Messages

181

Lenses / Re: 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 vs 17-40mm f/4L for a crop camera

« on: February 19, 2012, 03:17:14 AM »

Go for the 15-85mm if you're sure you'll not go FF. It's a great lens - from an IQ perspective most copies of the 15-85mm are very sharp, produce contrasty / well coloured images. You won't notice an IQ deficiency when using the 15-85mm in comparison with the 17-40.

The 15-85mm has a wider zoom range than the 17-40. I'd find the 40mm tele end quite limiting.  Also, the 2mm on the wide end are very useful. The 15-85mm has IS, whereas the 17-40mm doesn't. Both have USM / FTM. I use the 15-85mm on my 7D as my main lens, and yes, I have and use L lenses, but the 15-85mm is up there in image quality with many L zooms.

The main thing the 17-40mm has for it, is a slightly superior build quality (and of course, FF compatibiility). The 17-40L is constant aperture, but to me (and many users) that's not a big issue, especially as at 40mm the 15-85mm has just gone from f4.5 to f5.0 (which isn't much 'slower' than f4).  So for me it's a no brainer.

All the best.

Paul

182

Lenses / Re: 70-300L anyone?

« on: February 17, 2012, 01:40:32 PM »

I have this lens, and it's sharp sharp sharp, has great contrast & colour. Is built like a tank. Is actually very useable as a walk-around, hand-holdable lens. It's max aperture is very close to the 70-200mm f/4 lenses at same focal lengths, PLUS you get an extra 100mm.

Definitely worth buying if you want a very convenient, telezoom that can high image quality, and don't need to use it for sports in low light.

Paul

183

Lenses / Re: The future of the EF-s 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM

« on: February 14, 2012, 05:45:33 PM »

There are many happy users of the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens.  It can produce great photos in the hands of the right person - as can a lot of other lenses...    The constant f2.8 is great for low light work, and to get a decent amount of subject isolation / background blur at the tele end.

I don't believe an update for the 17-55mm will be coming anytime soon though. One of the major reasons that I have for this, is that Canon released the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM a few years ago, ie a few years after the 17-55.

While the 15-85mm isn't a constant f2.8 lens, it does improve on a few other aspects of the 17-55mm:

• better flare control
• 2mm more on the wide end
• 30mm more on the tele end
• better IS (4 stops)

Some people argue the 15-85mm build quality is slightly better than the 17-55mm... but I'd say it's quite close.

Both lenses (17-55mm and 15-85mm) are very sharp, have good contrast, make use of Canon's true USM focus and benefit from IS (3 & 4 stops respectively). So they are great 'kit lenses', which each meeting differing photographer's needs.  (The 15-85mm meets my needs much better in a 'kit lens' - eg when I want a fast lens, it should be at least f/1..   

So while there might be a 17-55mm II sometime in the future, I expect that is probably around 4 or 5 years away at least..... In the meantime I think Canon will be producing lenses to complement it (eg more dedicated / primes lenses).

I also believe that it's very hard to compare an EF-S lens with an 'equivalent' EF (ie FF compatible) lens, due to the differing nature of focal length, DOF, etc - although f2.8 (on APS-C) will always let in more light than f4 (on FF) even if the background / blur isn't as affected as much. Then there is the whole argument about "difference in build quality between an L, the new prosumer lenses, older 'gold ring' lenses, etc, etc,".  I won't even go there... 

Best wishes.... and happy photographing....   

Paul

184

Lenses / Re: EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro vs. EF-S 60 f/2.8 Macro ?

« on: February 14, 2012, 05:05:04 PM »

The 100mm makes a good casual portrait / subject isolation lens for me too. The fast USM focus (especially on my 7D) is great. Some people say it focusses slow, but not mine!

I think the speed of the 100mm non-L is ok, too - but it takes about two seconds to focus completely from macro to infinity and back. In comparison to modern lenses (try the 17-55, 15-85, ...) this is slow like molasses.

Thanks Marsu42 for your reply to my comments above. 

You're right that it might take two seconds if the focus is at the MFD (1:1) focus setting and the (portrait) subject is eg 3 metres away (in a poor contrast setting) and it cycles from macro to infinity and back.  But what I mean is the focus is much much faster under 'normal focus composition' for portrait.

That is, if the lens' focus is set at 1 metre, and my (portrait) subject is 3 metres away, it will jump there in about a third to half a second (or less time in good contrast).  That's why I also find the minimal focal distance (MFD) focus limiting switch on the 100mm macro handy.

Some people have reported that even in situations like the above, the Canon 100mm macro USM nonL is slow and their 100mm L is much quicker... but certainly mine isn't slow.  My experience is that my 100mm USM lens's focus speed is very close to other Canon USM lenses when the focus is 'already in non macro settings'.

I have the Canon 15-85mm and the Canon 70-300mm L (perhaps my fastest focusing lenses) - and I also had the Canon 28-135mm and Canon 100-300mm (sold both these recently), and I'm very happy with the focussing speed and accuracy of all my Canon USM lenses.

On the other hand, I sold my Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens a few months ago - the main reason being the focus speed, accuracy and consistency were not up to my standards. I'm waiting for a true (full ring) USM prime from Canon in the 50mm - 60mm range, between f/1.4 - f2.

Cheers all, and thanks again Marsu42. 

Paul

185

Lenses / Re: A Lens Roadmap? [CR1]

« on: February 13, 2012, 05:04:26 AM »

You could consider the Sigma 50 f/1.4 or the 70mm Macro in that case. Or the Canon EF-S 60mm Macro which is a really, really sharp lens!

Maxxevv... I'm unsure if you were writing to me. If you did, thanks (and I'll reply briefly below).

There are too many users with 'inconsistent AF' issues with the Sigma 50 f/1.4.  A review of many 'in the field user sites' (eg FredMiranda, etc) - shows the number of people for whom this is an issue (a significant percentage).

I've also had AF issues with 2 previous Sigma lenses (not the 50mm f/1.4 though).  Not that my 2 Sigma lenses didn't work 'at all' - but there is enough inconsistency that I wouldn't want to chance it on the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 at this stage. I know I could buy a lens and there is the possibly of returning it.  My rigorous demands can't be met in a 'test in the shop' environment.  So I will pass on that, though you're right it's a very tempting lens.  But for AF critical applications, I'm going to stick with Canon or buy a lens that is rated by hundreds of users as 'consistent'.

As for the two other lenses you mentioned - the 70mm macro, and the Canon 60mm macro - they are too slow for my needs - as in, they are f/2.8 whereas I require a f/1.8 minimum.  Thanks for your thoughts and comments / reply, though. Appreciated!   

Paul

186

Lenses / Re: A Lens Roadmap? [CR1]

« on: February 12, 2012, 09:08:04 PM »

There are 2 lenses in that CR1 lens roadmap which interest me:

• EF 50 1.8 IS, status “prototype”, has tag “spring 2013″ 
• EF 60 L IS lens tagged “prototype”

I had the 50mm f1.8 but sold it recently as I didn't use it much, and the focus was not consistent or accurate enough for my needs.  Though it performed much better on my 7D than on my 350D, it didn't cut the mustard.  I use my Canon 100mm USM macro for candid portraits, which does well (fast, accurate, consistent focus, and still v good subject isolation).

So I'm on the lookout / in the market for a fast prime around 50mm / 60mm (I don't want to get the 85mm f1.8 - though I'm aware that's a good lens.  The 50mm / 60mm focal length suits my style more, and on my APS-C cameras.

If a new 50mm f1.8 would come out with improved focus (ie true ring USM, with full time manual focussing) - I'd get it (I don't 'need' IS, but that would be a bonus). It would be good if it was relatively inexpensive (ie below $600 Aus) with decent build quality (eg similar to the Canon 100mm non L macro USM, or the Canon 80mm f1.8 USM) - that's good enough for me.

Most importantly, I would need it to have superb IQ wide open (ie sharp, contrast and good bokeh).   

The 60mm L option could be good (if it's a 1.4 that would be even better - but hopefully it wouldn't be HUGE.... I prefer most of my glass to be lighter, where possible). I like the size of the current 50mm f1.4.....  But if the 60mm L would come out, being an L lens, it would understandably probably be 'larger'..... Hmmmm.  Again, I'd like superb IQ wide open and USM focussing. IS would be a 'bonus'.

Let's see!!! Well, there you have my thoughts / hopes regarding the mentioned lens / possible lens roadmap!

Paul

187

Lenses / Re: Next 5D Kit Lens

« on: February 12, 2012, 08:03:45 PM »

I believe that the 24-105L will remain the 'main' kit lens for the next 5D Kits lens (and I voted as such). My take on it, is that 'kit lenses' (even for the 5D level) are 'historically' a more all round lens - and perhaps a bit slower than a 'faster' lens (that's why I see the 24-70 mk II f2.8 as a more 'specialist' lens).

The 24-105L is a well rounded, great lens - and can be used by many FF users to capture quite a variety of beautiful photos, from landscape, to portraits, and various photo genres in between. Ok the 24-105L is not a 'dedicated lens' for those applications, but it can do a number of things 'quite well' - which is why I believe it's a good 'kit lens'.

Of course, some resellers might 'bundle' other lenses, including the 24-70 (mk I old stock or new mk II) with the next 5D.  And others might 'bundle' / reduce the price of a prime with it.   

I don't have a FF camera, but I had 2 x APS-C Canon camera bodies, including the 7D.  I think the 15-85mm should be the 'kit lens' for that camera, but most times it wasn't bundled as such.  I use the 15-85mm as my general 'walk around' lens, and it's focal length and usability (IS, USM, etc) work well - though when I need a specialist application, I'll use one of my other lenses, eg UWA, 100mm USM macro, 70-300mm L, etc.

The 24-105L is the 'most similar' to the 15-85mm for full frame, and has a very good focal range.  I'm interested to read more people's thoughts / takes / perspectives. I have used a 5D, and know that many FF users find the 24-105L their 'go to lens' for many situations.

Cheers, and regards all!   

Paul

188

Lenses / Re: EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro vs. EF-S 60 f/2.8 Macro ?

« on: February 08, 2012, 12:02:33 AM »

Like others have mentioned, the working distance is probably the main differentiating factor between the EF-S 60mm and the EF 100mm.  Also, the 100mm is full frame compatible (not the 60mm).

I've go the Canon 100mm Macro USM (non L) and love it a lot. Very sharp (as is the 60mm macro which I've used).  For most macros I use a tripod, though occasionally I shoot handheld. The L's IS is helpful here, but reported at only about '1-stop' advantage (at macro distances!) from most field reports.

The 100mm makes a good casual portrait / subject isolation lens for me too. The fast USM focus (especially on my 7D) is great. Some people say it focusses slow, but not mine!

All the best.

Paul

189

Lenses / Re: Amateur looking at a Macro, Prime and Walkabout lenses... input please!

« on: February 04, 2012, 06:13:46 AM »

You've been give a lot of good advice already.... Here is my 2 cents worth...   I can also vote for the Canon 100mm USM macro (nonL). It is a very sharp lens, and as most of your macro photography will probably be with a tripod, no need to buy the L (with IS) unless you really need that.  I have the 100mm macro non L and like it a lot (also use it on my 7D as a casual portrait lens, it's fast to focus - though some people state otherwise, one theory that some copies are slower). Also be aware that there is a non USM Canon 100mm macro (which I wouldn't recommend as highly).

I've also had the 28-135mm (as my main walk around on my 350D for some years). I had a good, quite sharp, and reasonably contrasty copy- but I recently sold it - as I bought a Canon 15-85mm USM which is definitely superior in every way, and has a more useful focal range as a walk around.  Regarding telezoom lenses, if I were you I would keep the 70-300mm IS, and sell the 55-250mm. There is just too much overlap between these 2.  A bit over a year ago I bought the 70-300mm IS USM L, whch is the best telezoom for my needs (I don't need a fast telezoom, as I don't do sports, etc). The size and usefulness is great.  Razor sharp and super fast focus too.

Regarding the 50mm primes, I had a 50mm f1.8, which yes could do amazing things, but the focus bugged me. It was noticeably better on my 7D than my 350D, but I ended up selling it, as it didn't cut the mustard for me. Also the bokeh was not quite pleasing enough for what I wanted. I'm waiting for an improved 50mm (I don't want to get the Sigma 50mm f1.4, as there are too many stories of it having focus issues that can vary body to body - though the optical quality is certainly very high).

Paul

190

Landscape / Re: Winter Milky Way Time Lapse - (Canon 5D MK II)

« on: January 12, 2012, 05:13:58 PM »

Awesome video, very well produced Harles99! The music and moving images match very well together.

I can appreciate the patience needed in getting to the final outcome.  Well worth it!

Thanks for sharing.

Paul

191

Site Information / Re: The Unofficial Canon Rumors FAQ

« on: January 10, 2012, 09:22:05 PM »

Absolutely funny!      The OP is way cool... and the best laugh I've read from online humour in a while.  Well done WildBill   

I was eating lunch here at work, and almost did a 'neuro-coffee-ism' over my keyboard at some of the Q&As!!   

Neuro... your posts are indeed very much respected by myself (and I expect many others). Cheers.

Applause to you both WildBill & Neuro.
 

Peace

Paul

192

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits

« on: January 10, 2012, 07:36:13 AM »

Wow!!!!   

A true variety of photos that have been posted here.... thanks everyone!! Applause! 

It's so great to see many fantastic quality photos. I love bird photos.

Here is a small contribution from me. I hope you'll enjoy these. 

Paul

193

Lenses / Re: A set of lenses for around the world travel.

« on: December 28, 2011, 08:03:59 AM »

Already much good advice has been given (well done, applause to several folks)   

I have a Canon 7D and have travelled with it already to many places. Whether I go on short term or longer term trips, I've been appreciating taking mainly versatile zoom lenses.

For a full frame (eg Canon 5DmkII) - the Canon 24-105mm makes a lot of sense. I use my Canon 15-85mm lens on my 7D for most of my shots. I also take the 70-300mm as my most common 'second lens' (awesome IQ and very hand-holdable telezoom).

A lot about which lenses, DOES depend on your shooting style.   There are time when I might want ultra wide angle (eg for architecture / some dramatic landscapes) or a fast prime (for eg candid portraits, or low light photography). 

When I went to SE Asia last year, I took along my 'whole kit' (including 2 camera bodies). I'm not sure I'll be doing that again in a hurry - because basically all of the time I had 1 camera with me, and the other in the hotel, and 'extra lenses' did add weight. I have lived 'overseas' for over a decade, and never had anything stolen from me in my life (except a t-shirt left drying on a village fence in remote Romania).

I do back up photos every evening both on a laptop and then on a portable USB powered Gigaone hard-drive / card reader, keeping both separate so there is less risk of 'loosing all' 

Generally when I travel for some tie again, I'll probably take either JUST my 7D with 15-85mm (and no tripod). This is also what I use when I travel interstate to Tasmania (I'm in South Australia) to visit my extended family and friends there for a week or two each year. However if I went on a photographic excursion (eg a 1 day or few day travel specifically to take photos) -then I might take specific lenses (eg a macro too).  For me though, 'less is more' - as it allows me to feel freer, travel with greater ease and 'actually' free up my moving to take more photos when I want, rather than carting a lot of things.

That's just how I've evolved over the years.   

I do hope the OP has a great, wonderful 'around the world' travel (I'm jealous!) -and  we might get to see some of the best of the best photographic outcomes! Best wishes.

Paul

194

Lenses / Re: All Around lenses

« on: December 20, 2011, 07:00:47 PM »

Having read all the posts so far, there is much great advice already offered.

My perspective mirrors that given by some others already - if this is a first DSLR (regardless of age, though probably particularly for a 14 year old) - I'd say that most enjoyment and the best 'learning' could be obtained with 1 lens. My suggestion is to get the Canon 60D with the 15-85mm lens - for very high image quality, wide angle (24mm equivalent) - and still capable of great portraits (in decent light).

Buy a 50mm f1.8 or f1.4 only if really really necessary. I might even suggest taking a tripod instead of more lenses, but that depends on the exact itinerary and travel plans. The convenience of 'just' having a camera with 1 lens attached can often not be underestimated for travel in many situations (and yes, I travel a lot).

Buy a lens hood to protect against flare / snow, etc (you can get a good quality one for about $5 to $10 - including shipping! - from Hong Kong / China). It also offers a bit more dust protection - ie prevents some of the dust from settling on the front element.

The suggestion given by one person to buy a Canon 5DmkII with the 24-105 isn't bad, however as the OP stated that he is on a budget, I would still be inclined to suggest the Canon 60D with 15-85mm instead, which is still very suitable for an Iceland trip.  The 15-85mm performs similarly on a APS-C to the 24-105 on a FF.  (And yes, I've used both).

The 24-105 is superior in build quality, but the 15-85mm is quite good - and the 60D is no slouch either in build quality & functionality (though I do admit that the 5DmkII has superior image quality).

The cost savings by staing with an APS-C (well over $1000) would be worth it unless the OP is SURE he is going 'pro' and requires a FF in the future.  There is so much scope to learn on a 1.6x 'crop sensor' camera - particularly as a first camera coming up from a P&S.

Paul

195

Lenses / Re: All Around lenses

« on: December 20, 2011, 12:38:38 AM »

Many good perspectives have been given already.

I'll just quickly add my 2 cents worth

My favourite 'all round lens' for my 7D body is my Canon 15-85mm USM IS.

What '2nd lens' I take depends on the circumstances. Eg:
1. if for architecture, big sweeping landscapes, would usually be my Sigma 10-20mm EX
2. if for wildlife, my Canon 70-300mm L
3. if for macro (or casual portrait) my Canon 100mm macro USM

Sometimes I even take my Sigma 10-20mm and my Canon 70-300mm L as the 'two lenses'.  I usually don't like walking with more than 2 lenses on me.  1 lens is even better.

When I visited Perth (Western Australia) a few weekends ago, I just took my Canon 15-85mm, and really didn't miss anything I wanted with that.   

Regards

Paul