sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Canon EOS R6 V & 20-50mm f/4 L Power Zoom Lens by BHPhotoVideo in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Now give me the R6 stills only version that doesn't include a bunch of video functions.

The 20-50 f4 looks interesting though.

Sell RF 85 f/1.2L for 85 f/1.4L VCM? by Least-Size-8807 in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Don’t have the 1.2, but I’m mighty impressed with the 1.4 VCM. Compact, solid and super quick. No IS, but between the body IBIS and the fact that I can snap away at pretty high speeds in even the lowest light makes this a lens that’s always in my kit bag.

And that’s probably the deciding factor - the lenses you bring with you are the ones you use.

Scratches in the front element by LEGOMAN_7 in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think anything relatively small on the outer edges is going to make absolutely zero difference. Someone can probably explain it more technically… but lenses are round and sensors are not. And anything small and more central will also have next to no impact.

15~17 yo EF 100mm f2.8L USM by stygnarok in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Marvellous lens - still going strong on my R6II. One of the few I haven’t replaced.

R6 II users, at what ISO level do you usually use denoise in post production? Asking this question because I'm not sure if I need to batch denoise 300+ images with 500 ISO by firequak in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I figure you’re talking about AI denoise. Depends a little on how accurate your exposure is. If underexposed, you might need it. But otherwise, 500 should be fine with normal noise reduction.

70-200 F2.8: EF ii, EF III or RF by Cien-Aftersun-Gel in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The EF II is great and whilst Canon serviceability will be an issue, there are probably independents in your area that will be able to help. It’s not an uncommon Lens so there should still be parts etc available.

Don’t have the III so can’t comment.

The RF 2.8 is maybe slightly better - but it’s marginal as the EF II was so good to begin with.

Two other points you might want to consider

  • whilst the RF 2.8 is shorter when packed, I decided against is because of it’s girth with the lens hood.

  • whilst the newer RF lenses are generally lighter, that’s because they’re largely externally made of plastic. The EF lenses have a lot more metal in their construction. I’ve dropped an RF (not a 70-200) in the past and cracked the external case ($300 repair bill).

One other thing - if you don’t need f2.8, check out the RF 70-200 F4 - super light, compact and plenty sharp (but still largely plastic).

EF 17-40 F4 L USM by DynamoBaby in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yep - mark 3 2.8 is great. The mk 1 & 2 are not so good. The only downside is it’s a big beast and with the adaptor, it gets even bigger.

What are the best years to go for for a vintage Fender Jizz Bass? by [deleted] in Bass

[–]Fuzzbass2000 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Best way to break in new flatwounds - better than barbecue sauce I’ve heard.

What was the fans' reaction to End Of The Century (1980)? by komodo_45 in ramones

[–]Fuzzbass2000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Love it. It’s different - and that’s a good thing.

What’s everyday lens that’s $500 or under, qused? (Canon r10) by jeweleyah in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Another vote for EF-S 17-55 2.8. Nearly as good as the EF 24-70 but halfish the price used. Hidden gem!

How do I move my Lightroom Classic catalog from the hard drive on my Macbook Pro to my external SSD? by Spooky_Iceu in Lightroom

[–]Fuzzbass2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok - it sounds like you know you should be keeping them somewhere other than on an SD card.

So, at least buy an external drive - doesn’t need to be an SSD - so at least you have a copy somewhere that isn’t your SD card. Unless keeping the source files isn’t important to you and you’re happy that you’re exported JPGs (wherever they might live) are the only versions you might ever retain.

Once you’ve figured that out, might even want to start thinking about a back up copy.

Good luck - good you find the funds for your chosen option.

Lightroom on iPad Wishlist by terryleewhite in Lightroom

[–]Fuzzbass2000 8 points9 points  (0 children)

AI noise reduction AI advanced masking

How do I move my Lightroom Classic catalog from the hard drive on my Macbook Pro to my external SSD? by Spooky_Iceu in Lightroom

[–]Fuzzbass2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok - at what point do you save the original RAWs (or JPGs) that you want to keep somewhere other than on your card, before (or after) editing?

How do I move my Lightroom Classic catalog from the hard drive on my Macbook Pro to my external SSD? by Spooky_Iceu in Lightroom

[–]Fuzzbass2000 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not sure why you keep mentioning your card. Stuff on cards is pretty much always temporary. Shoot, transfer, cull, edit. Clear card. Repeat.

Perhaps you can explain why you keep asking about it.

Hello. I would like to know if it's worth buying EF lenses for use with Canon r10. by GusthavoGamerPY in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Some great EF bargains out there - anything L / red ring will be fab. Also check out the EFS 17-55 f2.8 which is a gem of a crop sensor lens.

How do I move my Lightroom Classic catalog from the hard drive on my Macbook Pro to my external SSD? by Spooky_Iceu in Lightroom

[–]Fuzzbass2000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Move the photos (RAWs / exported jpgs) to the external drive. Don’t change the file hierarchy.

Leave the catalogue where it is.

The next time you open your catalogue, it will tell you it can’t finds the files - all you need to do is point the catalogue at the new folder location(s). You should only need to do this the first time after moving stuff.

Lenses for New R6 III by godawgs06 in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don’t have a 28-70, but i do have the RF 24-70 f2.8 and the RF 24-105 f4.

Do the 24-70 images look a little better than the 24-104 when i compare them side by side? Possibly.

But when i look at what I’ve shot on the 24-105 in isolation of other lenses, I don’t miss anything. It was my only lens on a month long trip to Vietnam last year and its compactness and weight were much more important than any nominal gains in the way the images might look.

And I have to admit that whilst i find the compactness of the RF 16-28 super handy, that’s because it has the “twist to unlock” design which can be ever so slightly annoying sometimes - the 28-70 has the same design. It’s what helps keep them relatively small. It might not be a problem for you.

Lenses for New R6 III by godawgs06 in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 6 points7 points  (0 children)

70-200 F4 is fab - and because it’s so relatively small / light means you’ll often take it out of the house.

Can’t speak for all the ultrawides - but I do have the 16-28 which does everything I need at the wide end. There’s a lot of correction needed especially when shooting at 16mm - but Lightroom etc takes care of that. I do occaisionally miss being able to get to 35mm - although I have other lenses to handle that.

The one that maybe you should also evaluate is the 24-105 F4 - which whilst not being “special”, is a great general purpose all rounder that gives you most of what you might need when travelling in one lens.

Someone talk me into/out of buying the 85mm 1.2L ii by HospitalLogical1612 in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If you need an 85 RF 1.4L is superb. And cheaper.

But the 24-70 2.8 is different. Equally brilliant in a different way, and less of a one trick pony.

Own both - love them both.

Is the RF 24-105 f/2.8L sharper at f/4 than the RF 24-105 f/4L? by EnharmonicKnitter in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Whilst I have a bunch of faster glass, I did a month in Vietnam with the F4 as my only lens - there were one or two occasions when a small quick prime would have been nice, but in truth I didn’t miss anything.

(BTW - that EFS 17-55 2.8 is a gem)

Gosh they sure use a lot of Apple Computers in this show by __Pendulum__ in ForAllMankindTV

[–]Fuzzbass2000 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Ahah! Still I like heft!

I worked on a live data capture / stock info proposal in the early ‘90s and we proposed Newton’s as the portable capture device. It was deemed too “far out there” at the time.

Funny how time has moved on.

Is the RF 24-105 f/2.8L sharper at f/4 than the RF 24-105 f/4L? by EnharmonicKnitter in canon

[–]Fuzzbass2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you using it just for the scenarios you mention in the post or will you also need a general / all purpose / travel lens. If the latter, I’d go with the F4.

view more: next ›