1
May 22, 2013, 11:01:02 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.
Pages: [1]
2
Third Party Manufacturers / When will we see the Sigma 30mm DC HSM?
« on: March 01, 2013, 02:14:08 AM »
I really want a fast normal (for APS-C) prime and was on the verge of buying either the 35mm 1.4 (Sigma) or the 35 1.4L (most likely the Siggie) and this one came out- so I thought, hey, this will be a little wider and hopefully a lot lighter- let's see how it turns up!
The wait's frustrating- any ideas when they start rolling them out?
The wait's frustrating- any ideas when they start rolling them out?
3
Lenses / Keep Tamron 70-300 VC USD or get the 1.4x to go with the 70-200 II
« on: December 12, 2012, 11:51:47 PM »
So I finally upgraded my 70-200 2.8 IS to the vII, and I am faced with the following facts:
Let's break down the questions:
As always, your input is greatly appreciated.
- The 70-300, while good for it's price, does not have a very fast AF.
- Since I have owned the 70-200 2.8 IS vI I have hardly taken the 70-300 out.
- 300mm @f/5.6 isn't really useful for birding- in fact there isn't really much use for 200-300mm for me on a regular basis.
Let's break down the questions:
- How is the 70-200 II plus 1.4x AF speed? Please comment on both II and III and the Kenko ones, if you have used them. [As a reference, the Tamron AF is faster than the non-L Canon but much slower than the L. More than enough for slowly moving subjects (humans) but not fast moving ones (birds)]
- Have you used more than one version of the 1.4x TC? I don't have a weather-sealed body, and I believe the II added only weather-sealing. So if there's not a world of difference between II and III, would I be fine with the I?
- Do you use your 70-300mm variable zooms (L, non-L, third party, whatever) between 200-300mm? If so, when?
As always, your input is greatly appreciated.
4
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Would I benefit from going full frame?
« on: November 06, 2012, 05:25:20 PM »
I have an APS-C setup with the 7D and 10-22 and 17-55 2.8. I have considered moving to FF with the recent reduction in prices of the 5DII and the 6D being announced, but here's the dilemma:
1. I am quite happy with the IQ of the 7D up to ISO 1600, but the noise above that is bad. So indoor photography without flash suffers. That is the main reason for my FF considerations.
2. I am aware that if I move to FF, I will have to trade my EF-S lenses for FF equivalents. My lenses will hold their value and I can get the 24-105 and 17-40 without losing any money (cannot afford the 24-70 II). But while the 24-105 is very good lens, I am not so sure about the 17-40. I didn't like the copy I owned (and I used it on a 5DII as well). And, I cannot afford the 16-35 II. Additionally, if I use f/4 after moving to FF- what do I gain over using f/2.8 in APS-C?
3. I did like using the 5DII for the short time I had it and the images were very nice, especially since I almost exclusively use the center AF point, but I do use the high-speed mode a lot on my 7D and I will certainly miss it (and again, cannot afford the 5DIII).
So given these circumstances, is there something I would gain by going FF with a 5DII/6D with a 24-105/17-40 (that offsets my loss of fps) or should I wait until I can afford the 5DIII/24-70II/16-35II? I am sure many of you have gone this route- your advice will be greatly appreciated.
1. I am quite happy with the IQ of the 7D up to ISO 1600, but the noise above that is bad. So indoor photography without flash suffers. That is the main reason for my FF considerations.
2. I am aware that if I move to FF, I will have to trade my EF-S lenses for FF equivalents. My lenses will hold their value and I can get the 24-105 and 17-40 without losing any money (cannot afford the 24-70 II). But while the 24-105 is very good lens, I am not so sure about the 17-40. I didn't like the copy I owned (and I used it on a 5DII as well). And, I cannot afford the 16-35 II. Additionally, if I use f/4 after moving to FF- what do I gain over using f/2.8 in APS-C?
3. I did like using the 5DII for the short time I had it and the images were very nice, especially since I almost exclusively use the center AF point, but I do use the high-speed mode a lot on my 7D and I will certainly miss it (and again, cannot afford the 5DIII).
So given these circumstances, is there something I would gain by going FF with a 5DII/6D with a 24-105/17-40 (that offsets my loss of fps) or should I wait until I can afford the 5DIII/24-70II/16-35II? I am sure many of you have gone this route- your advice will be greatly appreciated.
5
Lenses / Can crop sensor users expect something like the 35 f/1.8 in the near future?
« on: September 21, 2012, 12:33:29 AM »
The 35 f/1.8 is an excellent quasi-normal prime for the DX cameras (I say quasi-normal because it does not emulate my vision like a 50mm does although it has a similar field of view as 50mm in a FF). But on the Canon side, even though I have used the 28 f/1.8 I didn't like it much (I wouldn't say sharpness was the issue- I am not a sucker for pixel peeping- I just didn't like the images I shot- maybe my mistake), the 35 f/2 lacks USM which I prefer very much. Also both these are more expensive. Anything on the horizon for us crop-sensor users who cannot afford the 35 f/1.4? Any ideas?
P.S. I acknowledge there are other non-Canon primes in this range, but here I want to know if Canon has anything in the pipeline.
P.S. I acknowledge there are other non-Canon primes in this range, but here I want to know if Canon has anything in the pipeline.
Pages: [1]