Messages

1

Lenses / Re: Lens to take to Ireland

« on: December 18, 2012, 12:33:49 AM »

I would grab the 17-40 and 70-200... That is my basic lens setup for weddings. I have tried midrange lenses like the 50mm and just dont enjoy the perspective. and you get the best of both worlds with these two. /UWA to short tele sounds good to me. Most places you will shoot will be either necessity for UWA or necessity of tele.

At least that is what I run into...

Basically the 17-40 covers all landscape, city scape, architecture, or environmental portraits... while the 70-200 is great for portraits...

2

Lenses / Re: what 5 lenses would you want (exclude factors such as buissiness and body)

« on: December 18, 2012, 12:19:04 AM »

15mm 2.8 Fisheye
16-35mm 2.8L II
24mm 1.4L
85mm 1.2L
70-200mm 2.8L IS II

Hopefully One day...

3

Lenses / Re: Landscape Question

« on: August 14, 2012, 12:43:43 PM »

This was shot on 16-35 II at 22 on 50d. I don't see any real issues with an aperture of 22... maybe its just me.

4

Lenses / Re: Environmental Portrait Lens?

« on: August 01, 2012, 11:27:29 PM »

I just got rid of it... I got a 70-200 2.8L IS for it and that is more appropriate for the weddings I have been shooting. But I just booked several portrait sessions and now want wide again... I guess I needed the 16-35 more then I thought...

5

Lenses / Environmental Portrait Lens?

« on: August 01, 2012, 08:31:27 PM »

What lens would be a good environmental portrait lens. I am shooting  Crop Sensor (for the time being) and want a good lens for environmental portraits. I would love to invest in a 35mm 1.4L But just don't see that any time soon.

What would you reccommend?

6

Lenses / Re: Lens upgrade

« on: June 18, 2012, 03:05:59 PM »

You absolutely will not regret it... I thought the same thing when I drop $1000 on my 70-200 f/4L. It was the best idea I have made as far as photography goes. It opened my eyes to another range of Image Quality and made the ammount of keepers increase insanely (if thats a word).

The 24-105 is a GREAT video lens (one of the most popular) and depending on whaat you are photographing it can be a great photo lens too..

You will be head over heels for this lens

7

Lenses / Re: First L Lens or upgrade, looking for advice

« on: June 18, 2012, 01:36:09 PM »

...a wedding is not as easy as simply capturing a few key moments.

C'mon - how hard can it be?  Just set the camera to 'P' mode (that stands for 'Pro' right?) and click away...   

Yes... P=Pro... green is for go...

8

Lenses / Re: What is you wedding kit?

« on: June 17, 2012, 08:01:38 PM »

I recently sold my 70-200 f/4 IS so my 16-35 is my best piece of glass... So I tend to use it alot. I had a wedding yesterday and used two lenses... (16-35 II and 28-135 [for a few closer shots]) I think I need to get a 135mm L and I can shoot an entire wedding with a 16-35 and 135...

I love my 16-35 but I shoot with a crop body and 80% of my shots are at 35...

When I get a FF I am sure I'll need somthing longer (24-70/70-200 probly) but I am happy with the results I get from my 16-35 on Crop.

9

Lenses / Re: EF-S 18-135mm IS STM vs EF 28-135mm IS

« on: June 14, 2012, 04:30:55 PM »

I hardly use my 28-135 any longer it is a backup lens... (havnt had it mounted in a year probly) but was not entirely impressed by the 18-135...


Might be that it is EF-S and I have a lot of reservations about EF-S. (although I am getting FF VERY soon)

I didn't hate the lens so I wont reccommend away from it but the two lens setup seems better anyway. Just my opinion.

Try to find one to borrow or rent... Try it and make ur decision... the 28-135 doesnt sell for much anymore... just too many of them around...

10

Lenses / Re: Thinking of getting one of the older 20-35L or 17-35L

« on: June 14, 2012, 04:25:35 PM »

Cant argue with the 17-40 as long as f/4 is acceptable... Shooting weddings I NEED the 2.8 (about the slowest that would be acceptable). I have heard too much good about the 17-40 to hate on it too much...

Seems to be a war between 16-35 and 17-40 and neither CAN win because the two lenses are for different purposes

11

Lenses / Re: EF-S 18-135mm IS STM vs EF 28-135mm IS

« on: June 14, 2012, 03:42:38 PM »

I have owned a 28-135 (50d Kit) since Jan 2010 and it has been a faithful lens. If you are looking for a wider lens I would reccommend the 17-55mm... no use in buying two lenses that have the same focal range. I have shot with the 60d (18-135 kit) and found very sharp images (good light and little fringing) but saw nothing too impressive. I would still prefer my 28-135 over the 18-135...

12

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Less talking and more shooting

« on: June 11, 2012, 06:33:14 PM »

Or... your like me and have a slow day job that you kill time with... I dont get the opportunity to get out and shoot... Learning gear and talking shop is a way to improve your photography too. I wish I could go to SE Asia and shoot and get my gear dirty but I dont get those chances.

13

Lenses / Re: Advise on TS-E lens for aerial/landscape work

« on: June 09, 2012, 01:36:31 PM »

Hard thing... Lenses are almost ALWAYS preference but I ahve seen many more photographers owning/using the 24 over the 45....

Just my $.02

14

Lenses / Re: Canon 17-40L lens for $500...good deal?

« on: June 09, 2012, 01:33:11 PM »

I almost ALWAYS shoot wide on my 16-35 II... From what i hear the ver II has ALOT less distortion than the Ver I. I shoot on a crop (making this a "normal" lens) and LOVE the results I get... I hear alot of good about the 17-40 and alot of people swear by it.

I now swear by my 16-35II so I would still reccommend this... But would not by any means disagree with those who have posted before me

15

Lenses / Re: Thinking of getting one of the older 20-35L or 17-35L

« on: June 06, 2012, 04:32:54 PM »

I am so happy with my 16-35 II that I dont think i COULD reccommend anything else WA from canon... although I have yet to get my hands on some wide L primes...