View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
oldschoolripper Outlaw
Joined: 26 Jul 2004 Posts: 143 City: Tupelo
|
Posted: Jul 27, 2004 8:54 am Post subject: Lens Question for Photo Gurus |
|
|
Which one would suit me and my D-reb better?
Canon 100-400 F4L
Sigma 70-200 2.8
And is the Image Stabilization worth paying the extra $ on the L series Canons for shooting mainly from chase boat/riding boat?
Right now I have a Sigma 28-200 Aspherical IF all the pics in my gallery were taken with it. I am not completely satisfied with the crispness and hate the low light ability.
Here is an example of the Sigma 28-200 IF |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
BillJ Wakeboarder.Commie
Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 1568 City: San Diego
|
Posted: Jul 27, 2004 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Are you sharpening your pics in photoshop using USM? Maybe you don't need a new lens, just some photoshop work on the images.
For the money, I'd suggest the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L. It's very sharp and generally you don't need more than 200mm for shooting wakeboarding. IS won't buy you anything shooting action sports, it's purpose is to give you an extra stop or two for lowlight hand-held shots. I have the 70-200mm f/4L and it's definitely very sharp. But if you want the extra reach then the 100-400 f/4L should work well too - I don't know if it's any sharper than your current lens though.
I've found that a simple 2-step sharpening process works really well for DRebel pics. First use 20%, 50 radius, 0 levels. They call this "defogging" the pic. Crop the pic and then resize it to it's final size for posting and then sharpen again, this time using about 110%, 0.4, 0 levels (adjust the percentage and threshold to get the desired results). This should really help make the pic look crisp without making it look oversharpened.
Here's a nice article about sharpening and USM if you're not familiar with it. http://www.seittipaja.fi/data/Photography_lessons/Processing/Lesson_2/_Sharpening.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
oldschoolripper Outlaw
Joined: 26 Jul 2004 Posts: 143 City: Tupelo
|
Posted: Jul 27, 2004 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks Bill, I will try the sharpening technique in PS.
Also do you think the 70-200 f4L would be a good choice over the 70-200 f/2.8L?
I know the f4 will cost less.
Thanks again. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
oldschoolripper Outlaw
Joined: 26 Jul 2004 Posts: 143 City: Tupelo
|
Posted: Jul 27, 2004 10:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Heres how it came out after putting it through the process you explained. Thanks again. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BIGMAC Wakeboarder.Commie
Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 1824 City: Russellville,AR
|
Posted: Jul 27, 2004 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have heard that the 70-200 f4 is a nice lens but I would fork out the extra $ for the 2.8.
To see the IS actually work is amazing and I believe that you would be able to see the difference at slower shutter speeds.
I have also heard that the Sigma 50-500 AKA Bigma is a good lens.
I saw a guy using a 100-400L IS the other week at an INT comp and he gave me his site name to check out the shots. It's www.lostvalleyphoto.com. Then click on the INT pics. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BIGMAC Wakeboarder.Commie
Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 1824 City: Russellville,AR
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
BillJ Wakeboarder.Commie
Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 1568 City: San Diego
|
Posted: Jul 27, 2004 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
The 70-200 f/4L is about half the price of the 2.8L. Both are incredibly sharp lenses and whether it's worth the extra cost to go with the faster lens is up to you. It may improve the auto focus slightly but that's about it for wakeboarding. Generally you'll want to shoot at f4 anyway to have enough depth of field to keep the rider in focus.
Shooting for a chase boat is tough with the Rebel because the AI Focus only kicks in using sports mode. And even then the 7 AF points probably aren't enough to track the moving rider.
After sharpening it looks pretty sharp - particularly considering it's a tight crop of the original. By the way, I've found that you get better results saving the pic as jpeg instead of gif. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jflock2 Outlaw
Joined: 25 Nov 2003 Posts: 234 City: Atlanta
|
Posted: Jul 27, 2004 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have a Canon 75-300MM Ultrasonic lens with a digital Rebel and it works very well. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RD Addict
Joined: 22 Apr 2003 Posts: 626 City: Discovery Bay
|
Posted: Jul 28, 2004 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have the 70-200 f2.8L but if you're main focus is wakeboard shooting the 70-200 f4 is fine. I have never used f2.8 shooting wakeboarding and you can always turn up the ISO. The f4 is way lighter too, a condition I'm becoming very aware of with the 1D. The 100-400 is even bigger than the 70-200 f2.8 especially extended. It's a great lens but too long for shooting from the boat or chase boat IMHO. For the times you're shooting from the shore just get an extender, they work great on the 70-200's. The bigma is nicknamed that for a reason, it's just huge. I recently got what I consider a very versatile lens, the Canon 70-300 DO IS. This thing is small, compact, has 3rd generation IS and gives images just about as good as the 70-200 f2.8. It focuses way faster than the 75-300 and the IS is magic at 300mm.
Bill: I can tell you're becoming a photoshop guru just by looking at your photos but I'm surprised you're still using USM. Why not get a cheap PS sharpening action like Fred Miranda's and make it easy on yourself? I'm using PhotoKit sharpener and it's unbelievable although a bit more expensive at $99. When you get the mkII (or did you already?) you are going to think you died and went to focus heaven! _________________ Rich Dykmans |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BillJ Wakeboarder.Commie
Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 1568 City: San Diego
|
Posted: Jul 28, 2004 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RD, yeah I already picked up a 1D Mark II. Amazing camera and the AI focus speed is incredible.
I've tried a couple of different sharpening tools such as FocalBlade and Intellisharpen. They do seem to work well but I haven't decided which one to buy yet. For posting to the web USM works pretty well and it doesn't take much when you start with a quality shot.
I'm looking at longer lenses to shoot surfing and haven't decided whether to go with a prime or a zoom. The Bigma is an obvious choice because of the price but the Canon 100-400 is a nice option too. I may upgrade the 70-200 f/4L to the 2.8L since the 1D Mark II autofocus works better with the faster lens. Wow, too many toys to spend money on! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
oldschoolripper Outlaw
Joined: 26 Jul 2004 Posts: 143 City: Tupelo
|
Posted: Jul 29, 2004 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ok Now I am thinking I will probably go with the 70-200 2.8 because i think it will be a better "all around"
NOW-
My next question is this: I am also considering a Canon 10D instead of the D-reb (I have a friend who wants to buy my D-REB)
SO what are the advantages of the 10D over the REB.
I know that the 10D has a much better burst (3fps 9 frames) Where the D-REB has (1.5fps 4 frames)
Any help is appreciated |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RD Addict
Joined: 22 Apr 2003 Posts: 626 City: Discovery Bay
|
Posted: Jul 29, 2004 5:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
What happened the first time you shot wakeboarding with the mkII? I'll bet you were grinning from ear to ear!
FocalBlade is supposed to really be "da bomb" if you take the time to learn it. Have you tried the demo version of Photokit Sharpener? It's a free download at Pixelgenius.com.
I don't remember any major focus speed differences between the f4 and f2.8 on the 1D but I know the mkII is faster. I wish I'd bought the 2.8 IS now that I've seen how well the IS works on the 70-300 DO.
I'm looking at the 400DO, I can't see jumping out of the boat with the bigma, cam and tripod. If I fell in I know I wouldn't let go and that combo would drag me to the bottom!
I really should just get the 100-400 and save the $ but I have a hard-on for the 400DO. I've played around with the 100-400 and I just don't care for the trombone style zoom. Between the IS and the weight of the 400DO you can handhold it even with the extenders. Handholding the Bigma is close to impossible I hear. I figured I'd blow my wad on at least 1 canon Tele-prime! _________________ Rich Dykmans |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RD Addict
Joined: 22 Apr 2003 Posts: 626 City: Discovery Bay
|
Posted: Jul 29, 2004 6:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
oldschoolripper:
Wait til Sept if you can for Photokina, it's just about a sure thing that Canon is upgrading the 10d and burst rate is one of the areas that's supposed to be improved. I didn't think the Rebel was that much slower than the 10d anyhow. Plus it's not only the burst rate but the focus speed that holds you back with the 10d/Rebel. If nothing else the price of the 10d will drop like a rock in Sept. _________________ Rich Dykmans |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Josh R Wakeboarder.com Freak
Joined: 20 Jan 2003 Posts: 3163 City: Melbourne, Australia
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
BIGMAC Wakeboarder.Commie
Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 1824 City: Russellville,AR
|
Posted: Jul 29, 2004 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
RD, Thanks for the info. I have just been using the intellisharpen and it works pretty good but I will check the others out. I purchased the 70-200 IS and I love it to death.
Josh R.
You have more gadgets and gizmos than most on this board!!! It's all about prioritizing Here's a pic to inspire you!!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Josh R Wakeboarder.com Freak
Joined: 20 Jan 2003 Posts: 3163 City: Melbourne, Australia
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Want2ride Outlaw
Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 182 City: Layton, Utah
|
Posted: Jul 29, 2004 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have the 70-200 F4 for my D-Rebel and I love it, it is such a great lens!! I didnt think I would use the 2.8 that much(and it was way out of my price range) so I went with the F4 and I have been nothing but happy with it. Its so light, I used a 2.8 IS for a bit one day and after putting my F4 back on it felt like a feather compared to that. And the price is great, I got mine for about $700 after shipping.
Now with the 10D over the D-Rebel I think you should stick with what you have, if you install the hacked firmware, its basicly the same camera as the 10D, the only advantage is going to be as you said the buffer(9 frames compaired to 4, and I think its 3 frames a sec. vs. 2.5 for the rebel) and the body. Not worth the extra money to me. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RD Addict
Joined: 22 Apr 2003 Posts: 626 City: Discovery Bay
|
Posted: Jul 29, 2004 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BigMac:
Nice! . . . It looks like you just took those two out of the box! Drag em thru the dirt a little bit!
Want2ride:
I'm with you there, I'm also into lightness these days and the 70-300DO stays on unless I need f2.8 or f4. _________________ Rich Dykmans |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BillJ Wakeboarder.Commie
Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 1568 City: San Diego
|
Posted: Jul 29, 2004 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So anyone have any wide-angle and fisheye recommendations for me? I'm thinking about picking up the Canon 17-40 f/4L and a Sigma 15mm fisheye. I don't think that I'll need the speed of the Canon 16-35 f/2.8L at twice the price of the 17-40. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RD Addict
Joined: 22 Apr 2003 Posts: 626 City: Discovery Bay
|
Posted: Jul 30, 2004 6:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have the 17-40 and I think it's plenty wide on a 1.3X crop body. I've seen a lot of image quality comparisons that claim it's every bit as good as the 16-35 and I really like pics from it. If you're thinking about needing a WA for indoor use though you might want the f2.8. I haven't gotten a fish eye yet but a lot of people swear by that cheap Russian one the Rubinar I think. _________________ Rich Dykmans |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BIGMAC Wakeboarder.Commie
Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 1824 City: Russellville,AR
|
Posted: Jul 30, 2004 7:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have the 17-40L to and it's really sharp. I also checked out and almost bought the Sigma 12-24. I have seen pics from the 12-24 and the vinetting is minimal especially on a 1.3-1.6 sensor. It was also sharp but not quite as sharp as the 17-40. (from the pics Ive seen). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BIGMAC Wakeboarder.Commie
Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 1824 City: Russellville,AR
|
Posted: Jul 30, 2004 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
RD, HAHAHA!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|