« on: February 11, 2013, 04:56:59 AM »
The 5D2 takes 1 CF card
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Compared to the new sigma at 6999 nok/1200$, it felt like a good deal.
The new sigma is $899!
I'd recommend the 35L, tried on a 60D and it was brilliant. 50L works great for parties, portraits and such.
I'd wait until the sigma gets more reviews.
Get the king of creamy creaminess; the creamy bokehlicious 50mm 1.2...Won't that be a bit wide? I mean, you can always get closer, but wont that be a bit impractical?
I can barely understand what you are trying to write? The 300mm 2.8 is way out of my budget, but the F4 is affordable and a good lens. As I've read other places, the 300mm F4 combined with a 1.4x extender will work ok, but might not work with the 2.0x? I have a 5D Mark II
I am sorry if i expressedm me unprecisely. I speek from my own expierience, we were in south africa for wildlife shooting 4 weeks.
if i look at the costs we had to pay for this trip, 4000$ for the aquisition of the 300 2.8 was not the major expense. this it if course different if you shoot wildlife next to your home if tehre is some (i dont know where you live)
After such a trip you can resell such a lense if it was a one time use, but i kept it because i hope to go additional times. Yes i would have liked to have a 600mm lens, but i didnt bye one for the same reason as you. if you consider a 70-200 ii its already hald the price, then the difference becomes even smaller compared to the costs of the trip.
the disadvantage of the "big" glasses it that you cant leave them allone in third world countries, means you lug the equipment even on a city walk.
If you need more reach than you can afford with your FF camera, maybe a second crop camera is an option, a 50d is available cheaply and has the best AF below a 7d.
because you reported that you tried a 600 ii i assumed that you have a dream and maybe oyou may be working at a solution to make this dream true, in ignorance of your "budget". Thats why i wrote about the 300 2.8 as a more affordable compromise :-)
Why do you need a FF? What are you missing on your current camera? The 60D is a great camera. Especially if you don't have the option of buying and selling used equipment, going FF is going to be expencive.
What I think you are missing is something in the wider end and something in the tele end. You should definitely keep the 50. My experience is that F4 is not fast enough for low light indoor photos. But again I live in Norway, and I'm guessing Brazil is a bit lighter
1. You can go for the 17-40 (it's a great value), but you don't have the big aperture
2. Get a wider prime (ex. around 24-35mm) like the Sigma 30mm F1.4 and get the 70-200mm F4L NON-IS. The combo is slightly more expensive, but both are pretty good lenses. The 70-200 is really sharp and the 30mm has a wide aperture.
The 50 you've got is a good portrait lens.
The 60D lacks AFMA. Getting fast primes to match it well is hard. If he is looking to use fast primes, a different body (crop or FF) with AFMA would be important. I did not realize how much sharper my lenses were until I switched to a body that had AFMA. It mattered with f/2.8 lenses and it definitely matters more with f/1.2 or f/1.4 lenses.