[uofmtiger]

Another Canon fan here. I only own a couple primes, though (Canon EF 50mm f/1.8, 100mm f/2.8 Macro). My dad has the 85mm mentioned above and it is a great, sharp lens. If you shoot indoors a lot it is worth getting.

I also have some Canon zoom lenses, a P&S (Powershot S45), and a rarely used video camera (ZR60). Yep! I am a fan!

 

[Sh0eBoX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by beerguy0 /img/forum/go_quote.gif IS only helps with camera shake, it won't stop subject movement. If it's too dark to get a high enough shutter speed to stop movement, IS won't help. I'd go with the faster lens for indoors. If you have problems handholding, a monopod will help. Fast + IS is more useful, but more $$$. The Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS is an excellent lens, but very pricey.

thanks for that, i didn't really even think about how the IS would not help stop subject movement -- i will take that into consideration

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif What exactly are you going to take photos of? I really like IS. I think it depends what you're going after. f/2.8 Pros - Extra stop of light which allows you stop motion better - Can give you your more subject isolation - Autofocus is better f/4 Pros - Lighter lens - F4 IS is one of the sharpest Canon lenses - more is in focus given that it's f4. IS Pros: - gives you more handhold ability and more sharp pictures. At night time this is great for non moving subjects - another useful thing which people don't mention often is you can increase your depth of field by stopping aperture down. When I'm not perpendicular to my subject and part of them may get out of focus, I stop down to get a bit more. Canon Pros: - Faster and quiet autofocus (depends which lense but the one you mention, yes). This is important in lower light IMO. - L color is awesome Sigma Pros: - it's cheaper One important thing to note is quality when the lens is operating at it's extremes, whether wide open aperture, at it's closest, and farthest focal lengths if it's a zoom. I do not know how Sigma 70-200 2.8 operates at 2.8. On some lenses they become softer. Whether you like that or not is up to you. I know that on some lenses, to me, they are not that useful because I don't like the images. e.g. 50mm @ 1.4. I use that lens at f2. I wouldn't want to buy a faster lense just to stop it down.

thanks! lots of good stuff here. i'm not shooting anything in particular... i guess i would just like a versatile lens for whatever comes my way. the sigma is good enough for outdoor shooting, but when i go indoors it's just a pain. If i can find the ef 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS for a similar price i may consider getting that over the sigma, but i have to read up on reviews to find out how much of a difference the canon is over the sigma.

IS would be useful, but i'm not sure how often i will be taking pictures of moving subjects under low light situations, and how much not having f/2.8 will hinder the performance of the lens.

oh well, i have plenty of time to do some reading... i don't have enough cash yet to buy a lens like this

thanks for all the info!

 

[lan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by laxx /img/forum/go_quote.gif I spent a weekend with the 17-40L and it's a ton faster than the kit lense.

You mean mechanically faster right? The kit lens is sort of close to f4 already.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sh0eBoX /img/forum/go_quote.gif IS would be useful, but i'm not sure how often i will be taking pictures of moving subjects under low light situations, and how much not having f/2.8 will hinder the performance of the lens.

For me the difference between 2.8 and 4 isn't that big. Why? Because I don't think 2.8 is fast enough for low light situations anyway.

 

[RedLeader]

A710 IS user here. A mini-slr I can fit in my pocket! The glass may not be the most awesome, but a DIGIC 2 taking raw with IS isn't bad in my books.

 

[Mrvile]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedLeader /img/forum/go_quote.gif A710 IS user here. A mini-slr I can fit in my pocket! The glass may not be the most awesome, but a DIGIC 2 taking raw with IS isn't bad in my books.

That thing could have a 10-1000mm f/1.8 IS zoom lens on the front of it, boast a Digic III processor, and shoot 10mp RAW+jpeg at 8fps, but that doesn't make it close to an SLR.

Nah dude I'm just playin, the A710 is a great little compact P&S that can take some amazing photos as long as the user knows what he's doing

If you can find one, give the Canon Pro1 a try sometime. That will definitely make for quite a P&S experience.

 

[vo328]

My only lens (other than the XTi kit lens) is the 70-200mm F4 L lens from Canon. It's an amazing lens and the thing is built like a tank. I am still learning how to best take advantage of it, but I can say it is one heck of a sharp lens. I grappled with buying a non-L lens from Canon, but just didn't like the build quality of the the non-L lenses. I also love the 580EX-II flash... it's an amazing flash with excellent range.

 

[RYCeT]

I have Rebel XT w/ Canon 50mm 1.8. I tried Canon EF-S 17-55mm IS 2.8, I can't justify the cost for performance, my 50 1.8 seems give a slightly better result and it's not acceptable IMHO since 17-55 cost $1k. I'm still looking for walk around lens, considering canon 17-40 f4l or tamron 18-55 2.8.

 

[3x331m]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RYCeT /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...considering canon 17-40 f4l or tamron 18-55 2.8.

17-40 F4 L is my walk-around lens. I can shoot wide-open and still feel confident about the image quality.

If the lighting condition is less favorable, nothing is better than a tripod.

 

[lan]

You mean the Tamron 17-50 2.8? It's good lens, one stop faster and has a little more reach. The Canon 17-40 doesn't seem as good in flexibility in comparision.

re: tripods, they don't work unless you carry one

Well looks like I decided on a lense in my first post.

If anybody is interested in Canon 24 2.8, Canon 50 1.4, Tamron 28-75, let me know because they've been "replaced".

 

[laxx]

Did you get the 24-70 f2.8L?

 

[lan]

Nope. I was only interested in primes that can do slower speed motion sports. I chose the 85mm 1.2. I wanted something for lowlight and I like this focal length. I like image stabilization so I prefer 24-105 over 24-70. 135mm was just too long.

 

[beerguy0]

My current Canon inventory:

Film:
F1-n, with motor drive and speed finder (2" eye relief, swivels for waist level viewing- great for macro work.)
Canon FD 200 f/4 Macro
Canon ML-1 Macro Light

EOS Elan 7, with the kit lens (28-90?)
420EX flash

Digital:

Canon Pro 1 - my first real digital camera. It's a real gem for a P&S, as long as you can live with ISO 50.

I outgrew the Pro 1, and took the plunge for the 20D. I didn't buy the kit lens, instead opting for the 17-40 f/4 L and 70-200 f/4 L.

I've always been a big fan of ultra-wideangle lenses. I used to own the Canon FD 14 /2.8 L, and felt handicapped by 17mm on a 1.6x body. So I added the 10-22 EF-S, and a 1.4x TC.

Then I started doing some stage photography, which requires fast lenses. So, I added the 28 f/1.8 and 85 f/1.8. Great little lenses to have around, especially for cat pics.

My latest addition is the only non-Canon lens I have ever bought for any of my Canon cameras, in 23 years of shooting Canon. I needed a macro lens, and I wound up buying the Sigma 150 /2.8 macro. Fantastic lens, at a great price. And, it includes the things Canon charges extra for now, like hoods and tripod rings.

I still have a few items on my wish list, like the battery grip, vertical finder, a long telephoto, macro flash....

 

[RedLeader]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrvile /img/forum/go_quote.gif That thing could have a 10-1000mm f/1.8 IS zoom lens on the front of it, boast a Digic III processor, and shoot 10mp RAW+jpeg at 8fps, but that doesn't make it close to an SLR. Nah dude I'm just playin, the A710 is a great little compact P&S that can take some amazing photos as long as the user knows what he's doing If you can find one, give the Canon Pro1 a try sometime. That will definitely make for quite a P&S experience.

If I could afford anything better I would in a heartbeat, but this was a birthday present from several people (quarterbacked by my wonderful girlfriend) and I have no complaints. I don't know nearly enough to justify the expense of a DSLR setup, so I'm more than happy to learn all I can with this camera which takes IMO awesome pictures. When I feel I've outgrown it, I'll move on to something else.

 

[oic929]

My canon gear consist of

400d/Xti
Tokina 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5
50mm f/1.8
70-200 f/4L

I will soon be upgrading the 50mm to the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 as I find 50mm on a crop camera is a bit long. Hopefully by the end of the year I'll be able to get the IS version of the 70-200

 

[Mrvile]

Is anyone interested in either a Sigma 10-20 or the Sigma Ringflash? The ultrawide is getting less and less use these days and I've found that I don't really need the ringflash, it just adds to the bulk, and I've wanted to give some other lenses, like the 85/1.8, a try.

Also, does anyone have any experience with the Bushhawk? I'm thinking about picking one up to use with my 100/2.8, hopefully it will work for macro as well as it would for telephoto.