I have a Canon Rebel EOS Rebel sl1 100D camera. I have an older Sigma APO 170-500 lense.  Can this be used on the digital camera with an adapter and which adapter? I have looked everywhere and frankly not experienced enough to understand most of what I'm reading other than you can but the autofocus won't work have to do manual. I don't want to ruin my camera plus I can't find anywhere which adapter it would be if I do try to do this. Anyone's help I would appreciate. Thanks
5131
I've got some lenses of brand X, but I've just got a new camera of brand Y. How can I tell if it's possible to use my lenses on my camera? I accept that I may lose a lot of automatic functionality like autofocus, aperture control and metering when using an adapter to connect the two.
72731
So I just got this Nikon D3100 Camera.  And I am trying to take a picture using autofocus with the kit lens(18-55mm).    The system is in Auto mode, AF-A, single frame and the lens A-M switch is on "A",  VR is "ON".  When I press shutter half way down, focus confirmation light in lower left corner of viewfinder neither lit nor blinks(hear clicking). When I press the shutter all the way down, the shutter seems locked (hear clicking, but shutter not released).    The manual says the shutter will lock itself if it can't get focus. But the place is well lit and have distinct color and I can easily focus using my old Canon.    The camera works fine in manual focusing, but I can't get it to take picture under auto-focusing.  I wonder is there something wrong with the setting that I don't know or is that I got a lemon?  Thanks
15227
So, I mount a 200mm lens on my Canon 450D. It effectively becomes a 320mm lens. Is this the equivalent of 320mm on a full frame camera? That is, from what I've figured out I get an equivalent field of view but nothing I've read is indicating that I get the magnification to go along with it.  So as my question says in the title, does my crop sensor camera really turn my lens into a longer one (in terms of magnification), or does it just look like it based on the reduced field of view I get?
48760
I'm looking at buying a new SLR body. I have an old film Nikon entry-level SLR (about ten years old) with a kit lens. If I buy a Nikon body, how likely is it that my old lens will work on it? Would I be better off buying a new lens?
32930
I have found that my Nikon 60mm Micro AF-D changes aperture from 2.8 to 3.2 when used with a D90. I have tried both A and M mode. Is it by design? Why?  I intend to buy  and it will lock the maximum aperture at 2.0 (my guess) instead 2.8. So should I buy it or not, or would it be better to buy the newer 50mm 1.4 AF-S version?
121935
On the weekend I attended a wedding and took my camera along.  I was not the official photographer -- just a guest.    My camera is a Canon 5D Mark III, and I was using an EF 50mm f/1.4 USM lens.  At the evening reception, which was a dark room with disco lights etc, I was going round taking lots of photographs of all the party people and in order that I didn't have to worry about my camera settings, I shot in Aperture Priority mode, with auto-ISO, and f/number of mostly around f/2 - f/4.  I used AI Servo mode so that it would track people dancing etc.  Of course, I also shot in RAW.  It is a testament to the 5D Mark III that it was able to find focus in such challenging conditions!!  However in my stupidity, I didn't change the maximum auto-ISO setting, and most of the shots were taken at a whopping ISO 25,600 -- the camera seeming to prefer to increase the ISO rather than slow the shutter speed to get an exposure.  The shutter speed in most shots is probably faster than it really needed to be - around 1/125-1/250th...  For a 50mm lens I probably only really needed 1/80th-1/125th to freeze the action?  This has resulted in some incredibly noisy and grainy shots, lacking in the detail I'm used to.  Note that I don't think it's a focus issue - the focus is fine, and the shots aren't blurry either.  Just noisy.  I imported all the photos into Lightroom 4, and have been playing with the Noise Reduction and Sharpening sliders, but in order to really get the noise levels to a normal or acceptable level, I've had to push that NR slider all the way up to 80 (choke!!).  Normally I'd only apply at most about 40, even in a low-light photo!  This much NR has meant that the detail in peoples faces is overly softened, and skin tones are looking almost plasticky.    So my question is, what would you say is the best way to "recover" these photos and balance noise reduction against sharpening, or to reduce the noise in another way?  I do also have Photoshop Elements 11 at my disposal, though I'm not the best with it.  However, if there is another way in which I could use that to achieve the same thing, I'd also appreciate some pointers.
27258
I am planning to buy a DSLR soon.  Before I zero in on the model, I want to know whether it is advisable to buy a kit (body + 18-55 lens) or not? OR should I go for the camera-body and the lens separately?
58663
I use a Metabones adapter for Canon lenses on a Sony body. Why doesn't the lens adapter, which sets the lens further from the sensor, have the same effect as using extension tubes, allowing closer focus?
17726
I use a Canon EOS Rebel T3i (600D) with the kit lens. I have experimented a lot with different settings and modes, but I feel like I have wasted many good shots that could have looked amazing, if only they were a little bit sharper.  I use auto-focus on most of my pictures and make sure to choose the right focus point, but all of my photos are still a little bit out of focus. When I zoom in, I can see that the pixels are not very crisp or well-aligned.  I am not sure if this issue is caused by my equipment or skills.
45409
I am considering buying my first DSLR.  How do I know whether I need a 18-200 lens, 17-85, or 18-55? Or something else?
115379
I have a Canon 60D, bought it back in 2013. Use it quite a while, but in past two-three years, I lost interest in photography. I will be going on a long trip this summer and would like to take a decent camera with me. Is Canon 60D still a decent one or I will be missing on features and upgrades comparing to the latest versions?  In terms of lenses I own Tamron 24-70 2.8 And Canon 100 2.8 Macro.
100855
A good friend of mine has a d5100, which was working perfectly fine yesterday. Today, however, it refuses to autofocus at all - it makes no effort to move the focusing ring etc.  I have tried everything I know, from the obvious (making sure it's set to auto, not manual focus), to the less obvious (changing AF-L settings, trying Live View), to the downright desperate (trying every mode, random setting, and a menu reset) among others. I have also tried changing lenses, but the problem is the same.  This points to the problem almost certainly being in the camera body. The lens contacts are clean, the lenses were correctly fitted and it was bright enough to autofocus.  Currently I have no ideas other than a faulty shutter release button, broken circuitry (unlikely), or some bizzare instant-burnout of the lenses' AF motors.  Please, does anybody know anything about this? Thanks in advance, I will be eternally grateful (and owe you a beer/wine/tea/soft beverage if we ever meet!).
82701
So,  (credit to mattdm for pointing it out) says:     Firstly, when you turn the lens around you obviously lose the CPU connection between the lens and the camera, so say goodbye to autofocus, metering (in most cases) and aperture control (though I’ll come back to that)   Then:       The advantage of this old lens is that it has a manual aperture ring, which neatly neutralises the loss of automatic control mentioned above.   So, since G lenses don't have an aperture ring, aperture can't be controlled anyhow if we reverse the lens?    Secondly, is it practical that we set the metering and the aperture (manually) before taking the lens out and reversing it?  Is there any other way to get around this problem in G lenses (assuming that the camera bodies have the manual focus, aperture, metering controls)?
84248
I'm very new to digital photography, so I still haven't gotten the hang of all this exposure and ISO stuff, etc. I have a Canon EOS T3.   My question is how big of a difference does it make using manual settings rather than auto settings for everything? I've taken some pretty nice photos with all auto settings, and I'm not sure if it could have turned out any better using manual settings. I know that there are some people who have been in the game for years upon years, and to them they can notice the difference between photos taken with manual vs auto settings, but for my situation, do you think it really makes a difference? Is my camera smart enough to determine the best settings for me?  Also, lets say manual settings are better (which I'm sure they are, since they give you greater control). How often are you supposed to adjust your settings? Between every shot, considering they are unique shots? Or does it not matter about the object, but rather the lighting environment? So if I'm in a forest at 2:00 PM on a sunny bright day and I take photos for one hour, should I be constantly adjusting my settings between every unique shot to get the best out of it? Or do I usually just find one setting that works for the environment I'm in?
34892
I have a Canon 40D and like taking macro shots sometimes, so I'm thinking of buying a macro lens. I'd also like the lens to double up as a portrait lens. I'm not a super serious photographer, so my budget is not huge, but I'm considering the Canon EF-S 60mm f2.8 USM Macro Lens and the Canon EF 100mm f2.8 USM Macro Lens. I also note that Sigma and Tamron have lenses in that focal range and price range.  So reasons I can think of to go for the 60mm would be:   smaller and lighter probably a better focal length for portraits bit cheaper   While the 100mm would be better for:   insect photography, as I could keep my distance a little better.   Are there other key factors to consider? Would you recommend one of the third party lenses as particularly good? Are there any of these lenses to avoid?
95512
I've been taking photographs for a while, and have started to think about moving to full-frame. I'm on a very limited budget, but I currently have a good macro lens and am quite willing to buy something like a EF 50mm f/1.8 to start off with. I could possibly stretch my budget as far as a 70-200 f/4 L or 24-105 f/4 L.  Primarily, I'm interested in taking photos of small wildlife like reptiles, amphibians and insects, but I have a healthy interest in landscapes, birds and street photography.   I currently have an EOS 30D, and I love the way the camera handles, especially with the dual control dials. For this reason, I think shooting with a Rebel would be a significant step down.   However, I have seen 5Ds and occasionally 1Ds Mark IIs on ebay for roughly the same price as an EOS 650D. I'm sure these cameras have better IQ than my 30D, since they are pro-level bodies from around the same time, and full-frame besides. The question is, are these cameras now so old that the image quality from them is a substantial step down from current Rebels?   I realise I'll be giving up continuous shooting speed and some amount of low-light performance, and that I'd also need to get an external flash, but besides these, are there any substantial caveats I need to be aware of before I go ahead and take the plunge?
118335
I have been using my dad's old Metz mecablitz 18 B1 flash for a while with my Canon 7D and had no trouble with it, but just received some advice from a friend that using old flashes can fry the camera. Is this true? And if so, is there a safe way to use it (I'm trying to avoid having to buy a new flash – but also would like not to destroy my camera). The flash takes 3 x AA batteries and has a single hotshoe connection.