October 25, 2014, 10:03:16 PM

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 - DJL329

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32
Lenses / Re: why????
« on: July 24, 2011, 10:53:04 AM »
If you consider the fact the widest EF lenses (14mm, 15mm fisheye and 16-35mm) are all f/2.8, not 2.0, and I think you will find your answer.

Contests / Re: Holga Giveaway
« on: July 21, 2011, 12:37:03 AM »
I know I'm not going to win, but...

Lenses / Re: new lens and camerabody
« on: June 28, 2011, 08:06:02 PM »
My doubts are like this...

first buy?
> CANON 7D  [1.035 eur]
> CANON EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM (€999)
>  lighting, tripods, heads...

second buy?
> CANON EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM (€1 250)

third buy
> CANON EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM (€1 199)

please, which could be your opinion

Since you are just starting out and you're ultimate goal is to get the 5D Mark II (or III), then you should consider getting a cheaper body (600D) to start.  Even consider a used or refurbished one, such as the 40D.

Canon Refurbished Lenses:

Canon Refurbished Bodies:

Fred Miranda Buy & Sell Forum (great place to buy used equipment):

Fred Miranda Discussion and Review Forums:


If you're going to be using the ultra-wide angle lens for shooting landscapes (and, therefore, don't need the extra f-stop), consider the 17-40mm f/4L, it's almost as wide and about half the cost (it also takes 77mm filters, instead of 82mm ones).  Another option, is a used 16-35mm Mark I (the original used 77mm filters).

You mentioned you wanted to shoot some sports, so check out the 70-200mm f/4L, instead of the 24-105.  You will double your reach and eliminate the overlap with the ultra-wide.

You could then get a 50mm f/1.4 to fill the gap in between those 2 lenses.  Using a fast prime, like a 50mm  'normal' lens, is a great way to learn exposure (much easier to blur the background) and comes in handy in low-light situations, including portraits.  (I recommend that this should be the first lens that you buy.)

In the end, no one can tell you which is the correct lens to buy.  Read reviews and decide what you want to do with your camera and lens(es).

Finally, remember that a great photo depends more on the skill of the photographer, than the camera and lens.  The camera might set the exposure correctly, but it cannot choose or frame the subject.

Good luck and have fun,


EOS Bodies / Re: BUY 5d MkII now or WAIT for 5d MkIII????
« on: June 11, 2011, 05:20:59 PM »

Just wait for the 5D Mark III to come out ... and then buy my 5D Mark II. ;D


Contests / Re: Blue Crane Digital Giveaway!
« on: May 27, 2011, 07:47:47 PM »
"The End of Winter"

My entry for the "Understanding the Canon Speedlite" DVD.

Lenses / Re: Using EF-S lens on FF body???
« on: May 26, 2011, 07:12:27 PM »
Even if you could, you're still not going to fill up the a full-frame sensor, so why bother risking it?

Lenses / Re: Does anyone know of any adaptors which allow
« on: May 26, 2011, 12:23:17 AM »
If possible I wish try and fit the Canon 10-22mm lens to my new Canon 5Dd markll,
i don"t have any wide lens for my new 5d mark ll, except 85mm1.8,  28-135,
2 days ago i preapered money for buy canon lens 17-40, on the last minute when i searched on the photography forums, i saw some people said this not great lens and have some issue on the edge, and something els,
now i just need one wide canon lens, thanks for any advice

Even if you could mount it, the EF-S 10-22mm will not fill up the sensor on a full-frame dSLR (or 35mm SLR, for that matter), as it is designed for the smaller 1.6x crop sensor.  Lots (most?) of lenses are 'soft in the corners,' but unless you're making large prints, I doubt it will be a big problem.  Don't be a 'pixel peeper' -- worry about your subject and how it's framed.  Besides, if they could make lenses 'perfect,' they wouldn't have to keep designing new ones... ;)

The 17-40mm f/4L is one of Canon's "L" lenses, so it'll be of higher quality than the 10-22mm.  That wide, the only other options for full-frame are the 16-35mm f/2.8L (more expensive, of course) or the 14mm f/2.8L, which is even more expensive.

You could also check out 3rd party lenses, like the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 (also sold under other names, such as Bower at B&H Photo).  I've seen lots of good reviews of that particular one, however it is completely manual, so no auto-focus.

My recommendation is to check out the Canon forums on fredmiranda dot com for reviews and samples images taken with the 17-40mm.  (They also have a buy&sell forum, for purchasing used equipment.)  And, as someone else mentioned, try it out before you buy (always a good idea with an expensive item). 

Canon General / Re: Patent - EF 50 f/1.4
« on: May 25, 2011, 09:11:19 PM »
Any experts who are able to explain what the potential differences may be? To me this looks like the same design Canon had for the last 40 years - which I think is great by the way.

What is the thing marked as "Ggi 1"? And could it be that the lens element in the back is bigger?

So, anyway - what ever they'll do I hope it'll be better mechanically.


Definitely has to have USM.  A reduced MFD would also be nice, as some of the newer primes have.

Canon General / Re: Patent - EF 50 f/1.4
« on: May 25, 2011, 07:59:23 PM »
I wonder, though, if the EF non-L primes sell enough these days for Canon to feel that a redesign and everything associated with a new product is warranted.  In recent years there seems to have been a pattern of letting non-L primes wither.

Perhaps now that they updated a lot (most?) of the L primes, they're finally getting around to the non-L primes.  The 15mm Fisheye would be one example.

Lenses / Re: New Canon Lenses Availability - Update
« on: May 25, 2011, 07:56:16 PM »
My feeling is that no new lens announcements will be made until they've sorted this mess out.

Generally, I'm not one to second-guess Canon (or Nikon). I can't argue with their success. But, I do admit this whole lens thing has me wondering.

I didn't pay much attention when these lenses were first announced because lenses that cost thousands of dollars aren't likely to show up in my camera bag anytime soon. I never really understood why they felt the need to upgrade these Big Whites and assumed it had more to do with market positioning than anything else.

But, as the months go by without the product actually being delivered, it sure does seem that it's got to be a little embarrassing. And, I agree that it's a little hard to announce and deliver other lenses while these announcements gather dust.

1.  As megapixels increase, the dSLRs start to out-resolve the lenses.

2.  New technology, including the newer IS modes.

3.  Competition.  If you sit still, you fall behind.

4.  Part of the delay has been caused by the natural disasters in Japan, which is where the bodies and lenses are produced.

Lenses / Re: New Canon Lenses Availability - Update
« on: May 25, 2011, 06:50:39 PM »
I can't wait for the comments from the folks wondering 'Why wasn't the 200-400mm w/1.4x TC included in this updated announcement?'

(In case you are wondering, that lens is a P-R-O-T-O-T-Y-P-E, not a product ready for release.)

EOS Bodies / Re: A grateful end to the DSLR video "revolution"
« on: May 22, 2011, 09:34:37 AM »
You two realize that Gibbygoo actually didn't write this?  :-\

Apparently not!

EOS Bodies / Re: 5D Mark III [CR1]
« on: May 21, 2011, 10:58:52 AM »
If the pixel count followed Morse's law (like storage does), the 5D3 would have been 80MP.

I believe you meant Moore's Law, which refers to the number of transistors on an integrated circuit (which double every two years), not storage.

EOS Bodies / Re: best quallity ,full framecanon dslr choice ?
« on: May 14, 2011, 11:52:08 AM »
"Computers aren't the same as cameras.  Comparing them is like apples and oranges."

1.  I have to disagree with that statement.  Essentially a digital camera IS a computer.

2.  So why wouldn't it be logical to expect a camera's abilities to increase substantially every couple years?  Note, I didn't say double every two years, but a substantial increase.

3.  But knowing a DSLR is essentially a computer why do we have such outrageous prices for used models?

1.  A digital camera *has* a computer inside, but it is not a multi-function device, like a 'desktop computer.'  It's more comparable to a 'gaming' system (PS, XBox, etc.):  a single-function device, which use proprietary hardware and, like cameras, get updated much less frequently.

2.  Because computers are general function devices that use standardized hardware and there is a lot of competition.  Another reason is that the system vendors (HP, Dell, IBM, etc.) don't have to design and build their own processors:  Intel and AMD take care of that, and their head-to-head competition drives design and keeps prices down.  Canon and Nikon know that you're not going to take your lenses and mount them on some start-up company's camera, so they don't have to release new cameras as often.  Since they're both making lots of money, they have no reason to change.  [If all lenses fit on all cameras without an adapter, and all of a sudden a new company came along and started rolling out new cameras on a faster schedule with new features, Canon and Nikon would be forced to change.]

3.  Supply and demand.  People can sell products (new or used) for whatever the market will bear.  If no one was willing to spend that much money for a used camera or lens, the prices would be lower.  It also shows the lack of homework that people do, especially when you see someone buy used equipment on places like ebay for close to or even more than a new item.

Landscape / Re: Buying a Camera
« on: May 14, 2011, 01:24:40 AM »
I'm trying to decide if I should buy Canon T2i, T3i or 60D. I think that the 60D is better than the others but; it comes with only one lens 18 - 135, is that a good enough lens for landscapes(sunsets)? or do you think that the other 2 are as good as the 60D? :-\

As someone else also said, the 28mm f/1.8 is excellent for landscapes/sunsets (I use it for them all the time).  Here's an example:


Also, read up on how to take good pictures (composition, framing, exposure, etc.), because good photography happens with a camera, not a computer.  Your time is better spent taking pictures, than fiddling with .raw files.  You can get brilliant colors with .jpg files by changing the "Picture Style" settings from their defaults and setting the white balance correctly before you start shooting.

Good luck and have fun!

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32