Canon lenses

[ldmelsa]

have you considered the canon 450d?
the kit 18-55mm IS lens is very sharp (i checked it out for myself)

for telephoto:

canon also make the excellent "Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM"
http://www.markforrester.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/canon_f4_70-300mm_is_usm_lense.jpg
i used this lens once and was amazed by the sharpness throughout the entire range and f/stops

there was no, real world, image quality deference between this lens and the more expensive 70-200 L f4 lens
plus this one has IS (a godsend for telephoto lenses)

[koffiejunkie]

Has anyone tried this one? I saw one for the first time yesterday in Jessops, and they wouldn't let me try it out :(

http://www.canon-europe.com/Images/--_tcm13-152991.gif (http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Image_Stabilization_Lenses/EF_70-300mm_f_f4.5-5.6_DO_IS_USM/index.asp)

It's quite a bit more compact and much more expensive. Pity that it's a touch slower than the 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

[ldmelsa]

Has anyone tried this one? I saw one for the first time yesterday in Jessops, and they wouldn't let me try it out :(

http://www.canon-europe.com/Images/--_tcm13-152991.gif (http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Image_Stabilization_Lenses/EF_70-300mm_f_f4.5-5.6_DO_IS_USM/index.asp)

It's quite a bit more compact and much more expensive. Pity that it's a touch slower than the 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

it's to expensive when compared to the other one
you are just paying for the size
the picture quality is the same, if not a little worse :(

ps - love the gif with the alpha channel :D

[ldmelsa]

the "Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM" is the best bang for buck telephoto
it's sharp, really sharp :eek:

[bwana]

the "Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM" is the best bang for buck telephoto
it's sharp, really sharp :eek:Not a particularly glowing review of it at http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.asp

[ldmelsa]

Not a particularly glowing review of it at http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.asp

what is wrong with it? :confused:

[bwana]

what is wrong with it? :confused:They disagree with your assessment that it is as good as the 70-200 L f4.

According to the review it is not parfocal, doesnt have full time manual focusing, has soft corners, slow focusing . . . . and so on.

Of course I'm not in a position to compare - I've got the 70-200 f4 so my getting the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM would be pointless. :)

[ldmelsa]

They disagree with your assessment that it is as good as the 70-200 L f4.

According to the review it is not parfocal, doesnt have full time manual focusing, has soft corners, slow focusing . . . . and so on.

Of course I'm not in a position to compare - I've got the 70-200 f4 so my getting the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM would be pointless. :)

i have shot with all of these lenses and what they are talking about are things that can be discussed at dpreview/vb
but for real world use i can't recommend this lens enough
slow focusing: that's very strange - i can only talk about the one i used, and it was very fast - instantaneous, actually (as fast as any other lens)
has soft corners: not even at 300m f/5.6 :eek::confused: (perplexing to say the least)

this lens can also do more than the 70-200 f4 because it can go to 300mm and has IS, and all this at the same image quality and for less money
that's a no brainer

if one was going higher one would get the
Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 L USM
or
Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS USM




They disagree with your assessment that it is as good as the 70-200 L f4.

i did not say it's as good as
i said it's better :D

[bwana]

i did not say it's as good as
i said it's better :DI've yet to find a supporting source for your assertions but I'll see if I cant borrow a 70-300mm f/4-5.6 for a few minutes and do an actual side by side - like the people at the digital picture. :)

[ldmelsa]

I've yet to find a supporting source for your assertions but I'll see if I cant borrow a 70-300mm f/4-5.6 for a few minutes and do an actual side by side - like the people at the digital picture. :)

I thought you already have a telephoto lens. Are you thinking of getting one of these?



ps - you can't compare the image quality (practically the same) of a

70-200 f/4 L
to a
70-300 f/4-5.6 IS

deferent features/range

[bwana]

I thought you already have a telephoto lens. Are you thinking of getting one of these?Of course not - its merely for my own edification.
ps - you can't compare a

70-200 f/4 L
to a
70-300 f/4-5.6 IS

deferent features/range:confused: You must have to have arrived at the conclusion that the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS was the better lens.

[ldmelsa]

You must have to have arrived at the conclusion that the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS was the better lens.

sorry - i meant there is no point in comparing image quality because they are different in other ways like:

200mm VS 300mm
non is VS is
ergonomics
weight
price

but image quality is more or less the same

[bwana]

sorry - i meant there is no point in comparing image quality because they are different in other ways like:

200mm VS 300mm
non is VS is
ergonomics
weight
price

but image quality is more or less the sameWas that a comparison-less comparison? :confused:

Maybe I'll wait until after I get the teleconverter I've been lusting after - that should reduce the impact of the 200mm vs 300mm.

I'm not sure how ergonomics comes into it?

[ldmelsa]

Was that a comparison-less comparison?

i don't follow

[Yogotta B. Kidding]

You cannot compare Canon L series lense image quality to the non-L series.

There is a place for each of these lenses, but I have to admit I would anytime choose a L-series.

the 70-300Is is twice the normal USM, but you wont take better pix with it.
Even 80-200F2.0 L series lense has the image quality which makes it preferable to the 70-300IS.

It all depends on what you want to do. I prefer primes lenses for IQ

[koffiejunkie]

it's to expensive when compared to the other one
you are just paying for the size

Contrary to popular belief, size does matter... :D


You cannot compare Canon L series lense image quality to the non-L series.

Yes you can. If you read the 350D thread you would have read that I compared an L lens to a kit lens (of a different brand) shooting the exact same shot and found them to give me the same result. So the difference between the two lenses (granted, at that particular focal length) was everything *except* image quality.


There is a place for each of these lenses, but I have to admit I would anytime choose a L-series.

Again, you're falling hook, line and sinker for the red line. :) If you spend any amount of time reading photography forums where Canon's lenses are discussed, you'll find that the 50mm f/1.2L is not as sharp, even stopped down a stop or two, as the significantly cheaper 50mm f/1.4 and the ridiculously cheap 50mm f/1.8. Despite what the reviews say. In the real world a lot of pro togs are very unhappy with that lens.

There are more lenses that are not L lenses but are as good. The 17-55 f/2.8 is widely accepted to be of L quality. It's in the L price range too. I've tried it - build quality doesn't feel much different from my 24-105L either. So the only real difference is the red line.

Not to mention some of the quality glass that's available from Sigma, Tamron and Tokina....

[koffiejunkie]

And in the end, it hardly matters, because that million dollar shot may end up being taken with your point&shoot because that's all you had with you when the opportunity presented it self. Who's gonna care? The days when commercially sold photos had to come from a pro with expensive SLR kit are over. I have seen images published in respectable publications taken with P&S cameras. Spend some time browsing flickr and see what's possible...

[ldmelsa]

Contrary to popular belief, size does matter... :D
ja, but the little one does not perform :p



you'll find that the 50mm f/1.2L is not as sharp, even stopped down a stop or two, as the significantly cheaper 50mm f/1.4 and the ridiculously cheap 50mm f/1.8. Despite what the reviews say. In the real world a lot of pro togs are very unhappy with that lens.

wow
i did not know that

it's good at f/8 though:

Shutter Speed: 1/200 sec
Aperture Value: f/8
ISO Speed: ISO100
Lens: EF50mm f/1.2L USM
White Balance: Daylight
Picture Style: Landscape
http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/eos1dsm3/images/samples/landscape_icon.jpg (http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/eos1dsm3/html/eos1dsm3_sample3-e.html)

if the f/1.4 is cheaper, what's the point of the f/1.2?
i really don't now why one would get the 1.2

[koffiejunkie]

ja, but the little one does not perform :p

The performance difference is small enough for me not to worry too much about it - it's not like I'm making a living off selling those pictures.


it's good at f/8 though

...snip...

if the f/1.4 is cheaper, what's the point of the f/1.2?

I didn't say it wasn't any good. Just that a lot of people complain that it's not as good as one expect for a lens that's almost $1000 more (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12140-USA/Canon_2515A003_50mm_f_1_4_USM_Autofocus.html) expensive (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/457680-USA/Canon_1257B002_Normal_EF_50mm_f_1_2L.html) than Canon's nearest alternative.

Interesting quote from photozone, and this just shows how people buy into the idea that a premium line of products are definitely better quality:


The AF accuracy is just Okayish on the EOS 350D but that´s surely more a fault of the camera´s rather mediocre AF rather than the lens. (http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/158-canon-ef-50mm-f12-usm-l-test-report--review)
Amusing, since it's the very same 350D they're using for all their lens tests, resulting in "extremely" (http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/188-canon-ef-24-105mm-f4-usm-l-is-lab-test-report--review) fast (http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/175-canon-ef-16-35mm-f28-usm-l-lab-test-report--review) AF (http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/176-canon-ef-17-35mm-f28-usm-l-lab-test-report--review) speed (http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/177-canon-ef-17-40mm-f4-usm-l-test-report--review) and pretty good accuracy (http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/181-canon-ef-s-18-55mm-f35-56-is-test-report--review) (even for the kit lens).

So is "pretty good" better or worse than "okayish"?


i really don't now why one would get the 1.2

Ring type USM with full-time manual focus, weather proofing, bragging rights or maybe just being taken serious? It seems the idea that it's stupid to use anything other than L glass on the high-end camera is so widespread that being spotted with a 1Ds MK3 and a regular lens must surely be a career killer...

[ldmelsa]

It seems the idea that it's stupid to use anything other than L glass on the high-end camera is so widespread that being spotted with a 1Ds MK3 and a regular lens must surely be a career killer...

i've seen a top photographer in SA use a nikon 18-200 vr lens on her d300 for model work
that's what i would buy for me if i had nikon :eek:
you see, most modern lenses are sharp at their ideal f/stop
L lenses are sharp, even when wide open - they also have better corner sharpness (my subjects are never in the far corners :D) - they have also been known to survive falls of 7ft onto rocks :cool:

[koffiejunkie]

you see, most modern lenses are sharp at their ideal f/stop
L lenses are sharp, even when wide open - they also have better corner sharpness (my subjects are never in the far corners :D)

Neither are mine. Not intentionally, anyways :o


they have also been known to survive falls of 7ft onto rocks :cool:

See, there's one of the reasons why I bought that lens. Ideal for clumsy okes like me :)

That said, I haven't even bumped it yet, much less dropped it.

[Yogotta B. Kidding]

Contrary to popular belief, size does matter... :D

....
.....
Koffie, thats wher you and I are different, I dont read a lot of photography forums. I try and use as many lenses as I can (borrow & rent) of the focal range used.

For example;
You gonna tell me the 55-200 canon lense beats the hell out of the 70-200F2.8L? And better still that same 55-200 performs better at 200mm than the 200F2.8L?

And also the 75-300, beats all the the L lenses in that focal area?

I agree on the 50mm comaprison, even tho I have not had the opportunity to use the F1.2. I stopped at F1.4, as to me the price difference from F1.8 down to F1.4, does not warrant a possible buy. The 1.4 battles with finding proper focus, so the motor in the lense aint gonna last..... At under ZAR1200 the 1.8 is a steal.

There is a reason why some lenses are just a lot more expensive. Try a 300 F2.8 L IS, it wins hands down in that focal length, and so does the 200F2.8L, and I dont think the 100 Macro has equals either.

I have used all these lenses on a 350D, 20D & 40D. I even tried a 2X converter on the 300F2.8L.....

Sure the forums are great, but all forums are the same where every peep, praises his own stuff.

Yes, since we are not real pro;s who actually make a living from photography, we stick to the consumer lenses, they are good enough and we can get as much image out of our 75-300 which cost 5K as we would from the 300F2.8L which costs 50K.

[koffiejunkie]

Koffie, thats wher you and I are different, I dont read a lot of photography forums. I try and use as many lenses as I can (borrow & rent) of the focal range used.

For example;
You gonna tell me the 55-200 canon lense beats the hell out of the 70-200F2.8L? And better still that same 55-200 performs better at 200mm than the 200F2.8L?

And also the 75-300, beats all the the L lenses in that focal area?

Where do you get that from? Firstly, my "size matters" comment referred specifically to comparing the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Image_Stabilization_Lenses/EF_70-300mm_f4-5.6_IS_USM/index.asp) and Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM (http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Image_Stabilization_Lenses/EF_70-300mm_f_f4.5-5.6_DO_IS_USM/index.asp). I like the latter for it's compactness in my bag, and since I travel a fair bit, I don't depend on my photography to put food on the table, the slight performance difference and price is an acceptible compromise for me. It performs better than my Sigma 70-300 at the extremes anyway.

Secondly, I never even mentioned the 55-200 or 75-300 or any other lens v.s. the 70-200L models. Maybe you're confusing me with someone else. I don't have, and have never tried the 55-200 or 75-300. I was simply stating that it has a red line around doesn't mean it's the best glass ever made at that focal length, and I stand by that. I cited the 50mm f/1.2 as a specific example that many professionals who have spend the money on it, are disappointed with. I have read many times over that it is not as good in any respect (except price) as the 50mm f/1.0 it replaces. I've also ran into this (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=280230084602) setup more than I expected - makes you think.


I agree on the 50mm comaprison, even tho I have not had the opportunity to use the F1.2. I stopped at F1.4, as to me the price difference from F1.8 down to F1.4, does not warrant a possible buy. The 1.4 battles with finding proper focus, so the motor in the lense aint gonna last..... At under ZAR1200 the 1.8 is a steal.

I have tried several of the f/1.4 models and have not had thsi problem. If I ever feel the need for a 50mm, that's the one I'll get. For now, I have opted for a 35mm f/2 which gives me roundabout the same angle of view that the 50mm on my K1000 does.

There is a reason why some lenses are just a lot more expensive. Try a 300 F2.8 L IS, it wins hands down in that focal length, and so does the 200F2.8L, and I dont think the 100 Macro has equals either.


Sure the forums are great, but all forums are the same where every peep, praises his own stuff.

Like I said, I was referring to an example of people who are not happy with their "own stuff."

Anyway, that fact that you're getting this much varied responses on the qualities of this lens and whichever other one should tell you that maybe there's a consistency problem on Canon's part, which is disappointing. Considering the manufactuing technology we have available (and have had for the last 20 years), there really shouldn't be any difference between samples.

[fivelza]

Gents, what is the difference between an IS and a non-IS lense?

[koffiejunkie]

Image Stabilizer

[BigAl-sa]

Gents, what is the difference between an IS and a non-IS lense?R10000 :D

[bwana]

R10000 :Dlol - aint that the truth. :D

[fivelza]

R10000 :D


lol - aint that the truth. :D

:o thank you :o

[Yogotta B. Kidding]

Koffie;
I agree on this statement of yours
"Anyway, that fact that you're getting this much varied responses on the qualities of this lens and whichever other one should tell you that maybe there's a consistency problem on Canon's part, which is disappointing. Considering the manufactuing technology we have available (and have had for the last 20 years), there really shouldn't be any difference between samples."

I dont live of money from my photos either, and I buy old stuff. The 450D's 18-55IS lense is the closest I ever came to "the latest and greatest". Hiwever, I do believe in buying good equipment because they last well (age wise too). I still have my Metz 45 flash which is 20yrs end of 2008.

In the consumer market you have to accept a variance to the pro equipment, and you also have to accept a variance between the branded (ie Canon, Nikon, Pentax etc etc) and other brand lenses.

The only two perfect lenses I know of to date is the Canon 300F2.8L IS and the 200F2.8L nonIS lenses. They produced perfect images on both my 350D and 30D. Perfect to me that is.....

Happpy snaps.....

[koffiejunkie]

I dont live of money from my photos either, and I buy old stuff. The 450D's 18-55IS lense is the closest I ever came to "the latest and greatest". Hiwever, I do believe in buying good equipment because they last well (age wise too). I still have my Metz 45 flash which is 20yrs end of 2008.

I don't live off my photos either but I am fortunate that I have a good job that pays reasonably well, and no wife/kids to drain my finances, so I can splash on the good stuff while I can afford it. Like you say, they last a long time.


In the consumer market you have to accept a variance to the pro equipment, and you also have to accept a variance between the branded (ie Canon, Nikon, Pentax etc etc) and other brand lenses.

I don't buy that. Canon especially have the financial means to have very very strict tolerances. I have seen in other manufacturing industries that it is possible to make things to incredibly tight tolerances. Case in point is Yamaha's brass musical instruments. Bach and Conn (the Canon and Nikon of that particular industry) both make good and bad copies of any particular model, and it is common practise to fly overseas to get to the big shops to try out 20 or so of the same model instrument, and buy the best copy. Yamaha on the other hand, you can order via mail and know that you get exactly what you expect. It's simply sloppy QC on Bach/Conn's side. Same goes for Canon/Nikon etc. If it's possible for them to make good copies of any given lens, there's no excuse for not making all copies the same. And since (you would hope) they calibrate each lens before shipping it, it means each lens is tested so they should know if there's a problem.

[Frankie]

You cannot compare Canon L series lense image quality to the non-L series.



The EF-s 17-55 2.8 IS is one example where the IQ (and price) is most certainly comparable to 'L' lens'.
The build quality does not compare, but that's not what's being discussed.

[koffiejunkie]

The EF-s 17-55 2.8 IS is one example where the IQ (and price) is most certainly comparable to 'L' lens'.

I've heard that. Haven't found one in a shop yet to try. It's a pity there isn't an L lens in that range. The 16-35 is nice but it's a bit short for a walk-around kinda lens. It would be nice to have something like the 17-55 f/2.8 that I can keep if I ever get a FF camera :)


The build quality does not compare, but that's not what's being discussed.

But it's way better than the kit lens, from what I read.

[bwana]

I've heard that. Haven't found one in a shop yet to try. It's a pity there isn't an L lens in that range. The 16-35 is nice but it's a bit short for a walk-around kinda lens. It would be nice to have something like the 17-55 f/2.8 that I can keep if I ever get a FF camera :)lol - arent you the one who commented that someone was falling "hook, line and sinker for the red line."? Concluding that only real difference between that particular lens and a L lens was the 'red line'.

Is L grade important or not? :confused:

[koffiejunkie]

Poor choice of words on my part. I should have said "Full Frame lens" - L glass only comes in FF. That said, there are no fast non-L full frame lenses in that focal range. If the 17-55 f/2.8 was available in a FF, I'd buy it.

[bwana]

I'm thinking of getting the Canon EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 IS lens as a stop gap lens before I move to full frame - either that or the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS.

I'd like the wide angle of the 17-55 but the lack of the full frame compatibility is what's holding me back. :o

[koffiejunkie]

How about the 16-35L f/2.8? That's my next purchase (as far as lenses go - I have a few (http://www.flickr.com/photos/koffiejunkie/2450687366/in/set-72157604544995682/) other (http://www.yamaha-europe.com/yamaha_europe/uk/10_musical_instruments/20_orchestra/20_brass_instruments/50_trombones/05_xeno_trombones/10_ysl_881/index.html) items (http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/macbook_pro?mco=MTE4NDY) on my list first).

The EF 24-105L is a great lens, you won't be sorry, but it's not wide - not on crop body. I've looked long and hard at every image from the 18-55mm kit lens I could hand on, and really, it's just not particularly sharp. At least nothing like either the Sigma 10-20mm or the Canon EF 24-105L, so I don't regret purchasing either. That said, I'm seriously considering dropping the £600+ on the 17-55mm f/2.8 - I can't see myself justifying spending the money to move to a FF body until the 40D dies.

[bwana]

How about the 16-35L f/2.8? That's my next purchase (as far as lenses go - I have a few (http://www.flickr.com/photos/koffiejunkie/2450687366/in/set-72157604544995682/) other (http://www.yamaha-europe.com/yamaha_europe/uk/10_musical_instruments/20_orchestra/20_brass_instruments/50_trombones/05_xeno_trombones/10_ysl_881/index.html) items (http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/macbook_pro?mco=MTE4NDY) on my list first).

The EF 24-105L is a great lens, you won't be sorry, but it's not wide - not on crop body. I've looked long and hard at every image from the 18-55mm kit lens I could hand on, and really, it's just not particularly sharp. At least nothing like either the Sigma 10-20mm or the Canon EF 24-105L, so I don't regret purchasing either. That said, I'm seriously considering dropping the £600+ on the 17-55mm f/2.8 - I can't see myself justifying spending the money to move to a FF body until the 40D dies.The EF 16-35L f/2.8 is going to be too hard on my wallet.

The sigma seems nice but too slow for what I want to do and I need something with a bit more versatility so I dont have to be changing lenses all the time.

BTW - the canon 18-55mm kit lens might have a (serious) distortion problem at its widest and it is a little too slow but I dont think there is a particular lack of sharpness. I took it with me last weekend to St Francis and got some awesome images out of it.

[marine1]

Guys I might be able to organize Canon lenses cheap.

[bwana]

Guys I might be able to organize Canon lenses cheap.There's cheap and then there is B&H cheap - which one? :)

[Azrael]

A nice alternative to the Canon 17-55mm, if you dont want to blow the budget, is the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/Tamron-17-50mm-f-2.8-XR-Di-II-Lens-Review.aspx). It lacks IS, is a few mm shorter and unfortunately comes in EF-S mount only. But at least you'll save yourself around R5000 that you could put to better use once you decide to go FF. It gets pretty good reviews.

[BigAl-sa]

A nice alternative to the Canon 17-55mm, if you dont want to blow the budget, is the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/Tamron-17-50mm-f-2.8-XR-Di-II-Lens-Review.aspx). It lacks IS, is a few mm shorter and unfortunately comes in EF-S mount only. But at least you'll save yourself around R5000 that you could put to better use once you decide to go FF. It gets pretty good reviews.A good alternative, but not EF-S mount. Only Canon make EF-S mount lenses. It will fit on a full frame body, but you will probably get pretty severe vignetting on FF bodies.

[Azrael]

A good alternative, but not EF-S mount. Only Canon make EF-S mount lenses. It will fit on a full frame body, but you will probably get pretty severe vignetting on FF bodies.

True - ment to say it's not made for FF bodies, it will fit, but as you say - severe vignetting :)

[koffiejunkie]

Guys I might be able to organize Canon lenses cheap.

Know of a truck that had some stuff fall off? :D

[bwana]

A good alternative, but not EF-S mount. Only Canon make EF-S mount lenses. It will fit on a full frame body, but you will probably get pretty severe vignetting on FF bodies.According to BH it's "Not compatible with 35mm or digital cameras with image sensor larger than APS-C size" so while the Tameron might fit it's relegated to the same pile as the 17-55 f/2.8. Not necessarily a bad pile as I'll most likely keep (and use) a cropped sensor camera even after I go FF.

[bwana]

How about the 16-35L f/2.8? That's my next purchase (as far as lenses go - I have a few (http://www.flickr.com/photos/koffiejunkie/2450687366/in/set-72157604544995682/) other (http://www.yamaha-europe.com/yamaha_europe/uk/10_musical_instruments/20_orchestra/20_brass_instruments/50_trombones/05_xeno_trombones/10_ysl_881/index.html) items (http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/macbook_pro?mco=MTE4NDY) on my list first).I'm coming around to the idea of spending the extra $'s on the 16-35.

[koffiejunkie]

I'm coming around to the idea of spending the extra $'s on the 16-35.

Hehe, nice. Extra jobs lined up? :)

[ldmelsa]

.

You play the trombone. Cool. :D

[koffiejunkie]

You play the trombone. Cool. :D

I used to. But my instrument is busted (blotched repair job for a rather minor dent). I'd like to get a new one but these things don't come cheaply. In fact, it's the most expensive item on my wishlist :)

[bwana]

Hehe, nice. Extra jobs lined up? :)Not yet but things are looking good. :)

[koffiejunkie]

That lens (the 16-35) is certainly on my to-buy list, but not before I have a full frame camera. For now my 10-20 covers that range mostly.

[bwana]

That lens (the 16-35) is certainly on my to-buy list, but not before I have a full frame camera. For now my 10-20 covers that range mostly.You'll need to replace it anyway when you go FF - something I'm trying to avoid (otherwise I'd be keener on the 17-55 f2.8) so right now its the EF 16-35L f/2.8 . . . . or the 24-70mm f/2.8 :o

[koffiejunkie]

You'll need to replace it anyway when you go FF

My next full frame body will be a EOS film camera, so the 40D ain't going nowhere anytime soon :)


(otherwise I'd be keener on the 17-55 f2.8) so right now its the EF 16-35L f/2.8 . . . . or the 24-70mm f/2.8 :o

Make sense. Get both.

[bwana]

My next full frame body will be a EOS film camera, so the 40D ain't going nowhere anytime soon :)and I'll still have a 400D (until I wear them out :)) but I cant bring myself to spend the $900 on a lens I know I wont be able to use on a new body.
Make sense. Get both.Maybe eventually (though there is a considerable overlap) but I need to decide on one for now. TBH I'd prefer the 24-70 for when I go FF but I'm thinking I need the wider 16mm on my current camera. The 70mm also closes the gap to my 70-200mm.

[bwana]

Noticed a glaring problem with the 17-55 kit lens last night as I was photographing a local guest house - flaring. While the barrel distortion is a snap to fix the flaring is a royal pain.

Anyone have any PS tips/tricks they've used to handle it?

[ldmelsa]

Anyone have any PS tips/tricks they've used to handle it?

"hoya skylight"
this is what i use
it's a uv filter or something (the shop included it with my lens)
but it seems to stop the flaring thing too
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hoya-58mm-Skylight-Filter/dp/B00006H2F1

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3122/2681473695_00970ef36f.jpg

[koffiejunkie]

Noticed a glaring problem with the 17-55 kit lens last night as I was photographing a local guest house - flaring. While the barrel distortion is a snap to fix the flaring is a royal pain.

Anyone have any PS tips/tricks they've used to handle it?

I have yet to see any flaring on my Sigma 10-20mm. Yes, I'm plugging it ;)

To be serious, can't you get a lens hood for it?

[BigAl-sa]

Noticed a glaring problem with the 17-55 kit lens last night as I was photographing a local guest house - flaring. While the barrel distortion is a snap to fix the flaring is a royal pain.

Anyone have any PS tips/tricks they've used to handle it?Don't think it will be too easy to fix in post :(

To prevent it, try removing filters - extra reflections between the filter and the front of the lens can cause it.

[bwana]

"hoya skylight"
this is what i use
it's a uv filter or something (the shop included it with my lens)
but it seems to stop the flaring thing too
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hoya-58mm-Skylight-Filter/dp/B00006H2F1Is that on the 18-55? If so I'll have to give it a try . . . . unless I get a different lens ;)

I do know that most of my flaring problems stopped when I stopped using unnecessary filters.

BTW - have you got against showing EXIF?
I have yet to see any flaring on my Sigma 10-20mm. Yes, I'm plugging it ;)

To be serious, can't you get a lens hood for it?Any lens I buy today needs to be compatible with my next camera and the sigma, while impressive, is too slow for what I need and isnt designed to be used on a fullframe body.

I'm not sure, but I dont think a hood will help prevent an in picture light from flaring.
Don't think it will be too easy to fix in post :(

To prevent it, try removing filters - extra reflections between the filter and the front of the lens can cause it.Yeah - I ended up removing it with the clone/heal tools but it was a laborious task. :o

EDIT - considered getting a lens hood from OutdoorPhoto but they want r60 for delivery! So before I do that (or support my local camera shop) I'm going to print one out (http://www.lenshoods.co.uk/hoods/Canon-EF-S-18-55mm-f-3.5-5.6-kit-lens.php) and see if it helps. :)

[ldmelsa]

Is that on the 18-55?

no
that's my 28-135 IS (my 300d is broken)
but it's the same filter
i remember that i got flare on my 18-55mm when taking it off

can you show us one of your pics with flare?

[bwana]

no
that's my 28-135 IS (my 300d is broken)
but it's the same filter
i remember that i got flare on my 18-55mm when taking it off

can you show us one of your pics with flare?I'll take some fresh ones tonight - I've got a feeling it will be easy to reproduce as it seems to happen when the lens is at its widest (18mm).

[koffiejunkie]

Any lens I buy today needs to be compatible with my next camera and the sigma, while impressive, is too slow for what I need and isnt designed to be used on a fullframe body.

My quip about the 10-20mm was tongue in cheek. But to counter your argument - right now you have to go back to do the job again because your kit is not giving you the right result. So you're losing time/money. Have you tried it with your 18-200?


I'm not sure, but I dont think a hood will help prevent an in picture light from flaring.

I didn't realise it's in-picture. Yeah, lens hood will be of limited help there.

[ldmelsa]

Any lens I buy today needs to be compatible with my next camera and the sigma, while impressive, is too slow for what I need and isn't designed to be used on a fullframe body.

Well, that Sigma is a super wide angle lens for crop factor cameras. It's not what you need. It's for taking wide angle shots with EFS cameras. It does not solve your flaring problem.

BTW - It's not to slow. It's a super wide angle lens. These lenses aren't that sharp at large apertures. Super wides are used at small apertures, mostly. If you really want a fast one, wait for your fullframe camera and get the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM. Version II has better corner sharpness. It's a great lens!!!

[koffiejunkie]

If you really want a fast one, wait for your fullframe camera and get the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM. Version II has better corner sharpness. It's a great lens!!!

Or just get it now, since bwana said it was at 18mm, so this lens will do the job already.

[koffiejunkie]

BTW - It's not to slow. It's a super wide angle lens. These lenses aren't that sharp at large apertures. Super wides are used at small apertures, mostly.

That's somewhat of a generalisation. The 10-20 is at it's sharpest at f/5-5.6, which is wide open from around 14mm (f/4 at 10mm). Something else to keep in mind is that, at that short a focal length, infinity is pretty close. According to the DOF caluclator (http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html), 10mm at f/5.6 on a crop body gives you infinity from 1m away, and 1.4m at f/4. Given that it is rectilinear, I think it's a pretty good choice for jobs like this.

But as I said before, my quip about the 10-20mm was tongue in cheek - I know bwana won't buy it. :D

[bwana]

My quip about the 10-20mm was tongue in cheek. But to counter your argument - right now you have to go back to do the job again because your kit is not giving you the right result. So you're losing time/money. Have you tried it with your 18-200?Sorry but your counter doesnt help my situation as I would still need to actually buy it and if I'm going to buy a lens it's going to be FF compatible. I really cant afford to buy a lens I (hopefully;)) wont be able to use within a year.

I dont have a 18-200 - rather a 28-300 (which will be useful in the future on a FF) which wasnt wide enough for the job. Fortunately I did manage to remove the flaring with some careful clone/healing work. :)
Well, that Sigma is a super wide angle lens for crop factor cameras. It's not what you need. It's for taking wide angle shots with EFS cameras. It does not solve your flaring problem.

BTW - It's not to slow. It's a super wide angle lens. These lenses aren't that sharp at large apertures. Super wides are used at small apertures, mostly. If you really want a fast one, wait for your fullframe camera and get the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM. Version II has better corner sharpness. It's a great lens!!!I need a fast wide angle lens - so far my top two contenders are the 16-35 f/2.8 and the 24-70 f/2.8. I never have wanted another crop lens - though I did briefly consider the 17-55 f/2.8.
Or just get it now, since bwana said it was at 18mm, so this lens will do the job already.It will indeed . :)

[ldmelsa]

That's somewhat of a generalisation. The 10-20 is at it's sharpest at f/5-5.6

cool
I did not know that. Nice lens!
Best bang for buck EFS/DX super wide angle.
Maybe these EFS super wide lenses are sharper than FF ones at large apertures.
The Canon EF super wide lenses are sharper at f/11 than at f/4.
I have heard of this deference before. (EF/FX vs EFS/DX)
Maybe that's another advantage of crop factor.

Check this combo, hey?

Nikon D300
Nikon 18-200 VR
Sigma 10-20

:)

[koffiejunkie]

Sorry but your counter doesnt help my situation as I would still need to actually buy it and if I'm going to buy a lens it's going to be FF compatible.

I've said *twice* now I mentioned the Sigma tongue-in-cheek. Geez.


I dont have a 18-200 - rather a 28-300

Aah, my mistake.


so far my top two contenders are the 16-35 f/2.8 and the 24-70 f/2.8.

I haven't tried the 16-35, but I damn near almost bought the 24-70 f/2.8. When I went shopping for my first lens I found a very nice second-hand copy for £500. If I knew how much they were new I would have bought it, but I was quite sold on the 24-105 f/4.


cool
I did not know that. Nice lens!
Best bang for buck EFS/DX super wide angle.

It's why I bought it. The Canon EF-S 10-22mm is (from what I've read) marginally better, and if feels a tiny little smoother (I tried it), but nowhere near enough to justify the price difference.



Maybe these EFS super wide lenses are sharper than FF ones at large apertures. The Canon EF super wide lenses are sharper at f/11 than at f/4. I have heard of this deference before. (EF/FX vs EFS/DX)
Maybe that's another advantage of crop factor.

It might be. You have more DOF on a crop body, which might very well result in a sharper image. It may be that the lens design just shifts the the sweet spot. I wonder how this would compare to whatever is considered ultra-wide on the Olympus body.


Check this combo, hey?

Nikon D300
Nikon 18-200 VR
Sigma 10-20

Looks like fun. If I didn't already buy the Canon + glass, I might have gotten the D300. I almost did, actually. It was just almost £400 more expensive at the time and I couldn't see it being worth the difference. If I was willing to spend that much more I would have added one or two hundred more and gotten the 5D...

[bwana]

EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM - end of story.

[bwana]

EDIT - considered getting a lens hood from OutdoorPhoto but they want r60 for delivery! So before I do that (or support my local camera shop) I'm going to print one out (http://www.lenshoods.co.uk/hoods/Canon-EF-S-18-55mm-f-3.5-5.6-kit-lens.php) and see if it helps. :)Didnt come out too bad - just have to test it now. :D

http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/picture.php?albumid=19&pictureid=429

[mercurial]

How much did that hood cost?

[bwana]

How much did that hood cost?R2 :D

[mercurial]

R2 :D

:eek: Are you serious? Did you make that yourself or did you get it on a great special?

[bwana]

:eek: Are you serious? Did you make that yourself or did you get it on a great special?DIY jobby as per my earlier post. :)

. . . and I used card, hence the outrageous expense :D

[mercurial]

DIY jobby as per my earlier post. :)

. . . and I used card, hence the outrageous expense :D

Wow, nice. I missed that earlier post.
Yeah that's an outrageous expense :D

[bwana]

Wow, nice. I missed that earlier post.
Yeah that's an outrageous expense :DConsidering what a local retailer wanted for the proper hood I thought it might be worth a shot to see if it made a difference.

[koffiejunkie]

So, what's the verdict then?

I forgot my hood for the 24-105 in a hotel, and they say they didn't find it (probably thought it was rubbish and threw it away). Replacement is £40-50 :eek:

[bwana]

So, what's the verdict then?

I forgot my hood for the 24-105 in a hotel, and they say they didn't find it (probably thought it was rubbish and threw it away). Replacement is £40-50 :eek:Well it looks cool but I haven't been able to field test it yet. I was planning to this afternoon but as it turns out I've managed to lose my remaining tripod mount so I'm be looking for a new one of those next.

[mercurial]

Considering what a local retailer wanted for the proper hood I thought it might be worth a shot to see if it made a difference.

How much were they charging?

[bwana]

How much were they charging?r233 for the hood and r60 for the shipping.

[mercurial]

r233 for the hood and r60 for the shipping.

Oh ok. It's not that bad a price. Was it at orms?

[bwana]

I hereby christen my as yet undelivered lens . . . . Stuck in customs :(

[mercurial]

Still? Why so long?

[bwana]

Still? Why so long?Who knows.

One thing I noticed is that UPS has now classified the package as having been delivered. I wonder if B&H knows they do this because I apparently have two days to examine the goods if I want to return them.

[koffiejunkie]

You should let them know. UPS is lying and it reflects badly on B&H

[bwana]

You should let them know. UPS is lying and it reflects badly on B&HI know - I've already got an email into UPS and I'm working on the B&H one now.

[mercurial]

When did you order this again?

[bwana]

When did you order this again?22/07 and verification problems lead it only being shipped on the 24th (partially my fault so not holding that against them).

We're still in the promised delivery window of 5-7 working days but I'm just kind of annoyed with UPS - it seems to me that they're just padding their stats.

[mercurial]

Oh ok. A week ain't that bad but they should get their act together.

[bwana]

Oh ok. A week ain't that bad but they should get their act together.I know, but I'm impatient :o

[mercurial]

I know, but I'm impatient :o

LMAO! I'm exactly the same! :o

[bwana]

Hope you never have to deal with the dolts in BHPhoto's customer service! I emailed them pointing out that UPS had recorded the parcel as having been delivered and tried to ascertain if the 2 day return window commenced when I actually received the package or when UPS says I did. Their first response was
Our Answer Is: Sorry, but your order consists of the CANON 16-35mm f/2.8L 2 EF (USM) LENS only. After pointing out to them that their reply really had nothing to do with my enquiry they returned with
Our Answer Is: Please be advised that according to UPS the package was delivered today, Sorry, there is no specific date on an overseas order since there is customs involved.
Tracking Number: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Type: Package
Status: Delivered
UPS has delivered the shipment. :eek: :eek:

[koffiejunkie]

That's just disappointing...

[mercurial]

I'm worried about this buying from abroad thing. Does this kind of thing always happen? I just want them to deliver my stuff to my door without any hassles.

[koffiejunkie]

When that delivery comes, make the delivery guy write the date, then scan that form before handing it back!

[bwana]

That's just disappointing...It could be I was a victim of an automated system that doesnt understand English. I'll switch to New Yorker and see if they comprendez that. ;)
I'm worried about this buying from abroad thing. Does this kind of thing always happen? I just want them to deliver my stuff to my door without any hassles.TBH - I'm sure the package will arrive in due course. B&H is a reputable dealer and the savings really do make it worthwhile.

[koffiejunkie]

It could be I was a victim of an automated system that doesnt understand English.

I was going to suggest maybe your UK/ZA spelling might have confused them, but then I did a quick browse through your posts and couldn't find any examples.

[BigAl-sa]

Have you tried speaking to "living body" at ups?

http://www.ups.com/content/za/en/contact/index.html?WT.svl=SecNav

[bwana]

Have you tried speaking to "living body" at ups?

http://www.ups.com/content/za/en/contact/index.html?WT.svl=SecNavYup - still stuck in customs.

They also dont think there is anything untoward about designating a package as having been delivered even if it hasnt.

[BigAl-sa]

Yup - still stuck in customs.

They also dont think there is anything untoward about designating a package as having been delivered even if it hasnt.Sounds rather skelm to me. (I assume you've been here long enough to know skelm :D)

[mercurial]

Does it make a difference if you choose International Express Mail? That's the option I was thinking of taking if I buy something from them. It's just a few days slower but you save a little.

[bwana]

Sounds rather skelm to me. (I assume you've been here long enough to know skelm :D)Yeah - thats one of the words I've picked up :D
Does it make a difference if you choose International Express Mail? That's the option I was thinking of taking if I buy something from them. It's just a few days slower but you save a little.Depends - the bottleneck here is apparently customs so I dont know if it would make a difference. My understanding is also that IEM goes via the SA Post Office :eek: - something I try to avoid.

[mercurial]

Yeah - thats one of the words I've picked up :DDepends - the bottleneck here is apparently customs so I dont know if it would make a difference. My understanding is also that IEM goes via the SA Post Office :eek: - something I try to avoid.

Oh man. What about U.S. Postal Service Priority Mail International (6 - 10 Day Delivery) with Lumicon. I will be getting some filters from them for my telescope and the delivery costs $41.60. Will this also go through the SA Post Office?

[koffiejunkie]

Oh man. What about U.S. Postal Service Priority Mail International (6 - 10 Day Delivery) with Lumicon. I will be getting some filters from them for my telescope and the delivery costs $41.60. Will this also go through the SA Post Office?

That's still via SAPO. Pretty much anything where the courier company has a local presence and their guys bring it to your door, goes through SAPO.

When I send a parcel to S.A., either from the UK or the US, and I send it via registered (or whatever they call it), it's only trackable until it crosses the S.A. border.

[mercurial]

That's still via SAPO. Pretty much anything where the courier company has a local presence and their guys bring it to your door, goes through SAPO.

When I send a parcel to S.A., either from the UK or the US, and I send it via registered (or whatever they call it), it's only trackable until it crosses the S.A. border.

So what would you recommend as the better option wrt delivery?

[bwana]

So what would you recommend as the better option wrt delivery?Have the store hit the filters with a hammer and fax you the pieces? :eek:

[mercurial]

Not the answer I was looking for :eek:

[koffiejunkie]

Courier. The lesser of all the various evils :)

[BigAl-sa]

Have the store hit the filters with a hammer and fax you the pieces? :eek:You don't have to do that, SAPO will do it for you free of charge ;)

Anything on the 16-35 yet?

[bwana]

You don't have to do that, SAPO will do it for you free of charge ;)

Anything on the 16-35 yet?Stuck . . . . in . . . . flipping . . . . Customs . . . :mad:

[mercurial]

Still? Yikes. What's the difference between using the post office and using UPS? :o

[koffiejunkie]

Still? Yikes. What's the difference between using the post office and using UPS? :o

The likelihood of actually receiving your package...

[mercurial]

The likelihood of actually receiving your package...

But bwana's having problems with his. I'm a bit worried that if I choose UPS, I'm gonna experience the same problems.

[bwana]

But bwana's having problems with his. I'm a bit worried that if I choose UPS, I'm gonna experience the same problems.Either way your parcel is going through customs - it's who handles things before and after, and who ultimately takes responsibility that is important to me.

[mercurial]

Either way your parcel is going through customs - it's who handles things before and after, and who ultimately takes responsibility that is important to me.

Ok. But what I can't understand is why yours is still there. Are they not informing you as to why? That's so unprofessional on their part and I mean who wants to wait longer than the stipulated period? They should just mail it already!

[bwana]

Ok. But what I can't understand is why yours is still there. Are they not informing you as to why? That's so unprofessional on their part and I mean who wants to wait longer than the stipulated period? They should just mail it already!I doubt customs is ever known for their professionalism. :o

[koffiejunkie]

Ok. But what I can't understand is why yours is still there. Are they not informing you as to why? That's so unprofessional on their part and I mean who wants to wait longer than the stipulated period? They should just mail it already!

Customs is a bit like home-affairs - a black hole. I very much doubt they give the courier companies a reason or update or any information. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't let them know in a timely fashion that items have cleared either.

[mercurial]

I doubt customs is ever known for their professionalism. :o

Lol true. Is there a number that one can call them for enquiries? I want to get all the info before I do anything stupid :D

[bwana]

Good grief - customs is "querying the documentation" so there's little to no chance I'll get my lens out of their hands this week.

[mercurial]

Good grief - customs is "querying the documentation" so there's little to no chance I'll get my lens out of their hands this week. Good grief! That's crazy :mad:

[bwana]

Good grief! That's crazy :mad:Calculating VAT is apparently more complicated than I thought. :rolleyes:

[mercurial]

Calculating VAT is apparently more complicated than I thought. :rolleyes:

Lol. Eish, this country makes me wonder a lot of the time. Did they give you any ETA?

[koffiejunkie]

Calculating VAT is apparently more complicated than I thought. :rolleyes:

Somebody hid their calculator? :D

[mercurial]

bwana, is this the first time that customs has delayed your deliveries? If not, how long do they usually take?

[bwana]

bwana, is this the first time that customs has delayed your deliveries? If not, how long do they usually take?I think they pulled this stunt once before with me - usually they're (seemingly) efficient.

[mercurial]

I think they pulled this stunt once before with me - usually they're (seemingly) efficient.

Ok, so it's usually around 7 days?

[bwana]

Ok, so it's usually around 7 days?Usually. I had problems once before at customs with a Mac mini but I think that was through FedEx.

[mercurial]

Usually. I had problems once before at customs with a Mac mini but I think that was through FedEx.

Ok cool, thanks.

[BigAl-sa]

Hey Bwana, I saw on another thread (which I can't find now), that customs want your credit card statement to see proof of payment. I am sure that they want to see the exact amount that your bank transferred overseas, so they can screw you for the maximum amount of tax/duties possible (and they don't have to do any difficult sums).

[bwana]

Hey Bwana, I saw on another thread (which I can't find now), that customs want your credit card statement to see proof of payment. I am sure that they want to see the exact amount that your bank transferred overseas, so they can screw you for the maximum amount of tax/duties possible (and they don't have to do any difficult sums).It wouldnt surprise me.

[koffiejunkie]

So have you gotten the lens yet? Or an ETA? I'm quite curious about that lens - I've read on several occasions that is very "contrasty" - sounds nice... :)

[mercurial]

So have you gotten the lens yet? Or an ETA? I'm quite curious about that lens - I've read on several occasions that is very "contrasty" - sounds nice... :)

He "doesn't want to talk about it" :D

[Frankie]

I'm in the US (Pittsburgh, PA) on business and bought the EF-s 10-22 UWA zoom.
I got it from Abes of Maine which cost $709 with the hood at $35 and 2nd day shipping (total $765).

We went out with it this past weekend using it on my wife's 350D while I had the 17-55 on my 30D - it was real handy not having to change lenses on the move.

I am really impressed with my new addition.

[bwana]

He "doesn't want to talk about it" :DIt's out of customs and should arrive in PE tomorrow morning . . . which only gives me a few hours to get used to it before a job tomorrow evening. :o

[koffiejunkie]

It's out of customs and should arrive in PE tomorrow morning . . . which only gives me a few hours to get used to it before a job tomorrow evening. :o

Talk about cutting it fine!

[koffiejunkie]

I'm in the US (Pittsburgh, PA) on business and bought the EF-s 10-22 UWA zoom.
I got it from Abes of Maine which cost $709 with the hood at $35 and 2nd day shipping (total $765).

Nice! First shot?

I find my 10-20mm to be huge fun. So much more perspective to play with.

[bwana]

Talk about cutting it fine!Aint that the truth.

[xrapidx]

Hey Bwana, I saw on another thread (which I can't find now), that customs want your credit card statement to see proof of payment. I am sure that they want to see the exact amount that your bank transferred overseas, so they can screw you for the maximum amount of tax/duties possible (and they don't have to do any difficult sums).

True - I recently had hood-dampers for my car sent from Japan - there was no indication of price on them, so they wanted a invoice (gave them the eBay invoice), and they wanted a copy of my credit card statement reflecting the amount. Vehicle parts are 20% + 14%

I think it'll only happen if there is no indication of price or value on the item.

[bwana]

True - I recently had hood-dampers for my car sent from Japan - there was no indication of price on them, so they wanted a invoice (gave them the eBay invoice), and they wanted a copy of my credit card statement reflecting the amount. Vehicle parts are 20% + 14%

I think it'll only happen if there is no indication of price or value on the item.There was the shipping invoice as well as the declared value - I guess the math was a bit too complicated for them as they insisted on the cc statement. :confused:

[xrapidx]

There was the shipping invoice as well as the declared value - I guess the math was a bit too complicated for them as they insisted on the cc statement. :confused:

Probably - saw a percentage thing they worked out on one order of mine, customs got the % wrong.

[koffiejunkie]

There was the shipping invoice as well as the declared value - I guess the math was a bit too complicated for them as they insisted on the cc statement. :confused:

It's easier (and more fun) to make your life miserable than to work it out themselves...

[bwana]

It's easier (and more fun) to make your life miserable than to work it out themselves...12 days. That's how long its been in SA. :mad:

[koffiejunkie]

I guess it was in S.A. a day after you placed your order...

[bwana]

I guess it was in S.A. a day after you placed your order...Not quite but that was partially my fault as I didnt look at one of the emails they sent which contained a request for credit card verification. :o

It (eventually :o) shipped on the 23rd and arrived in SA on the 25th.

[Frankie]

Nice! First shot?

I find my 10-20mm to be huge fun. So much more perspective to play with.

Here's a few

http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php?photo=5616&cat=500

http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php/photo/5615

http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php/photo/5614

I'll be having fun with this latest lens that I've decided completes my lens collection.

If you view the large version of the pics you can see the EXIF

We've had great fun holding it at arms length taking pictures of the wife and I with the scenery in the background.

[bwana]

Here's a few

http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php?photo=5616&cat=500

http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php/photo/5615

http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php/photo/5614

I'll be having fun with this latest lens that I've decided completes my lens collection.

If you view the large version of the pics you can see the EXIFNice - pity you're stuck in Pittsburgh though :p

So what else is in your collection?

[Frankie]

Nice - pity you're stuck in Pittsburgh though :p

So what else is in your collection?

Pittsburgh's not too bad - I was thinking of driving up to Niagara but the 3.5 hour drive each way is putting me off.

Here's my collection:
EOS 350D + Kit 18-55 lens
EOS 30D, EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS USM,
EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM, EF 28 f1.8 USM,
EF-s 10-22, Kenko 2X TC, 580EX, remote button

The 2X TC, 18-55 kit lens and EF 28 1.8 gather dust

[bwana]

Nice collection :)

[UnoPanelvan]

I have a old Pentax with motorized Auto lens. The shutter is broken. It has a 28/80 lens.

Can the parts / lens be used on something more modern?

[koffiejunkie]

Here's a few

http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php?photo=5616&cat=500
http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php/photo/5615
http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php/photo/5614

Very cool!


I'll be having fun with this latest lens

+1 I'm having huge fun with mine and telling anyone who will listen to buy one :)


EOS 350D + Kit 18-55 lens
EOS 30D, EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS USM,
EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM, EF 28 f1.8 USM,
EF-s 10-22, Kenko 2X TC, 580EX, remote button

I'm looking long and hard at this lens. As much as I love my Sigma 10-20mm and EF 24-105L, I find when I'm travelling, I keep switching them and most of my photos end up being the range of the 17-55 (I tend to use the longer end of the Sigma). The 17-55 f/2.8 has a reputation for matching L glass in quality and the few minutes I played with it really left me impressed.


I have a old Pentax with motorized Auto lens. The shutter is broken. It has a 28/80 lens.

Can the parts / lens be used on something more modern?

What model is the camera?

[Frankie]

I'm looking long and hard at this lens. As much as I love my Sigma 10-20mm and EF 24-105L, I find when I'm travelling, I keep switching them and most of my photos end up being the range of the 17-55 (I tend to use the longer end of the Sigma). The 17-55 f/2.8 has a reputation for matching L glass in quality and the few minutes I played with it really left me impressed.


It is notorious for the dust ingress, flare and exorbitant price.
I've cleaned the dust out of mine and since use a UV filter which has stopped the dust ingress and bought the expensive hood which reduces the flare and I take note of the light angles and avoid situations that could cause flare, however I'll never do without this very versatile walk-around lens.

[koffiejunkie]

I wasn't aware of the dust and flaring. I guess I'll have to find a place that will let me take it out in the street.

It kinda bothers me that a UV solves the dust issue. How the hell does dust get in via the front element???

[Frankie]

I wasn't aware of the dust and flaring. I guess I'll have to find a place that will let me take it out in the street.

It kinda bothers me that a UV solves the dust issue. How the hell does dust get in via the front element???

There's fairly large gaps around the front sticker - take a look here
http://www.pbase.com/rcicala/1755_is_surgery

[koffiejunkie]

Aah right. Lens design has changed somewhat since the last time I took one apart (I was young enough to get a hiding :)).

The thought of taking my 24-105L apart to get dust out scares the living daylights out of me!

[mercurial]

It's out of customs and should arrive in PE tomorrow morning . . . which only gives me a few hours to get used to it before a job tomorrow evening. :o

:D At least it's here now :)

[bwana]

I wasn't aware of the dust and flaring. I guess I'll have to find a place that will let me take it out in the street.

It kinda bothers me that a UV solves the dust issue. How the hell does dust get in via the front element???I've heard that Canon also recommends a clear filter on the 16-35 in order to weather proof it.
:D At least it's here now :)Not quite - UPS is claiming it's delayed due to yesterday's strike action. :mad:

[mercurial]

Not quite - UPS is claiming it's delayed due to yesterday's strike action. :mad:




And the drama continues... They are pathetic. I'm surprised your goodies got here so quickly. I ordered some filters for my telescope on the 4th and it will only be here the 11th :o

[bwana]

I'm going to propose to UPS that the rebrand locally as SNAFU.

[mercurial]

I'm going to propose to UPS that the rebrand locally as SNAFU.

SNAFU :confused:

[bwana]

SNAFU :confused:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAFU

I've resigned myself to the idea that I'll have to forgo the new lens for tonight and make do with the 28-300 sigma with flash on one body and the 50mm f/1.8 on the other. :o

[mercurial]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNAFU

I've resigned myself to the idea that I'll have to forgo the new lens for tonight and make do with the 28-300 sigma with flash on one body and the 50mm f/1.8 on the other. :o

Lol, thanks for that link. Don't worry. You'l have it soon :)

[koffiejunkie]

I've resigned myself to the idea that I'll have to forgo the new lens for tonight and make do with the 28-300 sigma with flash on one body and the 50mm f/1.8 on the other. :o

What are you shooting tonight?

[bwana]

What are you shooting tonight?Some soiree or another . . . so people.

[mercurial]

I thought shooting people was against the law :D

[bwana]

Well, now that the urgency has passed I think it is safe to assume my lens will be arriving today . . . :rolleyes:

[mercurial]

Well, now that the urgency has passed I think it is safe to assume my lens will be arriving today . . . :rolleyes:

Lol. Mine has cleared customs. I should get my filters today :D * crosses fingers *

[koffiejunkie]

I read somewhere online (can't find it now, frustratingly) that canon has a equivalent to Nikon's 18-200 VR in the works. Should be interesting - that might make a very nice travel lens.

[bwana]

I read somewhere online (can't find it now, frustratingly) that canon has a equivalent to Nikon's 18-200 VR in the works. Should be interesting - that might make a very nice travel lens.Wiki has a fairly comprehensive list of Canon's ef lenses here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_lens_mount#List_of_EF_lenses and EF-s here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF-S_lens_mount#List_of_EF-S_lenses

I'm all spent out for now. I did manage to drop my sigma last night - no apparent damage though.

[xrapidx]

Lol. Mine has cleared customs. I should get my filters today :D * crosses fingers *

You manage to get your new one hooked up to a camera yet?

I still haven't since we last spoke, was sent to Jhb. till the end of August :(

[mercurial]

You manage to get your new one hooked up to a camera yet?

I still haven't since we last spoke, was sent to Jhb. till the end of August :(

Shame dude. I don't have a SLR yet. I plan to get one at the end of this month. Customs just called me - my telescope filters will be delivered by 11:00. Charges from customs came to R399. A little more than I expected but very happy nontheless. If I had to buy this from a local store, it would've costed me thousands more...
I'll definitely be a regular customer of B&H now :D

[koffiejunkie]

Customs just called me - my telescope filters will be delivered by 11:00. Charges from customs came to R399.

How much was the order?

[mercurial]

How much was the order?

$249 for the filters and $71 for shipping.

[bwana]

Got my lens . . . finally :D

[mercurial]

Got my lens . . . finally :D

Lol yeay :D

[koffiejunkie]

Cool! First pic!

[ldmelsa]

Got my lens . . . finally :D

Awesome!

16-35 f/2.8 L, right?

Now you need a FF cam to take full advantage of it.
That said it will work great on your 400D, for now. (wide to midrange)

[bwana]

Lol yeay :DYay indeed :D


Cool! First pic!No point, my first two pics are traditionally of the lens cap and my foot - like to get those out of the way ;)


Awesome!

16-35 f/2.8 L, right?

Now you need a FF cam to take full advantage of it.
That said it will work great on your 400D, for now. (wide to midrange)16-35 f/2.8 L II :) and yeah - the FF is on my wish list. :)

[koffiejunkie]

Now you need a FF cam to take full advantage of it.

Ultra wide FTW!!! :D

[koffiejunkie]

Yay indeed :D

No point, my first two pics are traditionally of the lens cap and my foot - like to get those out of the way ;)

Cool, third then. Why are you even still online? I'd be out shooting!


and yeah - the FF is on my wish list. :)

Rumor mill says Canon will be announcing some new DSLR(s) on 26 August. Some journos have been invited.

Speaking of which, I'm quite liking the idea of going to Photokina. It's not real expensive to get there, it's 20 bucks to go in, there's lots of eye candy (the cameras and the girls holding them) and they don't mind you taking pictures... :D

[ldmelsa]

16-35 f/2.8 L II :) and yeah - the FF is on my wish list. :)

Oh yes, II!
Version II has better corner sharpness.

[bwana]

Cool, third then. Why are you even still online? I'd be out shooting!



Rumor mill says Canon will be announcing some new DSLR(s) on 26 August. Some journos have been invited.

Speaking of which, I'm quite liking the idea of going to Photokina. It's not real expensive to get there, it's 20 bucks to go in, there's lots of eye candy (the cameras and the girls holding them) and they don't mind you taking pictures... :DWorking today though I might get a chance to use it this afternoon. I'll be happy if canon returns fire from Nikon's recent volley of releases.

In the short term I'd probably see if I could find a decent second hand 5D (assuming there is a glut when Canon actually replaces it).


Oh yes, II!
Version II has better corner sharpness.I cant wait until that becomes an issue. :)

CRUD - my gear doesnt fit in my camera bag anymore. :(

[xrapidx]

Shame dude. I don't have a SLR yet. I plan to get one at the end of this month. Customs just called me - my telescope filters will be delivered by 11:00. Charges from customs came to R399. A little more than I expected but very happy nontheless. If I had to buy this from a local store, it would've costed me thousands more...
I'll definitely be a regular customer of B&H now :D


$249 for the filters and $71 for shipping.

Isn't that almost 20%? I thought there wasn't a charge on optics? :confused:


BTW.Just had a meeting, I finished the entire project plans scheduled work for the month in 3-days... I get to go home on Sunday :D

[bwana]

Isn't that almost 20%? I thought there wasn't a charge on optics? :confused:


BTW.Just had a meeting, I finished the entire project plans scheduled work for the month in 3-days... I get to go home on Sunday :DUPS usually throws in a little sumthin' sumthin' too for good measure.

[ldmelsa]

bwana, what are you going to be using your new lens for?
you said that you needed a super-wide lens that is fast
do you shoot interiors for clients?
are you doing a bit of freelance photography now?

[mercurial]

Isn't that almost 20%? I thought there wasn't a charge on optics? :confused:


BTW.Just had a meeting, I finished the entire project plans scheduled work for the month in 3-days... I get to go home on Sunday :D

This was inclusive of VAT and some other charges. In any case, I saved thousands, which I would not have, had I bought the optics locally. The filters arrived this morning :)

Oh and congrats on the 3 day magic! :)

[bwana]

bwana, what are you going to be using your new lens for?
you said that you needed a super-wide lens that is fast
do you shoot interiors for clients?
are you doing a bit of freelance photography now?I needed a wide angle primarily for group shots and interiors. I was using the kit lens so regularly I think it will prove to be a worth while investment.

It will also been nice to have for recreational shooting too - esp landscapes and the kids (fast helps there too :)) . . . it is kinda heavy though :o

I did just manage to get a pinprick of flaring but it wasnt as easy as doing it using the kit lens.

[ldmelsa]

it is kinda heavy though

that's good! :D

[koffiejunkie]

I did just manage to get a pinprick of flaring but it wasnt as easy as doing it using the kit lens.

If you know how to force it you can make any lense flare or throw CA. I've managed to make the 24-105 f/4L flare badly, although I have yet to see any CA from it.

[bwana]

that's good! :DUp to a point - at least its solid. :)

[koffiejunkie]

So now that bwana has his new toy, I'm itching to get something too :) To be serious, a friend's band is playing on Monday night and I'm worried that the 35mm f/2 will be too short, so I'm now seriously thinking of getting a 50mm. Does anyone here have experience of both the plastic fantastic and the f/1.4?

[bwana]

Compared to the 1.4 the 1.8 could almost be considered as chump change. I'd get the 1.8 and then decide if you have a need for the other one.

[koffiejunkie]

Yeah, I'm favouring the 1.8 too for now, but for other reasons. I've already splashed on the flash and *another* camera bag this month.

[bwana]

Yeah, I'm favouring the 1.8 too for now, but for other reasons. I've already splashed on the flash and *another* camera bag this month.I've somehow managed to cram in all my gear into my bag apart from the 18-55 kit lens.

[koffiejunkie]

I've somehow managed to cram in all my gear into my bag apart from the 18-55 kit lens.

Well, you don't need it anymore, do you? :D

BTW, I decided to grab the nifty fifty after all. I figure if I don't like it I can pass it on to my sister - she has an EOS film camera.

But sadly Jessops didn't have one in stock. The guy seemed quite surprised that I expected them to have it! I asked if they have it at any of their other branches? Yes, just one, on the other side of town. Now, I was on the way to work (weekend shift) so I can't do it. Cool, can you get it here by monday? Nope, can't do.

Anyway, I just realised I have a 50mm lens - my Pentax-M 50mm f/2. I just need an adapter :)

[BigAl-sa]

Got my lens . . . finally :DSo where are the pics? You've had it for more than 24hrs :p

Enjoy it!

[BigAl-sa]

BTW, I decided to grab the nifty fifty after all. I've heard of lots of focusing problems with the 1.8 - I think I'd rather spend a bit extra on the 1.4??

[koffiejunkie]

I don't mind manual focus. The situations I'm looking to address with this lens are generally the ones where AF is likely to not bee too effective.

I have been wanting to buy the 1.4, but it's about four times the price, and I was looking at getting it while I'm in Hong Kong next month. So I'm not to keen to get it now.

At the same time, I have an opportunity to get my hands on a band new (old stock) Pentax-A 50MM f/1.2 for my K1000, and I'm going to buy it. I'm thinking I could rather spend a few extra pounds on a K-mount to EOS converter, and use that instead. I really don't mind using the focus ring, I'm not going to be shooting sports or BIF with a 50mm lens after all.

[bwana]

I'll see what I can do about posting some samples after spinrite has finished having its way with my MBP's hdd.

There isn't that much wrong with the 1.8's af but the manual ring is a bit fiddly. A laggy band helps though. :)

Edit. I use red of course :D

[ldmelsa]

K-mount to EOS converter

I did not know you get such a thing.
I've got an f/1.7 50mm Pentax lens.

[koffiejunkie]

There are a few, some are dodgier than others. This (http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/AF-Confirm-Adapter-Pentax-PK-lens-to-Canon-EOS-camera_W0QQitemZ370074279053QQcmdZViewItem?hash=it em370074279053&_trkparms=72%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14.l1318) looks good.

There are a few gotchas. The bit sticking out at the back of the Pentax lens is in the way of the full frame mirrors, so if you have a 5D or 1D series, you have to cut it off. Apparently this isn't an issue on the crop bodies, and I'm happy to pay £14 to find out. Other than that, a few things might be off -distance scale, etc, but I'm not really too concerned about that.

[bwana]

I have one lens that I'd love to get a converter for.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2221/1726421362_d89fdd6a15.jpg?v=0

Its got a thread on the mount end.

[koffiejunkie]

M42?

[UnoPanelvan]

Very cool!

What model is the camera?

Sorry only saw your question now

Pentax SFX. (No other info)

[bwana]

M42?and that is? :o

[koffiejunkie]

M42 = Pentax screw mount.

[bwana]

M42 = Pentax screw mount.Ok - so what do you think . . is there an easy way to get it to fit on my camera? Would it be worth it if I could?

[UnoPanelvan]

M42 = Pentax screw mount.

Can my broken Pentax SFX (with damaged shutter) mount + lens be used? :D

I saw a huge lens one day in a German shop second hand for a ridiculous price. The guy got annoyed when I kept on insisting there must be a way to mount it on that (NOW) broken Pentax. There was no way!

PS Nope, just checked mine is a clip/twist on version.

[koffiejunkie]

Yip, it's even better, since there are not pins or fancy things in the way. There are several (http://search.stores.ebay.co.uk/big-is-camera_M42-canon_W0QQfciZQ2d1QQfclZ3QQfsnZbigQ5fisQ20cameraQQ fsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQsaselZ109440703QQsofpZ0) options.

Disclaimer - I don't own any M42 kit and haven't tried this.

[koffiejunkie]

Can my broken Pentax SFX (with damaged shutter) mount + lens be used? :D

Look on eBay for another one to cannibalise for parts. You would have to find someone who knows how to fix it though, older photographers might know how or know someone who does.


PS Nope, just checked mine is a clip/twist on version.

Yours would be K-mount (bayonet). There is no shortage of M42-to-K-mount converters. If I remember correctly some of them were even manufactured by Pentax.

[UnoPanelvan]

Look on eBay for another one to cannibalise for parts. You would have to find someone who knows how to fix it though, older photographers might know how or know someone who does.



Yours would be K-mount (bayonet). There is no shortage of M42-to-K-mount converters. If I remember correctly some of them were even manufactured by Pentax.

But is it worth it? A new digital SLR seems to be so much more enticing. Well one day.

[koffiejunkie]

Well, that's for you to decide. You can probably buy a second-hand film body for the cost of repairing it. But here's the beautiful thing, you can use your existing K-mount lenses on a Pentax or Samsung DSLR.

[UnoPanelvan]

Well, that's for you to decide. You can probably buy a second-hand film body for the cost of repairing it. But here's the beautiful thing, you can use your existing K-mount lenses on a Pentax or Samsung DSLR.

Thanks. I'l be off to the shop soon, when I have the cash to spare.

FIlm Body? I pushed my fingers through the shutter trying to change film in the dark. Thereafter the "curtains" at the back does not lift always or mostly. Anyway needs to get away from film I think.

Will the electronic auto zoom work on the other cameras? or will or be a manual funtion then.

[koffiejunkie]

Electronic autozoom? Are you referring to what Pentax calls "Power Zoom"?

As far as I know that's simply a in-lens business - as long as the camera gives power to the lens (which the DSLRs do), it'll work.

[koffiejunkie]

Yours would be K-mount (bayonet). There is no shortage of M42-to-K-mount converters. If I remember correctly some of them were even manufactured by Pentax.

Well, what do you know, they still do (http://www.pentaxwebstore.com/detail/PTX+30120).

[bwana]

Well, what do you know, they still do (http://www.pentaxwebstore.com/detail/PTX+30120).So I could use one of those in conjunction with the K-mount to Canon EF?

[koffiejunkie]

No idea - it should work, I think. The M42-to-K as far as I remember keep the same distance to the film, so you don't lose infinity focus. So it shouldn't make a difference. But again, I haven't tried this, don't have any M42 glass either, so I could be wrong.

[koffiejunkie]

But why would you want to do that? You're paying for two adapters already, so just buy the M42-EOS and Kmount-EOS and use them separately. Or do you want to use that lens on your Pentax too?

[bwana]

Do they do a M42 to EOS? That would be ideal (provided the glass is worth a damn). I've got no desire for film anymore - that ship has sailed.

[koffiejunkie]

Yip. I just noticed I posted the wrong link before. Here (http://search.stores.ebay.co.uk/big-is-camera_M42-canon_W0QQfciZQ2d1QQfclZ3QQfsnZbigQ5fisQ20cameraQQ fsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQsaselZ109440703QQsofpZ0) is the correct one.

[koffiejunkie]

Got my plastic fantastic (http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_50mm_f18II/index.asp) today. Three things surprise me so far:

1. It's bigger than I expected. The glass itself is quite a bit wider than my 35mm f/2 (http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_35mm_f2/index.asp) too.

2. It feels cheaper than I expected - the focus ring especially is a bit shoddy.

3. It's lighter than I expected.

But, judging by my first few shots, it is, optically, very good. I'm going off to a rock fest for the weekend tomorrow - I should have some post-worthy shots by the end of it.

[bwana]

Got my plastic fantastic (http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_50mm_f18II/index.asp) today. Three things surprise me so far:

1. It's bigger than I expected. The glass itself is quite a bit wider than my 35mm f/2 (http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_35mm_f2/index.asp) too.

2. It feels cheaper than I expected - the focus ring especially is a bit shoddy.

3. It's lighter than I expected.

But, judging by my first few shots, it is, optically, very good. I'm going off to a rock fest for the weekend tomorrow - I should have some post-worthy shots by the end of it.L series it ;)
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/picture.php?albumid=19&pictureid=502

It helps :D

Enjoy your weekend!

[koffiejunkie]

Ladies and gents, I present to you my first shot from the Nifty Fifty a.k.a. Plastic Fantastic a.k.a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II (http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_50mm_f18II/index.asp):

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3157/2768612363_a9786592dd_m.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/koffiejunkie/2768612363/)

I'm happy to say I'm not disappointed. It was a little short for most of the artist shots, but not by so much that I can't crop comfortably. Interestingly, most of the pros hired to cover the event, mainly shot with 70-300mm lenses of various flavours. After this weekend I can see the sense in that. Might be time to start saving for one of those...

[koffiejunkie]

L series it ;)
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/picture.php?albumid=19&pictureid=502

It helps :D

Enjoy your weekend!

LOL!

[bwana]

Ladies and gents, I present to you my first shot from the Nifty Fifty a.k.a. Plastic Fantastic a.k.a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II (http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_50mm_f18II/index.asp):

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3157/2768612363_a9786592dd_m.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/koffiejunkie/2768612363/)

I'm happy to say I'm not disappointed. It was a little short for most of the artist shots, but not by so much that I can't crop comfortably. Interestingly, most of the pros hired to cover the event, mainly shot with 70-300mm lenses of various flavours. After this weekend I can see the sense in that. Might be time to start saving for one of those...I shot a charity event at the Boardwalk and the stage was so well lit that I hardly used anything but my sigma 28-300mm. This was before I got the 70-200 which it what I would probably use now.

A old problem has reared its ugly head - I need a bigger bag!

http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/picture.php?albumid=19&pictureid=528

[koffiejunkie]

Ha! So how many bags do you have? I count five so far:

1. A Nikon shoulder bag I got for a bargain at Photo Optix just before they went out of business. It's a nice enough bag, but the "steal me" label puts me off using it.
2. A LowePro Rezo TLZ 20 (http://products.lowepro.com/product/Rezo-TLZ-20,2017,8.htm) that I bought when I had just the Pentax. It's not big enough to take the 40D + 24-105L but I used it this weekend with the 35mm and 50mm - just enough space to fit both comfortably.
3. A LowePro Topload Zoom 2 (http://products.lowepro.com/product/Topload-Zoom-2,2052,8.htm) that's big enough to take the 40D + 24-105L along with the Sigma 10-20 in the bottom (just).
4. A Crumpler Pretty Boy XXL (http://www.crumpler.co.uk/?product=Pretty_Boy_M&page=details&product_line=589&lsc=1) - this is my favourite bag, but unfortunately can't take as much stuff as I'd like anymore.
5. LowePro Fastpack 250 (http://products.lowepro.com/product/Fastpack-250,2086,14.htm) - this one gobbles up all my kit: 40D plus all its lenses, the K1000 plus all it's primes (can't make the zoom (http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/vivitar/PRD_85175_3128crx.aspx) fit but I hardly use it), flash, filters, GPS logger, card reader, the P&S, extra batteries for both, cable release, spirit-level and rizlas :) Oh, and My Macbook. That said, it's a very tight fit - I'll probably get the 350 (the same but slightly larger) before my next trip.

SIGH - bag addiction... :o

[bwana]

Ha! So how many bags do you have? I count five so far:I just have the three - a Kata knapsack (above), a lowerpro that holds my camera with the 16-35 just right, and a small case logic that will just hold my camera with the 28-300 (and smaller).

I dont have any one bag that will hold it all though. :o

[koffiejunkie]

Interestingly, most of the pros hired to cover the event, mainly shot with 70-300mm lenses of various flavours. After this weekend I can see the sense in that. Might be time to start saving for one of those...

I should add that they were all shooting with full frame bodies. 70mm seems a little long on a crop body for some of the shots I took.

I hear you about the light. Although I used the 50mm wide open a lot, it's more because I wanted to than needed to. At the main stage (which had decent lighting), I often hit 1/1000 at ISO200 or 400. At the other stage, unfortunately the lighting was crap - they had the band (saw only two there, and it was the same for either) lit from behind, and the bright white lights that's suspended from the roof in front of the band spent most of the time shining in the audience's eyes. Don't have many keepers from that stage.

[koffiejunkie]

I just have the three - a Kata knapsack (above)

I keep hearing good things about the Kata bags, but I have yet to see one in a shop.


I dont have any one bag that will hold it all though. :o

He he, two cameras change things slightly. The K1000 doesn't really count here because it's hardly bigger than a G9 :)

I neglected to mention, what I can't fit in the Fastpack 250, and this is why I'm thinking of getting the 350, are the lens hoods.

[bwana]

I keep hearing good things about the Kata bags, but I have yet to see one in a shop.Its a great bag. There's even a place for MB in the back.
I neglected to mention, what I can't fit in the Fastpack 250, and this is why I'm thinking of getting the 350, are the lens hoods.With the exception of the new lens I just reverse the hood. :)

http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/picture.php?albumid=19&pictureid=529

[koffiejunkie]

With the exception of the new lens I just reverse the hood. :)

Well that's the thing. The 70-300 has a pretty slim hood, but it adds just enough width so that I can't get it in the bag along with everything else. The 24-105 has a much wider hood, since it's essentially a wide zoom on FF (doesn't really matter, since I lost it), and the Sigma's hood is pretty wide as well. I don't carry the Sigma's hood with me though - don't see the point. It's about three cm long - if I really need to block out direct sun, I just use my hand, or stick on the CP.

[bwana]

Well that's the thing. The 70-300 has a pretty slim hood, but it adds just enough width so that I can't get it in the bag along with everything else. The 24-105 has a much wider hood, since it's essentially a wide zoom on FF (doesn't really matter, since I lost it), and the Sigma's hood is pretty wide as well. I don't carry the Sigma's hood with me though - don't see the point. It's about three cm long - if I really need to block out direct sun, I just use my hand, or stick on the CP.One of the best things about hoods is the protection they offer the glass. That 3cm can make a big difference if you bump it. I'd sooner use lens hoods than clear filters any day. :)

[koffiejunkie]

I guess so. I'm not using the UV for protection any more. It's too much hassle to get it off and get the CP on. I found on my last trip I just kept the CP on most of time while outdoors - didn't hurt. The filters also cause some vignetting on the 10-20mm - I need to invest on a slim CP, but they're pretty pricey.

I tend to think if I dropped a lens, especially the 24-105L, I'm probably more likely to cause damage to the internal mechanics than the front element. The Sigma 10-20mm is, again, the exception, because of that "bubble" front element.

[mercurial]

What do you guys think about this Canon EFS 55-250mm F4.5-5.6 IS lens (http://www.sacamera.co.za/productdetail/CANEFS55-250IS/Canon-EFS-55-250mm-F4.5-5.6-IS.html)?

[ldmelsa]

What do you guys think about this Canon EFS 55-250mm F4.5-5.6 IS lens (http://www.sacamera.co.za/productdetail/CANEFS55-250IS/Canon-EFS-55-250mm-F4.5-5.6-IS.html)?



A natural for globe-trotting vacationers and soccer parents, this is the obvious second lens for Canon EOS 40D and Rebel XSi owners. Clearly it and the 18-55mm IS make an attractive team that promises sharp pictures in dicey light across an amply wide 13.9X zoom range. And you can’t beat that price. (http://www.popphoto.com/cameralenses/5327/lens-test-canon-55-250mm-f4-56-ef-s-is.html)


The one great feature the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS Lens has beyond just the basics is a 4-stop Image Stabilizer with vertical and horizontal auto-panning detection. With IS switched on, A half-press of the camera shutter release results in a much less jittery view through the viewfinder. (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-55-250mm-f-4-5.6-IS-Lens-Review.aspx)



Technically the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS is a tiny lens with a great performance potential. The resolution is very good across the range. Chromatic aberrations are basically a non-issue. The level of distortions remain moderate. The most obvious flaw is, unsurprisingly, vignetting at large apertures. The build quality is fine for a lens in this class and it is one step up from the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS that we’ve seen here recently. (http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/194-canon-ef-s-55-250mm-f4-56-is-test-report--review)
.

[mercurial]

Thanks Idmelsa :)

[bwana]

[/URL]

[URL="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-55-250mm-f-4-5.6-IS-Lens-Review.aspx"] (http://www.popphoto.com/cameralenses/5327/lens-test-canon-55-250mm-f4-56-ef-s-is.html)


(http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/194-canon-ef-s-55-250mm-f4-56-is-test-report--review)
.But what do you think of it? :)

Me - no opinion - never shot with it but you know my feelings on EF-S lenses in general.

[mercurial]

But what do you think of it? :)

Me - no opinion - never shot with it but you know my feelings on EF-S lenses in general.

I don't :confused:

[bwana]

I don't :confused:I think that the trend is going to be towards full frame cameras sooner rather than later so while it might be a good idea now eventually you might find yourself with a lens that wont work on a new body. Sure there is the possibility that canon (for eg) might completely discontinue the entire EF mount but I think (hope) it is a less likely scenario.

As for me - and I'm only making assumptions for me - I want my next camera to be full frame and with the exception of the kit lens I'm not going to have to sell any glass.

[mercurial]

Thanks for the clarification :cool:

[koffiejunkie]

I don't think they'll discontinue the EOS mount entirely. EF-S *maybe* but even that, I doubt. While I agree that full frame will become much more widely used in the next few years, I don't see crop bodies going away any time soon. They're cheaper to make, more compact, and provide a nice extra revenue stream for manufacturers.

[bwana]

I don't think they'll discontinue the EOS mount entirely. EF-S *maybe* but even that, I doubt. While I agree that full frame will become much more widely used in the next few years, I don't see crop bodies going away any time soon. They're cheaper to make, more compact, and provide a nice extra revenue stream for manufacturers.I also think that with a gradual move towards FF there will be a glut on second hand crop lens market with people looking to unload when they make the shift.

[mercurial]

I can't see the switch anytime soon. There is a relatively huge price leap from crop to FF. We also need to keep in mind that not everyone wants to go pro.

[bwana]

I can't see the switch anytime soon. There is a relatively huge price leap from crop to FF. We also need to keep in mind that not everyone wants to go pro.Technology is changing and sensor prices are going to fall.

[mercurial]

Technology is changing and sensor prices are going to fall.

Yeah, but I think it's gonna be a long, long time before they decide to pull the plug on it. I mean the entry level pro cameras are gonna have to take a dramatic price drop for the layman to afford a pro cam.
I personally would not kill off the market. There is a need for amateur equipment, for amateur photographers and again budget plays a part.

[bwana]

Yeah, but I think it's gonna be a long, long time before they decide to pull the plug on it. I mean the entry level pro cameras are gonna have to take a dramatic price drop for the layman to afford a pro cam.
I personally would not kill off the market. There is a need for amateur equipment, for amateur photographers and again budget plays a part.Why does amateur equipment have to use crop sensors? There is plenty of other technology that could be used to differentiate pro/am bodies.

[mercurial]

Why does amateur equipment have to use crop sensors? There is plenty of other technology that could be used to differentiate pro/am bodies.

Because not everyone wants to own professional equipment, especially at the prices they currently are. I guess my main statement is that most people are happy with entry-level SLRs and especially cos they are somewhat affordable.

[bwana]

Because not everyone wants to own professional equipment, especially at the prices they currently are. I guess my main statement is that most people are happy with entry-level SLRs and especially cos they are somewhat affordable.Technology advances. If it's as cheap to produce a full frame sensor tomorrow as it is to produce a APS-C today why bother with the smaller sensor anymore? Phase it out.

[mercurial]

Technology advances. If it's as cheap to produce a full frame sensor tomorrow as it is to produce a APS-C today why bother with the smaller sensor anymore? Phase it out.

I agree. If it becomes as cheap, then by all means. But I can't see this happening for a long time.
The jump from R6000 to R25000 is gonna take a while...

[bwana]

I agree. If it becomes as cheap, then by all means. But I can't see this happening for a long time.
The jump from R6000 to R25000 is gonna take a while...I'd put good money on it being far less than a decade:

Now - say for example in five years you break your camera (assuming you've finally got one by then :D) . . . and what if you've been producing some quality images and see that full frame sensor cameras, while not as cheap as APS-c, have become much more affordable. What are you going to buy? Are you going to let your bag full of EF-S lenses keep you with the smaller sensor or are you going to take a hit and try to sell them?

[mercurial]

I'd put good money on it being far less than a decade and I've got every intention of being buried with my lenes :D

Now - say for example in five years you break your camera (assuming you've finally got one by then :D) . . . and what if you've been producing some quality images and see that full frame sensor cameras, while not as cheap as APS-c, have become much more affordable. What are you going to buy? Are you going to let your bag full of EF-S lenses keep you with the smaller sensor or are you going to take a hit and try to sell them?

Lol. To be honest, I don't think I will purchase another SLR for a very, very long time. If I have one that works well for me then I will probably keep it and work with it. It probably all depends on what I use it for. For a pro, the upgrade would have to happen, but if I'm just mucking around then I would probably keep it for as long as I can. Having said that, I only intend on buying one or two lenses - that being the 70-300mm and maybe a macro lens. If a FF becomes a lot cheaper, I would definitely make the switch.
My only gripe is that they cost so much. Else I would happily invest in one. Does that answer your question? :D

[bwana]

Lol. To be honest, I don't think I will purchase another SLR for a very, very long time. If I have one that works well for me then I will probably keep it and work with it. It probably all depends on what I use it for. For a pro, the upgrade would have to happen, but if I'm just mucking around then I would probably keep it for as long as I can. Having said that, I only intend on buying one or two lenses - that being the 70-300mm and maybe a macro lens. If a FF becomes a lot cheaper, I would definitely make the switch.
My only gripe is that they cost so much. Else I would happily invest in one. Does that answer your question? :DThat's why in my scenario I said it broke - and for the sake of argument it was beyond economical repair ;)