[TheChemist]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif I haven't had a chance to use lightroom. the RAW processing of CS3 seems fine to me. Is there really more to the RAW workflow in lightroom that makes it better? I don't do resizing in Photoshop. Bicubic isn't the best resizer. Try using anything with Lanczos. It's just sharper and has more detail. I use just a tad little USM after.

The integration of a fantastic library combined with the great RAW processing is what makes Lightroom stand out from Photoshop in the RAW category. Cycling through pictures and making adjustments is just easier in LR. The keyword tagging is awesome for organizational purposes, you've got the full set of RAW processing right there in one nice menu - really its a program that you should try out and see how it fits you. It fits me and I think its wonderful.

 

[Mrvile]

Ok, I ended up trading my 70-200/4L for the 70-300IS and I'm glad I did. I received the 7/3 today and so far everything looks good. Lens is SHARP and IS works great! Here are some 100% crops:

300mm f/5.6:

300mm f/8:

And of course, being the smart consumer I made sure I tested portrait mode. 300mm f/5.6:

f/5.6 is sharper than I expected, and though f/8 is noticeably sharper, f/5.6 is still very useable.

The lens is built alright, about the same as my 100/2.8 macro, though it doesn't have the focusing panel (I don't know why, it's always a nice feature to have). I did notice that you can't turn the focusing wheel when the lens is set to AF, which is kind of a bummer, and the focusing wheel turns when it's AFing. The focusing wheel is rather small and discreet so it doesn't get in the way. I also noticed that the USM on this lens isn't as good as the USM on other Canon lenses I've owned, which is to be expected since this lens doesn't have full ring-type USM. The AF is still relatively fast, though it is quite noisy and will hunt in low light.

Otherwise, the lens lives up to my expectations and it really fits my needs. Now I just need to pick up a lens hood for it (cmon Canon, let's get the message already!).

 

[lan]

Well that was quick. At least you got to mess with an L lense to see what it's all about. I seem to have this craze for image stabilization. I find it quite useful. Did you need the extra reach of the 70-300?

I miss my canon cameras. Taking the minolta with me on my trip is affirmation I love a fast handling camera. The minolta is slower but the lense I'm using is slow focusing. I'm using the video camera in the car instead. Another thing I learned, holding the video camera without all that stuff around it is just a disaster. I get a good amount of stabilization from my bracket contraption. Glad I built it. One anoying thing about the HV20 is lack of wide angle. It's a bit ridiculous for a video camera. Good thing I got that wide angle adaptor BUT it is clearly distorting the image and there's no front rings in which I want to put a hood. HD video shows the dirtiness of the lense and well anything weird easier.

 

[Mrvile]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well that was quick. At least you got to mess with an L lense to see what it's all about. I seem to have this craze for image stabilization. I find it quite useful. Did you need the extra reach of the 70-300?

Well if you want to see me arguing with myself about what I was going to do, you can check out this thread.

 

[Mrvile]

Sorry bringing this thread back from the dead...

Anyway I posted this over at POTN, some of you guys may be interested in reading: Canon 70-300 IS review

Oh and this thread is probably going to be moved to Gear-Fi...

 

[archosman]

I was looking at this very lens yesterday. Thanks.

 

[troymadison]

yo dudes check out my canon camera

 

[Kahuna]

Presently I own the following:

Canon 20D body
17-40 f4L
50 f1.4
70-200 f2.8L I.S.
400 f5.6L
All glass has a Hoya Skylight 1B (S-HMC) Super Multi-Coated Glass Filter for glass protection, and I own a B+W 77 mm Kaesemann Circular Polarizer Multi-Coated (MC) Glass Filter.

I also have a Canon EF 1.4x II Extender.

In addition I own a Gitzo 1410 tripod with a Markins M20 ball head mounted.

 

[lan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kahuna /img/forum/go_quote.gif 50 f1.4 70-200 f2.8L I.S.

I'm still trying to convince myself to keep the 50 1.4. The problem is once you're used to L colors, it's hard to go back even though this is a nice prime. I find it's autofocus too slow also.

 

[bperboy]

I've got Rebel XTi and 100mm Macro. I've put a bunch of photos in the Post your photography thread. Check it out and maybe tell what you think!

 

[Kahuna]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm still trying to convince myself to keep the 50 1.4. The problem is once you're used to L colors, it's hard to go back even though this is a nice prime. I find it's autofocus too slow also.

I mainly use the 50 1.4 when I want the Boken (at 1.4) for a particular shot. I would love to get my hands on 50 1.2L, but simply do not use that focal range enough to justify the 1.2L's cost...

I'll 2nd the L's great color!

 

[digitalmind]

I'm still shooting with a 300D, kit lens, 50mm 1.8, and a 70-300mm Tamron. I'm looking to replace the kit lens and have roughly €500 to do this with. I know this question has been covered a heck of a lot of times on other boards -- but since there's a topic here: What would you / have you opt(ed) for?

I'm currently looking at the Canon EF-S 17-85 f/4.0-5.6 IS USM, but would like to hear some more recommendations. I would really like to keep the wide 18mm, since I shoot a lot at almost fully zoomed out. Also would like a 10-20mm lens, but then I'll still be stuck with the kit lens for anything past 20mm.

 

[Sh0eBoX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by digitalmind /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm still shooting with a 300D, kit lens, 50mm 1.8, and a 70-300mm Tamron. I'm looking to replace the kit lens and have roughly €500 to do this with. I know this question has been covered a heck of a lot of times on other boards -- but since there's a topic here: What would you / have you opt(ed) for? I'm currently looking at the Canon EF-S 17-85 f/4.0-5.6 IS USM, but would like to hear some more recommendations. I would really like to keep the wide 18mm, since I shoot a lot at almost fully zoomed out. Also would like a 10-20mm lens, but then I'll still be stuck with the kit lens for anything past 20mm.

I'm going to go ahead and vote against the 17-85, based on things i've heard about it. the barrel distortion on it is moderate, and it has CA problems. Sharpness is not bad in the center, but as you fall out toward the corners/edges it's not too hot. Also, it's a slow lens so it can't really be used well in anything other than daylight (unless you're shooting still subjects, in which case the IS will prove helpful). I think you would be better off getting the Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 EX DC Macro (a very well-regarded lens at POTN, which many people love to have as a kit lens replacement for a relatively cheap budget). Besides not having IS and losing 15mm on the long end, I think this lens is better in all respects than the 17-85

 

[digitalmind]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sh0eBoX /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm going to go ahead and vote against the 17-85, based on things i've heard about it. the barrel distortion on it is moderate, and it has CA problems. Sharpness is not bad in the center, but as you fall out toward the corners/edges it's not too hot. Also, it's a slow lens so it can't really be used well in anything other than daylight (unless you're shooting still subjects, in which case the IS will prove helpful). I think you would be better off getting the Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 EX DC Macro (a very well-regarded lens at POTN, which many people love to have as a kit lens replacement for a relatively cheap budget). Besides not having IS and losing 15mm on the long end, I think this lens is better in all respects than the 17-85

Hey, thanks for the recommendation. This is also what I read in various topics. I initially disgarded it based on price, since it is pretty much a bit more than half of the Canon 17-85 (foolish, I know). However, if it performs as good as people say it does, that makes it a winner. I won't mind losing the 15mm on the long end, I hardly ever use more than 50mm anyhow (and in which case I move to the 50mm 1.8). The price especially helps, leaving me with less time spent saving for 30D body.

 

[Sh0eBoX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by digitalmind /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hey, thanks for the recommendation. This is also what I read in various topics. I initially disgarded it based on price, since it is pretty much a bit more than half of the Canon 17-85 (foolish, I know). However, if it performs as good as people say it does, that makes it a winner. I won't mind losing the 15mm on the long end, I hardly ever use more than 50mm anyhow (and in which case I move to the 50mm 1.8). The price especially helps, leaving me with less time spent saving for 30D body.

Yeah, the 17-70 is definitely an outstanding lens, especially for the price. You can check out the photo archive for it on POTN and see what people have been able to do with it (IMO... there are some astounding photos reflecting what you can get out of this guy once you learn how to use it). If I had a tighter budget when I was replacing my kit lens, this would definitely have been in my bag. However, I was able to stretch out a little bit and grabbed myself a 17-55 f/2.8 IS and never looked back (boy do I love this lens

)