RGF said:

big, heavy, cumbersome and expensive
There is the Nikon 14-24 but it is awkward to use

Other recommendation? Nothing in the Canon lineup seems to fill the gap without giving up on IQ. Any recommendations.

Thanks

Click to expand...

Considering your above mentioned problems, I don't think any lens in Canon/Nikon stable will meet your needs ... IMHO only option is to compromise with 16-35 f/2.8 L II

Absolutely

kennephoto said:

I hear ya and I do the same thing pay off my credit card every month and haven't paid interest on either card. Guess I should as for a raise haha. What do you mean pay yourself at variable interest rates?

Click to expand...

It means that on months when there is a lot of money left, i repay more, on months when there is less left, I repay less. In the end, I repay a little more than I took, so my savings account ends up with a net profit. (it's kinda linked to what my wife looks good in and how much the latest drresses cost as well

adhocphotographer said:

Thanks... was looking at those. I can even find them in India for the European price too...

Click to expand...

Hi nice shot!!

Can you please tell me where i can find reverse lense adapter and extetion tube for cannon 450D in india?

i am leaving in Pune Maharashtra

It sure is an awesome place. You need to go there soon as people have been moving and stealing rocks. Everytime I go one or two rocks that I've shot in the past have disappeared and all that's left are their tracks. Another sad part is that there are people who have driven their vehicles on the playa with leaving tire marks.

rwmson said:

Awesome location and shot! I would love to go there.

Click to expand...

bycostello said:

sissors?

Click to expand...

Hilarious, love it.

But there's a better option, less destructive. On my own Black rapid Straps (I have several), the "Loose" end has a Plastic Buckle on it that has a "gap" in one side, slip the strap through the "gap" disconnecting the strap from the belt, then slide the Plastic Buckle out of the end loop using the same "Gap" int he Buckle, the Strap will now slip through Plastic Buckle attached to the Shoulder piece where you shorten/lengthen the strap, you now have a loose end, fit your new R2 Buckle & reverse the procedure.

Shouldn't require the use of scissors, knives or any other sharp instrument.

oooh looks good...

7enderbender said:

ksagomonyants said:

Hey guys! I'm sure you're all aware of the terrible explosions in Boston. Just another sign of how street photography can be dangerous sometimes, especially when we don't think about it and don't expect anything like that. I hope none of those who live in Boston or visited it yesterday got injured. Take care!

Click to expand...

As a Bostonian I certainly appreciate this. Let's be careful though not to take the real and perceived dangers out of perspective. Despite the discomfort that we sure all feel at this point at the sight of trash cans let alone the 24-h "news" coverage of it we should not stop doing what we're all doing. The likelihood of falling victim to whatever insane kind of person responsible for this is pretty small compared to our everyday risks. You're very likely more at risk of being hit by a car or falling off a ladder still.

And I say this as someone who only wasn't right there at that time due to a scheduling conflict...

Click to expand...

+2. All my thoughts to people of Boston. Stay strong. A very memorable vacation at one one time in my life. Being a lifetime Bruins fan I visited the gardens the year before they tore them down. Now I have two NHL teams close to the heart. Jets and Bruins

Apparently iFly was on NikonRumors and got sick of it and sold all their gear and switched to Canon ;D ;D ;D

---

Seriously though . . .

---

I took my boy to iFly (indoor skydiving) and saw the canon camera behind the glass.

They had the benefit of front-lighting, I was fighting that light from the back (won't know until I get home how well I did since I'll have to post-process for the lighting).

Bought a pic as a hedge against my still growing skills with the Tamron 24-70; I was mostly paying for the curiosity of the exif . . .

THAT said, I got what I wanted for $4:
They're using a 50D w/ 10-22mm.

Glass/plexiglass is truly my nemesis; I hate seeing my fat arse in the dang image I had both of my high-end filters, which DID NOT fit my lens (did I mention I'm still learning on the Tamron?) . . .

I'm going to scrutinize the image when I get home, but it was ISO 1600 and I was at 6400 with the 5DmkII, so wish me luck

these lens caps are the best
http://www.lenscoat.com/hoodie-lens-caps-c-5.html?osCsid=c3128c973e5defa1c4f706b17381bb4c

got one for my 600 FD since the original that it came with was in a bad way (perished with age but the lens itself is in mint condition)

viggen61 said:

Agreed. Great Crested Flycatcher! Nice shots!

Click to expand...

Thanks Viggen, I appreciate your kindness!

This is just plain awesome 8)

acelegendary said:

Hey there,

Long time reader, first time poster.

I recently filmed an engagement session, and wanted to utilize a shallow depth of field in bright light without an ND filter. So, knowing that I would end up slowing the footage down to 40%, I cranked up the shutter speed in order to hit around f/2. The results? Well, see for yourself:

http://acelegendary.com/blog/2013/4/9/sean-liz-save-the-date

Click to expand...

ankorwatt said:

sorry, no I said only that you do not lose anything with higher resolution in a sensor regardless which lens you use, look at page 6, do I need to add that OFFCOURSE it is the same sensor size we are talking about

And I think you are a little bit rude when you are talking about the same bull sh...
it's derogatory (nice word I found)

Click to expand...

Your the type who backtalks, quibbles, beats around the bush, dodges direct questions, obfuscates, etc. in order to make your arguments. If you would just directly answer peoples questions, you wouldn't have so many problems. Because you DO do those things, well...people don't trust you. And, every time you get involved, the conversation tends to go downhill, into the death spiral of you perpetually blanket stating "Canon Sucks", and everyone else trying to present reasonable arguments as to why they don't suck...they just aren't the best of the best at sensors "currently".

Everyone knows you hate Canon, and no one cares. I'm just curious when you'll actually pick up on that fact...

GMCPhotographics said:

Which leaves one to wonder if they no longer have that capability or they outsourced the original FD lens optics, which would explain why it's so darn expensive!

Click to expand...

Had Canon outsourced production of the lens elements, they would have been cheaper, not more expensive. And they'd very likely still be available today, even if not packaged and sold by Canon.

That's because Canon wouldn't have outsourced to somebody smaller or less capable than themselves; they'd have outsourced to somebody who was already making such lenses, somebody who had already sunk the cost in R&D and tooling and what-not. Somebody whose own operation was so big that they had manufacturing capacity to spare for others, enough that they could sell to others for less than what it would cost to start from scratch -- else why buy from them in the first place?

That nobody else is selling camera lenses with >200mm front objectives should also be a pretty big clue that there isn't some secret mystical source of such beasts that Canon went to. By way of comparison, Meade's biggest refractor is comparable to Canon's current Great Whites, and other manufacturers of consumer refractors have similar specs at the top end of their lineups. It's only when you get out of the consumer realm into scientific instruments that you find anything in the range of the Canon 1200...and those, by definition, aren't mass-produced. Indeed, they're made in similar quantities to the Canon 1200, and cost as much...hmmm....

Cheers,

b&

Neeneko said:

I am guessing it would be too much to hope that at least one of them would have a tripod mount.....

Click to expand...

I guess you are right!

A tripod mount at the nodal point would be ideal ...

I had this lens in my bag but sold it after discovering that it did not offer anything the Sigma 50 150 2.8 (model I and II) could not do better. The Sigma is discontinued and replaced by the 50 150 OS which is in my eyes a joke as it is as big as the 70 200 OS.

All three lenses are soft.

The Sigma 50 150 front lense does not rotate, it does not extend while zooming and it is small and silent. Of course it is DC (digitally crippled) and EX (expensive). However as a 2nd hand lens it is usually a bargain.

The Tokina is sharper wide open at 135mm as the Sigma is at 150mm. Can't compare them at 135 mm as I never did test this.

I love the Tokina build philosophy, I like my 11-16 2.8 and my 20 year old 28 70 2.6 but:
Both lenses have no zoom creep but if you turn the Tokina upside down my lens makes the sound of a piston going through a cylinder and some rattling like a loose screw following shortly after.
The 50-135 autofocus has this acoustic resemblance of a BOSCH Accu drill. That does not diminish its optical quality but the Sigma scores much higher here in my personal preference with a silk smooth HSM implementation.

I get this alot when I shoot event and wedding.For wedding,I will face their friends and relatives tried to take some shot with their cell phone or compact camera.While events,I will face those reporters from various of newspaper.
Often,I will let them have the shot 1st then I lift up my camera and raise my hand asking everyone look at me with strong and firm tone.Just 1 or 2 shot make sure everyone looking into the camera and I will leave the place while allowing someone else take the shot.
Then,I grab some candid with my 70-200 while they were been photographer by others.

add the 40mm into the sub $500 lens this is top of the bang for buck chart IMO

Also

I'd like to add two other very common misconceptions people have

1) highest mega pickles is the best - this is often not the easiest thing to explain to newcomers, hell its impossible here (please dont derail this thread with infinite debate over QE and pixel density blah blah)
most common question from wedding guests / participants is how many mega pixels is that camera?
meanwhile i'm holding 2 or 3 different bodies

2) super zooms must be the best because they have the biggest range of numbers quite often newcomers dont understand the concept of aperture at all and therefore dont understand why that tamron 18-270 produces crap images compared to a 24-70 mk2

neuroanatomist said:

[...], and during operation the sound was almost a low growl.

I wouldn't be concerned about it...

Click to expand...

It's life Jim ...

Re: Frustrated with the delay in the 200-400

Thanks - hopefully you are correct and it will be out 2Q13, not 2Q14

AndyG said:

I've never personally held a Canon 5DMKIII, but from all of the reviews and videos online I've been scared away from it because of the softness of the video.

Click to expand...

I use a 5D3, I think the image looks fantastic. I just shot a 40 minute film with it, we used a 5D2 as a b camera and I can absolutely tell the difference in quality between the two. I don't think the softness of the image should be a concern, especially since the image can withstand post-sharpening quite well.

Watch the Phil Bloom review of it and it should ease your concerns quite a bit:

http://philipbloom.net/2012/04/09/5dmk3/

until my pictures start looking bad i can't see why i'd wanna test

just a note about the juzaphoto comparisons: the sigma 50-500 is the old version without os. there is a newer version with os, and it cost more than than the 150-500.

bdunbar79 said:

RGF said:

bdunbar79 said:

I found at least for soccer and football the improvements in the 1DX sensor outweighed the resolution loss. Wildlife is another deal though, as I'm not familiar with focal lengths of 500 and 600mm.

Click to expand...

when you say outweighed resolution loss, what ISO and how large do you print?

Click to expand...

For football I've printed 50% crops at ISO 8000 at 8x10, ISO 1600 with 75% crop at 10x14.

Again though, I realize the FOV of a 500 and 600 is going to be quite different, but those shots beat my 1D4 by a long way.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I'll be borrowing one ina few weeks from CPS and I'll be able to compare then.May upset my budget a bit, a whole bit.

Ewinter said:

I spoke to the canon guys about it and got the play with the redesigned lens. Basically, where the TC housing was made it hard to change filters and release the lenses, so they moved it. It's a beaut of a lens

Click to expand...

Built-in TC is not common (may be the first in a non-cinc lens) so I am sure that there are design/usability issues around it. I would have hoped (foolish me) that Canon would have worked these out long ago.