October 23, 2014, 09:33:27 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 - AJ

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 28
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS
« on: July 24, 2013, 03:58:10 PM »
I really don't get the "IS is for video" thing.  Video clips typically last several seconds, and IS won't hold an image that long.  If you shoot video and care about quality, you use a tripod.

I may sell my Canon 17-55/2.8 to get this lens.  I'm very interested.  T-stop of 1.8.  They weren't fibbing....

The F-stop is 1.8, the T-stop will probably be in the 2-2.1 neighborhood, possibly 2.2 with that many elements.
DXO measured 1.8

Yes I too was expecting about 2.2

Bad Rumor.

1.8 + OS = dont think so!!!!
That's my first reaction too.

I may sell my Canon 17-55/2.8 to get this lens.  I'm very interested.  T-stop of 1.8.  They weren't fibbing....

Lenses / Re: Lens recomendation for infant passport photo
« on: July 21, 2013, 04:26:32 PM »
A passport photo is 2x3 inches.  The lens doesn't matter.  However correct pose and lighting are paramount - if they are wrong the photo will be rejected.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Fantasy Dayhiking Kit
« on: July 21, 2013, 04:19:25 AM »
Drebel with a FF sensor (plastic body, pentamirror = lightweight)
Canon 14-24/2.8
100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS mk2.

Lenses / Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« on: July 20, 2013, 03:04:25 PM »
Canon 17-40/L, when used as an UWA on FF gear, not as a standard lens on crop.
Why do you say this? I use the 17-40 as a standard lens on crop and it performs very well for the most part IMO, as I understand it it's biggest weakness is used at the wide end without stopping down on FF. Using it on crop negates most of this issue.
The 17-40 is Canon's best full frame WA zoom.

I'm using a 17-40L on crop as a standard zoom because I plan (for CR regulars yes, really :-p) to upgrade to ff sometime and most of all the L is sturdy and sealed which makes a great difference because I regularly shoot in snow and dusty/dirty outdoor conditions. Just be sure to replace the lens hood with a 83J...

... however @f4 the 17-40L is clearly lacking in sharpness and except for the above reasons I really wouldn't recommend it on crop, even though it has a very good price nowadays esp. with Canon cashback rebates.

Sure, it works as a standard zoom on crop.  But used this way I wouldn't call it a "sleeper lens".

Lenses / Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« on: July 20, 2013, 04:36:40 AM »
Canon 55-250/4-5.6 IS

Excellent little lens! I just sold mine because of disuse (but the 400D I used it on has been replaced with a Sony NEX).

Yes it's a good lens.  I have messed around with quite a few starter telephoto lenses over the years, and this is the only one that does not disappoint.  It's no L lens, but it's decently sharp optically.  Just stop down a little when at the long end.  The 5x zoom and low weight make it a great choice for lightweight travel, hiking, and other uses in strong light.  I have a 2'x3' canvas wrap printed from a photo taken with this lens, and it looks like it was taken with far more expensive and bulky gear.

Lenses / Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« on: July 19, 2013, 03:17:28 PM »
Canon 85/1.8
Tamron 90/2.8 macro
Tamron 17-50/2.8 non-VC
Canon 55-250/4-5.6 IS
Canon 50/1.4
Canon 70-200/4 non-IS
Canon 17-40/L, when used as an UWA on FF gear, not as a standard lens on crop.
Canon 15/2.8 fisheye

Lenses / Re: Indoor Lens recommendations?
« on: July 14, 2013, 05:02:29 AM »
In your place, I think I would go with the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. Personally, I think it is the best general purpose zoom lens for a crop body.  It also works very well combined with a fast telephoto prime, such as the 85/1.8, which makes a very nice portrait lens on a crop body.

You still need a fast enough shutter speed to get a nice and sharp photograph. My advice would be EF 85/1.8 USM, which is a fast focusing, sharp at 1.8, very affordable and overall decent lens for what you want it to do.

In your case, I think a flash would be more helpful.  You can then use your current lenses and drag the shutter.  The flash will help freeze the subject while the longer exposure time will allow the background to be exposed properly.

I agree with these 3 suggestions.  If this were me, I would start with a 17-55 2.8 and then add a 85 1.8 if I needed more reach.  Adding a good speedlite or two is always a good idea as well and can be used to expand your creative possibilities beyond what you can do with just fast lenses and natural light.
Thirded.  I can tell you from experience that this combination works.  This is my go-to wedding setup: 17-55, 85/1.8 and two 550EXs.  If you need more reach then get a 70-200/2.8 IS to complement the 17-55.

If shake and trembling is an issue, consider using a monopod.

Lenses / Re: 50mm Primes that don't suck wide open?
« on: July 14, 2013, 04:56:35 AM »
Here's the thing about the 40/2.8, in my humble opinion.

This lens could easily have been speced at f/2.  However it isn't.  Canon made the diaphragm to open up only to f/2.8 so that it's sharp "wide open".  This satisfies the testchart-shooters, and ensures the lens gets good reviews.

Personally I like a lens that opens a little wider, even if that results in a little softness.  I like my 50/1.8 and I accept the fact that it's not razor sharp at f/1.8.  However it is cracking sharp at f/2.8 so that's what I stop down to when I need more sharpness.  It's all about knowing the characteristics of the lens and working with it.

Here's the other bit about fast lenses: it's all about what's not in focus, i.e. bokeh.  Sharpness in the center still matters, somewhat, but sharpness in the corners wide-open is completely moot for most purposes (except perhaps astrophotography).

Street & City / Re: Bratislava
« on: July 03, 2013, 03:16:38 PM »

Bratislava streets by <CiD>, on Flickr

This one is far better than any of the others.  I suggest cropping away the bright area above the atch.

I only put Canon lenses on my Canon bodies ... not
I only put Microsoft software on my Windows PC ... not
I only put genuine Ford parts in my Ford Focus ... not

wake up people.  A Canon body is a platform on which you can mount a whole slew of lenses: Tamron, Zeiss, Sigma, Tokina, Canon, Rokinon, you name it.

Canon lenses are generally awesome, but if you limit yourself to Canon lenses only then you are limiting yourself.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Deal: Canon EF 24-105 f/4L IS $699
« on: June 29, 2013, 05:56:26 AM »
That's a much better deal than the 24-70/4 IS

Lenses / Re: The ULTIMATE Canon lens
« on: June 26, 2013, 03:56:31 PM »
Do you think I should buy this one?  Or should I wait for the mark-2?

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 28