July 30, 2014, 03:22:03 AM

Show Posts

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.


Messages - Julie G.

Pages: 1 [2]
16
Lenses / Re: "Affordable" telephoto lens for wildlife
« on: November 21, 2012, 06:38:56 AM »
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

You can use either the 1.4x or 2x with the 300/4, technically.  But with the 2x, you have a 600mm f/8 lens - that means no AF on your 5DII (1-series bodies can AF with an f/8 combo, the 5DIII will be able to next April, assuming the firmware is released on schedule).  The 300/4 will take a bigger IQ hit with the 2x.

Thanks for the info! I think the 300mm alone will be enough for me, maybe a 1.4x if I feel the need for longer focal length or just putting it on my 50D. The 400 F5.6 could be an option, but it lacks IS. But this is a dilemma for the future (just bought a used 85L so I'll have to start saving up again :P)

17
Lenses / Re: "Affordable" telephoto lens for wildlife
« on: November 21, 2012, 05:13:57 AM »
If I may squeeze in a question: How's the Canon EF 300mm F4L IS USM with the 1.4X III or 2.0X III extenders?

Yes that may be a dream, but its dangerous to think about toys like this one. but maybe half way between would be a used 300 2.8 is i with a 2x converter. you have a 2.8 lens in bad light, great AF at 2.8, and e good 600 5.6 but for this you need a good tripod, a really good one. Compared to a 600 ii its really affordable, and anyway better than every consumer telezoom.

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

18
Lenses / Re: "Affordable" telephoto lens for wildlife
« on: November 21, 2012, 03:57:58 AM »
If I may squeeze in a question: How's the Canon EF 300mm F4L IS USM with the 1.4X III or 2.0X III extenders?

19
Lenses / Re: 24-70 or 70-200??
« on: November 21, 2012, 03:50:41 AM »
You can't compare them and the decision comes down to what that person needs: wide/normal or tele. So it's a personal choice. But I'm guessing he/she want's both, but right now he/she can only buy one of them.

20
Lenses / Re: 24-70 or 70-200??
« on: November 21, 2012, 02:27:20 AM »
I would go for the 70-200 because I don't like the 24-70 (soft at 2.8!). Just sold mine and bought the 35L, couldn't be happier.

I have the cheap 70-200 F4 NON IS and I love it, it's great for sports, nature, portraits. I would like the 2.8 IS II, but it's not my first priority (might buy the 135L instead). But it all comes down to what you want to shoot, something wide like landscape and group portraits or something with a bit tighter view to isolate a subject for portraits, sports, nature.

21
Lenses / Re: Help me choose a lens
« on: November 21, 2012, 02:09:29 AM »
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.

Pages: 1 [2]