Cameras & Photography Because there aren't already enough ways to share photos...

Official Lens Discussion Thread

Thread Tools
 
Old 03-26-2008, 12:15 AM
  #521  
Moderator
 
Mizouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,283
Received 2,795 Likes on 1,989 Posts
Originally Posted by stogie1020
Yeah, true, just not sure I want to give up f2.8 for the overlap.

I wish Google would make the perfect lens. f1.0 5mm-600mm IS 3.2lbs... $499.00
im sure they have something in the works.
Old 03-26-2008, 12:32 PM
  #522  
is learning to moonwalk i
 
moeronn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SoCal
Posts: 15,520
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by stogie1020
Yeah, true, just not sure I want to give up f2.8 for the overlap.

I wish Google would make the perfect lens. f1.0 5mm-600mm IS 3.2lbs... $499.00
Since when did Google get into the camera lens business?

BTW, don't forget the 24-105 f4 has 3-stop IS. Still, on a crop, I think you'd want your main walk around lens to be wider than 24.
Old 03-26-2008, 02:54 PM
  #523  
Needs more Lemon Pledge
 
stogie1020's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Age: 52
Posts: 52,768
Received 2,000 Likes on 1,173 Posts
Well. Google is making cell phones, so it's only a matter of time before they start making everything else. OK, joking.

What would you recommend for a main walk around? the 17-55? 10-22?

This is for a crop body.
Old 03-26-2008, 02:59 PM
  #524  
is learning to moonwalk i
 
moeronn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SoCal
Posts: 15,520
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Between those two, the 17-55, no question. The 17-55 may not always be wide enough, but it is much more versatile - f2.8, larger range, IS. I used (rented) the 10-22 this weekend and really enjoyed it, but I was at the Grand Canyon. I don't think I'd use it much, if at all, for a walk around. I had primarily been using the 17-40 f4 L as my walk around, but now I'm thinking about selling it since the 17-55 is working well.

Again, I'm not knocking either of the other two options (24-70 f2.8 or 24-104 f4 IS). Those are both great lenses from what I have read. I just think that 24 won't be wide enough on a crop.
Old 03-27-2008, 02:09 AM
  #525  
Senior Moderator
 
srika's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 58,616
Received 10,697 Likes on 5,420 Posts


lol can anyone find a larger version of this? here is the flickr link:

http://static.flickr.com/45/152386454_fa67e5da89.jpg

not posting this for any reason, necessarily - just something I ran across tonight.
Old 03-27-2008, 02:39 AM
  #526  
Moderator
 
Mizouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,283
Received 2,795 Likes on 1,989 Posts
i wonder what event that was for.
Old 03-27-2008, 04:18 AM
  #527  
Unofficial Goat
iTrader: (1)
 
The Dougler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto
Age: 39
Posts: 15,744
Received 112 Likes on 89 Posts
ok, so I've just finished my tax return, and I will be receiving a sizable return. My question is if I were to spend some of it on camera gear what should I get? Currently I have an XTI, 50mm 1.8, 18-55 IS and random filters and bag/pod. I'm torn between a reasonable telephoto either 70-200 or 70-300 but would like a good comprise of fast glass or IS for the buck, or just getting an extension tube set. the tube set would offer me a reasonably priced way into limited macroish photog which I love, but I would also really like to extend the reach of my current focal length limitations. I think i'm favoring going the zoom route, but at the same time I can't decide if I'm better off waiting and buying high end zoom lens later. Argh I don't know what I want.
Old 03-27-2008, 07:29 AM
  #528  
Photography Nerd
 
Dan Martin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto
Age: 44
Posts: 21,489
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
Here's another good site that does a good job at comparing focal lengths: http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/article...omparisons.htm

I've had this guy's site bookmarked for a couple years, but I just stumbled across it again last night. There's a lot of good stuff on that site, so it's worth browsing around.
Old 03-27-2008, 11:22 AM
  #529  
Have camera, will travel
 
waTSX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Federal Way, WA
Age: 63
Posts: 7,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Dougler
ok, so I've just finished my tax return, and I will be receiving a sizable return. My question is if I were to spend some of it on camera gear what should I get? Currently I have an XTI, 50mm 1.8, 18-55 IS and random filters and bag/pod. I'm torn between a reasonable telephoto either 70-200 or 70-300 but would like a good comprise of fast glass or IS for the buck, or just getting an extension tube set. the tube set would offer me a reasonably priced way into limited macroish photog which I love, but I would also really like to extend the reach of my current focal length limitations. I think i'm favoring going the zoom route, but at the same time I can't decide if I'm better off waiting and buying high end zoom lens later. Argh I don't know what I want.
The EF 70-200L f/4 IS would be a great pickup, considering you already have a decent walk-around range covered. It's a lot cheaper and lighter than the f/2.8 version and excellent by all accounts I've read. That would give you 320mm of reach on the long end with your XTi. I have and love the 2.8 IS version, but it's a beast to haul around for a full day and I wouldn't mind having a lighter, albeit slower, version.
Old 03-27-2008, 03:11 PM
  #530  
Unofficial Goat
iTrader: (1)
 
The Dougler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto
Age: 39
Posts: 15,744
Received 112 Likes on 89 Posts
Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM Autofocus Lens $579
Zoom Telephoto EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS Image Stabilizer USM Autofocus Lens $479
EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Autofocus Lens for Select Digital SLR Cameras $279

Best bang for the buck? the 55-250 seems really cheap, looks like time for research...
Old 03-27-2008, 04:09 PM
  #531  
Senior Moderator
 
srika's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 58,616
Received 10,697 Likes on 5,420 Posts
Originally Posted by Mizouse
i wonder what event that was for.
I wonder what the cost of all the equipment in that pic is...
Old 03-27-2008, 06:33 PM
  #532  
sup
 
ViperrepiV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 2,147
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I just posted this in the "used camera equipment" thread, but i realized that this is probably a beter place for it...

I am in the market for a DSLR.....I found a used Xti for $400 (base only)....the guy is also selling a Sigma 18-200mm for $300. Any idea of the lens quality on this one? He said he would sell me the (non stabilized, i think) kit lens for $50, which seems to me like kind of a waste....but if I don't get the kit lens, and I don't get the one he is selling, I will need a good quality but versitle lens....any thoughts?
Old 03-27-2008, 06:51 PM
  #533  
sup
 
ViperrepiV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 2,147
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by ViperrepiV
I just posted this in the "used camera equipment" thread, but i realized that this is probably a beter place for it...

I am in the market for a DSLR.....I found a used Xti for $400 (base only)....the guy is also selling a Sigma 18-200mm for $300. Any idea of the lens quality on this one? He said he would sell me the (non stabilized, i think) kit lens for $50, which seems to me like kind of a waste....but if I don't get the kit lens, and I don't get the one he is selling, I will need a good quality but versitle lens....any thoughts?

maybe this lens?

Sigma Zoom Super Wide Angle 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro Autofocus Lens for Canon Digital EOS


and not sure if this is the same thing...

Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC SLD ELD Aspherical Macro Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras

Thanks for helping the n00b!
Old 03-28-2008, 11:48 PM
  #534  
sup
 
ViperrepiV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 2,147
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
well i got the xti body, and tomorrow im going to buy one of two lenses. the one i mentioned up top:


Sigma Zoom Super Wide Angle AF 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro Autofocus Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras

or



Sigma Zoom Super Wide Angle 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro Autofocus Lens for Canon Digital EOS

not sure which....help?
Old 03-29-2008, 03:48 AM
  #535  
Unofficial Goat
iTrader: (1)
 
The Dougler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto
Age: 39
Posts: 15,744
Received 112 Likes on 89 Posts
seems the 17-70 offers good range and speed, also it could help make a good kit because your next lens could be a 70-XXX and you would have a fair amount of range covered.
Old 03-29-2008, 07:24 PM
  #536  
sup
 
ViperrepiV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 2,147
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by The Dougler
seems the 17-70 offers good range and speed, also it could help make a good kit because your next lens could be a 70-XXX and you would have a fair amount of range covered.
thanks for the advice. I ended up getting the Promaster (Tamron) 17-50mm f2.8....the store i went to said the tamrons are better than the Sigma (i.e. they didn't carry the sigma), but i also read good things about this lens, and i figured that I didn't need all that much zoom, and i liked the 2.8 at all lengths.











they look better at a higher res though
Old 03-29-2008, 10:12 PM
  #537  
Drifting
 
drigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: florida
Posts: 2,751
Received 267 Likes on 91 Posts
Originally Posted by waTSX
I have and love the 2.8 IS version, but it's a beast to haul around for a full day and I wouldn't mind having a lighter, albeit slower, version.
i'll trade you for my 70-200mm f/4L
Old 03-30-2008, 04:08 AM
  #538  
Unofficial Goat
iTrader: (1)
 
The Dougler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto
Age: 39
Posts: 15,744
Received 112 Likes on 89 Posts
Originally Posted by drigo
i'll trade you for my 70-200mm f/4L
If your looking to sell, PM me.
Old 03-30-2008, 10:15 AM
  #539  
Have camera, will travel
 
waTSX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Federal Way, WA
Age: 63
Posts: 7,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by drigo
i'll trade you for my 70-200mm f/4L
Lol! Nah, I'll hang on to the 2.8 IS, but the f/4 IS is a pretty sweet piece of glass, especially if you're doing daytime shooting.
Old 03-30-2008, 03:01 PM
  #540  
Drifting
 
drigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: florida
Posts: 2,751
Received 267 Likes on 91 Posts
Originally Posted by waTSX
Lol! Nah, I'll hang on to the 2.8 IS, but the f/4 IS is a pretty sweet piece of glass, especially if you're doing daytime shooting.
lol..i know i was only kidding..
from what i've read..the f/4 is one of the sharpest lenses in the canon line-up..
Old 03-30-2008, 03:04 PM
  #541  
Drifting
 
drigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: florida
Posts: 2,751
Received 267 Likes on 91 Posts
Originally Posted by The Dougler
If your looking to sell, PM me.
i'll let you know...if i get rid of it i would replace it with the f/2.8 but right now i'm saving up for either the 24-70 f/2.8L or the 17-55 f/2.8IS
Old 04-03-2008, 01:49 PM
  #542  
Needs more Lemon Pledge
 
stogie1020's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Age: 52
Posts: 52,768
Received 2,000 Likes on 1,173 Posts
Anyone know if the 70-200 2.8IS will fit vertically in the Tamrac Adventure 9 lower compartment (detached)? According to the dimensions it seems like it 'just barely' is too big.
Old 04-08-2008, 02:01 PM
  #543  
Moderator
 
Mizouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,283
Received 2,795 Likes on 1,989 Posts
no idea, but the 70-200 2.8 non-is will either barely fit in my bag or just wont fit. depends on if i have the hood attached.

good thing i don't own this lens YET, otherwise ill get the urge to buy a bigger bag.
Old 04-10-2008, 11:10 AM
  #544  
dom
Senior Moderator
 
dom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Age: 47
Posts: 47,710
Received 801 Likes on 662 Posts
Anyone use or have experience with the new Canon EF-S 55-250 IS? Just ordered one since I had a chance at a pretty good deal. I was waiting and waiting to buy a 70-200 or 70-300 but I could never justify the price for the amount of times I use the camera.
Old 04-10-2008, 12:06 PM
  #545  
nnInn
 
jupitersolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,670
Received 1,084 Likes on 646 Posts
From what I've been reading, people say that it is a pretty sweet piece of glass. Very sharp.
Old 04-10-2008, 01:51 PM
  #546  
Needs more Lemon Pledge
 
stogie1020's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Age: 52
Posts: 52,768
Received 2,000 Likes on 1,173 Posts
Originally Posted by dom
Anyone use or have experience with the new Canon EF-S 55-250 IS? Just ordered one since I had a chance at a pretty good deal. I was waiting and waiting to buy a 70-200 or 70-300 but I could never justify the price for the amount of times I use the camera.

You have probably seen them already, but here is a link to the Amazon user reviews:

http://www.amazon.com/review/product/B0011NVMO8/ref=cm_cr_dp_all_helpful?%5Fencoding=UTF8&coliid=& showViewpoints=1&colid=&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDes cendinghttp://www.amazon.com/review/product/B0011NVMO8/ref=cm_cr_dp_all_helpful?%5Fencoding=UTF8&coliid=& showViewpoints=1&colid=&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDes cending
Old 04-10-2008, 04:58 PM
  #547  
Moderator
 
Mizouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,283
Received 2,795 Likes on 1,989 Posts
serious? i was going to buy one but i decided to break the bank and get a 70-200 F/4.0L
Old 04-10-2008, 05:07 PM
  #548  
Moderator
 
Mizouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,283
Received 2,795 Likes on 1,989 Posts
WOW, this lens is TINY compared to the 70-200 2.8.. feels really fake in my opinion
Old 04-10-2008, 05:34 PM
  #549  
Moderator
 
Mizouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,283
Received 2,795 Likes on 1,989 Posts
Old 04-10-2008, 05:44 PM
  #550  
COME AT ME BRO!
 
evilone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: st.johns, NL (CANUKISTAN)
Age: 44
Posts: 9,796
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
I have a lens question. I have 2 lenses for my D80, a 70-300mm and 28-80mm. I am going to europe for 2-3 weeks this summer and was wondering what would be the best lens to get for panoramic type shots? I have heard of a wide angle lens or something like that, but Im not really sure. Any help is welcome!
Old 04-10-2008, 05:49 PM
  #551  
Moderator
 
Mizouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,283
Received 2,795 Likes on 1,989 Posts
well there are 2 ways you could get a panoramic shot, i think.

one way is to take a bunch of pictures next to each other and stitch it together later in photoshop

or you can get a wide angle lens like around the 10mm range and then crop it
Old 04-10-2008, 05:52 PM
  #552  
COME AT ME BRO!
 
evilone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: st.johns, NL (CANUKISTAN)
Age: 44
Posts: 9,796
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
how much does a good wide angle lens go for?
Old 04-10-2008, 05:57 PM
  #553  
Moderator
 
Mizouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,283
Received 2,795 Likes on 1,989 Posts
i dunno how well these are but here.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._ED_IF_DX.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._6D_EX_DC.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...T_X_124AF.html
Old 04-10-2008, 06:00 PM
  #554  
COME AT ME BRO!
 
evilone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: st.johns, NL (CANUKISTAN)
Age: 44
Posts: 9,796
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
thanks MIz.. GOD DAMN $1k for that Nikon glass.. shit and i thought the $650 or so was bad enough for my 70-300.. Anyone on here ever use Sigma or Tonkia glass before? those are more in my price range. I cant really afford to spend a grand on glass atm.
Old 04-10-2008, 06:13 PM
  #555  
nnInn
 
jupitersolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,670
Received 1,084 Likes on 646 Posts
Originally Posted by dom
Anyone use or have experience with the new Canon EF-S 55-250 IS? Just ordered one since I had a chance at a pretty good deal. I was waiting and waiting to buy a 70-200 or 70-300 but I could never justify the price for the amount of times I use the camera.

dom,

Take a look at this thread, scroll down to the first picture.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/635123
Old 04-11-2008, 08:35 AM
  #556  
dom
Senior Moderator
 
dom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Age: 47
Posts: 47,710
Received 801 Likes on 662 Posts
Pretty good reviews and a nice Photo in that thread to boot!

I was playing with it last night. I was outdoors and was generally pretty happy. My main concern was the speed of the auto focus especially at 250mm. I had played with a 75-300 at work at the auto focus was brutally slow. But this thing was just fine, I was tracking my dog moving around the backyard and it was surprisingly quick.

I haven't uploaded any photo's yet so I can't speak to the image quality. But for what I paid, ($230 CAD) I think I'll be pretty happy with it.

You can HEAR the IS. A little bizarre after using point and shoots that have IS that is silent, but it doesn't seem to affect performance
Caught that quote in one of the reviews. It was kinda strange hearing the IS. I thought it was broken.

As for build quality, its a step above the 18-55 kit lens but nothing to get excited about. Although I do prefer the zoom grip over a 70-200 series. Nice rubbery texture.
Old 04-11-2008, 08:52 AM
  #557  
nnInn
 
jupitersolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,670
Received 1,084 Likes on 646 Posts
I can hear the IS working on my 300 f/4. Was a little odd to me as well, first lens that has done this. Others say they have the same thing.
Old 04-11-2008, 09:00 AM
  #558  
dom
Senior Moderator
 
dom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Age: 47
Posts: 47,710
Received 801 Likes on 662 Posts
I don't remember hearing the IS on the few of the 70-200 series lenses or the 17-55 IS I've used. Not a big deal, you really have to listen for it anyway.
Old 04-11-2008, 09:09 AM
  #559  
Team Owner
 
EuRTSX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: District of Corruption
Age: 36
Posts: 23,588
Received 105 Likes on 69 Posts
I had the Tokina 12-24mm.

Was a very nice lens for the money.




Originally Posted by evilone
thanks MIz.. GOD DAMN $1k for that Nikon glass.. shit and i thought the $650 or so was bad enough for my 70-300.. Anyone on here ever use Sigma or Tonkia glass before? those are more in my price range. I cant really afford to spend a grand on glass atm.
Old 04-11-2008, 11:57 AM
  #560  
is learning to moonwalk i
 
moeronn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SoCal
Posts: 15,520
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Mizouse
WOW, this lens is TINY compared to the 70-200 2.8.. feels really fake in my opinion
Then you should have never played with the 2.8

If I ever decide to get the 2.8, I'll probably have a similar (though opposite) reaction. But, the f/4 IS is more likely than either 2.8 at this point.


Quick Reply: Official Lens Discussion Thread



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:26 PM.