PDA

View Full Version : I bought a new lens for my camera today


suedv
06-09-2008, 10:45 PM
My old zoom lens bit the dust so I bought a new lens today. I bought a Canon EF70-300mm F4.5-5.6 IS USM zoom. I know there are several higher quality lenses out there, but I'm sure my new lens is something I can handle well.

Those Canon L series lenses are REALLY tempting. They have really good optics and are less likely to be damaged around the water than most lenses, but they are SO HEAVY. I know some of you folks use the L-series lenses. I don't know how you do it. I think I would take a lot less pictures if I had to haul around all that weight. I wouldn't be able to hold some of those lenses in a boat and take a steady picture.

I still have my eye on a Canon 70-200/2.8 EF-L IS USM zoom lens for lower light settings or situations where I really want to go for high quality, but that couldn't be my main "carry it almost everywhere I go" zoom lens. The higher quality lenses out of my strenght ability.

So, I'm just wondering what else do you guys who are into cameras like for good water sport pictures? By the way I'm not moving over to a different camera body.

Utahfoiler
06-09-2008, 11:41 PM
The EF70-300mm IS USM lens is an ok lens for day use, but anything indoor or at night would not do as well. I have both the 70-300 IS USM and the EF70-200 F2.8L IS USM. The 70-200 is by far my favorite lens, yes it is heavier, but you can't beat the pictures. If the weight is too much, then you could get the EF70-200 F4L USM. It is a lot lighter and you have the fixed aperture through the entire zoom range. I don't like the variable aperture on the 70-300. I shoot manual or aperture priority most of the time, and I don't like when I zoom in the aperture changes. If you get the EF70-200 F4 lens without IS, it is only a little more than the 70-300 with IS lens is.

I like the image quality better on it as well. The 70-300 does not have the same image quality.

You should see my last lens I bought for sports. EF400MM F2.8 IS USM. Now that is a beast.

D3skier
06-09-2008, 11:47 PM
The EF70-300mm IS USM lens is an ok lens for day use, but anything indoor or at night would not do as well. I have both the 70-300 IS USM and the EF70-200 F2.8L IS USM. The 70-200 is by far my favorite lens, yes it is heavier, but you can't beat the pictures. If the weight is too much, then you could get the EF70-200 F4L USM. It is a lot lighter and you have the fixed aperture through the entire zoom range. I don't like the variable aperture on the 70-300. I shoot manual or aperture priority most of the time, and I don't like when I zoom in the aperture changes. If you get the EF70-200 F4 lens without IS, it is only a little more than the 70-300 with IS lens is.

I like the image quality better on it as well. The 70-300 does not have the same image quality.

You should see me last lens I bought for sports. EF400MM F2.8 IS USM. Now that is a beast.


not only in weight but price as well....

dapicatti
06-10-2008, 02:32 AM
Sue
No advice here, but can't wait to see your pictures. You have such a great eye....Enjoy it!

ncsone
06-10-2008, 08:57 AM
Sorry, I am a Nikon man. Can not be of much help on this one.

bigmac
06-10-2008, 09:17 AM
I use a 70-200VR f/2.8 (Nikon) for shots from the boat. I don't think the stabilization feature is that helpful in high-frequency jolts like riding in a boat and I leave it turned off, preferring to use higher shutter speeds that make image stabilization irrelevant.

http://www.pbase.com/hmac/image/46598102.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/hmac/image/32058974.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/hmac/image/64723471.jpg


I haven't shot anything from the boat with my current camera. It's full frame, so I'll be interested to see about zoom now that I've lost the 1.5x crop factor that I had with the D2H. Might have to use the 1.4 teleconverter, which adds more bulk and length to an already-large and heavy lens/camera combination.


.

stuartmcnair
06-10-2008, 12:49 PM
Sue, you should be fine with that lens for all of your shots around the water. I usually dial the aperture up a bit on the 2.8 anyway since it is so bright on the boat.

My preferred lens is the 70-200 2.8 L. I agree with bigmac that the IS is not that helpful on the boat. That does well for low light situations on a still subject.

Bigmac...don't worry about the tele...with the full frame you will be able to crop and still get a better shot than what you were getting.

Knox's_Better_half
06-10-2008, 01:46 PM
Sue, I would have to agree that I am not much help. I get some great shots with my camera, but when we get into the high tech stuff...I am not so good. I cant wait to see some of your good pictures though.

3event
06-10-2008, 03:19 PM
Sue, I love my 70-200F4L, as noted above the constant aperture is great. The price seemed like a stretch to me at the time. But for certain, when I compare with the kit lens pics, the L difference is dramatic.

russlars
06-10-2008, 03:34 PM
Sue,
Congrats on the new lens. I'm sure that you will get some great shots from it.
My wife uses the Canon 70-200/2.8 EF-L IS USM for most of our waterski pics and she also uses it for sports photography. It is a great lens, but she also complains about the weight. I did buy her one of these: http://www.procameragear.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/30/products_id/141
She likes it and it helps distribute the weight of the camera/lens a little better.

phecksel
06-19-2008, 12:09 PM
Sue,

Since I added the 70-200 2.8 (nikon mount sigma lens) to my collection, the 70-300 hasn't seen the camera once. 70-200 cropped is a better pic then the 70-300.

bigmac
06-19-2008, 02:21 PM
Sue,

Since I added the 70-200 2.8 (nikon mount sigma lens) to my collection, the 70-300 hasn't seen the camera once. 70-200 cropped is a better pic then the 70-300.

I have a friend who's a professional photographer. He's had that Sigma lens (and a few other Sigmas) for years and loves it. He has had to have it re-chipped twice, once when he went from a Fuji to Nikon, then once when he moved from one Nikon model to a newer model. Nikon occasionally diddles with the specs of their AF and metering systems. Not a problem on their lenses - they can just take care of it in a firmware update for the camera - but it can be an issue for third party lenses that have to reverse-engineer their electronics to stay compatible. Not sure if this is true of Canon too.

The optics of that lens are very, very good, apparently.

suedv
06-19-2008, 02:49 PM
Since I started this thread and read everyone's posts (that fit with my concerns in the first place) I had major second thoughts about the lens I bought. I held on to the lens for a few days without using it and then I took it back. I now I have the L series 70-200 2.8 lens. I took pictures with it at a show ski tournament last weekend in Indiana and it worked really well.

I figured out a way to deal with the weight of the lens for show ski events. I move around enough taking pictures at a show that my monopod drove me crazy. I bought one of those back support things they sell for construction people and the lens quickly became much more manageable.

Here's one picture with my new lens.

skeeler
06-19-2008, 02:55 PM
Since I started this thread and read everyone's posts (that fit with my concerns in the first place) I had major second thoughts about the lens I bought. I held on to the lens for a few days without using it and then I took it back. I now I have the L series 70-200 2.8 lens. I took pictures with it at a show ski tournament last weekend in Indiana and it worked really well.

I figured out a way to deal with the weight of the lens for show ski events. I move around enough taking pictures at a show that my monopod drove me crazy. I bought one of those back support things they sell for construction people and the lens quickly became much more manageable.

Here's one picture with my new lens.

That is a great lens, I have one as well. Enjoy it!!!

trickskier
06-19-2008, 04:29 PM
WOW!!! Great pic Sue.................:D

36582

Knox's_Better_half
06-19-2008, 04:40 PM
Since I started this thread and read everyone's posts (that fit with my concerns in the first place) I had major second thoughts about the lens I bought. I held on to the lens for a few days without using it and then I took it back. I now I have the L series 70-200 2.8 lens. I took pictures with it at a show ski tournament last weekend in Indiana and it worked really well.

I figured out a way to deal with the weight of the lens for show ski events. I move around enough taking pictures at a show that my monopod drove me crazy. I bought one of those back support things they sell for construction people and the lens quickly became much more manageable.

Here's one picture with my new lens.

Beautiful pics Sue!

rlivingood
06-19-2008, 05:52 PM
Hey one thing to consider if you really want the 2.8. That is that most of the time you will never use the 2.8 ap. Consider the focal plane distance (depth of field) at 100mm at 20 feet and the range is only 19 to 21.1. As you move close the range get's even smaller. Now do that again at 200mm and the range at 20ft is 19.8 to 20.3. (as focal length goes up and distance changes closer yields very tight DOF and it gets wider the farther away, I have a DOF chart and calculator that I use all the time when setting up shots) Almost sure to be too small for two people in the same picture unless they are right on the same line. So the lens you have with the larger aperture would be the what you would normally use. Not to say I never use my large fstops (all my lens are 2.8 or faster down the the 50mm 1.0)

gigem75
06-19-2008, 08:47 PM
Still using my D2H, sure would like a D3. Most lenses are sharpest between 5.6 and 11, wide open is usually the least sharp.