03-17-2015 02:03 PM
I'm new here. I have a Canon T3i. Two kit lenses came with it in a bundle...18-55mm, 55-250mm. I am considering getting the Canon 18-200mm. Would the Canon 18-200mm be a good choice to replace both lenses, or are there better choices to replace them with and keep the 18-200mm also?
Solved! Go to Solution.
04-07-2015
08:58 AM
- last edited on
04-07-2015
09:14 AM
by
Stephen
Morning Biggs. [Mod note: Removed for violation of FORUM GUIDELINES. Please stop asking members to violate guidelines. CLICK HERE. To review the guidelines in their entirety.]
And can you tell me just how one uploads pics in our post as you do to show me your pics, like the bird and horse. I've tried to do that several times with no luck. I did finally figure out how to uplaod a pic for my avitar, but can't seem to figure how to upload pics so I can show them to you and Bob.
04-07-2015 09:39 AM
Hey, I do hope you are getting over the cancer episode. We are both 68 and have certain medical restrictions. I have been retired for over 12 years now. I understand 68 years old.
The, maybe excessive, push to RAW for you does not need to be rehashed as to the advantages. I hope they have been driven home. But the, currently, simplistic job of its use is another reason. You are a computer guru. So this should be second nature for you. Take this example. You have to put your photos on your computer. Right? DPP that came with your camera will do this automatically. It will d/l the images and display them without effort on your part. At this point, there is no difference between your jpg files and a RAW file as nothing on your part is different. OK? But now you have RAW files on the screen instead of compressed jpg.
The rendering is done by DPP automatically. But you now have twice or more of the ability to make them better. Or you can simply choose to save them as is to a jpg. The only difference here is you choose RAW on the menu on the back of the camera.
Lets add PSE into the mix. After you learn it, you will have a whole new world of editing possiblites.
Cameras can be great lead ins to make new friends. That is great. I hope that works out for you. A word on a "model release", to clarify it more. Average people do not have an expectation of privacy in a public place. There is no release required to do whatever with the images. Of course I mean non-slanderous use or degrading, etc. Even celebrities have few legal rights if they are in a piblic place. This has a gray area, however. If you state your goal is to profit from the photos you should get a release. Especially if the person cooperates. But if they ask you not take their photo, you should honor that although you probably don't have to. Anybody can sue for anything in this country. Local ordenances may apply, too. There are “community standards” laws to contend with.
None of that applies to children. They are ALWAYS off limits.
I hope you get better quickly so we can pursue the great photography hobby even futher.
04-07-2015 09:43 AM
"wow. and I thought my post was friendly."
Your meaning? Mine was not?
I can not share an opposing view? I thought this was a place for interchange of view points. If you don't like mine, I am not "friendly"?
04-07-2015 09:48 AM
"And can you tell me just how one uploads pics ..."
Yes it is easy. Click on the icon that looks like a mountain with a moon. Chooes the file on you computer and u/l it. Then click the insert image tab.
BTW, you may be limited to a size restricton if I remember correctly so don't try a full size jpg or RAW files. Reduce it first in your "editor"!
I would love to see your stuff.
04-07-2015 10:42 AM
Sorry Stephen. My mistake. I see guys mentioning 3rd party names and places all the time. I have no idea what I said or have said in the past that's different. What did I say that was a violation? I'm not being rude, I just don't understand what's wrong with mentioning names of 3rd party companies just in conversation. Please clarify that for me.
04-07-2015 11:01 AM
@jazzman1 wrote:Sorry Stephen. My mistake. I see guys mentioning 3rd party names and places all the time. I have no idea what I said or have said in the past that's different. What did I say that was a violation? I'm not being rude, I just don't understand what's wrong with mentioning names of 3rd party companies just in conversation. Please clarify that for me.
Especially given that yesterday almost every current thread in this forum got hit by a thinly veiled ad (complete with links) for some sort of pink rubber band that's supposed to keep lenses from falling out of their zoom settings while being carried around. I believe (based on a couple of quick glances) that they're still there.
04-07-2015 11:03 AM
Hello jazzman1!
When Forum Members mention the Canon gear they use and that it was purchased from an Authorized Canon Dealer such as Adorama, B&H Photo or Amazon, we generally have no issues with that, however this community is not intended to help you sell your gear. If you'd like to do that, there are many other forums on the Internet that are designed for that sole purpose. This Community Forum is intended to be a place where users can go to get help and ideas from other community members and if needed, help from Canon staff directly.
The blue links my previous post are links to the entire Forum Guidelines and to the specific part of the Forum Guidelines that have been in violation.
We hope this helps to clarify things!
04-07-2015 11:12 AM
Hi Bob!
They're all gone!
Sorry, we usually catch spam like that. That one got past us. In the future, if you guys see something that is obviously spam, report the post as abuse and we'll pull it. We don't want things like that gunking up your Forum!
04-07-2015 12:35 PM
biggs,
in a thread that purportedly, is about the 18-200mm lens, I posted what is, perhaps, the ONLY defense of this lens.
to which, you jumped all over it (yep, so glad to make your acquaintance. what a great guy!) - seemingly (unseemly?) because you disagree - which, obviously, is your right.
I'll rehash my two cents, the EF-S 18-200mm lens WILL RESULT in a user capturing many, many images (due to its compositional dexterity) than otherwise. the next criticism I receive about the optical resolution of this lens will be the first.
to me, that's more important - usually, but not always - than achieving the sharpest possible image in the farthest corners of a composition.
ymmv.
04-07-2015 12:48 PM
Ok. I will try to stat viligent.
02/20/2025: New firmware updates are available.
RF70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM Z - Version 1.0.6
RF24-105mm F2.8 L IS USM Z - Version 1.0.9
RF100-300mm F2.8 L IS USM - Version 1.0.8
RF50mm F1.4 L VCM - Version 1.0.2
RF24mm F1.4 L VCM - Version 1.0.3
01/27/2025: New firmware updates are available.
12/18/2024: New firmware updates are available.
EOS C300 Mark III - Version 1..0.9.1
EOS C500 Mark II - Version 1.1.3.1
12/05/2024: New firmware updates are available.
EOS R5 Mark II - Version 1.0.2
09/26/2024: New firmware updates are available.
Canon U.S.A Inc. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or part without permission is prohibited.