[raptor84]

NOw the next step will be full frame senors for you

 

[Wmcmanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif 2 new L Lenses were announced both Tilt and shift. Canon introduces 17mm & 24mm TS-E lenses: Digital Photography Review

Interesting. The 17mm lens is perhaps worth considering as a general purpose ultra wide angle, but the price tag of Euro 2,499 is a bit scary! Wonder what it will cost in the US market? The other choices that I've been considering are:

EF 16-35 f/2.8L II USM ($1,450 at B&H)
EF 14 f/2.8L II USM ($2,020 at B&H)

To be honest, of the 3 of them, I'm leaning toward the prime, but could be convinced otherwise.

I'm using a 40D but plan to pick up a 5D II in the near future and keep the 40D as a second body. I'm not intending to use the 5D II video capabilities on a regular basis. I've got a Sony PMW EX-1 XDCAM for that purpose.

Other lens in my bag include:

EF 50 f/1.2L USM
EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM
EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM
1.4 and 2.0 extenders

I'm thinking about selling the 24-105 and replacing it with an EF 85 f/1.2L II USM ($1,870 at B&H). I think with 14, 50 and 85 primes, I'd be more or less covered, although the missing 35 would always nag at me, I suppose.

Also thinking about adding an EF 300 f/2.8L IS USM ($4,100 at B&H) to cover the telephoto range. This lens would come in quite handy for track days, and is at just about the right focal length for that purpose. In the Canon L range, there is a big price jump to move up to anything that will get you closer, so unless I had an urgent need (which I don't foresee) to become a wildlife photographer, I'll just use the extenders if need be and call it a day. This lens is the lowest on my priority list and probably won't happen for a while, unfortunately. Actually, it may be a dream that is never fulfilled.

After CanJam, I'm planning to head up to Alaska for most of the summer. I'm really not sure if the budget will allow for any new lenses (or the 5D II) between now and then. But at the same time, they would be nice to have!

 

[OverlordXenu]

My advice: Stick with a simple, fast, small, and light wide-angle prime. 35/2 seems to fit the bill...

One of the worst things that can happen to photographers is getting obsessed with gear, or hunting for a magic bullet. Both are a waste of time, and money. To be honest, some art/photography books are going to be better investments than more lenses. Lenses don't make the pictures, neither do sensors or films, or cameras...the photographer does. You. Composition, composition, composition. That is the most important factor. A good photographer can take good shots whether they're using a Carbon Infinity, Phase One P45+, Hasselblad, 5D Mk. II, Holga, Instamatic, whatever.

As someone trying to become a photojournalist, I've rarely wanted more than a wide-angle lens. I only carry one lens around with me, on one body. I've got a lot of stuff at home to fool around with, and I choose which I think will be the best tool for the job.

Also, to be honest, normal lenses and short teles have always bored the heck out of me. I like to get close. If I didn't use my F100 so much I'd get a 24/1.4. If someone gave me $10.000 and told me to buy a camera outfit, I'd get a 5D Mk.II, 24/1.4, 35/1.4, 14L II, and 200/2. I'm a sucker for fast primes. If you bent my arm and forced me to get at least one zoom, I'd get the 16-35L II. (I like fast primes because of their lack of DoF, mmm...)

Also, here's a link to show you what can be done with equipment that you would probably think crappy or mediocre. Rob Galbraith DPI: Alex Majoli points and shoots

 

[vibin247]

Here's my dreamsheet:

1Ds Mark III (x2)
16-35 f/2.8L II
24-70 f/2.8L USM
85mm f/1.2L II

I work photojournalistically myself, and 95% of the time, a fast, wide-angle lens will work just fine. I currently use a 40D, 24mm f/1.4L and 70-200mm f/2.8L

 

[Wmcmanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverlordXenu /img/forum/go_quote.gif My advice: Stick with a simple, fast, small, and light wide-angle prime. 35/2 seems to fit the bill... One of the worst things that can happen to photographers is getting obsessed with gear, or hunting for a magic bullet. Both are a waste of time, and money. To be honest, some art/photography books are going to be better investments than more lenses. Lenses don't make the pictures, neither do sensors or films, or cameras...the photographer does. You. Composition, composition, composition. That is the most important factor. A good photographer can take good shots whether they're using a Carbon Infinity, Phase One P45+, Hasselblad, 5D Mk. II, Holga, Instamatic, whatever. As someone trying to become a photojournalist, I've rarely wanted more than a wide-angle lens. I only carry one lens around with me, on one body. I've got a lot of stuff at home to fool around with, and I choose which I think will be the best tool for the job.

Nice post, and undoubtedly true.

Quote:

Also, to be honest, normal lenses and short teles have always bored the heck out of me. I like to get close. If I didn't use my F100 so much I'd get a 24/1.4. If someone gave me $10.000 and told me to buy a camera outfit, I'd get a 5D Mk.II, 24/1.4, 35/1.4, 14L II, and 200/2. I'm a sucker for fast primes. If you bent my arm and forced me to get at least one zoom, I'd get the 16-35L II. (I like fast primes because of their lack of DoF, mmm...)

By 14L II, are you referring to the same lens I mentioned above? 14 f2.8L II. It's the only 14 that Canon seems to offer.

 

[lan]

Here's some interesting videos on the creation of one of Canon's super telephoto lenses, 500mm f4 IS.

YouTube - Canon Lens Production 1
YouTube - Canon Lens Production 2
YouTube - Canon Lens Production 3

 

[mr_baseball_08]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wmcmanus /img/forum/go_quote.gif Interesting. The 17mm lens is perhaps worth considering as a general purpose ultra wide angle, but the price tag of Euro 2,499 is a bit scary! Wonder what it will cost in the US market? The other choices that I've been considering are: . . . After CanJam, I'm planning to head up to Alaska for most of the summer. I'm really not sure if the budget will allow for any new lenses (or the 5D II) between now and then. But at the same time, they would be nice to have!

Wow Wayne! Quite a gear list. Once college graduation rolls around I'll be picking up a 5D Mk II and a 16-35 as well.

I didn't know you were a photog, where is your online gallery?

 

[krmathis]

Yeah, quite some nice Canon rigs in here.

I am waiting for the spring, so I could spend some time outdoors shooting some nice motives. Tired of all this snow and cold weather...

 

[Azazel90x]

Just ordered a Canon G10, should be here by the end of the week, ill post pics when it arrives!

heres a placeholder for now

 

[archosman]

First of April all Canon lenses are going up in price. And no... it's not a joke. Might be a good idea to pick up what you want now.

 

[Towert7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by archosman /img/forum/go_quote.gif First of April all Canon lenses are going up in price. And no... it's not a joke. Might be a good idea to pick up what you want now.

Nikon lenses already went up in price. Sad to see.

 

[majid]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wmcmanus /img/forum/go_quote.gif Interesting. The 17mm lens is perhaps worth considering as a general purpose ultra wide angle, but the price tag of Euro 2,499 is a bit scary! Wonder what it will cost in the US market? The other choices that I've been considering are: EF 16-35 f/2.8L II USM ($1,450 at B&H) EF 14 f/2.8L II USM ($2,020 at B&H) To be honest, of the 3 of them, I'm leaning toward the prime, but could be convinced otherwise. I'm using a 40D but plan to pick up a 5D II in the near future and keep the 40D as a second body. I'm not intending to use the 5D II video capabilities on a regular basis. I've got a Sony PMW EX-1 XDCAM for that purpose.

I have the old 24mm TS-E (with a 5D and 5DII). Remember, they are manual-focus lenses. I don't think the viewfinder on the 50D is good enough for manual focusing unless you constantly set the lens to infinity focus or use a viewfinder magnifier like the discontinued Magnifier S or the Angle Finder C. Even on the 5D/5DII, you should upgrade the focusing screen to the dimmer but sharper Ee-S/Eg-S.

The 16-35 II has improved the coatings, but keeps the same optical formula. It's not a great lens, not in the same caliber as the other L lenses in your lineup. The 17-40 f/4L is optically superior.

Keep in mind rectilinear ultra-wide lenses are very hard to control. Shift the lens a little bit from horizontal and you end up with massively skewed perspective. I used to have a VC 12mm Super-Wide Heliar on my Leica, and sold it because the perspective was too extreme. You may find the same with an ultra-wide prime when you graduate to full-frame.

One lens I would seriously consider if I were you would be the Zeiss Distagon ZE 21mm f/2.8 when it comes out. Sure, it's manual focus like the TS-E, but the optics are stellar. Otherwise, the 24mm f/1.4L seems a logical choice, but you may not want it due to the overlap with your 24-105.

Quote:

I'm thinking about selling the 24-105 and replacing it with an EF 85 f/1.2L II USM ($1,870 at B&H). I think with 14, 50 and 85 primes, I'd be more or less covered, although the missing 35 would always nag at me, I suppose.

I have the 35 f/1.4 and the 50 f/1.2, I use the latter far more often. The 24 f/1.4 is different enough to matter.

 

[Wmcmanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by majid /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have the old 24mm TS-E (with a 5D and 5DII). Remember, they are manual-focus lenses. I don't think the viewfinder on the 50D is good enough for manual focusing unless you constantly set the lens to infinity focus or use a viewfinder magnifier like the discontinued Magnifier S or the Angle Finder C. Even on the 5D/5DII, you should upgrade the focusing screen to the dimmer but sharper Ee-S/Eg-S.

Thanks for this input. I think I'll stay away from the TS-E lenses for now. Maybe by next summer. In the meantime, I've got plenty of other things that I still need to get my mind around and begin to grow into.

Quote:

The 16-35 II has improved the coatings, but keeps the same optical formula. It's not a great lens, not in the same caliber as the other L lenses in your lineup. The 17-40 f/4L is optically superior.

Again, good advice. Thanks for that. I'm really wanting to go with primes anyway.

Quote:

Keep in mind rectilinear ultra-wide lenses are very hard to control. Shift the lens a little bit from horizontal and you end up with massively skewed perspective. I used to have a VC 12mm Super-Wide Heliar on my Leica, and sold it because the perspective was too extreme. You may find the same with an ultra-wide prime when you graduate to full-frame.

This is something that I'm willing to deal with. When you get into more specialized lenses, there will be many frustrations that you don't have with the point and click stuff. Even if I visit the Grand Canyon and get nothing but a bunch of washed out pics, I can always go back again! In fact, that's a pretty good excuse.

Quote:

One lens I would seriously consider if I were you would be the Zeiss Distagon ZE 21mm f/2.8when it comes out. Sure, it's manual focus like the TS-E, but the optics are stellar. Otherwise, the 24mm f/1.4L seems a logical choice, but you may not want it due to the overlap with your 24-105.

Looks interesting and might be worth a try. Wouldn't hurt to have at least one manual focus lens. If nothing else, it would force me to develop some skills that I don't now have! That's half of the fun, isn't it? Ok, well, not half but at least part of the fun. The results still count for more than half. This lens is quite a bit cheaper than Canon's 14, which is a good thing.

Quote:

I have the 35 f/1.4 and the 50 f/1.2, I use the latter far more often. The 24 f/1.4 is different enough to matter.

Sort of what I was thinking when I bought the 50. Figured that a 24 could be added later and be different enough. But since I'm covered down to 24 with my zoom, I figured it might be best to go for broke with the 14 prime. It would be used for 'dedicated' landscape shots, whereas the 24-70 would be more of a walking around type of lens and my 50 prime would be used for indoor and low light shooting.

 

[Wmcmanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif Here's some interesting videos on the creation of one of Canon's super telephoto lenses, 500mm f4 IS. YouTube - Canon Lens Production 1 YouTube - Canon Lens Production 2 YouTube - Canon Lens Production 3

Interesting stuff. Thanks for sharing. Still not going to fork out $5,800 for this bad boy though! Canon | Telephoto EF 500mm f/4.0L IS | 2532A002AA | B&H Photo Free shipping, in case anyone is interested...

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by archosman /img/forum/go_quote.gif First of April all Canon lenses are going up in price. And no... it's not a joke. Might be a good idea to pick up what you want now.

Thanks for the info!
I am considering a tele lense for my 50D, and guess its worth hurrying up before April 1st. Hmmm...