Messages

31

Lenses / Re: Should I sell my 70-200L vii for the 85mm 1.2?

« on: October 19, 2012, 02:24:06 PM »

Maybe you would prefer the 135mm f/2.0L for portraits.

This!

I think you will find that the 135 f2L is a very good prime to put in place of (any) 70-200. It is fast, sharp and much more practical in many applications than the 85 f1.2L.

32

Lenses / Re: Cheapish standard / short tele replacement / upgrade

« on: October 18, 2012, 11:44:47 AM »

Looking at your list of gear and reading your post, the answer is clear, get the Canon 50 1.4 and enjoy.

33

Lenses / Re: Next Lens

« on: October 18, 2012, 11:42:03 AM »

Having the 35 1.4L and the 100 2.8L I can understand why you might be disappointed in what the 24-105L offers. I wouldn't suggest changing the 85 1.8 for the 85L, I dont think you will be that impressed with its speed and accuracy compared with the 35L and the 100L.
Better for you would be the 50L, it will give you approx 85 on the Rebel (with the dreamy bokeh you may be seeking with the 85L) and it will provide a very useful normal POV on the 5DIII.

34

Lenses / Re: I'm not impressed with my 70-200mm f/2.8L USM... so is it me or the lens?

« on: October 17, 2012, 10:09:29 PM »

I'm seriously considering selling both 70-200's and then get the 135.  Does anyone mind not having is on the 135? 

The extra stop of light should come in handy when i shoot my daughter playing basketball.

Hey JD, me again.

Love the 135 f2L for Basketball; it is far superior to the 70-200 IMO. But beware, it has a very shallow DOF also.

It could potentially be a little short for outdoor sport; I prefer 300mm there.

35

Lenses / Re: I'm not impressed with my 70-200mm f/2.8L USM... so is it me or the lens?

« on: October 16, 2012, 10:57:07 AM »

The additional images are helpful.

In the shot where the ball carier is coming towards us, the grass just behind the player is in focus. Your AI is capturing the area where they were and then as you depress the shutter, they are closer and slightly out of focus. Using a smaller aperature will help over come this issue.

Similarily, but for different reasons, in the shot with player 13, the grass just slightly beyond the player is in focus. I believe that your AI is averaging here and giving this result.

As for the shots with your 100mm, it's no surprise that the 100 Macro kills on sharpness when compared with the 70-200 zoom; like the 135 f2L, it just is that much better.

I sold my 70-200 f2.8L IS when moving to FF earlier this year, replacing it with a 135 f2L and 300 f4L IS. The 300 has since been replaced by a 300 f2.8L IS. I do have the 100 f2.8L Macro on my Christmas list (love those shots you shared).

36

Lenses / Re: I'm not impressed with my 70-200mm f/2.8L USM... so is it me or the lens?

« on: October 14, 2012, 08:55:13 PM »

The first two shots are Lightroom adjusted images adjusted from raw for the cloudy day with the 1/400 to 1/500th day.  The 2nd set are untouched jpegs from the sunny day with the cpl and up to 1/8000 of a second.  I was shooting in raw and I adjusted some of those, but not to the point where I was pleased with the result. 

So my query for yall is, is it me or is it my lens?

Seeing the 2nd Set would be helpful.

The images shared, as many have said already, are a result of the shutter speed is too slow. The rule of thumb you used is to reduce camera shake hand holding a lens, it has nothing to do with moving objects and the speed needed to freeze action. Sports require 1/1000 at a minimum, faster at times depending on what action it is you are trying to stop.

Post up the other examples.

37

Lenses / Re: need help with a lens decision

« on: October 10, 2012, 08:21:59 PM »

If you say you hardly use the 24, then why buy a 24- zoom?

You are also willing to part with the 50 as part of this exchange, what do you use the 50 for now? and how often?

If you want the new 24-70 (many do) then make the trade and be happy with it.

If you aren't shooting wide now, the new zoom isn't likely to change that.

38

Lenses / Re: 85mm lens

« on: October 10, 2012, 08:14:33 PM »

With the 5DIII the 135 f2 is the best choice for indoor sports like Basketball and Volley Ball. The subject isolation is great with superb speed and AI.


1/1000 f2 ISO 5000


1/1000 f2 ISO 5000

For Ice Hockey, you will want something a little longer and may want to stick with your 200 zoom.

39

Lenses / Re: Need quick advice Please and thanks! Choir photoshoot!

« on: October 10, 2012, 12:53:20 PM »

Cafeteria shot (from above) for a HS Choir could be fun. Lighting in Cafeteria may be harsh, but you can adjust color later. If the Choir has a banner, set it out on one of the tables, have them arrange around it, have fun, keep it simple.
Go for it and dont be afraid to have multiple takes. This shouldnt be one set up and one shot. Move the kids around, get them involved, make it fun (but not silly of course).

40

Lenses / Re: Which lenses?

« on: October 10, 2012, 12:47:44 PM »

On a Crop Sensor Body, I have shot Soccer with a 200mm f2.8 and found it to have plenty of reach and speed for the sport.
When moving to a Full Sensor Body, I moved up to a 300mm and found it captured back most of the reach lost by shooting full frame.
As for hand holding, the 300mm f4 is as easy to manage as any of the 70-200 zooms. I used this for Lacrosse last season and had no problem tracking and shooting hand held for the entire game while on my feet.
I have since upgraded to the 300 f2.8 and have found it quite a bit more cumbersome along the sidelines, but added a wide shoulder strap to "rest" during time out.
Thinking that Cricket is played out of doors and in the daylight, any lens that provides f4 or better should afford you the shutter speeds you need to capture the action. Lenses with f2.8 or better will give you better subject isolation with shallower depth of field, but that may not be the look you are going for with this particular sport.
Cheers!

41

Lenses / Re: Need quick advice Please and thanks! Choir photoshoot!

« on: October 09, 2012, 10:00:26 PM »

I say work with what you got. Renting something new, for this is likely to be unsuccessful for you. Use the equipment you are familiar with in a way that you know will give you a good result. Trying to go wide to get this in one shot is likely to disappoint everyone. A multi shot pan or scan may allow you to creat a higher resolution image with your 50 or 40. Investigate your location and set up the group in a way that will allow you to capture the best images.

42

Lenses / Re: First Portrait Lens, Need Suggestions

« on: October 07, 2012, 09:28:14 AM »

On a crop body I enjoyed the 50mm focal length most shooting portraits indoors. Outdoors, I preferred the 85mm as it afforded a bit more working distance and better subject isolation.

43

Lenses / Re: Wide angle/standard zoom

« on: September 28, 2012, 02:00:40 PM »

Hey guys, I'm having a bit of a dilemma, I'm trying to decide which way to go gear wise to accommodate my 70-200 2.8 l is ii. I am an enthusiast looking to move up to a ff, and shoot landscapes, portraits, and some sports(why I got the 70-200 and my extenders.)

Making lens choices having a Crop Sensor Body looking ahead to a FF Body is difficult. The 70-200 you have currently will have much shorter reach on a FF and therefore your dilemma will be different with a different body.

You have the cream of the crop zoom now, so you will want to find something comparable in your next selection. I would also recommend the 16-35 f2.8 II. On a crop sensor it provides a 24-55 zoom. This will give you the range, speed and image quality you are familiar with form your 70-200 f2.8 II.

If/when you move to a FF body, I suspect you will find yourself wanting a 24-70 and a 300 to gain back the range lost without the 1.6x crop factor.

44

Lenses / Re: If you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they...???

« on: September 28, 2012, 01:52:53 PM »

Thankfully there are so many excellent choices!

45

Lenses / Re: Minimum Aperture

« on: September 28, 2012, 01:50:25 PM »

Your 50mm lens is a prime example...

*rimshot* Ba dum bum.

I see what you did there.