dSLR thread

[Gilbo]

Incidentally, it's hard to appreciate how thin those lenses are unless you can see them on the camera, so here's a link for the curious. For candid photography you can't beat them. People are much less intimidated when they don't have a massive zoom being shoved in their faces.

Also, there's a good, old Sunday Morning Photographer article by Michael Johnston (who had a monthly column in Black & White Photography Magazine for a long time) I bookmarked some time ago; he writes about the best autofocus lenses money can buy and mentions Pentax a couple times. He doesn't mention any of the little guys but he mentions a couple classics like the 31mm f1/.8. I actually have a silver 77mm f/1.7 --looks pretty weird on the all-black K10D.

The lense I'm most curious about at the moment is the new Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8. The author of 16-9.net says he'll have a review soon. You can see a comparison of the classic Pentax 85mm f/1.4 Michael Johnston mentions in his article and Canon's legendary 85mm f/1.2L from the author of 16-9 here. That's enough Pentax pimpage for now I suppose.

 

[udaman]

Incidentally, it's hard to appreciate how thin those lenses are unless you can see them on the camera, so here's a link for the curious. For candid photography you can't beat them. People are much less intimidated when they don't have a massive zoom being shoved in their faces.

Also, there's a good, old Sunday Morning Photographer article by Michael Johnston (who had a monthly column in Black & White Photography Magazine for a long time) I bookmarked some time ago; he writes about the best autofocus lenses money can buy and mentions Pentax a couple times. He doesn't mention any of the little guys but he mentions a couple classics like the 31mm f1/.8. I actually have a silver 77mm f/1.7 --looks pretty weird on the all-black K10D.

The lense I'm most curious about at the moment is the new Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8. The author of 16-9.net says he'll have a review soon. You can see a comparison of the classic Pentax 85mm f/1.4 Michael Johnston mentions in his article and Canon's legendary 85mm f/1.2L from the author of 16-9 here. That's enough Pentax pimpage for now I suppose.

LOL, Gilbo

After that still born wine thread on SR, I thought we'd never see you post again...welcome back .

Talk about pimpage, Olympus wrote the book on tiny, sexy little lenses....24mm Shit PC lens is supposed to be the best of the bunch for PC. Oh if only Oly would make a full-frame, all metal bodied dSLR of the same size or smaller/lighter than the classic OM1/OM2 line of 30yrs ago (FYI for you youngsters, *much* smaller/thinnery/sexier in the hands feel you almost end up gropping it, lol; than the silly 4/3rds sensor size Oly E410)...do you even have an idea how small these are, how revolutionary they were 30yrs ago, compared to these sad- politely 'voluptous' dSLR's now (more like excessively exaggerated, unnecessarily artificially 'big' bulging plastic silicone in nonsensical curves like department...Pam Anderson, lol).

 

[Gilbo]

I'd actually really like to handle an E-410. I'm not sure how it'd feel, but lighter is great, and for casual situations smaller is less intimidating to people. I think it would be a good travel camera. The big turn-off for me is the price of the glass, although, by all accounts it's all worth those asking prices. I'm also somewhat bothered by the lack of prime lenses for the format, and the fact that, despite the smaller sensor size, the zooms aren't much more compact or lighter than their APS-C or 35mm equivalents. Of course, it does show its advantages in things like make 3x telephoto zoom lenses with f/2.0 apertures (that's a 70-200mm 35mm equivalent for those who aren't used to the 4/3 sensor size). That's a pretty unique beast...

The wine thread, ha! Two weeks after I started that thread I got a job offer in Ottawa that I couldn't refuse; they said I had to be there for work in 3 weeks, so I picked my whole life up and left. The job has been brutally hectic ever since. I was working 7 days a week, more than 8 hours a day for a while ... Oh well. It's still quite intense, but there's light at the end of the tunnel. I still managed to drink quite a bit of wine, just didn't have time to talk about it .

 

[ddrueding]

I think I'll be getting that 60mm EF-S Macro next, though a wider-angle landscape lens would be nice. Is the 18-55 good for that? Or is there something I'm not considering?

 

[LunarMist]

Or is there something I'm not considering?

Learn how to use the equipment you have, rather that run around trying to do everything at once.

 

[ddrueding]

Learn how to use the equipment you have, rather that run around trying to do everything at once.

Yes Obi-Wan

I've been reading up on composition, but I don't have an eye for it yet.

 

[e_dawg]

I think I'll be getting that 60mm EF-S Macro next, though a wider-angle landscape lens would be nice. Is the 18-55 good for that? Or is there something I'm not considering?

Huh? Don't you already have the 18-55 lens? 18-55 is the single most universally useful focal length range in existence, IMO (esp if you can only have one range). Having said that, one might also say that it can also be the most "boring", a "compromise" range, and least useful for various common specific applications. For example, wide lenses are more impactful for landscapes and travel, and longer lenses are better for portraits.

A super-wide zoom can be somewhat revolutionary if you've never shot that wide before. In fact, the last two vacations I've been on, I left my mid zooms at home -- even the all-encompassing 18-200 -- in favour of the Sigma 10-20. Admittedly, there were occasions in which I wished for something a little longer than 20 mm, but I did about half of my shooting at 20 mm, about 30% between 14-18 mm, ~ 10% at 10-11 mm, and ~10% using the 35/2.

If I had to do it again, I think a 12-24 would be a great choice as a vacation lens and something that opens up a whole new world of photography. You wouldn't get that extreme wide angle of view that you would get at 10 mm (yes, that 2 mm makes a difference), but the extra 4 mm of reach would make it a more practical and universal lens in more situations.

I found the 35/2 to be a little too long for the typical low-light shots indoors at restaurants, musea, etc. Thinking the Sigma 24/1.8 would be a better choice IMO for a vacation prime and general urban / indoor social photography.

Macro lenses also open you up to a new world... the macro world. Macro pics are often breathtaking and fun when you first start, but IMO, the novelty wears off after a while. I found it's harder to get it right than I thought (lighting, focus, and nailing the shot quickly when you have a short window of opportunity), and once I was able to take a decent macro, I didn't have the motivation to create beautiful images... it became about technical perfection, and there wasn't any real satisfaction beyond that.

That is a contrast from, say, shooting people, where the images move me and inspire me at a much deeper level than crisp, magnified pics of bugs, flowers, etc. My main problem is finding willing subjects more than anything else.

I guess that's enough soapboxing for now.

 

[Handruin]

I finally found a 1d mark III at newegg and ordered me one. I'm working from home today waiting for UPS to deliver it.

I'm debating getting the canon 24-70mm f/2.8L or the 135 f/2 L to go with it. The 135mm is at a weird focal length, but I love all the pictures I've seen taken with it. On the flip side, I want a decent walk around lens for the 1d.

 

[ddrueding]

Yes, I already have the 18-55. And I still need to play with it some more for landscapes. Just curious if something shorter would be fun. Sounds like that is a yes.

I know I have a lot to learn before I'll be knocking out decent pictures, but accumulating lenses isn't like accumulating computer parts, right? These things do hold their value and don't get outmoded as quickly, do they? The bodies I understand, but the lenses are more or less transferable within a brand, no?

 

[Handruin]

I'm so excited.

(yes, as always Zelda is my test subject)

This pic was just in a mix of messing around with the camera.

50mm
F /1.8
ISO 400
1/80th

edit: the only thing I did was add a touch of sharpening in Canon DPP, no other post processing.

Click to enlarge

 

[ddrueding]

Beautiful shot Handruin. Enjoying your new toy? What were the features that drove you to get it?

 

[Handruin]

Features I wanted were the fantastic ISO noise handling, the 14 bit RAW, the brighter viewfinder, the auto focus speed increase, weather sealing, and better battery life (not to mention this thing feels great in my hand...seriously). Bonuses are the 10 fps and extra MP over my 20D. I took some test shots at ISO 3200 and they are usable...I think even you would like that feature.

 

[e_dawg]

I finally found a 1d mark III at newegg and ordered me one. I'm working from home today waiting for UPS to deliver it.

I'm debating getting the canon 24-70mm f/2.8L or the 135 f/2 L to go with it. The 135mm is at a weird focal length, but I love all the pictures I've seen taken with it. On the flip side, I want a decent walk around lens for the 1d.

Congrats Handy! Between these two, the 85/1.2, and the 100/2, I don't think you could go wrong with any of these world class lenses from Canon.

IMO, the 24-70 will be much more useful if you don't already have a top notch midrange zoom. The 85/1.2 and 100/2 would be more useful focal lengths IMO, the 100/2 being the most economical option, but the 85/1.2 generally being the more useful focal length. Of course, only you know which length would be more useful to you. That said, the 135/2 is universally praised from what I've heard...

 

[e_dawg]

Just curious if something shorter would be fun. Sounds like that is a yes.

Yep!

These things do hold their value and don't get outmoded as quickly, do they? The bodies I understand, but the lenses are more or less transferable within a brand, no?

More or less. You have times when there are significant features that affect value and compatibility... like EF-S, IS, USM, etc, so that will come into play as the next big thing hits... full-frame vs DX crop, etc. And third party lenses generally don't retain their value as well as Canon/Nikon/Pentax lenses do.

Speaking of third party lenses, I was going to mention that if you were thinking about a macro lens, I would suggest a portrait macro like the Tamron SP 90/2.8 that excels in both areas. It's a great deal with the current rebate.

 

[e_dawg]

BTW, beautiful kitty. Very nice, Handy.

 

[mubs]

Congrats, Handy! Keep us posted.

I'm in love! What a gal Zelda is. I'm surprised she poses for you without getting distracted.

 

[mubs]

Found a pic of Tannin here.

 

[LunarMist]

Doug,

I've noticed there was a wave of 1D MK IIIs everywhere last week including the usual places, so I believe the backorders are fullfilled. If the AF is dsyfunctional as is common with the 1D MK III, will you lose 15% in returning it for a refund, or will Newegg keep replacing it?

 

[LunarMist]

Found a pic of Tannin here.

That is an old image I have seen many times. The name of the photographer escapes me, but it is not Tony.

 

[mubs]

Tannin has written many times about lugging a lot of photo gear, and I wanted to poke fun at him, LM! ;-)

 

[Handruin]

Congrats Handy! Between these two, the 85/1.2, and the 100/2, I don't think you could go wrong with any of these world class lenses from Canon.

IMO, the 24-70 will be much more useful if you don't already have a top notch midrange zoom. The 85/1.2 and 100/2 would be more useful focal lengths IMO, the 100/2 being the most economical option, but the 85/1.2 generally being the more useful focal length. Of course, only you know which length would be more useful to you. That said, the 135/2 is universally praised from what I've heard...

I have a 50mm f/1.4, a 70-200 F/2.8L, and a 100mm macro that work with the 1D. The 85/1.2 is nice, but not what I'm looking for right now. I'm thinking I'll go with something like the 24-70/2.8 for now and consider the 135mm as a fun lens sometime down the road. I've heard nothing but good about the 135/2.0 except that it is at an odd length for general use.

 

[Handruin]

Doug,

I've noticed there was a wave of 1D MK IIIs everywhere last week including the usual places, so I believe the backorders are fullfilled. If the AF is dsyfunctional as is common with the 1D MK III, will you lose 15% in returning it for a refund, or will Newegg keep replacing it?

The auto focus seems fine so far for me. From everything I've read about the AF issues, they pertain to the AI servo mode which I only use < 1% of the time anyway. I normally use the single center AF cross type sensor for 99% of my photo work. Have you read/heard differently regarding other issues with AF?

Newegg only allows exchange/replace for the same camera, not a return for refund. If issues do crop up, I'll contact Canon for service on it, but so far it seems to be working brilliantly for me. If you know of things to try and test it for issues, please let me know. From a long a detailed article I read regarding the AI Servo issues, it seems I'd need to take a series of pictures with an object moving towards or away from me. I can take sample shots of moving traffic and see how well it does.

 

[Handruin]

Congrats, Handy! Keep us posted.

I'm in love! What a gal Zelda is. I'm surprised she poses for you without getting distracted.

She's very good about posing, I've lucked out with a cat who likes to model. I was having trouble getting pictures of her because every time I sat on the floor to take her picture, she wanted to come over to me to rub against me and be affectionate.

 

[e_dawg]

Aww, that's nice. I wish I wasn't allergic to cats. Zelda is the type of cat that inspires people to want a cat!

On another note, I find that one of the limitations I have now is finding willing subjects. Honestly, I find it tiring asking people if I can take their picture all the time. I'd rather go to some street event or some performance in the public square than ask.

 

[e_dawg]

Incidentally, it's hard to appreciate how thin those lenses are unless you can see them on the camera, so here's a link for the curious. For candid photography you can't beat them. People are much less intimidated when they don't have a massive zoom being shoved in their faces.

You know Gilbo, that's a very good point. I was talking about this with someone on another board after he posted some fabulous pics that he took with the bazooka-like 200/2 VR in a cafe. I find that people don't really think twice if you have a tiny flip style camera phone and are not too concerned if you are using a tiny Canon Digital Elph. However, when you start pointing a dSLR + medium/large lens at someone, you can sense them feeling uncomfortable, irritated, or even angry.

[...] best autofocus lenses money can buy and mentions Pentax a couple times.

Thanks for the link. The Pentax primes seem quite compelling. The 21/3.2 Limited seems a little soft in the corners unless it's stopped down to f/5.6, according to Photozone tests, however, although it's not like there's many alternatives at that focal length. I think the Pentax 24/2 would be great too, as I like the 24 mm focal length a lot. The 31 mm is a bit long for me as a staple lens.

The lense I'm most curious about at the moment is the new Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8.

That's a massive lens. I'm sure it will perform quite well, but it's a little big for my liking.

You can see a comparison of the classic Pentax 85mm f/1.4 Michael Johnston mentions in his article and Canon's legendary 85mm f/1.2L from the author of 16-9 here.

Don't forget about Nikon's 85/1.4. All the Nikon guys love it, and so do I.

 

[Gilbo]

Olympus has got some new lense announcements. The ones I think are neat are the 14-35mm f/2 (28-70mm 35mm equivalent)! And the 12-60mm f/2.8-4.0 which would be a phenomenal, fast, extended-range standard zoom.

 

[e_dawg]

Yeah, those are two interesting lenses. I'd love the 12-60, myself, which would become 16-90 on a 1.5x crop sensor.

I'm thinking about bodies with CCD-shift IS these days, as I am not seeing enough constant aperture VR zooms of reasonable size and weight nor wider than normal primes from Nikon. The upcoming Nikon bodies are very nice, but I'm a little disappointed in the lens selection. Pentax, Olympus, and Sony are all coming out with compelling lens and body options these days!

 

[Stereodude]

18-90...

 

[e_dawg]

Actually, I think it's 16-80

 

[ddrueding]

I assume that this 1-5x 65mm macro is not a good general purpose macro lens? Too much of a good thing? Not able to capture entire flowers, etc?

 

[LunarMist]

Correct, and it is especially not suitable on your camera.

 

[ddrueding]

Correct, and it is especially not suitable on your camera.

(self-test) Because of the crop factor of the smaller sensor?

 

[LunarMist]

The auto focus seems fine so far for me. From everything I've read about the AF issues, they pertain to the AI servo mode which I only use < 1% of the time anyway. I normally use the single center AF cross type sensor for 99% of my photo work. Have you read/heard differently regarding other issues with AF?

Newegg only allows exchange/replace for the same camera, not a return for refund. If issues do crop up, I'll contact Canon for service on it, but so far it seems to be working brilliantly for me. If you know of things to try and test it for issues, please let me know. From a long a detailed article I read regarding the AI Servo issues, it seems I'd need to take a series of pictures with an object moving towards or away from me. I can take sample shots of moving traffic and see how well it does.

It looks like Canon finally identified the problem after 5 months and have a solution.

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-8740-9068-9129

 

[Handruin]

Thanks Lunar for the info. I had been watching that page every couple weeks for updated info but had not seen that yet.

I'll be curious to run canon's test to see if mine is affected. This past weekend I took a bunch of photos and noticed some out of focus activity that might be characteristic of the problem. I was panning and snapping pictures while following a moving boat as it crossed in front of a sunrise and as soon as the boat was in front of the sun, the picture became out of focus. Once I passed the sun, it came back into focus (mostly). From what I read, bright lights can cause some of the problems due to the temperature, but that morning it was roughly 50 degrees F outside.

 

[Tannin]

The trouble you and I have, Doug, is that our Mark IIIs are the only 1 Series bodies we have owned. Mine clearly has better AF performance than my 20Ds or 400D (the 40D is still too new for me to know how good it is yet - only used it for a handful of frames, and not at all for birds in flight, so I can't compare 1D III and 40D) - but is my 1D III up to the standard expected of a 1 Series body? How would I know?

All I can say is that it's better than a 20D - so I'll just have to wait and see. In a way, I hope mine is faulty, because it's the best focussing camera I've ever owned already, and if it's possible to have even better than that ... well ... I'll be delighted!

 

[Mercutio]

I thought this was a pretty good article.

 

[ddrueding]

I thought this was a pretty good article.

That was a really good read. His description of aperture was the best I've seen.

 

[LunarMist]

You could actually go buy a book about basic optics and photography. In the olden days that simple explanation of aperture with an example was in the instuction manual.

 

[ddrueding]

I think for the moment I'm good on technical stuff. I'm trying to focus more on composition.

 

[mubs]

DPReview likes the Canon 40D.

I'm waiting for the review of the Nikon D300.

Then yum, rob a bank to buy the better one.