Miscellaneous Photography Thread
05-01-2006, 02:41 PM
#121
VERTEX Army CEO
Thread Starter
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 7,408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Need some advice from the gurus up in here...
So I'm thinking of getting a new lens right now since I'm not satisfied with 18-55mm kit lens (AF is sloow & very soft. it's a hit or miss w/ this lens). So I'm thinking of the following options:
Option 1:
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Lens = apprx. $1100.
Good Range (indoor/outdoor), Great Reviews (sharp images), f/2.8
Heavy/Size, Price
Option 2:
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Lens = apprx. $300
Great Reviews (sharp images), Light-Weight/Size, f/1.4
Limited Range/Non-telephoto (might be awkward indoors/small areas & an inconvenience w/ no zoom)
What would you do in my shoes knowing what you know now?
Option 1:
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Lens = apprx. $1100.
Good Range (indoor/outdoor), Great Reviews (sharp images), f/2.8 Heavy/Size, PriceOption 2:
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Lens = apprx. $300
Great Reviews (sharp images), Light-Weight/Size, f/1.4 Limited Range/Non-telephoto (might be awkward indoors/small areas & an inconvenience w/ no zoom)What would you do in my shoes knowing what you know now?
05-01-2006, 03:30 PM
#122
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GTNPU Z
So I'm thinking of getting a new lens right now since I'm not satisfied with 18-55mm kit lens (AF is sloow & very soft. it's a hit or miss w/ this lens). So I'm thinking of the following options:
Option 1:
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Lens = apprx. $1100.
Good Range (indoor/outdoor), Great Reviews (sharp images), f/2.8
Heavy/Size, Price
Option 2:
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Lens = apprx. $300
Great Reviews (sharp images), Light-Weight/Size, f/1.4
Limited Range/Non-telephoto (might be awkward indoors/small areas & an inconvenience w/ no zoom)
What would you do in my shoes knowing what you know now?
Option 1:
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Lens = apprx. $1100.
Good Range (indoor/outdoor), Great Reviews (sharp images), f/2.8 Heavy/Size, PriceOption 2:
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Lens = apprx. $300
Great Reviews (sharp images), Light-Weight/Size, f/1.4 Limited Range/Non-telephoto (might be awkward indoors/small areas & an inconvenience w/ no zoom)What would you do in my shoes knowing what you know now?
05-01-2006, 08:43 PM
#124
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 4,801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can get the 50 f/1.4 and either the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 or the Tamron 28-70 f/2.8 instead of the Canon L. Look into the 17-XX range, too. I find myself wanting a little more on the wide side sometimes.
05-01-2006, 09:07 PM
#125
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 XR Di is 1/3 the price of the 24-70 f/2.8L but is capable of providing great color/contrast/sharpness. The Canon has the edge on the AF speed and the quietness nature of the AF, but the Tamron isn't too bad for $330 (after MIR). The Canon is also weather sealed, but this is only useful if you use a 1D series body.
That being said, I use the Tamron as my all purpose lens and pocketed the difference and used it towards a Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS.
That being said, I use the Tamron as my all purpose lens and pocketed the difference and used it towards a Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS.
05-01-2006, 09:28 PM
#127
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do mostly automotive photography but there's plenty of cars in this thread... this is my first attempt at wildlife so it's all new to me.
Wildlife shots are with a Canon 10D, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, B+W circular polarizer, settings varied.
The Lotus Esprit wheel shot is with a Canon 350D, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, B+W UV (010) filter (won't make any difference to the image quality).
Wildlife shots are with a Canon 10D, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, B+W circular polarizer, settings varied.
The Lotus Esprit wheel shot is with a Canon 350D, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, B+W UV (010) filter (won't make any difference to the image quality).
05-01-2006, 09:30 PM
#128
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by stu46
Damn, f/2.8L IS. thought you were going to say the f/4L....lol
but for $600 new, $500 used, the f/4.0 is great bargain for outdoor use (ie drag racing, portrait shots, etc).
05-01-2006, 09:34 PM
#129
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 4,801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gr?
The f/4.0 won't cut it for indoor sports photography (ie volleyball, basketball) unless I'm shooting at ISO 3200 but for $600 new, $500 used, the f/4.0 is great bargain for outdoor use (ie drag racing, portrait shots, etc).
but for $600 new, $500 used, the f/4.0 is great bargain for outdoor use (ie drag racing, portrait shots, etc).The f4L is a bargin of a lens considering it's an L
05-01-2006, 10:06 PM
#130
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by stu46
I just started shooting indoors. I'm a little disapointed in my Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, but nothing a flash can't fix. I got much better pics with the Canon 50 f/1.8 but got a little cramped at times.
The f4L is a bargin of a lens considering it's an L
The f4L is a bargin of a lens considering it's an L
The first time I tested out my f/2.8L IS indoors I was amazed at how fast *and* quiet the USM is. It's practically instant.
05-01-2006, 10:19 PM
#131
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 4,801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has nothing to do with Sigma vs Canon. I thought the 2.8 was going to be quick enough, but it wasn't. Even on my 50 f/1.8, I shot at 1.8 and 2.0. Taking pictures of kids in Chuck-E-Cheese with the low light was a little difficult. Got me to thinking of trading the Sigma for a prime. Somewhere in the 30-35mm f/1.4 range.
The f/2.8L IS is on my dream list. Along with a 100 Macro and UWA. Maybe I'll wait a while to check out the 17-55 f/2.8 IS that just came out.
The f/2.8L IS is on my dream list. Along with a 100 Macro and UWA. Maybe I'll wait a while to check out the 17-55 f/2.8 IS that just came out.
05-01-2006, 10:53 PM
#132
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by stu46
It has nothing to do with Sigma vs Canon. I thought the 2.8 was going to be quick enough, but it wasn't. Even on my 50 f/1.8, I shot at 1.8 and 2.0. Taking pictures of kids in Chuck-E-Cheese with the low light was a little difficult. Got me to thinking of trading the Sigma for a prime. Somewhere in the 30-35mm f/1.4 range.
The f/2.8L IS is on my dream list. Along with a 100 Macro and UWA. Maybe I'll wait a while to check out the 17-55 f/2.8 IS that just came out.
The f/2.8L IS is on my dream list. Along with a 100 Macro and UWA. Maybe I'll wait a while to check out the 17-55 f/2.8 IS that just came out.
The 17-55 is EF-S so if you ever plan on upgrading to a 1D series body... I would rather go with the Tamron 17-50 but I plan on getting a 1D MKII in the fall when the prices drop when the new 1D series body is released. The 1D MKII should drop to $2000-2200 used.
05-05-2006, 09:46 AM
#136
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by cyberz350
Cool shots GTNPU Z
It looks like you may have sharpened em up a bit in photoshop. I did the same in the beginning because I wasn't satisfied with the sharpness I was getting out of the 18-55mm kit lens. Try changing the f stop to f/8-f/11 or so. You'll should notice a difference. I didn't need to sharpen these pics, they were both taken at f/8.
It looks like you may have sharpened em up a bit in photoshop. I did the same in the beginning because I wasn't satisfied with the sharpness I was getting out of the 18-55mm kit lens. Try changing the f stop to f/8-f/11 or so. You'll should notice a difference. I didn't need to sharpen these pics, they were both taken at f/8.
05-05-2006, 09:50 AM
#137
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by cyberz350
Yea, with primes you actually have to move further back or get closer to compose a shot. I just bought the Canon 50mm f/1.4 for about $340. Great lens and a decent price. I love the sharpness and the bokeh. Here's a couple shots I took with it.
f/2.0
f/2.0
05-06-2006, 06:35 PM
#138
Registered User
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Performance LAND
Posts: 1,731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Photoshot
Welp guys finaly had time to do a photoshot with TwoAcesProduction heres some quick samples MORE TO COME
Last edited by nissansource; 05-06-2006 at 07:46 PM.
05-07-2006, 11:00 PM
#140
Registered User
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: .
Posts: 9,482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just found this thread, and WOW, nice pics. My girlfriend was a photographer in the military, and I'd like to get her set up with a nice camera. Hopefully by the end of this year I'll be able to contribute something when we decide to go with Nikon/Canon.
By the way, those Enzo shots that were posted earlier were absolutely breathtaking. I think they're the best photos of that car I've ever seen. Nice!
By the way, those Enzo shots that were posted earlier were absolutely breathtaking. I think they're the best photos of that car I've ever seen. Nice!
