[Dominat0r]

I cant wait till my nifty fifty gets here....also picked up a 75-300 (cheap) just to get some taste of some range.

I would love to see some pics with that 17-55 IS, there is one for sale on the forums right now.

 

[I'm broke]

Some pictures with that lens:

 

[ecommerce813]

Nice pics I'm Broke. Personally I prefer the 70-200IS, but I've been playing with a 24TSE and Lee filter system recently.

 

[I'm broke]

Post tilt-shift pics! Is a tripod a must?

 

[ecommerce813]

Don't know if I have any particularly decent "tilt" pictures (still trying to get a handle on how to use this to good effect). I mainly use the shift to keep perspective normal on buildings and get "more sky" in landscape photos. I'm not sure it will be very intersting, but I think I have a TSE photo from San Diego I could dig up (be patient with me, since this weekend will be pretty busy).

About a tripod, I know I've shot a few pictures without (just for kicks), but I think it's pretty hard to hold the camera, manipulate the tilt +/- shift, manual focus, set manual exposure, check the viewfinder, and (then, finally) think about composition. Plus, on a crop camera, I think it's hard to see most of the effects of the tilt/shift in the viewfinder. Honestly, I'm not sure how anyone could do it looking through a 1.6x Canon or 1.5x Nikon.

 

[azt33]

I am thinking of getting rid of the 70-200mm f/4 L that I have and get a 10-22mm instead. I noticed on my last trip, that I have not even used the 70-200mm once. I did notice that my kitlens (I know, I know, I want to replace it) was not wide enough at times.

Do you guys/gals think that, for a person who apparently is not very interested in shooting tele, the 10-22mm and 24-105 L lenses would be sufficient?

 

[I'm broke]

I'm in San Diego! It'd be nice to see..

 

[I'm broke]

Quote:

Originally Posted by azt33 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am thinking of getting rid of the 70-200mm f/4 L that I have and get a 10-22mm instead. I noticed on my last trip, that I have not even used the 70-200mm once. I did notice that my kitlens (I know, I know, I want to replace it) was not wide enough at times. Do you guys/gals think that, for a person who apparently is not very interested in shooting tele, the 10-22mm and 24-105 L lenses would be sufficient?

My cousin has the 10-22 and it rarely leaves his camera.

 

[ecommerce813]

Quote:

Originally Posted by azt33 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am thinking of getting rid of the 70-200mm f/4 L that I have and get a 10-22mm instead. I noticed on my last trip, that I have not even used the 70-200mm once. I did notice that my kitlens (I know, I know, I want to replace it) was not wide enough at times. Do you guys/gals think that, for a person who apparently is not very interested in shooting tele, the 10-22mm and 24-105 L lenses would be sufficient?

What camera body are you using?

 

[azt33]

I am using the 350D (Rebel XT in the US, I think). I might be upgrading to the 30D/40D, I want to get the hang of shooting first

But I am staying with crop cameras, if you want to know that.

 

[ecommerce813]

Quote:

Originally Posted by azt33 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am using the 350D (Rebel XT in the US, I think). I might be upgrading to the 30D/40D, I want to get the hang of shooting first But I am staying with crop cameras, if you want to know that.

On a 1.6x crop camera the 10-22 translates into a 16-35 equivalent, which, I think is a very useful (perhaps even required) focal length to cover. Certainly if you choose to continue photography long-term, you will definitely find use of it (at least for family stuff, even if you don't ever do any landscape or people photography).

I don't have any personal experience with this lens since I can't use the EFS series, but I think it is decently regarded. I like the reviews from Digital Picture and Fred Miranda. I think there's another site called 16.9 that reviews lenses too, but I haven't fully checked them out yet. The classic dpreview site is also starting lens reviews, but I don't think they have yet looked at the 10-22.

My only concern about this lens is the viability of the EFS lens line. I know some would disagree, but I think market forces will eventually allow digital full frame to become the norm. If that happens, Canon may "drop support" for the EFS line (think FD mount). But that's all speculation. Probably, for the next 5 years or so, you'd be very happy with the 10-22 (especially considering the current $50 rebate on the lens).


DTKan

 

[azt33]

I actually plan to use it for landscapes and such, I have a planned trip to HK in April and this would be a great addition. So finding a use will not be a problem

Thanks for the websites, I am already a member of Fred Miranda and have used Digital Picture before. The reviews on FM are very favourable and I think it would be one of my favourite lenses when I get it. I love the effect the fisheye gives, I think it would be nice to play around with it (I just need to get the hang of PS Elements, so much to learn in so little time...).

TBH, I am not very worried about that. The cost of FF is just too high for the beginner photographer I think, the FF is more for the experienced amateur photographer IMO. It would be nice if FF did become the norm, I guess we'll find out.

 

[ecommerce813]

Quote:

Originally Posted by I'm broke /img/forum/go_quote.gif Post tilt-shift pics! Is a tripod a must?

You know, I just remembered that my avatar was done with a TSE 24. You can tell, that even with the shift function, the church is still too tall to be fully pespective corrected. I think the lens was set to near-maximum tilt (like 10mm), and I still had to do some (fast) alterations in CS2. Sorry if the colors or saturation are all off; I haven't calibrated my new monitor yet (hangs, head shamefully). Also, I'm still not sure what the requirements are for posting pictures, so I hope a medium JPG (sorry, not lossless) is good enough.

I'll still check those San Diego pics, but I think I used my 24-70 more than the 24 TSE.

DTKan

 

[ecommerce813]

Arghh--

does anyone know how to put the picture (full size) into the post, and not just as an attached file? Thanks

 

[I'm broke]

Use the image tags [ i m g ] image.url [ / i m g]

^Remove the spaces