New Equipment

[rpcrowe]

Sandy wrote...
"Have I justified why I'd like new equipment?"
IMO, just wanting new equipment is enough to justify it as long as your finances will bear the burden.
The only problem as I see it, with buying new equipment is when you are expecting that new equipment to drastically change the quality of your images.
Many folks shooting with crop cameras expect that their images will suddenly become "Ansel Adams - like" with the purchase of a full frame camera. This doesn't normally happen. A person shooting good to very good imagery with a entry level crop camera, may see an improvement if they turn to full frame. Since much of the quality of imagery is due to the photographer's talents, new gear will most often not bring a total renovation of image quality.
However, sometimes the addition of a selective piece of gear will allow the photographer to blossom. Case in point is the collection or really nice macro and close-up images posted by Brian since he acquired his 90mm Tamron Macro lens...
I ejuoy shooting and also enjoy post processing. I also enjoy most aspects of fishing. I like to use good gear and gear that I am comfortable with in both pursuits. A new fishing reel may not get me more fish but, it may contribute to more enjoyment while I am fishing...

[xpatUSA]

Originally Posted by skitterbug ........

A problem I have with my Rebel is that it doesn't seem to be sealed very well. It tends to draw moisture far quicker than I would expect a camera to do. I go through the stages of acclimating it to colder conditions by putting it on the side enclosed porch area and from there heading outside for winter shots. Before I realize it, I'm trying to get photos and instead of good results, there is a haze developing on my pics. It is frustrating.

I don't understand this one. Doesn't make sense to me. Moisture only comes when the camera is colder as the environment.

I don't understand it either.

If we're talking about surfaces inside the camera, the temperature of the air inside will equalize to the outside after a while - no matter how fast the camera is moved from here to there. Your Mollier chart will tell you if condensation will occur or not - and speed of camera movement will not be found on that chart, just as it is not found on my psychrometric chart.

Let's say that the camera/lens internal air started with a water content of 0.01 g/g of dry air: at 20 deg C (dry bulb) - that would be 70% RH, not unreasonable for an inside room.

Any surface inside the camera that falls thereafter to less than the dew-point for that water content (14 deg C) will start to collect condensation. Any lower temperature will collect even more condensation. For example, at 4 deg C inside, half of the original water content will be on some surface somewhere - provided that the camera/lens is hermetically sealed, although we know that it is not.

So, how does a lens on a camera magically "de-fog" just by taking it slowly outside and then leaving it sitting there for "a while"?

I know they do, just wanna know how . . .

[skitterbug]

With all the information you provided and the additional answers since then, I think I can be more specific. This is a list of what I would do, but there are many choices, and it might not be the right answer for you. I'm treating $2500 as a fixed amount, so any additional $$ you spend on one piece of equipment is something else you have to forgo.

I'm definitely interested in the direction you would head. And you are correct, I do have a bit more resource than I listed but I thought the $2500 a good place to start and stick fairly close to that amount if I could.

Before listing things, Manfred beat me to the keyboard: a more expensive camera will not be any less susceptible to condensation. It may be (depending on your selection) better sealed against moisture entering the camera, e.g., during rain.

Guess I had moisture problem totally wrong and have many replies setting me straight about how it develops. I'm going to be even more careful now about how to acclimate my camera to outside work and what I do with it coming back inside. Manfred gave some dtailed info about better practices that I can follow so perhaps I can develop a better system using the Rebel since it is my "practice and learning" camera.

1. You say you are keeping the Rebel. For me, that would end the discussion about brand. It makes no sense to own two cameras that can't share lenses and a flash.

2. Given what you wrote, I would stick with a crop sensor. You won't get enough advantages from FF to outweigh the disadvantages. (When I wrote about printing, I really meant "large". I print a good bit at 13 x 19, and I doubt you would be able to tell which are crop-camera photos.)

I'd start by comparing the features of the xxD series (70D, 77D) to the 7D II. They differ in build and controls, as well as price. I won't try to get into that.

It does seem to be a better choice to stick with Canon so long as Canon continues to be compatible with their gear.
The ability to print probably would not be a huge issue for me. Since getting the Rebel, I've made it my habit to use RAW format for pics. I figured that the more data I had to work with the better off I would be.

With respect to Dave's question about lenses: all Canon EF-S and EF lenses work on Canon crop-sensor cameras, without exception. The limitation is solely that EF-S lenses won't work on FF. I should only crop for years, and one of my favorite lenses then (and now, for that matter) is the 70-200 f/4 IS, which is an EF (full frame) lens.

I'm glad to know this. It means I can get new and still fall back to the lenses that I currently have.

3. You mentioned that one of your interests is shots of your grandkids. Mine as well. For that, I consider a bounce-capable flash to be essential. I have used Canon 430 EXII flashes for years, but there are some good off brands as well. Ideally, spend $30 or so and add a bounce card, like a Demb flip-it. This is a discussion for another thread, but I would take the cost of a flash right off the top in deciding how much you can spend on other things.

4. Given your budget, I would buy refurbished gear. Canon won't refurbish gear unless they can bring it to near-new condition, and they guarantee all of it. I would have to check, but I believe they have extended the warranty from 90 days to 1 year, at least on some equipment. I am including lenses as well as bodies. My most used lens is an EF 24-105 f/4 that I bought as a refurb 3 or 4 years ago. It's been flawless. I would avoid used gear unless you know who is selling it or you get a warranty, as you would from some vendors (e.g., Adorama and I think B&H and KEH, the largest vendor of used gear). I generally opt for refurbs when I don't buy new, sometimes waiting for a Canon sale.

Looking through my digital pics, I do tend to have grand-kids as a large part of my efforts. We haven't traveled much and
landscapes here are ho hum. Grand-kids provide amusement trying to get decent pics of them! Lighting has always been an issue while trying to get photos inside of our home. There is either too much light blazing through the windows or not enough because of the lateness of the day. Adding a good light system should probably become a priority but I can't stage the situations. All kids' photos are spontaneous.

The P52 was an exercise to learn how to use the camera better so for that project, I chose to take various different sorts of shots that I may not normally do. You will note that I've only included a few pics of kids because I am old fashioned and don't trust the web much.

5. You need to think about lenses, which is a big reason not to buy a new body--to save money for other stuff. Your post suggests three ways to go, but you will probably need to pick one: a macro lens, a faster lens for indoor candids of kids, and a longer and better telephoto. The last is the most expensive. Re the second: If you are going to do candids with flash, a fixed aperture lens is really preferable, and you need something that stays no slower than f/4. I rarely use wider apertures for that purpose because at f/2.8, it's very hard to keep a moving grandkid properly in focus.

With the encouragement to check out refurbished, I'll take a look and see what I'd be comfortable to do. I appreciate the info about what lenses may fit my needs. Currently, I try flipping from 55-250mm to 18-55mm based on distance/conditions from the kids and their activities. It is always a guess as to what situations will develop when I am around them!

Thank you for a detailed reply. I appreciate your thoughts very much.

[Manfred M]

So, how does a lens on a camera magically "de-fog" just by taking it slowly outside and then leaving it sitting there for "a while"?

Sublimation

[xpatUSA]

Sublimation

Sublimation?

Bad guess, Manfred, sorry (or a good wind-up ).

"Sublimation: the phase transition of a substance directly from the solid to the gas phase without passing through the intermediate liquid phase. Sublimation is an endothermic process that occurs at temperatures and pressures below a substance's triple point in its phase diagram."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublim...e_diagrams.svg

I was talking about temperatures well above the triple point of water and certainly at average atmospheric pressure and not about ice inside the camera/lens.

[skitterbug]

I don't see anywhere that you have said exactly what gear you have, apart from the fact that you have a Rebel and kit lenses, and I would be interested to know. When I chose Canon I did so because of the glass - they have (as I understand it) the largest range of lenses available from one manufacturer. However one other point that you made also was of interest: that you are taking photos of grand children. From that I assume that your are in your "mature years" and one of the issues of ageing (as I have discovered) is that we find it difficult to carry heavy gear around with us for long periods - loss of muscle mass and injuries take their toll. I don't know if that applies to you. I have found myself shooting with the Canon EOS M5 and the EF-M series lenses quite a lot lately. Yep, they can be considered a bit on the slow side, but the images are good from the units I have and they take any flash as required - the M5 has a built-in flash. Not only did I save weight, but volume as well. Not only is the M series less "in your face", but I can fit two M bodies, along with 4 lenses in the same space I would carry one body and two lenses in the DSLR range. I would suggest having a look at the EOS M-5, along with the 18-150mm lens, which is a good general purpose lens. If you REALLY want to use your kit lenses you can get a 3rd party lens adapter and use ANY Canon lens with the M-series bodies.

Sorry about not specifying what equipment I had. It is in my signature line but maybe not everyone can see that info. I have EOS Rebel T3i with EF-S18-55, EF-S55-250/4-5.6IS II lenses. I added a wide angle lens for experimentation - Tokina SD 11-16 F2.8 (IF) DX but I haven't used it very much.

You are right! I'm "aged" <LOL> so weight of equipment will make a difference as the years roll on.

I think I need to make a list with the recommendations to keep my options in order. The thing about the Rebel kit is that I started with it in 2012 because my older Sony digital DSCS75 eventually developed a faulty CCD and by the time it happened, Sony had already stopped repairing this product. (I wasn't very happy about that).
I will keep the Rebel because it still works. I'm not into using Ebay or online selling. In reality, my current gear probably wouldn't net me much in return profits anyway. Eventually, if I did start leaving it for my new gear, I'm certain one of the grand kids may be glad to have it (maybe).

So a list is in order! And I'll put your good suggestions on it too. Thanks for commenting!

[DanK]

Adding a good light system should probably become a priority but I can't stage the situations. All kids' photos are spontaneous.

Mine are all candids. that's why I suggested a flash and bounce card. My standard rig for grandkids is this:



although sometimes I use a 70-200 to allow greater distance. Note that the bounce card is mounted on the side of the flash; this allows me to turn the flash toward the ceiling when I shoot in portrait orientation.

As a starting point, set the camera for manual mode, f/4.0, 1/60 sec., ISO 400, flash in full auto. The reason for the ISO is to allow more ambient light. If there is a lot of natural light, I just use AWB as a starting point, but since you are shooting raw, it is trivial to fix the WB in post if you need to. You can always shoot an image with a whiBal card or similar to get you an idea how to set a neutral WB for a given set. These settings aren't always right--for example, in particular if there is a lot of ambient light you can get motion blur of things like eyelashes--but it works a good 80% of the time, and it is easy to change on the fly. I have this set as one of the custom settings on my camera, so I can just select that setting and have all the other settings put into place.

[Manfred M]

Sublimation?

Bad guess, Manfred, sorry.

"Sublimation: the phase transition of a substance directly from the solid to the gas phase without passing through the intermediate liquid phase. Sublimation is an endothermic process that occurs at temperatures and pressures below a substance's triple point in its phase diagram."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublim...e_diagrams.svg

I was talking about temperatures well above the triple point of water and certainly at average atmospheric pressure.

Don't forget pressure, when discussing the triple point, is the partial pressure of gaseous water, not the atmospheric pressure. Sublimation does occur at around or below the freezing point of water at atmospheric pressure.

In my part of the world, we see sublimation in action all winter long as snow, hidden in shaded areas disappears in spite of the temperature never getting about 0C / 32F. Sublimation is what is happening to make the snow disappear.

[xpatUSA]

Don't forget pressure, when discussing the triple point, is the partial pressure of gaseous water, not the atmospheric pressure. Sublimation does occur at around or below the freezing point of water at atmospheric pressure.

I did wonder about that, not that we're actually talking about lenses being iced-up inside . .

So, in this diagram, "pressure" can't be atmospheric . .




I mean, at 1 atm, 100 deg C "ambient" temperature would be a bit warm, even for heat-loving me.

Thanks for the clarification, BTW.

In my part of the world, we see sublimation in action all winter long as snow, hidden in shaded areas disappears in spite of the temperature never getting about 0C / 32F. Sublimation is what is happening to make the snow disappear.

We see it down here too, usually after a Canadian ice-storm, complete with falling tree-limbs . .

You guys need to stop doing that (sending what we call "Canadian Air" down here) . . .

[skitterbug]

We see it down here too, usually after a Canadian ice-storm, complete with falling tree-limbs . .

You guys need to stop doing that (sending what we call "Canadian Air" down here) . . .

Hi Ted - I'm off my topic for a few minutes because I am very curious why an "Aircraft Technician" from England would retire in Texas of all places?
BTW, thanks for your contributions. I don't fully understand all the technical stuff in them but your posts are interesting to read.

[xpatUSA]

Hi Ted - I'm off my topic for a few minutes because I am very curious why an "Aircraft Technician" from England would retire in Texas of all places?

Joined the RAF as an Aircraft Apprentice in 1956. Leaving after 12 years, I preferred electronics to grease and became a Gas Turbine Controls Engineer ending up as a Consultant to Rolls-Royce in Mt. Vernon, OH. I had already bought property near Bellville, TX while working in Houston, so that's where I retired to.

[skitterbug]

Thanks Ted - my curiosity is solved! One thing accomplished but I still have a myriad of stuff to consider! So back to my spread sheet....
Keep warm! And Merry Christmas to you!

[Manfred M]

I did wonder about that, not that we're actually talking about lenses being iced-up inside . .

Take a camera outside in the cold after having put on a lens cap that traps moist air between it and the front element of the lens. Take camera for a long walk before removing the lens hood and after that part of the lens has cooled down to below the freezing point of water. A nice thin layer of haze (i.e. ice) will be all over the surface of the lens element. Blowing on it will only make it worse. Leaving it exposed to the nice, cold air means that the very think layer of ice will sublimate and eventually the lens will become usable again.

I had something similar happen when I left a filter in place and the moisture trapped between the lens and the filter froze onto both glass surfaces.

Winter photography can be challenging if one is not careful.

[george013]

Hi Ted - I'm off my topic for a few minutes because I am very curious why an "Aircraft Technician" from England would retire in Texas of all places?
BTW, thanks for your contributions. I don't fully understand all the technical stuff in them but your posts are interesting to read.

Try to read this one. I just picked an English site. https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/p...lier-d_27.html. Three lines are important for you 1) the temperature, the left vertical 2) the amount of water in the air, the top horizontal and 3) the relative humidity, the curved numbered .10, .20 up to 1.
One example. Inside it's 20C and a relative humidity of 0.5 or 50%. You can read the air contains 0.007Kg water per Kg air. Follow that vertical line down until you cross the 100% relative humidity. You will read now 7C on the left temperature ax. That's when the water will condensate. Play with it.

George

[NorthernFocus]

The topic of photography equipment fogging up comes up fairly frequently. What amuses me is that invariably people have it backward. There is all this caution and procedure for taking the camera from a warm house out into the cold. Then people just walk back in the house with the camera when their done shooting. Completely backwards. Not sure how/where this got started. Maybe some highly read blogger who steers people that way? But what's even more amusing is a bunch of engineers trying to explain it

How about this, which one forms condensation, a hot ceramic cup of tea carried out into the cold? Or a glass of ice tea taken from an air conditioned house outside on a hot day.

[xpatUSA]

Take a camera outside in the cold after having put on a lens cap that traps moist air between it and the front element of the lens. Take camera for a long walk before removing the lens hood and after that part of the lens has cooled down to below the freezing point of water. A nice thin layer of haze (i.e. ice) will be all over the surface of the lens element. Blowing on it will only make it worse. Leaving it exposed to the nice, cold air means that the very think layer of ice will sublimate and eventually the lens will become usable again.

I had something similar happen when I left a filter in place and the moisture trapped between the lens and the filter froze onto both glass surfaces.

Winter photography can be challenging if one is not careful.

George is probably still puzzled, because he gave a conventional response in post #34 with no mention of ice. I am still a bit . . .

Trying to stick to my original question but now including ice inside the lens, and still staying with an hermetically-sealed system:

Air inside the system (camera+lens) starts at 20 deg C and 0.01 kg/kg water content. It is taken outside; as the temperature inside falls, condensation starts at 14 deg C. At about 0 deg C, the condensate freezes and continues to accumulate. Let's continue down to -5 deg C. At this point, the water content of the internal air is 0.0025 kg/kg meaning that 75% of the origin water content is now ice on the inside of the system. Now say that the ice sublimates somehow while the internal temperature remains at -5 deg C.

Where does that water vapor go to in a sealed system and what causes the ice to sublimate?

There's something missing, I think. The change of state? Enthalpy? Latent heat? (wild guesses, sorry).

[NorthernFocus]

...Trying to stick to my original question but now including ice inside the lens, and still staying with an hermetically-sealed system:...

The thermo sounds solid enough. But perhaps that base assumption of a sealed system is in error.

[xpatUSA]

The topic of photography equipment fogging up comes up fairly frequently. What amuses me is that invariably people have it backward. There is all this caution and procedure for taking the camera from a warm house out into the cold. Then people just walk back in the house with the camera when [they're] done shooting. Completely backwards.

Care to explain why, with numbers and credible references?

Not sure how/where this got started. Maybe some highly read blogger who steers people that way? But what's even more amusing is a bunch of engineers trying to explain it

Har-di-har - a bit like astronauts and light bulbs . .

. . glad you find it so amusing while some of us try to make technical sense of the subject at hand.

How about this, which one forms condensation, a hot ceramic cup of tea carried out into the cold? Or a glass of ice tea taken from an air conditioned house outside on a hot day.

We are talking about condensation on the inside of a container, Dan, neither at the interface between hot liquid and cold air nor on the outside of a glass . . a couple of straw men if ever I saw one.

[xpatUSA]

The thermo sounds solid enough. But perhaps that base assumption of a sealed system is in error.

No. It should be obvious to most people that I am simplifying the subject so as to ease calculation, not "assuming" that all cameras/lenses are hermetically sealed.

Someone much cleverer that me could do a calculation which accounts for an unsealed system. How about your good self?

[NorthernFocus]

Care to explain why, with numbers and credible references?

I believe I did provide credible references with the hot and cold tea. But you brought up a valid point that including the tea may have complicated the matter. So for anyone desiring the test the theory simply do the following on a cold winter's day. Simply take an empty glass out of the cupboard in your nice warm house and straight away walk out into the sub-freezing outdoors. Does condensation form on it? No. So why would it do so on a camera? Now leave the glass outside(in a dry place) until it reaches outside temperature. Preferably put a kettle on and have a cup or two of your favorite hot beverage while you wait. Now go grab the glass and bring it back into the toasty warm house straight away. Does it sweat? Then why wouldn't your camera.

No. It should be obvious to most people that I am simplifying the subject so as to ease calculation, not "assuming" that all cameras/lenses are hermetically sealed.

Someone much cleverer that me could do a calculation which accounts for an unsealed system. How about your good self?

It is tempting. But I'm 93 days into recovery from ARS and not willing to give that up for this particular topic.

But you did fail to account for DP in your closed system(and fixed volume) analysis