Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

AlaskaMoose

macrumors 68040
Apr 26, 2008
3,559
13,406
Alaska
Which version of the lens did you get? The mark 1's can be had for a lot cheaper than the mark 2's.
I bought the USM II, which comes with a detachable hood. This one:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/129190-USA/Canon_2529A004AA_Telephoto_EF_200mm_f_2_8L.html
It's a very fast and sharp lens, and perhaps my favorite. With a Kenko tube it can be used for close-up photography. I did that for about a year taking photos of flowers, but now use the EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro, and the 200 for birds nearby and wildlife such as moose and other large animals.

Ducky waiting for food:
IMG_6545b.jpg
 

soLoredd

macrumors 6502a
Mar 12, 2007
967
0
California
Depending on your low-light subject, what about using a flash? In my opinion, that is the easiest solution while retaining a good DoF and IQ. You could go with a f/2.8 and utilize the flash with good technique to stop motion, if that is what you are after. Hell, you probably could get away with a f/4.

Although I'm still a beginner when it comes to photography, I don't understand why flash photography is rarely mentioned. I can understand if the shooting conditions forbid or frown on using a flash but most times it doesn't. I got my 430exII recently and can't imagine how I would do without it now indoors. Even on my 24-105 f/4 IS, the flash is good enough to get me shots of a 5 month old. I can't imagine what a f/2.8 could do for you.
 

Phrasikleia

macrumors 601
Feb 24, 2008
4,082
403
Over there------->
Although I'm still a beginner when it comes to photography, I don't understand why flash photography is rarely mentioned. I can understand if the shooting conditions forbid or frown on using a flash but most times it doesn't.

I'd have to disagree with that last part. At least in my experience, most of the time using flash is a problem, especially if you want to take numerous photos. People tend to find flash annoying and obtrusive. It's also not very good for candids, at least not after the first shot. I tend to use my speedlight mostly for fill flash outdoors or else for "studio"-type shots.
 

Kronie

macrumors 6502a
Dec 4, 2008
929
1
I'm still not sure what the OP is shooting? Natural light portraits? Macro? Birds? I know you want 2.8, but why?

The best addition to your 30 1.4 is a zoom like the 17-85 or a used 17-40. IMHO.
 

clams

macrumors member
Original poster
Aug 2, 2009
44
0
I'm still not sure what the OP is shooting? Natural light portraits? Macro? Birds? I know you want 2.8, but why?

The best addition to your 30 1.4 is a zoom like the 17-85 or a used 17-40. IMHO.

I shoot mainly natural light portraits but I generally would like to try to expand to different areas. Mainly sports and street photography. I don't plan on much animal or nature photography. Macro, I'm definitely interested in.

In fact, I owned the 17-85, and honestly, I discovered that I could cover much of that zoom range by moving my feet with the Sigma 30. That's why I would want a telephoto as my next lens. I've always felt there was that reach that I would really want for street photography. 2.8 would not only help DOF control for portaits but be nice for lowlight shooting which a I do a lot.
 

clams

macrumors member
Original poster
Aug 2, 2009
44
0
If the OP wants to shoot in low light, he better spend some big cash in fast lenses, and expensive flashes. Otherwise he has no options but to boost ISO.

Hmm. I think that's the thing with a lot of Canon users. They simply look past the third party options and would only look at Canon L glass. Honestly, a lot of third party lenses give the best value for the dollar (although that 100mm f/2 and 200mm L is mk 1 is looking pretty good). If you look, a lot of the third party lens-makers make lenses that are almost as sharp but at the fraction of the price of Canon equivalents. And I'm not using photography as the primary means to support myself so that tiny difference isn't important enough for me to pursue.

So again, if I were to rephrase what I originally asked. I was wondering if there were any recommendations to a fast lens in the normal telephoto range that would cost 500ish max. And, I am not opposed to buying used.

Thanks in advance!
 

oblomow

macrumors 601
Apr 14, 2005
4,474
18,480
Netherlands
That is a great site! :)

at first I thought you meant the prime-junta site. Since this is written by a finn I thought it might perhaps be you ( finland not having much inhabitants ). I checked, then I noticed you were referring to the digital picture site. getting old....
 

toxic

macrumors 68000
Nov 9, 2008
1,664
1
I shoot mainly natural light portraits but I generally would like to try to expand to different areas. Mainly sports and street photography.

ok, first, street photography: there seems to be two camps when it comes to this. one wants to stand 50ft away and "snipe" with telephotos, the other uses wide-angle or normal lenses and get into the scene. two very different looks. you should decide what lens you want for this based on the look you want, not because you're too nervous to get in close. perspective changes with distance.

then sports: what kind of sports? your focal length requirements change with the type. indoor can be covered with a standard zoom and a 70-200. outdoor requires 400mm+ and a 70-200, or an analagous setup.

In fact, I owned the 17-85, and honestly, I discovered that I could cover much of that zoom range by moving my feet with the Sigma 30.

moving your feet changes the perspective of the shot. moreover, the amount you need to move changes with the size of the subject. taking a picture of a mountain requires more than a few steps when going from 17 to 85mm.


finally, when choosing prime lenses, choose based on focal length. make sure you "see" at the focal length you choose, otherwise you'll always be out of position for the composition you want.
 

clams

macrumors member
Original poster
Aug 2, 2009
44
0
Well I kind of narrowed it down and took what toxic had to say in mind. I'm thinking either the Tokina 100 f/2.8, 50-135 f/2.8 or the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8
 

JFreak

macrumors 68040
Jul 11, 2003
3,152
9
Tampere, Finland
at first I thought you meant the prime-junta site. Since this is written by a finn I thought it might perhaps be you ( finland not having much inhabitants ). I checked, then I noticed you were referring to the digital picture site. getting old....

Well there are 5 million people in Finland so I don't know everyone :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.