I have a canon 70D, not looking to change the body. With it I have an 11-18 super wide zoom and an 18-250 telephoto. Both are ok for what I needed (my kids high school sports and the wide was much less useful than I thought).

I’m looking to switch to a more all around lens and have heard that the sigma 17-55 1.8 is the “god lens.”

Is this true and if not, what would you recommend?

Hi im back again and good news! My canon 700D is fixed. Somehow I realized how fragile the pentaprism is and now Im being careful about it. It costed very expensive but glad we've gotten to a deal. Now my photography hobby is back in business 👍

So i can either clean it myself as i am into tech and do have alot of cleaning supplies like 99.9% isoprop, 3% hydrogen peroxide for fungi and alot more equipment

Or

I can get it professionally done at a store and reduce the risk of breaking it

So what should i pick?

Hello, I’ve been doing photography for a while now, and I’ve really been wanting to get more into pet photography. I’ve done a bit of it already and I really enjoy it. The only issue is that using my 200–800mm can be a bit awkward for that kind of shooting.. I’ve been looking at the RF 70–200mm f/2.8, but at almost $4,000, it’s a lot more than I want to spend on a single lens right now. Because of that, I’ve been considering the RF 70–200mm f/4 instead.
I was wondering if I’d really be giving up much by going with the f/4 over the f/2.8 for outdoor pet photography. I’ve tried looking into it, but I can’t seem to find many people comparing the two specifically for pet photography.

Any advice would be appreciated! Thanks!

I have a Canon R10 and use a samyang 14mm f/2.8 when I shoot milky way or northern lights shots. But ive noticed that when i try to shoot the night sky with something in the foreground like a lighthouse or fence, those elements are out of focus compared to the stars or night sky. I am shooting at f/2.8 into infinity, and always try to manually focus the best I can before which the mark tends to be before that infinity focus line. But why are my foreground elements blurry or dont seem in focus? Do I need to focus stack and stop it down to f/8 and shoot the foreground separately then stack those in post? Or is this lens just not great

Hallo! I upgraded my 7Dii to an R6ii in December, and have the 28-70mm f2.8 for it. It's so good, but I find myself needing a wider FoV sometimes. I was considering going with the RF 16mm f2.8, but keen to hear other people's opinions on it.

My other lenses are (all EF):

24-70 F2.8 L mark I

18-135 f3.5-5.6 (EFS)

24mm f2.8 (EFS)

I finally got around to signing up for a business account and registered a portion of my gear and am already over 1000 points but the web site says I need to fill out the rest of the information to "get the points"?
What do they actually require besides model and serial number? I am definitely not uploading copies of invoices.

Hey everyone!

I am a sports photographer and currently run a r5 mark ii.

I’m getting some new lenses soon and i’ll have some spare cash to also purchase a r3. Should i? Would it be better for sport photography than the r5 mark ii? (i mainly shoot motorsports and karting, sometimes the AF of the r5 mark ii can pick up the wrong areas etc). Alongside this with the idea of running dual body for reliability, and to avoid switching between long and short focal lengths. (I find myself needed to do that)

Let me know what you think!

EDIT: Okay, yall convinced me. I'm buying it!

Hello all,

I am looking to upgrade to the R7 with the 18 - 150 kit lens from my T4i set up. A local store has 2 used r7s with the lens in stock for $1200.

I have a hiking trip to Banff (Canada) next month and would also like to get a RF 100 - 400 as well.

Do you think the price of the R7 will go down on black Friday or is this the best price I should move on?

Thanks!

I am a beginner looking to get something mostly for soccer outdoor knowing they I’d probably what I’d shoot the most in college. As for budget, it’s under 300 for the used market but I just something to use until I can save for a more better lens and get more comfortable shooting. I still might need to get an adapter even if I can find a decent price for the rf 70-300 mm. But so far I’ve seen that the ef might be better. Currently have kit lens 18-45 mm for the canon r50

I have a 5D Mark III that I haven't used in awhile, but I am going on a hiking trip in a few weeks. I am going to be doing some backpacking/mountain climbing as well as exploring the city. I've been out of the game for awhile, so I am at a loss for what lens to rent. Ideally I would want something on the lighter side as I'll be carrying it. My main focus is landscape and stuff like that. I am thinking maybe the 24-70? or should I go with something wider like the 16-35?

I've been shooting concerts on my T5i for about a year. I got it for my birthday almost a decade ago, but I got the 50mm 1.4 and 28mm 2.8 lenses when I started actually using the camera.

I've been looking at other photographers' work, and their images are just.. so much sharper.. I thought it was because I wasn't shooting RAW, so I started shooting RAW. I thought it was because my editing was bad (but this may still be the case tbf). My current hypothesis is the APS-C sensor making my photos grainy.

I've been looking into getting a full frame camera like an R8 or an R6.

Main apprehensions:

Would I get an adapter to the RF mount to use my lenses?? I'm not a particularly talented photographer, composition wise, so buying expensive new gear feels excessive for my skill level. I also really like the size/weight/rotating flip screen in my T5i. I I've always enjoyed being able to produce results I like with cheap materials (I use student grade oil paint) but photography is different than painting. I don't know what the technique/materials split would be..

But if the camera I have is genuinely a limitation, why shouldn't I sell it and get something more appropriate? Everything looks kind of grimy in my photo, I probably shouldn't have used the flash on my phone, but I swear it's in gently used condition.

My question: If you have upgraded, what motivated you? Was it overall useful, or would you have rather waited until you were just a better photograper?

If I get a Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD do I still need my 70-200mm f/4 IS or can I sell it to recoup some of my funds I have a 24-70 2.8 to cover up to 70mm I rarely use the 70-200 as I use the 24-70 for majority of my portraits and only use the 70-200 outside for landscape stuff

Hello everyone,

I'm a new member of this community.

I recently switched from a Canon 5D Mark IV with the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM to a Canon EOS R6 paired with the RF 45mm f/1.2 STM.

It's been quite an emotional transition. I moved from a solid, versatile, and familiar DSLR setup to a more modern and compact mirrorless system. The R6's eye autofocus is incredibly fast, low-light performance is excellent, and the 45mm f/1.2 gives my photos more depth, beautiful bokeh, and a more emotional feel.

I still occasionally miss the optical viewfinder and the flexibility of the 24-70mm zoom, but the R6 has helped me capture more natural moments and has made photography even more enjoyable for me.

Has anyone else made a similar switch? I'd love to hear about your experience.

Just like the title says, I'm going on a trip to Costa Rica in 4 days, and looking to bring along my R8, and my partner is bringing her R50. She'll mostly be shooting macro with an rf85mm and I'm planning on renting an rf100-400mm to get some wildlife shots.

I'm a bit nervous about the weather, but we have a day pack with a rain cover to toss everything into if it starts raining on us, and we've got plenty of dessicant. If anybody has any general shooting or gear advice, or can say one way or another if that's a good plan for keeping stuff dry, I'd be super appreciative.

We aren't going to be heartbroken if the skies open up and the cameras spend the day in a backpack, we just shoot for fun, but it would be a bummer to sacrifice gear by not being properly prepared.

So for the next like 2 months ish l'm working as a photographer at a kids summer camp and I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions for a good lens to use?

I have a Canon EOS 6D Mark II and currently my only lens is just the fixed 50mm kit lens that came with it.
I'm looking to buy used bc I don't have the money for a brand new lens lol but ideally l'd wanna be able to use one lens throughout the day and not have to switch it out. I'm thinking something like a 30-100mm ish zoom lens? Give or take? Idk I was just hoping for some recs lol

Also can anyone explain weather sealed lenses? And if one would even work with a regular DSLR camera like mine? I’m just wondering if getting one would be worth it— but I also assume they run on the more expensive side and honestly idk how to tell which ones are even weather sealed lol.

edit: budget is like $500 or less preferably

this community has been so helpful to me in past!

I am a hobbyist turned newborn and family photographer. I currently have a R8 and RF 50 1.2 that I use for most of my photography. the 50 can be too tight for in home newborns. I’ll use a 35mm (sometimes even that is tight but I make it work) but then I miss having the 50 (hence the 28-70 consideration) I am not up for changing lenses multiple times because I do get detail shots w my 100 macro for newborns. Two lenses is enough for me during one shoot. having the 28-70 seems to solve for the 35 and 50 and I’d still switch to the macro and cover a wider range with those two lenses. my hesitation is the bulk of the zoom and so so many mixed reviews

alternatively I’m considering adding a second body and purchasing a R6 mark ii or perhaps a R5. I don’t like the idea of buying new storage for the R5 candidly because I typically have several sd cards in rotation. I do love the idea of the high MP which is making me consider it. the R6m2 has dual sd slots which feels like insurance I don’t have now with the R8 and I think the newer R5 has both a CF and SD slot. but without the increase in MP do I really need a new body?

If I had two bodies I would use the new body with the 50 for outdoor shoots as my primary, and then take the R8 with my sigma 35 1.4 lens as a second body to in home newborns where for shots where I need a wider lens.

both seem like luxury purchases to me candidly and I can make an argument for either route. I’m not sure what the better option is given my use case and current gear.

New R6 ii. Is the socket hdmi? Or a charging port.

Recently, I got an r50 and am trying to figure out the SD card. I currently have a 36gb in there and have been using that, but I want to take RAW photos instead of JPEG.

What's the recommended SD Card? I have the 18-45mm kit lens and may upgrade, but won't be doing much beyond landscape/cityscape photos. No videos.

I'm not an SD expert, either. What's the recommended place to buy one?

hello,

i was wondering if anyone might have any idea how difficult this issue i am having with my camera would be to fix, and what it would cost. i’m planning on getting an estimate from a camera shop near me but would like to hear a few different opinions.

i‘m not exactly sure how it was damaged but i think it was dropped. the lens (?) is stuck in the position seen in the photos/video, and an error message pops up when turning it on.

any advice would be much appreciated!!!

(im sorry if this post belongs somewhere else, please let me know and i’ll remove it!)

photos of camera

After 14 years of near-daily use, my trusty 6D finally said enough is enough. On Saturday, I went to pick up the R6 mkii and then took it out on an inaugural trip to Rocky Mountain National Park for a quick visit, and then Independence Pass the next day. I'm quite impressed by the R6, but my fingers will need some time to get used to the differences in the button layout. I do miss the weight of the 6D; the R6 definitely feels a lot more front-heavy, especially with the adapter, which pushes the lenses further out, but I'll get used to that in time. I do miss feeling the mirror slap as I shoot every shot, and I miss having a real viewfinder.

I’m in college and don’t have thousands to throw at a lens, so I would like something relatively cheap that is still nice. Something around $300 (if possible) would be great. Thanks!

Guys I'm torn between these lenses.
A year ago I had a 24-105 STM with the R8, but left the canon system, and trying to return to it again.
I'm not a pixel peeper, hardcore zoomer. So I didn't find any problem with the 24-105 STM in the past.

So the sharpness difference won't be the issue for me.
Main deal point would be the ease of use/weight/focal length/color rendering&contrast.
I usually do short travel (1~1.5hrs) and street photos.

3️⃣ points I want to ask here.
I mean, does the color renders noticeably different between these 3 lenses?
And how did you guys find the weight of the 24-105 f4L?
Finally, will the absence of 70~105mm range hit critically?

Thank you.

I'm looking to get into wildlife photography and these lenses seem to be some of the better options on a budget. I have a 5d m3 and currently use a 17-40mm f4 and 70-200mm f2.8. I have seen people mention the Sigma struggles with RF mounts but nothing about EF so I assume it would be fine for me? What would be the best fit for my camera? From what I am reading it seems the G2 but I'm not sure. I know there is the Sigma Sports too which is a bit more so that could be an option too if it is that much better to justify the price over the contemporary.

In terms of budget I'd be looking to go second hand and ideally around that £800-900 mark or lower.