mm just seems like such a nice lens for the price, that I'm going to guess a no to my questions

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: Czar
Love my Sigma 30mm f1.4
I also have the Canon 50mm f1.8, very nice lense
But my fav is my new Canon 85mm f1.8, better than the sigma, but most importantly its much much more accurate and faster at focusing.

Have you used any prime in the 20-30mm range that would match the 85mm f/1.8? Or any zoom in the 20-100 ish range for that matter? The 85mm just seems like such a nice lens for the price, that I'm going to guess a no to my questions

The primes I own are
Sigma 30mm f1.4
Canon 50mm f1.8
Canon 85mm f1.8

So these are the ones I have tried, oh and also the Canon 50mm f2.8 macro which we have at work.

For me I love the canon 85mm f1.8 the most right now, brilliant for portraits and concerts. But for general purposes I would say its the 30mm Sigma. Sharp, fast and has a very nice feel to it.

But for me the next lenses I would consider buying would either be the Canon 50mm f1.4 or the Sigma 20mm f1.8 EX. Sometimes I just feel that 30mm is to close. I was photographing a Bloodhoundgang concert few weeks ago and I tried the 30mm, 85mm and 10-20mm and I ended up using the 85mm the most even though I was right in front of the stage, basicly laying my elbows on the stage. The 10-20mm was so fun, but waaay to dark for this kind of work, thats why I want a 20mm or even 10mm prime

But the 30mm, to tell you the truth it was very disapointing, not because it lacked the perfomance but because a 30mm on a 1.6x crop body resultss in a very natural fov, but it can also be very very dull.

Other lenses I would consider are the 24-70mm f2.8 versions from sigma, canon and tamron or the 24-105 from canon (but that one is a little too slow for me at f4)

Start with the 50mm f1.8 if you dont already own it, but I still do highly recomend the 30mm sigma anyways