Topics

1

Canon General / Beach Vacation in a month... & I'm scared for my gear.

« on: May 19, 2013, 12:03:55 PM »

The last time I went to the beach, I had a Sony point and shoot ($200) and I had no fear.  I was taking pictures while the water was up to my knees with my daughter splashing around. 

And now that I have a 60D which might be a 5d mkiii by the time we are beach bound, a 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS mkii, a 24-105mm, and a bunch of other lenses.  And one grain of sand is all it takes to screw things up. 

So... what do yall suggest?  I will absolutely avoid changes the lenses outside... and I will absolutely not leave my gear on the sand or even on a blanket that might have sand on it... but is it worth the risk to even take it out of the hotel?  Should I rent a body/lens and let the guys at Borrow lenses remove the sand from the motor? 

I was thinking of stupid ideas like wrapping saran wrap around the lens and body and then just treating the lens like it was a prime... but that doesn't really seem reasonable. 

I should have agreed to go to Disney again. 

2

Canon General / It annoys me when camera phones try to take credit for professional level gear.

« on: May 14, 2013, 10:30:28 PM »

I see these photos on an iphone or windows phone and I KNOW that photo wasn't taken with a camera phone.  The bokeh gives it away.  It was probably a 35mm f/1.4 (or a 135mm f/2) with a 5dmkiii (or whatever the Nikon equivalent is) with wireless umbrella lighting being side lit from both the right and left. 

But no... that was a wide angle camera phone photo which simply looks like a 135mm f/2 was used.  So your gear that costs $5000 is really just overkill, since the camera phone's is MORE than sufficient.  Ughh...

3

Canon General / I lost $300 in an accounting error.

« on: May 08, 2013, 10:10:23 PM »

I keep a spreadsheet with all of my gear.  What I've paid, what I've sold, residual values, etc.  I was going through past years and I noticed I had a projection which combined several fields which resulted in me having to make a correction and consequently losing $300. 

It isn't that much considering I have spent over $29500 in gear in the past few years, but that phantom $300 will haunt me.  Every time I am saving up for a lens/body and I am a stone's throw away...

Ugh.

4

Lenses / Y'all are really good at spotting front or back focus in photos...

« on: May 05, 2013, 10:14:10 PM »

And  today was the first real opportunity I had to go and play with my new 70-200mm f2.8L is mkii.   so if y'all don't mind looking at some zoo photos.   this was just a test.  I  had it on aperture priority all day and I should have kicked up the iso to 1200+  when I was indoors,  but I  wass lazy and didn't bother.   so they aren't perfect,  and I'm really impressed with the lens.

 at the moment I have a 60d,  so no afma,  but I will be upgrading to a 5d mkiii  soon.   so if it is a bit front focused, I  will eventually be able to correct that without issue.

 photos to come. 

5

Lenses / Found a Canon 35mm f/1.4L lens for $900...

« on: April 28, 2013, 12:29:07 PM »

And I'm pretty sure I'm going to go ahead and buy it and sell my 50mm f/1.4 USM.  But I wanted to check with some "experts" to see if there is anything I should be looking for.

For example, I know the 50mm f1.4 has AF issues, the 17-55 and the 100-400 are dust suckers (by rumor at the very least), etc.

So is there anything I need to be aware of about the Canon 35mm?  Also, the new Sigma is reported to be crazy good wide open and it also is in the $900 range.  Is one really that much better than the other?

6

Lenses / Looking for a good bang for buck extender with a focus on image quality.

« on: April 25, 2013, 11:32:04 PM »

I just bought a 70-200mm f/2.8L is mkii so my coffers are starting to run dry, but with what little is left I'm upgrading my 60D to a 5d mkii.  So in my arsenal, I will have a 24-105, a 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro, a Rokinon Fisheye and a 50mm f/1.4.  I'm probably going to ditch my 50mm and upgrade to the sigma 35mm f/1.4 in the after the body upgrade and after the extender purchase. 

OK... now with all of that out of the way, I'm looking at pairing my 70-200 with an extender with a focus on image quality.  Based on that alone, the Canon 2x extender is out of the running.  I'm seriously considering the Canon Extender EF 1.4x II.  I read from DP review or some online presence that the II is roughly the same quality as the III, but different build quality.

I've heard of Kenko and I've been told there is additional functionality with more lenses... but I'm otherwise entirely ignorant of the piece.

So is the consensus bang for buck the 1.4 ii?  Or is there another option that yall would suggest?

7

Canon General / I'm looking for a telephoto zoom, but I've been underwhelmed before.

« on: March 30, 2013, 09:11:04 PM »

I'm ripping off ahsanford's question format... consider it praise rather than theft.

I thought I would start with a bit of history.  I started off with a Canon XS and a 18-55 and I got a 75-300mm along with it.  Without question, I was not happy with the 75-300, but I did learn a few things about shutter speed with shooting at a distance with a long zoom, not to mention having a relative understanding of bokeh at longer focal lengths. 

I eventually upgraded to the 55-250, and I know I'm romanticizing how great it was, but it was a good little lens, especially at the price I paid for it. 

I had a 70-200mm f/4L usm for a while and I didn't hate it... but I didn't think it was really that much better than the 55-250 (which I had sold quite a while before).  I REALLY didn't like it in low light, but I guess that is expected.  Outdoors it was good, but still never blown away like I had been with my primes (50mm f/1.8 and eventually f/1.4, 100mm f/2.8L IS macro, etc.)

So I waited a while and I got a 70-200mm f/2.8L USM... and I liked it more, but according to everyone here, it was a touch backfocused and my 60D as many of us know doesn't have AFMA... so I sold it because again... I wasn't blown away.  But I did like that a whole heck of a lot more than the 70-200mm f/4L usm. 

I would like a 135mm f/2L but it isn't an emergency to get one, but it contributes to my concern that if I get the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mkii, then I will have too much money in the same focal range (a 100mm f/2.8L IS, a 135mm f/2L, and then the aforementioned 70-200mm).

So I was thinking... is there a good zoom option that has more reach, with reasonable low light capabilites (5.6+ need not apply)...

Auto focus is a must, and image quality is paramount.  I find that if my lens doesn't have the capability of producing breathtaking photos, I just ignore it and work with my other lenses that are significantly more impressive. 

Brands:

I prefer canon.  I think they tend to have better resale value and so if I don't like a lens, I can always sell it again and either not lose anything, or at least not lose much.  I know Sigma makes a very good product depending on the specific lens, so I'm not averse to them... and they also tend to be a good deal cheaper for comparable specs... though maybe the image quality isn't quite as good... (70-200mm f/2.8 OS, I'm pointing the finger at you). 

I'm going to be upgrading to a 5D mkiii in a few months and I know I'm going to miss the reach of the crop sensor (though I realize the bokeh is still the same, if not better, and when I crop into the image, the depth of colors will be greater and it will be sharper... so I'm complaining only about perception of a loss of length).

As you guys always ask when someone pipes up about lens selection, here are my shooting needs...
 

• I am an enthusiast, but I'd like to think I've exceeded the hobbiest moniker.  I never been professional, though I think I get a little lucky here and there and come out with pro quality images.  And I would like to do a little sports photography on the side, though I realize that is a dependent position and if the kids plays 4 minutes in a game and doesn't do anything... it was basically a huge waste of time.
• Currently happily using a 60d, but I'll be upgrading to a 5dmkiii.  I plan on buying the lens after the mkiii, so f/4 for indoors might be manageable though not ideal as I'll kick up the iso.
• I don't do studio, but I will throw the camera up on a tripod and use my 430ex to get the shot I want.  Yes, a lone 430ex.
• I used to be a snob about using on camera flash... and I still am, though I'll bounce light happily to get more light into the environment and I enjoy the challenge that brings.  I actually created a homemade diffuser that I really thought did a very good job of lighting my subject while not causing them to cast much of a shadow.  I was very pleased with that.
• I don't like vignetting... I'll add some in post in LR4, but if I can skip that step, I will. 
• I like shooting wide open, or at the very least moving the aperture just a step away from wide open... so I'd prefer a lens that is really sharp nearly all wide open
• I am in really low light, handheld situations all the time.  In the last year, I shot football games (3rd grade through 8th), I shot an indoor play my daughter was in in rather dark lighting, I shot indoor baskeball (4th graders), an outdoor track event (photographing people run is crazy boring), and then the normal hodge podge of fatherly duties, like a pumpkin festival, a girl scout fireside jamboree (so very dark and I couldn't get even a hint of AF using my 50mm f/1.4easter egg hunts, trick or treating, etc. My subjects generally are both moving at a full run, or not moving at all. 
• High priority needs for this length: I'm a big strong guy, so if the lens weighs 10 lbs... it doesn't matter to me.  I really like taking Candids.  I shoot often in aperture priority and if it is a bright setting I'll throw iso into 100 and the let the camera adjust shutter speed. 
• Medium priority needs for this length: Handheld Low-Light (Concerts), Street, Portraits
• Low priority needs for this length: Landscapes, Handheld low-light (Gymnasium Sports)
• Zero need for this length:  Video (I'd shoot with my other lenses first), Macro (already have the 100mm f/2., Wildlife (I'll go out into the woods, but the only thing I saw the few time I went was a squirrel.
• I buy and sell gear at a small profit, and then I put that money into my gear... So I make around $2,000 a year doing so and it feeds my hobby.  So after I get the 5dmkiii, I should have $1,000 and I'm willing to spend maybe $2000 on the lens... up to $3000 if there is a miracle lens that is a great value out there.  I'll pay more for better gear at this stage.
• Weather sealing is important... and while I don't want to go out into the rain, I might get caught in the rain and I don't want to lament water spots affecting my image quality. 
• I'll print things for my wall, but they tend to be no bigger than 11x16...  But if I'm actually doing some sports photography, I really want my shots to be print capable. @ a fathead level, if it comes down to that.

What I'm considering...

I'm willing to consider a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS with a 1.4 or a 2.0 tele-converter.  With AFMA on the 5kmkiii, I don't have to worry about front or back focused and I know it is a miracle lens... but I have been disappointed with it's smaller brothers... so I just don't want to go back to the well and not like what I'm seeing AGAIN.

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-70-200mm-2-8-Telephoto-Canon/dp/B003HC8V9A/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1364689577&sr=8-1&keywords=sigma+70-200+2.8

I'm also willing to consider the 70-200mm Sigma.  I know it is not quite as good as the Canon, but for $600+ in savings... I might be willing to overlook it.  Also... throw on a teleconverter.

It is presumed by many (and absolutely expected by myself) that the EF 50mm F/1.4 USM will finally get a modern refresh like the 24mm, 28mm and 35mm lengths.  I own the new 28 and adore it.  I hold it in the same regard as my L glass -- it's a joy to use.

I would consider a prime lens if I had two bodies, but switching when the players come closer doesn't seem practical... though I have done something similar when I was trying to compare image quality of a 70-200 to a 100mm.  100mm won.

The Canon 70-300mm  f4-5.6L calls to me, but I'm not a big fan of variable apertures, but it does have more reach and it is a good price, but the difference between f/2.8 and f/5.6 means only two additional stops of iso, but that's what gives me reason for concern. 

There's also the 100-400mm by canon, but ditto on the variable aperture, f/4.5 to 5.6L.  Also, I don't like the the pump action lens.  If I recall, it lets in way too much dust. 

Sigma has a 120-400 and a 150-500 that sound really interesting, but their apertures are f/4.5-5.6 and f/5-6.3 respectively.  I really don't think I would be able to use indoors, kicking up the iso will help, but I'm not sure it will be adequate. 

If I were to go with a prime, I kinda like the 300mm f/4L.  I don't have too much to say about it, because I really don't want to carry on 200mm prime, one 300mm prime, and one 400mm prime.  Both are very well rated on Amazon, 4.5+ stars each, but it doesn't mean that it is right for me.

My mind is really not made up right now, so I'm willing to hear suggestions based on either personal experience or otherwise. 

8

Technical Support / Lightroom crashes when I try to import...

« on: March 23, 2013, 09:24:09 PM »

I'm pretty sure the answer to my problem is upgrade my computer to one that can handle LR4, but it normally works well enough, so I don't want to do that if I don't have to. 

Here's the problem and it occurs sporadically.  I open LR4, press cntrl, shift, I and for import, or I hit import and it says the following:

Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 64-bit has stopped working
A problem caused the program to stop working correctly.  Windows will close the program and notify you if a solution is available. 

Before this started, I cleared the cache... but I've done that before.

I have windows 7 home premium, 6 GB's of ram, and a 64 bit OS. I restarted the computer and it was to no avail... and I can wait for LR to fix itself... but I'd rather just have it start working again.

9

Lenses / How do yall compose a shot using a fisheye lens?

« on: February 12, 2013, 10:05:47 PM »

I just bought a Rokinon Fisheye for $300 from Amazon.  It's about 30 bucks cheaper than it normally sells for, and while I'd like to get it cheaper than I did, I've been wanting a fisheye to play with for a while. 

 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B008X1C4IY/ref=ox_sc_sfl_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER

But I'm composing shots in my mind (before I have the lens in hand) and I guess my question is, do yall bother following the rule of thirds when you are using a fisheye?  Do yall shoot your subject in the center of the frame so there is minimal distortion, and then recompose in post and place the subject along the third?

I'm excited to have a new toy, but my concern is that I don't like wide angle photography as I have presently experienced it (18-55mm kit lens and @ 24mm with my 24-105) all on a crop sensor 60D.  So I realize that doesn't really qualify as wide angle since it is 24-35ish respectively. 

But again... kinda excited to have a new toy to try and figure out.  I'm ok with the manual aperture and I'm ok with it being soft at f/3.5 since I plan on shooting at f/5.6 to f/8.  And I'm ok with it being all manual focus, though it really shouldn't matter much considering 8mm naturally has a large depth of field. 

10

Technical Support / While in 2nd curtain mode, my 430 exii will flash at the start of the shutter...

« on: December 23, 2012, 12:31:45 AM »

and then again at the end of the shutter.  It is in the hotshoe of my 60D, and I'm setting the flash  to 2nd curtain, and the 60D says it is in 2nd curtain as well.  So I know there is something stupid I'm doing... the question is what?

11

Technical Support / White balance setting and RAW. Also flash sync speed.

« on: November 14, 2012, 08:38:22 PM »

I'm going to be taking many photos of girls basketball in the upcoming months using a 60D, 100mm f/2.8L IS USM, 50mm f/1.4, and maybe a 5dmkii and a 24-105mm f/4L IS if I can find a deal.  There is blue padding along the walls of the gym that I plan on bouncing light from a 430ex ii out onto the court.  So one of my question is... if I'm bouncing light which gives a definite blu-ish tint, do I have to adjust the white balance to combat that?  I suppose I'm thinking that adjusting the white balance would only affect the .jpg image and not the raw image which I will later process in Lightroom.  So am I full of crap? 

Also, the 9 year old girls don't move that fast, so there isn't a ton of motion blur with a shutter speed of 1/250 of a second, but I'd prefer 1/1000 so I can freeze the "action".  And if I kick the iso up to 400, I think I can easily achieve 1/1000.  But using flash, I think it prevents me from using shutter speeds faster than 1/250.  I think I'm being redundant, but I can manually adjust in the settings so I can get a faster sync with the 430ex ii on the hotshoe of my 60D?

Thanks a ton...

12

Canon General / I have more money than I do needs... so what should be my next step?

« on: November 04, 2012, 08:39:09 AM »

I've been a SLR owner for about nearly 4 years now.  I own a 60D body, 24-105mm f/4L IS, 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro, and 50mm f/1.4.  I also have a 430ex II speedlite.  I have about $1600 in cash and I'm not quite sure what to spend it on.  I have a 9 year old so she is my main subject.  In the past 12 months I have photographed indoor plays, outdoor Easter egg hunts, night time "bonfires", swimming pool shots, football games (she's a cheerleader but I really enjoy photographing the players), and I will be photographing indoor basketball games under crappy gym lighting. I don't shoot a lot of wide angle and a bunch of my shots would be considered sports action or portraiture with pleasing blurry bokehs. 

No one probably cares about the process, but I want to illustrate that I have had a ton of different lenses.  I started with a Canon XS which was upgraded to a 60D after two years.  In regards to lenses, I had the kit lens (18-55mm) which I eventually upgraded to a 24-105mm f/4L USM.  I started with a 75-300mm which was upgraded to a 55-250mm after one year to a 70-300mm (briefly) to a 70-200mm f/4L USM (briefly) to a 70-200mm f/2.8L USM (briefly), to finally nothing.  Finally, I had a 50mm f/1.8 which I upgraded to the 50mmm f/1.4.  And I picked up a 100mm f/2.8L IS macro along the way. 

I like my 60D, but I would seriously consider upgrading to a 5D mkii if I find a deal for around $1200 which isn't completely out of the realm of reason if I sell a bundled printer and the kit lens (24-105mm). 

I think the biggest thing about upgrading bodies is that I will have Micro auto focus adjustment... and while I was underwhelmed by both 70-200's I had, I think if I am able to 100% lock into my target, I would be substantially more pleased with the results.  But I'm not sure I'm willing to go back to that well of disappointment.  Maybe I might dip into 70-200mm f/4L IS or the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mkii (the non IS f/2.8 was heavy, but it really didn't bother me so I doubt the IS version would cause me to complain).  But IS shouldn't be a factor since the shots I were taking were at 1/4000 of a second or faster... so it really comes down to the performance of the lens v. the quality of shot I received using the 100mm f/2.8L Macro. 

Having said that, if I buy the 5dmkii, I will only have 400 left in reserves to get anything else.  I really don't want to part with my 60d, but I know selling the used body for $650 (if I'm lucky) would then bump me back up to $1050 and again can buy another lens.

I've also considered a refurb 135mm f/2L direct from Canon.  The best case scenario is if I buy one during their sales and I pay around $740.  That would leave me with $860 and maybe I go ahead and dip my toe back into the 70-200's and get the f/4L IS.  That would be $914, but I can get away with spending $55 over my budget. 

I know there is a huge fight between those who prefer primes over zooms and I don't want to start one of those, but I've also considered a 300mm f/4L IS prime.  But I read reviews that it is not good for panning and it is older technology from 2008 (which sounds silly) but I do have concerns shooting with a 300mm prime with limited IS on a crop sensor. 

I've also considered a fisheye... but that's just for fun and is really low on my priority list. 

So my question is... would an upgrade to the body with one additional lens (whether it is the 135mm f/2 or the 300mm f/4L IS or even the 70-200mm f/4L IS) be the best bang for my respective buck.  Or should I stick with my 60D which has good low light performance (though not on par with the 5dmk ii or the 5dmk iii) and just get new lenses.  It's not an easy decision. 

OR is there something I'm not considering that would be an even better fit that I'm just completely ignorant about (and if someone mentions Nikon, I'll punch you in the face!).

Thanks for your help because I really have ambivalent feelings about both directions. 

13

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

« on: October 14, 2012, 01:38:18 PM »

A little history to begin with.  I have a 60D and previously owned a 70-200mm f/4L USM and it was ok.  It didn't seem like a significant jump in image quality from my 55-250mm IS.  Yes, I have faster shutter speeds, lower iso, and better bokeh (not to mention the size of the 70-200 drives the ladies wild... I assume... only guys ever comment about the size of the lens).

I decided to upgrade to the 70-200mm f/2.8 and I'm still not wowed.  Not the way I am when I use my 100mm f/2.8L macro USM.  I was considering getting a 200mm f2.8L prime, but thought the 70-200 would be more usable for a variety of situations.  I've also considered getting a 135mm f/2, but that seems too redundant to have with my 100mm L macro. 

So the other day I was shooting at 1/400th of a second because it was a really cloudy day and I was losing shots left and right (though in retrospect I should have taken off the CPL filter earlier and I should have bumped the iso up from 100 to 1200).  So I take full blame for that, but the images I lost really irked me.  I assumed incorrectly that  1/focal length would be sufficient (200x1.6=320 = shutter speed >1/320.  Nope). 

Then yesterday it was a cold sunny day, so I took some shots without the CPL and some shots with.  I normally shoot in aperture priority, but today I decided to go freestyle and shoot in manual.  Iso was between 320 and 640.  And my shutter speeds were 1/2000 and 1/8000 of a second.  And I'm still not happy with the result.  I've heard that the 70-200 is tack sharp between 70-135, and I have quite a few of the shots within that range, and I'm not blown away.

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?

14

Canon General / I'm mulling over 2 lenses (70-200mm f/2.8L USM or the EF 200mm f/2.8L USM II)

« on: September 25, 2012, 11:24:00 PM »

Obviously there are similarities in focal length and aperture.  Neither have image stabilization.  I have heard the 70-200 is tack sharp between 70-135... which raises the question, is the additional range I will get worth the additional 400 dollars.  I've already bought the 70-200, so I've answered my question, but I got it as such a good price, that I could sell it within a matter of days and then just get the 200 prime.

At the moment, I am shooting a ton of football games (pee-wee level).  And I imagine I will be shooting indoor girls basketball games here in the next few weeks. 

I already have a 24-105mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.4, and 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro.

Any advice is appreciated.  If the 200mm prime is incredibly sharp wide open... or isn't head and shoulders better than the 70-200mm... I'll stick with the zoom.  But I also don't want to use the 135-200mm range and be so disappointed that I never bother to use the lens. 

15

Canon General / Do you feel your photos have improved proportionally to the cost of your gear?

« on: August 30, 2012, 12:38:05 AM »

I have a 60D, 24-105mm f/4L IS, 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro, 50mm f/1.4 USM, and a 70-200mm f/4L USM.  I'm happy with the assortment of lenses, but it occurs to me that I'm not sure my photos are that much better than when I was shooting with a $150 - $200 Sony (7mp) point and shoot.

Just adding up the retail value of my gear ($4500), I'm not so sure that I'm 22X a better photographer than I was.  That's not to say I don't do a good job with my gear... I compose a shot well, I bounce light like a champ, and I get a ton of complements... but I think people take me more seriously because of the size of my camera than the relative improvement of the shots. 

I might just be having a bit of an existential crisis and I'm merely romanticizing the "quality" of my photos with the P&S... but still.  Do y'all think the gear has substantially advanced your product?