Messages

1

Lenses / Re: Please help me decide between the EF 300 f/4 L and the EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 L

« on: December 14, 2012, 04:56:13 PM »

I really enjoyed using the 300mm f4L. It has quick accurate focusing and is very sharp. The 1.4xII (not III) is a perfect companion with it. I purchased both items used for less than the cost of the 300 new.

Go for the prime, you will not be disappointed

2

Lenses / Re: 50mm upgrade or 85mm coverage?

« on: December 12, 2012, 02:43:02 PM »

I have the 24L, 50L, and 135L and have pondered getting an 85 or the 100 Macro. Every time I shoot with the 135L, I say, :I love this lens" and doubt if I would use either of the other. Every time I shoot with the 50L, I am so very satisfied, I also doubt I would take out the 85 instead.

I would love to have the 35L, 85L and 200L to technically fill the voids of my current kit, but I have never had a situation yet where the lenses I have left me wanting something more/different.

3

Lenses / Re: Best lenses for canon 5D mark iii or 6D

« on: December 07, 2012, 10:02:05 AM »

Why don't you begin with buying a kit with the excellent EF 24-105 mm? Take say 1000 photographs in different situations, indoors and outdoors, then produce a statistical overview of the focal distances you have used in practice.

Best advice so far.

You will very quickly be able to discern whether you need more speed, longer reach (telephoto), or wider angle. Unless you are rebuilding a previous kit of lenses where you know exactly what you want, buying everyting at once will likely lead to an unnecessary or inappropriate selection.

4

Lenses / Re: HELP: Canon 135mm F/2.0L Ultrasonic sound vs Other Ultrasonic sound

« on: December 04, 2012, 03:48:00 PM »

I do not have either of the 2 lenses you are comparing to the 135, but I do have a 135L and it is nearly silent unless I have a very difficult focusing situation (bad lighting or difficult background). My 24L and 50L are also nearly silent.

It may be the size of the glass in the 135L compared with the 50 and 24 you have. The focusing system is moving a lot more glass in the 135 than the others.

The noisiest lens I ever had was the 300mm f4L; often sounded like it was broken inside.

5

Lenses / Re: 50D->5D3 upgrade, what to do with my lenses?!

« on: December 03, 2012, 07:07:54 PM »

As many have already sad, the lenses you have will work just fine with a 5D3.

The thing you will notice is the change is useable focal length. Your 24-70 is going to seem a lot wider and your 70-200 will have you feeling like you need more reach.

I added a 300mm after getting the 5D3.

6

Lenses / Re: Don't want to make a rookie mistake

« on: November 27, 2012, 10:38:38 AM »

I disagree with the recommendation for the 135 f/2 - excellent lens, but on a crop it will be a bit long on occasion and it would burn up your entire budget.  Instead ...

- Purchase the EF 85 f/1.8 ($359 today at B&H) - this will cover most of your fast lens indoor needs, and has excellent focus, and is very sharp.  The AF will keep up with your sports and give you a fast lens for low light events like choir concerts where you might need the range.
- Purchase the EF 70-200 f/4L (non IS) $629 today at B&H.  For outdoor sports, wildlife, etc.  You don't need IS for sports because your shutter speed will need to be approx 1/500 and at that point IS isn't going to add value.  This is one of the best value L lenses and one of the sharpest 70-200 lenses.

This is sound advice based on your budget, experience and camera body.

The 85mm on a Crop Sensor body works very well for Basketball, Volleyball, etc. On a Full Frame Camera I have found the 135 f2 the better choice.

The 70-200 f4L is a very good lens and will provide much improved clarity and sharpness and speed over the 55-250 (especially at the long end).

From the DigitalPicture.com: My recommendation is to get the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM Lens over the 55-250. I think you will appreciate the better image quality as well as the high end physical features - the extra cost is worth it in my opinion. The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens is also a better lens, but less definitively so. Though I don't think the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Lens is great in terms of image quality and features, we can't lose sight of the fact that it is very inexpensive IS tele-zoom Lens. There is a niche for this model. A casual shooter who is happy with their Canon EF-S 18-55mm II or 18-55 IS Lens and needs a tele-zoom for infrequent use could be happy with this lens.

7

Lenses / Re: 135L vs 70-200 IS MK II - real world opinions and experience needed

« on: November 25, 2012, 11:02:04 PM »

Had the 70-200 f2.8 with my Crop Body, bought the 135 f2 when I went to FF. I eventually sold the 70-200, I just wasn't using it as much any more after getting the 5D3. I ended up with a 300 f4 and then the 2.8 after a bit. Love the look and feel of the primes and do not miss the zoom.

8

Lenses / Re: Kit for travelling around the world for 2 years!

« on: November 16, 2012, 09:17:18 PM »

Keep in mind on the 450D your wide zoom had an effective focal length of 28-135 and your tele zoom 85-400.

Your new 24-105 covers the wide end nicely and the 100-400 will adequately extend your reach to what you have been familiar with. Take time to consider the 70-300L before committing to the 100-400.

If you need macro, the 100L is a great lens for handheld macro shooting. The 180L is also worth your consideration (although the 100L is the one on my Christmas list).

9

Lenses / Re: 135mm L

« on: November 14, 2012, 05:28:48 PM »

For me the 135 f2 replaced my 70-200

10

Lenses / Re: Best Lens for photographing children

« on: November 14, 2012, 02:21:43 PM »

Depending on body (Crop vs FF) even the 85 could be long inside.

A 50mm on a crop is an excellent focal length for your intended shooting and offers several options for max aperture (1.2, 1.4, 1..

11

Lenses / Re: Should I get 1.4x III or 2.0xIII extender - please help.

« on: November 12, 2012, 06:20:56 PM »

200mm will be to short for BIF

Luke was saying he wanted the 1.4x for his 135 until he gets a 300 in the future

The 1.4x on the 135 will disappoint compared to the 200 2.8L II

12

Lenses / Re: Should I get 1.4x III or 2.0xIII extender - please help.

« on: November 11, 2012, 11:20:17 PM »

Honestly, if the 300 f2.8 II is in the future, I suggest you consider the 200 f2.8 II in the present rather than the TC. If/when you get the 300, then look at the TC you think will work best with the 300 and your shooting needs.

Using a 1.4x to get a 189mm f3.5 out of the 135 f2 is really not the best solution on a short focal length telephoto lens.

13

Lenses / Re: Lens recommendation -newborn shoot

« on: November 05, 2012, 06:00:28 PM »

Your 85 f1.8 should be very good.

A 100 f2.8L Macro will be stunning, especially with the 5D3.

14

Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70 II Or Primes Particularly 50MM 1.2L

« on: November 04, 2012, 08:07:55 PM »

I understand the need to raise funds for the zoom, but at the loss of the 24LII?!? That I think is a mistake. Being that the cost of the new 24-70 is steep, you may want to try it before you buy it.

15

Lenses / Re: Canon 24-70 II Or Primes Particularly 50MM 1.2L

« on: November 04, 2012, 07:39:10 AM »

I sold all my zooms after changing to FF and adding the 50L to my kit.

You didn't say what body you are using but if the lenses you listed are all L glass, the 24-70II will probably not impress you as much as you think it might, other than convenience.