Rodentman
|
Camera question...This is a tough one to explain since I don't have a lot of detail, but I'll try.
My brother had a Canon 35mm SLR with several lenses, not Canon brand, I think. The body died, and he bought an EOS that alledgedly will accept his lenses. His photos are poor. They are not sharp, and my poultry Nikon Coolpix 4800 puts it to shame, which it shouldn't.
I realize there are many variables, his knowledge of the camera's many settings, etc. and the fact that he gets defensive saying there is nothing wrong with the photos, just something wrong with ME.
I guess my query is: Are older lenses suitable for the digital body? Is that where the issue lies? What else can you suggest as to why his photos simply do not look sharp?
|
uncle aj
|
I'm not familiar with the Canon range but Valentino (Mike) is. I'll give him a PM and ask. One thing that struck me is if your brother thinks they are sharp, could it be his eyesight that's at fault? One more thing, is it out of focus unsharpness or could it be down to camera shake which can be attributed to many things. Too long a lens, too slow shutter speed etc.
EDIT
I've just spoken with a guy at work who uses Canon. He says that depending on the lens type, although they fit the digital bodies, the electrical contacts may not mate up so you would lose auto focus and exposure and these would have to be set manually.
|
valentino
|
If the lenses are AF fit they should work on any EF and EF-s mount, the only possibility is on older lenses of losing Auto focus (as AJ said) but not exposure (as that is done via the light hitting the sensor/mirror)
What EOS body does he have now? Older lenses should still return good results unless they used poor optics but even poor glass shouldnt render a very blurred result. It sounds much more like user error than equipment.
|
Rodentman
|
Yeah, I think it is user error based on the fact that my brother really doesn't understand the basics and tries to over expose and underexpose to get certain effects when he can't even get a decent photo in full auto mode. When I try to point out issues to him he gets all defensive, so he can do what he wants. He wanted a digital body to use with his complement of lenses but then just takes the standard lens on a trip saying the other lenses are too big and heavy.
The defense rests.
|
uncle aj
|
| Rodentman wrote: | Yeah, I think it is user error based on the fact that my brother really doesn't understand the basics and tries to over expose and underexpose to get certain effects when he can't even get a decent photo in full auto mode. When I try to point out issues to him he gets all defensive, so he can do what he wants. He wanted a digital body to use with his complement of lenses but then just takes the standard lens on a trip saying the other lenses are too big and heavy.
The defense rests. |
Guilty!! Send him to a penal colony. 
|
Tools
|
I use Canon equipment too.. A Canon 350D and a 30D..
I have some slight double vision in my right eye, so have had to relearn photography and count on my camera to keep me out of trouble...
|
uncle aj
|
Your camera and lenses seem OK as there's not a lot wrong with those pictures. I noticed you sneaked another lighthouse in.
|
Tools
|
| uncle aj wrote: | | Your camera and lenses seem OK as there's not a lot wrong with those pictures. I noticed you sneaked another lighthouse in. |
Reminds me of my younger days.......... 
|
uncle aj
|
| Tools wrote: | | uncle aj wrote: | | Your camera and lenses seem OK as there's not a lot wrong with those pictures. I noticed you sneaked another lighthouse in. |
Reminds me of my younger days..........
|
Did yours light up at the end? 
|
valentino
|
all this inuendo from you oldies, its like going to the school disco and having your mum and dad showing you how to dance ;)
|
uncle aj
|
| valentino wrote: | | all this inuendo from you oldies, its like going to the school disco and having your mum and dad showing you how to dance ;) |
They still do that..................do they? 
|
valentino
|
yes :mad:
|
