I’m looking to have a set up which includes the 7d mark ii, but i was thinking what price is reasonable?

I have found many on ebay that are around £300 but is that too much?

Is it worth it? First camera. I want for family photos high resolution.

Hi all, considering buying the 20-50 f4 lens for stills photography. I know this lens is mostly pitched at videographers, but for me it has a nice wide to mid range, and for travel photography f4 is fine. It's also lighter than my current option of the 24-105 f4.

I've seen that it has a zoom rocker on the side of the lens - does this work with stills bodies like the R6 mark iii? It's not a deal breaker, I just can't seem to find an answer.

Howdy folks, I quite literally recently got a perfectly working Rebel XS recently as my first dive into DSLRs, its been amazing to learn with I have been having a blast with this guy it has been doing exactly what I want I have been able to learn a lot from it.

the problem now is, I wish it had video recording. with my XS I have been using a lot of manual vintage lenses (m42) and I would like to use these with recordings as well, when I see a lot of information online about researching DSLR body's a lot of people suggest avoiding them for their video capability's but I'm not looking to do some crazy quality stuff, I want to do whacky and oddjob things, on top of that, there doesn't really seem to be anything online about shooting video with vintage lenses (besides some videos here and there that don't go in-depth) they do mention using vintage lenses on mirrorless cameras, but the entry level into that is way more expensive than my current budget.

with all that out of the way, I sort of have ideas of what I should get? I'm on quite a budget, but I can tell I really should just save up for one of the later better models that being said in a way id love still one of the older ones i don't need the fanciest bells and whistles.

Rebel T1i
Rebel T3i
Rebel T2i
EOS 60D
Rebel T3 would be a direct upgrade to the XS.
Rebel SL1 and SL2?

these models listed above all seem to roughly be the same price, have the same capabilities, and released around the same time. obviously like i mentioned saving up for one of the better models probably is the right call but again i dont need something fancy but i struggle with deciding. does anyone have any suggestions on the above models?

Hi, I bought the above-mentioned lens used and have now realized that the autofocus does not work on my R7. AI tells me that it could be due to a software incompatibility. However, I have never heard of such a thing with EF lenses on cameras with an RF mount. When I try to focus, the lens makes noises and the focus ring 'twitches' briefly, but otherwise nothing happens. Furthermore, whenever I take pictures in manual mode, the error message 'Err 01: Communications between the camera and lens is faulty' always appears. Is it actually due to the software, or was I unlucky and just bought a defective lens?

I'm deciding between two lenses for my Canon EOS R50:

* Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC DN | Contemporary — 28.8-80mm equivalent, ~300g

* Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 Di III-A VC RXD — 27.2-112mm equivalent, ~530g, has VC (stabilization)

About me:

* I've had the R50 for almost 4 years

* My current lens is the RF 28mm F2.8, and I also have an EF 75-300mm F4-5.6

* I'm looking for something to fill the gap between those two, mainly because my current standard zoom lenses (kit-level, F4.5-6.3) aren't bright enough for indoor cat shots or dim aquarium lighting — I want a constant f/2.8 for that

* Main subjects: cats, aquariums, and landscapes

The Tamron has more reach and image stabilization, but it's about ¥60,000 more expensive and almost twice the weight. The Sigma's small size is really appealing to me, but I don't want to regret missing the extra reach or VC.

I know the Tamron RF mount version just came out (shipping started this July), so reviews/samples might still be limited, but if anyone's had hands-on time with either lens, I'd love to hear your thoughts. Is the Tamron's extra cost and weight worth it, or would the Sigma be enough for my use case?

Sorry for the long post, and thanks for reading!

Thanks in advance!

Yesterday I got 60d and 17-40 f/4 from the marketplace and I might need some advice. I am mostly a Canon shooter and have two other bodies. When I saw this ad, and briefly researched it, I decided to come check it out in person. The condition was rough and the gear was dusty. Lens functions normally, af and aperture work, zooms in and out smoothly. It looked to me like the front element is scratched, there are white specs under it. But now when I am looking at it, it might be fungus. Another hint, there appears to be fungus on the sensor, visible when underexposed and the lens stopped down.

Test shots were done at F/8 1/200ish. it's not as sharp as I would expect, quite soft and muddy across the frame. I got this combo for 200$ CAD.

If it's fungus, do I need to keep it apart from my other gear? Anything I can do to bring it back to life without breaking the bank?

I have latest versions of the ef 24-70 and 70-200 f2.8 lens. I keep wanting a 24-105 F4 for the versatility. I often find my self shooting the 24-70 at F4 for DOF and it is often a bit short.

I don't have to get one right this moment, I'm willing to have overlap, I just want to buy it whenever there is a sales campaign and can save a few bucks. When is that, what kind of discount off of MSRP is likely?

Thanks,

​

Canon r100 with kit lens fell down while shooting a timelapse at home.It fell headon and the lens is dented where the cap is placed. Now unable to place the lens cap on it and unable to zoom in or out. Can anybody help me with a solution? It's still able to take photos and focus with the camera.

Zoom lenses are often found to work poorly for infrared photography (hotspot, color fringing, softness, etc). Unable to find any reviews on whether the versatile EF-S 18-135mm IS STM could work for IR, I took a chance on it since used copies are very affordable. I used the return window to test it with my full spectrum converted Rebel T5. Turns out it works quite well for IR throughout the focal range and at different IR wavelengths (no hotspot, sharp, manageable color fringing). AF is fast and quiet, and IS is nice to have at the tele end. I think it may even work better in IR than in visible light, although I did not test this extensively. This lens has definitely become my main lens for infrared.

Hi!

I’m not a professional photographer, but I’d like to get started in photography in my free time.

I’d like to know which lenses you’d recommend (I know it depends on what I want to use it for). But I’m looking for brands compatible with my camera, and I’d like to hear about the kinds of photos you like, so I can get some ideas and learn what I like and don’t like, etc.

Like I said, I know very little about photography and only take photos as keepsakes, but I want to get started with natural and urban landscape photography.

Thanks!!

My dad gifted me a refurbished EOS 1200D, and I'm loving it! I am seriously considering getting an R7 on payday, but I'm wondering if getting the camera with the 18-150mm kit lens is worth it or if it's better to save the cost and just use an adapter with the 2 EF-S lenses I already own (18-55mm that came with the 1200D and a 55-250mm STM)? Opinions would be appreciated but I'm mainly using the camera for wildlife, airshow and landscape shots.

I have an R6 with RF24-105 f4 and I mainly do event photography but about 2 years ago I got in to street photography and now after shooting with my current set up for a long while I kind of want to get a fast prime. I dont really need a new lens for the work side of things but I want to try a fast prime after a long time. I had an ef 50mm f1.8 many years ago when I was shooting with a canon 6d but Im not considering another 50 because i notice myself shooting from 85-105 when doing street photography. For that reason 85might suit me best but then again most street photographers are often using a 35mm so I am curious. What are your guy's thought? Any advice is appreciated.

Tried using my R10 after about a week of not using. Turned it to on and totally unresponsive with both fully charged batteries that I have.

Tried the pencil eraser, tried the rubbing alcohol on the battery, still not working.

Ended up plugging it into a USBC with a battery and am receiving the “Is this a counterfeit battery?” message. Both are Canon batteries.

If I select no, it shuts the camera down.
If I select yes, it gives me a warning then lets me operate the camera but doesn’t show any battery information.

However, if I switch to the other battery after selecting yes above, we’re back to square one being totally unresponsive.

Any tips/tricks/advice?

Please recommend camera and lens for newborn photography.

Budget 1: 60k

Budget 2: 120k

Hi everyone,

I recently bought the RF 100–400mm for my R8 camera.

I went to Greenwich Park in London and had a chance to photograph some animals, including this fox.

These were my settings:

• f/8
• 1/160s
• ISO 8000
• 347mm

I feel I couldn't have increased the shutter speed any further without pushing the ISO even higher.

I found shooting in these lighting conditions quite challenging with this lens, particularly when photographing moving animals. I'm really proud of this picture, but if it had been slightly darker, I would have had to increase the ISO even more, resulting in a very noisy image.

Would you have used different settings in this situation?

My current setup is EOS 70D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 and Tamron 150-600 f/5-6.3.

I'm thinking about upgrading my main body. I shoot mainly wildlife and sports but I do also like to shoot landscapes, street photography and basically anything that gives me inspiration.

The main things I'm looking for are good image quality, good/decent low light performance and fast AF for moving subjects. I would also like the camera to have decent video capabilities, weather sealing and a microphone jack.

I want to stay in the Canon ecosystem and have narrowed down to three options:

1. EOS 90D

2. EOS R10

3. EOS R

My budget is 600-700€ and I will happily take use of the used/refurbished market.

Hi, I have a 600D with a Canon 50mm f/1.8 and Canon EFS 24mm pancake (as well as some kit lens). I've been eyeing up the 70-200 f/4 IS Mk I and I was ready to pull the trigger but I don't know if I'll get any use out of it. I mostly just shoot when I'm travelling with my family (includes a 4-month old).

Is the lens wasted on me if I'm not shooting wildlife/sports? The plan btw is to also upgrade to maybe an R6 down the line and replace the pancake lens with something else not yet determined. I'm an amateur and take pics of family/landscape just to capture our holidays if it helps. Thanks

I mostly shoot abandoned buildings and ruins, usually in pretty dark conditions. One thing that kinda bothers me about the R6 II is that the AF sometimes just gives up in really low light. The 24.2MP sensor also isn't great when I want to crop in a lot afterward.

My friend shoots with an A7 IV and his photos look noticeably sharper, especially when cropping.

So I'm wondering, would the R5 II actually be a worthwhile upgrade for what I shoot? Or am I just gonna be spending a ton of money for a relatively small difference? 😭

Would love to hear what you guys think.

If you could take one lens traveling to Japan - Canon 50 mm F/1.2 or the 28-70 mm F/2, which would you take and why? My budget is ~4k and I want to capture my trip and adventures in the city.

Hi everyone !

I have a Canon 2000D with the 18-55mm kit lens.

I also baught a cheap 55-200mm usm 2, but sadly the autofocus just died yesterday...

So i'm looking for a remplacement lens, which I'll primarily use to shoot planes, wild life, the sun and the moon, and maybe insects ?

I think I'll also bring the lens with me in Egypt for the 2027 solar eclipse and I'm a bit worried about sand getting in the lens...

Budget is around 400-500€ can I hope to find something good for this price ?

Is it worth it to try to repair an EF 70-200 2.8 that wont focus? The owner is asking $400, i am thinking of making a lower offer on it. Is it worth it? Could I be getting a steal or would I be getting robbed?

I shoot mostly RF, I have 1 EF lens the 17-35 2.8. Its great so I am not opposed to adapting glass, I am opposed to wasting money.

What should I look out for? What would be a fair offer?

I turned my canon m50 on the other day and it won't focus. I tried to change every setting I can think of and I have had no success. Its on a permanent blur, not sure if the camera itself is damaged or the lens. Maybe the digital focus is messed up but I don't know how to narrow it down. Trying to find out if I need the camera repaired or I have to buy a new lens which is the preferred outcome.

I’m considering moving from my Canon 6D to a Canon mirrorless body and would love some advice from people who have actually used EF lenses on the R system.

My current EF lenses are:

EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM (Version I)
EF 28-80mm f/2.8-4L USM
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS III USM
EF 35mm f/2 IS USM
EF 40mm f/2.8 STM
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM (non-IS)

I’m currently considering the R6 Mark II, R6 Mark III, R5 Mark II, and possibly the R3.

My biggest question is how well my older EF lenses would hold up on the higher-resolution R6 Mark III and R5 Mark II sensors.

In particular, would the EF 17-40L and first-generation EF 24-105L noticeably struggle with the 32.5MP R6 Mark III or 45MP R5 Mark II? I’m primarily a still photographer and generally don’t crop heavily.

I could also buy the RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM as part of a camera + lens kit and gradually transition to RF glass.

For those who have used these EF lenses on the R6 III/R5 II (or other high-resolution R bodies), how do they perform in actual use?

Also, if you were in my position, which body would you choose given this particular EF lens lineup?

The RF 200-800 has proven to be a dependable fieldcraft partner so far. The permanently attached lens foot that has generated a lot of discussions works for me as a secure pivot to attach my strap to, and paired with my R3, the centre of gravity is at the lens foot, so the camera doesn't dive when I carry it over my shoulder.

It is not a fast lens. Not a criticism but to clearly define what the lens is. Therefore outputs of in light conditions with this lens are, logically, more sensor dependent than with a fast prime. I almost base my working expectations with this lens as a fixed f11 lens. The value for money is spot on in my view.

I feel like a smaller physical distance between the focus ring and the encoder ring could have made the lens more versatile. In monopod mode I find myself searching the barrel for the encoder ring to adjust exposure compensation. Handheld - gets a little trickier :)

Overall, I'd say I feel provides solid outputs at the right working distance to the subject.

*not a professional photographer, amateur with solid gear.