Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
L Glass w/ a Classy A**
- Thread starter efoto
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
MattG said:Make that three of us
I'm going to sell my 28-135 IS lens...not happy with it. I think I'm going to spend the extra buckage and go with an "L" of some sort; not sure which yet.
Surprised that you are disappointed with this lens. I have one and am very happy with it.
Though if you want something better you might look to the 24-105L IS.
efoto said:The f/4 L's are quite nice, much more cost effective than the f/2.8's but obviously brighter and faster. I almost purchased the 17-40 L but the focal length was just a bit too short in my opinion. The 70-200 f/4 L gets awesome reviews in every way in comparison to the f/2.8 (IS) versions, so that's always an option too. L is definitely sweet, I love the build quality of this 24-70 L, feels plain awesome but f/2.8 is freakin' huge!!!
I love my 17-40L. It is a great street shooter lens IMO. 2.8 lenses are great for DOF control. In fact rumors are that we may see some exciting lenses announced by all makers come February at PMA. Digital specific 17-55's and 55-200's with 2.8 apertures. Something for everyones budget (within reason of course).
Moxiemike said:
Oh, you were talking about the girl. I was talking about her camera.
Moxiemike said:
Never been to one of these photo shows. But a previous employer sent me to trade shows since I am Gay, and he felt that I would be better able to get past the "beautiful" bodies and come back with the right gear at the right prices.
You should have seen the look on one sales guy's face when he tried to win me over saying that the model was going to be at a private party for those that signed purchase orders that day. I said fine, but asked if her brother was going to be there too?
A bit OT, but I have had a few comments from my female customers that complain that when there are photo shoots held by companies, they fail to recognize that women are now empowered with the business purchase decisions too.
MattG said:
And there lies the rub.
So far in my Canon stable I have the following in no particular order:
From Canon; the 17-40L, the 28-135IS, a 28/2.8, a 50/1.8 mkI, and the 75-300IS (an OK performer IMO).
From others; a Tokina 12-24 (VERY sharp and very distortion free), a Tamron 28-70/2.8 (also VERY sharp), and a Zenitar 16mm fisheye (back when I was using a Rebel Ti mostly).
I am at a crossroads moment. I have a Rebel XT and a 10D. The 10D never made me happy for the lack of AF confirmation speed. Never had any backfocus issues. The Xt has been a winner for me so far for the way I shoot.
Been tempted by the new 5D. I miss knowing how the perspective of the lenses work on the 35mm format, and the DOF of those lenses under 35mm format. And their look. Those that have done LF shooting will understand more of what I mean.
So I am thinking of selling off the 10D (more than thinking actually). Converting the XT to IR by irdigital.net. Buying the 5D. Keeping the 12-24 for the XT. Keeping the 17-40L, the 28-70/2.8, and the 16, 28, and 50 for the 5D. And adding the either the 70-200IS or the 70-300DO. Haven't decided on what to do with the 28-135IS so far. I agree with iGary that it is a great lens for aerials and the such because of the IS.
The other option I face is adding a 20D or waiting for the 30D early next year (just speculation, given the age of the 20D by Feb 2006 and the announcement of the D200) given some of the glass I already own. But it is so tempting to go FF.
Lets see here, where to start....
Anna Kournikova is no exception, but that isn't her in photo....you must not watch your tennis That is Maria Sharapova, my Russian beauty As far as Ms. Canon vs. Ms. Nikon....Ms. Canon is Adriana Lima, a VS Angel as well as world-renowned supermodel, basically requiring her to look 'dolled up'. She does have a lot of makeup on in this particular picture, there are others of her that I prefer more though, less makeup along with less articles
The woman in my 'tar, as devilot pointed out, is indeed Emmy Rossum who was most recently seen in Phantom of the Opera and also starred in such "hits" as The Day After Tomorrow
Could someone briefly explain to me the differences between the 1dmkII, smkII, mkIIn? Just sentence or two, I don't want a debate just what they are....they're out of my price range so I haven't read all of their reviews but I figure some of you know.
MacNoobie said:
Anna Kournikova is no exception, but that isn't her in photo....you must not watch your tennis
That is Maria Sharapova, my Russian beauty As far as Ms. Canon vs. Ms. Nikon....Ms. Canon is Adriana Lima, a VS Angel as well as world-renowned supermodel, basically requiring her to look 'dolled up'. She does have a lot of makeup on in this particular picture, there are others of her that I prefer more though, less makeup along with less articles The woman in my 'tar, as devilot pointed out, is indeed Emmy Rossum who was most recently seen in Phantom of the Opera and also starred in such "hits" as The Day After Tomorrow
Could someone briefly explain to me the differences between the 1dmkII, smkII, mkIIn? Just sentence or two, I don't want a debate just what they are....they're out of my price range so I haven't read all of their reviews but I figure some of you know.
Chip NoVaMac said:
That is an f/4 right? I guess with IS that makes it much more effective....if only they had put IS on the 70-200 f/4, that would be sweet for a lower price-point than the f/2.8 IS.
I'm hyped to have a 2.8, I honestly never thought I would be in a situation to have such nice equipment like I do now. I often pickup hobbies and buy quality sh** from day one, but this time (photography) I did a decent amount of film work on my mother's old film body before actually buying stuff.
It would be sweet to get some great new lenses at PMA. I have to say I'm hoping that they don't update the 20D too far on PMA, or if they do it costs at least one arm more so that I can still sleep soundly at night.
And there lies the rub.
So far in my Canon stable I have the following in no particular order:
From Canon; the 17-40L, the 28-135IS, a 28/2.8, a 50/1.8 mkI, and the 75-300IS (an OK performer IMO).
From others; a Tokina 12-24 (VERY sharp and very distortion free), a Tamron 28-70/2.8 (also VERY sharp), and a Zenitar 16mm fisheye (back when I was using a Rebel Ti mostly).
<snip>
The other option I face is adding a 20D or waiting for the 30D early next year (just speculation, given the age of the 20D by Feb 2006 and the announcement of the D200) given some of the glass I already own. But it is so tempting to go FF.
Part of me wishes the 24-70 was a 20-70 for some added wide angle, probably just as much as I would personally need to get (considering the 20 f2.8), although then it would probably sacrifice something to do that, who knows.
So that Tokina 12-24 works well for you?
From what I have heard from a Canon 'insider' is that the rebuttal camera to the D200 will indeed announce at PMA in Feb and be available late March/April. Also, this new contender will more than likely be priced slightly above the D200 price point, similar to the gap between the 20D and D70s. With the D200 body around $1800, look for the '30D' to be priced between $2000 and $2200 US. So regardless of the fact that I'm sure the successor to the 20D will improve some features, count on a higher price which should still continue to make the 20D a value at its price for its features.
efoto said:
The new 24-105L is an F4.0.
And I agree a 70-200L IS at f/4 would be a killer, but not likley to happen for business reasons.
After the D200, you can bet the farm on a "killer" 30D IMO. On the lens front, you can look forward to more IMo from Nikon, Canon, Sigma, and Tamron to address the big sales from this Xmas on the DSLR front.
Very well! Super sharp and well corrected. The only lens better IMO is the Tamron 11-18! The shorter range and slower aperture of the Tamron allows it beat the pants off all others IMO. I went with the Tokina becuase it is a close second to the Tamron, and I wanted the extra range it offered over the Tamron.
Well the D200 is $1699US. Anything higher than $100-200US over that might kill the 30D IMO given the current line-ups from both.
Anything that Canon offers up next will have to have at least 5fps (maybe going to 6fps). Offer an EOS 1/3 build quality with weather stripping. IMO it will have to be a 12mp at least. In order to get the $200-2200US pricing it would have to be a 1.3x field of view factor sensor. But that would leave out those that have the EF-S lenses, and given the US love of lawyers - I don't see that happening.
1dsmkII has a 16mp full-frame sensor and 4fps shooting rate, along with other stuff. 1dmkII has an 8.2mp CCD (unlike the CMOS in the ds) and 8fps shooting. the 1dmkIIn is basically a 1dmkII with a bigger lcd (2.5") and some more advanced card features (simultaneous RAW and jpeg to separate cards, etc.)efoto said:Lets see here, where to start....
Anna Kournikova is no exception, but that isn't her in photo....you must not watch your tennis
The woman in my 'tar, as devilot pointed out, is indeed Emmy Rossum who was most recently seen in Phantom of the Opera and also starred in such "hits" as The Day After Tomorrow
Could someone briefly explain to me the differences between the 1dmkII, smkII, mkIIn? Just sentence or two, I don't want a debate just what they are....they're out of my price range so I haven't read all of their reviews but I figure some of you know.
Chip NoVaMac said:
Canon is gonna have a tough time upgrading the 20d when you consider how new the 5d is and how close the D200 comes to both the 20d and the 5d in terms of price (the former) and specs (the latter).
If they underspec it, it'll be seen as a failure compared to the D200 but do they really wanna undermine sales of the 5d?
I think that what will happen is: 30d @ 10mp. $1199. 5d drops to $1999. original rebel discountinued. XT drops to $799. I don't think there's much else they can really do. It's a tight fit for both in that "tweener" market.
I hope the Canon 17-55, if they make one, is great. Having had my nikon 17-55 for almost a year, it makes me not even notice i'm using a crop sensor anymore. It's sharp. Contrasty. Has INCREDIBLE color, producing lovely saturated tones, and is FAST.
I showed a non-camera guy my D2h with 17-55 and has him focus in low-light (my living room) and he was amazed at how fast it focused, from a completely OOF blurry VF to a lovely, tack sharp image in the VF.
And it's all the 17-55. Hopefully Canon will make one as good as the Nikon. There's really no flaw in this lens. It made me reconsider my Sigma purchases, thinking "i should just buy the top-end nikon stuff. it's that good"
Chip-- did you know that the Tokina 12-24 f4 is pretty much the same as the Nikon 12-24 f4 but without the SWM motor??? I guess nikon lisenced the design to them, as they did the n80 to Fuji. That tokina is a killer lens at half the price of the nikon with exactly the same specs. And you canon folks don't need a lens mount converter to use that great Nikkor now.
Agreed, but here's to wishingChip NoVaMac said:
How does a slower aperture help it out? I figured it they had made that lens 2.8 then you can always stop to 4/5.6/22 whatever, but how does it being 4.5-5.6 help it over the Tokina's straight 4?
I must have had an older/rumor price of $1800, I see it's being listed at $1700 now ($1699
). I still think that it wouldn't be too outrageous to expect the Canon competitor to come out $200 above that, listing at $1900. I agree with your points about the included features, as well as probably not going to the 1.3x sensor due to negation of EF-S lens users. I know FF uses EF, does 1.3 use EF solely as well?homerjward said:
So essentially the 1dsmkII is a 5D on steroids, the 1dmkII is a fast-shooter, and the 1dmkIIn has more user-oriented features than the 1dmkII? Does that essentially sum them up? Are the 1dmkII/n models 1.3x or FF?
efoto said:Agreed, but here's to wishing
How does a slower aperture help it out? I figured it they had made that lens 2.8 then you can always stop to 4/5.6/22 whatever, but how does it being 4.5-5.6 help it over the Tokina's straight 4?
A 2.8 aperture, by design limits, is usually not too sharp until you hit f5. And because of the lower aperture, you start to get diffraction at the high aps like f16, f22, et. al. Some 2.8's don't go past f16.
An f4 they can make smaller in diameter, to better tolerances, and get sharp ap's from wide open (which might still be soft) all the way to f22 with less diffraction than a 2.8.
Some lenses pick a larger aperture based on application, the 12-24 being a prime example. You don't need a big 2.8 on that lens, as it's easier to handhold anyway, and mostly used for landscapey stuff. I don't miss 2.8 on my 12-24 and it's my only piece of glass that's that slow.
Moxiemike said:
IMO the 5D is a different beast. FF sensor and only 3fps without the weather sealing gaskets.
Again the 5D is a different beast. A 20D replacement will have to have compatibility IMO with the EF-S mount and a 1.6x field of view factor in order to be compatible with digital specific lenses.
IMO we will see the 30D closer to the D200 in terms of specs and price. The original Rebel is basically gone already. The XT also gets an up grade to better match the current D70s. A new DRebel KISS to meet the D50. Unless there is a big leap in the quantity of FF CMOS chips that Canon can produce, the best reduction in price IMO is to go to $2700 to $3000 by the middle of next year.
It should match up well to Nikons offering.
Chip-- did you know that the Tokina 12-24 f4 is pretty much the same as the Nikon 12-24 f4 but without the SWM motor??? I guess nikon lisenced the design to them, as they did the n80 to Fuji. That tokina is a killer lens at half the price of the nikon with exactly the same specs. And you canon folks don't need a lens mount converter to use that great Nikkor now.
Pretty much thought so, but did not look at the element count or groupings to find out for sure. But I love your spin on the topic.
More likely that Nikon OEM'd the lens from Tokina with the provision that Nikon had exclusive use of the lens for x number of months, or till Tokina felt that there was enough critical mass to make it worth their efforts to produce in other mounts. I can't believe that Nikon would license a lens design that could kill their own sales, or to drive others from the Nikon mount bodies.
efoto said:
With extreme lens designs, getting the most from them requires compromises to get the best from a design. In particular if you are trying to compete at a particular price level.
That is why it is the slowest in the group of similar lens IMO. And also offering only a 1.6x zoom ratio, compared to 2x or better offered by others.
I must have had an older/rumor price of $1800, I see it's being listed at $1700 now ($1699
The 1.3x sensor so far is a EF mount only. But given the HS crop mode on the D2X, it is possible that Canon may offer the same sort of feature on a 30D. Mount an EF-s lens on the 30D and it goes into a 1.6x crop mode automatically.
Pretty well sums it up. The 1D's are 1.3x and the 1DS's are FF.
Moxiemike said:
Good points, but there is a need and desire for fast ultra wides. Otherwise you would not see 16-35 and 17-35's with 2.8's for the pros.
Chip NoVaMac said:
for sure. and i'd love to have a 12-24 f2.8. but i don't mind the f4 for it's applications. kept it smaller, and of course, cheaper.
Which leads me to show you:
http://nikonimaging.com/global/technology/scene/05/index.htm
12-24 developed by nikon. the DESIGN was liscensed off, not the actual lens manufacturing. So it's a different lens that is the same.
efoto said:
Yes and no, it has some good features, the FF sensor is a good thing and so is the 12.x million pixels, but there is a lot to the 1ds2 that isnt obviously apparent. I never really was THAT impressed with the 5d. But the way i see it the baby 1d2 is the 20d and the baby 1ds2 is the 5 d
Canon aim at an audience and look to have provided to the non pro side of that too.Basically, the way i see it they have aimed at certain types of photography, the 1ds2 is aimed at studio pros/portrait/glamour and landscape (with its fullframe and high megapixels) and the 1d2n is aimed at photojounalists and sports shooters, although this isnt as cut and dry as im making out (because you can use either for either)
Very fast, the 1d2n is the same as the 1d2 but with a few extras (they are not really that different, just canons version of a Mac speed bump)
So there are apparently some taboo questions being posted....posts and members are vanishing faster than lube on a pornstar
Regardless of the 'attacks' of late, I'd love to see some sample images from a 1dsmkII. I honestly have never seen any other than from dpreview and those are quite, well, dpreview. I'm not bashing your work or anything , I just want to see some examples because that camera is a serious contender for a future purchase by me.
Thanks in advance, I look forward to seeing some stuff.
Regardless of the 'attacks'
of late, I'd love to see some sample images from a 1dsmkII. I honestly have never seen any other than from dpreview and those are quite, well, dpreview. I'm not bashing your work or anything , I just want to see some examples because that camera is a serious contender for a future purchase by me.Thanks in advance, I look forward to seeing some stuff.
Well all this lens talk made me want to buy a new one
After reading pretty good reviews, I went with the new Canon 10-22mm EF-S for my Rebel XT. Next on the list is the 70-200mm f/4 "L".
After reading pretty good reviews, I went with the new Canon 10-22mm EF-S for my Rebel XT. Next on the list is the 70-200mm f/4 "L".
I'm debating between the 135 f2L and the 200 f2.8L right now to finish out my triple rebate. The 135 costs more but is f2 so that's understandable. They would would theoretically be overlapped in the future with the 70-200 f2.8 (possibly IS), but the 135 would still be f2 so that is better I suppose. I'm not exactly sure what to do, although the price point on the 200 is easier on the already-depleted wallet.
efoto said:Lets see here, where to start....
Anna Kournikova is no exception, but that isn't her in photo....you must not watch your tennis
I'll admit I dont watch a lot of tennis it bores me to death just like golf and football and baseball, hockey I can tolerate but the other sports I dont have the heart for. I'm not even a hockey buff either I just cant tolerate any sports and when I hear my friends talking about football I feel like they're all speaking Chinese. I did learn something though and who's the pretty face in the photo and even if I dont watch tennis a whole lot I've come to associate tennis with Anna so that probably explains my blatant answer. Miss Adriana Lima sounds familiar and yes she does look nice with the Canon in her hands
and hopefully next time with a little less articles homerjward said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but the 1D Mark II has a CMOS sensor, I doubt I've seen a CCD in an Digital EOS in a long time.
Anyways the way it goes is this:
Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II
Resolution: 16.7 MegaPixel CMOS Sensor
Sensor size: 36mm x 24mm (Full 35mm frame)
Focal Length Multiplier: 1.0x
Frame Rate: 4.0 FPS
JPEG: up to ~32 images
RAW: up to ~11 images
LCD Size: 2.0"
Canon EOS-5D
Resolution: 12.8 MegaPixel CMOS Sensor
Sensor size: 36mm x 24mm (Full 35mm frame)
Focal Length Multiplier: 1.0x
Frame Rate: 3 FPS
JPEG: up to ~60 images
RAW: up to ~17 images
LCD Size: 2.5"
Supports Picture Styles
Canon 1D Mark II (N)
Resolution: 8.2 MegaPixel CMOS Sensor
Sensor size: 28.7mm x 19.1mm
Focal Length Multiplier: 1.3x
Frame Rate: ~8.5 FPS
JPEG: up to ~40 images
RAW: up to ~20 images
LCD Size for: Mark II: 2.0", Mark II N 2.5"
(Mark II N Supports Picture Styles and simultaneous writing to both CF and SD cards)
efoto said:
The 1Ds Mark II isn’t so much the 5D on steroids, sure its got a higher mega pixel count then the 5D but the craze from Canon seems to be picture styles on the 5D and 1D Mark II N which are just a set of in-camera parameters that adjust sharpness/contrast/saturation and a load of other things behind the scenes. That and the 1Ds Mark II is a pro body, weather sealed, fast AF body. The 1D Mark II(N) is definitely the sports shooters camera though I don’t shoot very much sports with it, you loose roughly half the resolution and roughly half the price and gain a higher fps, same weather sealed body, good resolution, same fast AF as the 1Ds Mark II etc etc. The 5D is positioned to push the benefits of full frame sensors in a compact and therefore light weight body that doesn’t have a 1D series body (weather sealing, fast AF, high fps, etc etc) rating.
efoto said:So there are apparently some taboo questions being posted....posts and members are vanishing faster than lube on a pornstar
Regardless of the 'attacks'
Thanks in advance, I look forward to seeing some stuff.
I've got some galleries up on deviantART for now with the Mark II N
http://tzzdc.deviantart.com/gallery
I dont have any full size 8.2MP shots from the Mk II N at the moment and the only ones I do show off photos at ISO 1600 because someone at dpreview asked for them at that rating.
http://www.usnet1.net/blog/DPP07D50B0B0E1429.jpg
http://www.usnet1.net/blog/DPP07D50B0B0E1836.jpg
BakedBeans said:
I also think that the 1DmkII is also aimed at 35mm photographers that want the best that their 35mm lenses can give (at least with the ultra wides and wide angle lenses); but want to be as close to focal length perspective that 35mm offers but in digital. Without suffering in the edges.
Well put. Canon seems to be hung up on Picture Styles. So don't count out a 1DSmkIIn come February.
efoto said:So there are apparently some taboo questions being posted....posts and members are vanishing faster than lube on a pornstar
Regardless of the 'attacks'
Thanks in advance, I look forward to seeing some stuff.
Damn, I go to work and miss all the fun.
Best thing to find a place that you can rent the 1DS from and do your own shooting with it.
I hope to borrow our 5d from work and shoot it side by side with film with my 17-40L.
efoto said:
Depends on your need for the sharpest lens and your need for speed. The 135 would be a 210mm field of view, and the 200 would be a 320mm field of view.
I guess in a perfect world we all would have the 14/2.8, 20/2.8, 28/1.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 135/2.0, and the 200/2.8 on our 1.6x bodies.
But we could also try to live with the 16-35/2.8, 24-70/2.8, and the 70-220/2.8IS.
I think that one of the reasons I am drawn to the 5D is the 24TS lens. Had a 35PC Nikkor for my N70 that saw some use, not as much as I thought - but having it was great.
MacNoobie said:
For some reason that I fail to see right now, Picture Styles is omething that Canon is pushing for their high end cameras so far. So I would not be surprised to see an update to the 1DS with it too.
The 1D and 1DS cameras also feature the 45 point AF system, if that is a real selling point. Keep in mind this is from a Canon shooter.
IMO the 5D was a gamble on Canon's part betting on the features of the D200. Nikon surprised many by (at least with the paper specs) having a body that met the standards of the F100. Canon may have lost, only in gaining some sales for the 1D and 1DS in the short run.
The D200 wins some credit in offering an expanded bracketing range that makes PS CS2's HDR function usable.
Wow, this thread has really exploded.
To compliment my 70-200 f/4L, I think I'm going to get the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8. I've been reading reviews and they are all pretty dang positive for that lens.
Not to mention it won't break the bank.
After that, nice tripod.
To compliment my 70-200 f/4L, I think I'm going to get the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8. I've been reading reviews and they are all pretty dang positive for that lens.
Not to mention it won't break the bank.
After that, nice tripod.
Yeah we do, haha, this thread is just a bunch of guys looking for more pictures hahaLacero said: