| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/24/2004 03:06:13 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by dadas115:
I prefer the Sigma (APO version) to the Canon 7x-300 lens mainly because of lack of CA. When I had the EF 75-300 I was noticing a lot of CA at the 300mm end. I also found that the Sigma is a little bit sharper out there also.
Greg |
What does "CA" mean? |
|
|
|
03/24/2004 04:43:10 PM · #52 |
| are 62- i have had both lens', i prefer the sigma because it feels smoother to me, it has a macro feature, I think it is equally sharp and it costs less than the canon. So I guess I think you get more for the bang/buck. |
|
|
|
03/24/2004 04:45:22 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by ellamay:
are 62- i have had both lens', i prefer the sigma because it feels smoother to me, it has a macro feature, I think it is equally sharp and it costs less than the canon. So I guess I think you get more for the bang/buck. |
I also have the Sigma 70-300 it is very nice for my style of shooting. |
|
|
|
03/24/2004 04:56:02 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by Are_62:
What does "CA" mean? |
Chromatic Aberration.
|
|
|
|
03/24/2004 04:58:49 PM · #55 |
|
|
|
03/24/2004 05:02:04 PM · #56 |
| Dadas115 do you have an extra room in your house for all those lenses? |
|
|
|
03/24/2004 05:13:51 PM · #57 |
They take up a surprisingly small amount of room in the gun cabinet.
Greg
|
|
|
|
03/24/2004 05:15:52 PM · #58 |
Had to show a quick test.
Decided to go to my local Best Buy and get the cheap 75-300 -not USM not IS.
Here are some quick test shots.
Note, there was no post processing what so ever except for resize.
What do you think?
Also, shot at about 4pm so not all that bright out.
canon 75-300mm test shots
Remember, no color, contrast, level or sharpen done to these.
|
|
|
|
03/24/2004 05:18:42 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by TerryGee:
Had to show a quick test.
Decided to go to my local Best Buy and get the cheap 75-300 -not USM not IS.
Here are some quick test shots.
Note, there was no post processing what so ever except for resize.
What do you think?
Also, shot at about 4pm so not all that bright out.
canon 75-300mm test shots
looks a lot sharper than most of the shots i was taking with the IS USM version
Remember, no color, contrast, level or sharpen done to these. |
|
|
|
|
03/24/2004 05:45:36 PM · #60 |
very hard to tell the difference between cheap lenses and expensive lenses at that size.
Originally posted by TerryGee:
Had to show a quick test.
Decided to go to my local Best Buy and get the cheap 75-300 -not USM not IS.
Here are some quick test shots.
Note, there was no post processing what so ever except for resize.
What do you think?
Also, shot at about 4pm so not all that bright out.
canon 75-300mm test shots
Remember, no color, contrast, level or sharpen done to these. |
|
|
|
|
03/24/2004 06:19:39 PM · #61 |
14mm
15mm fisheye
16-35mm zoom
24 tilt shift
24-70mm zoom
mpe65mm macro
70-200mm is
90mm tilt shift
100mm macro
180mm macro
300mm 2.8
500mm 4 is
1.4xII
2xII
all "L" were applicable.
Pentax 67
35mm fisheye
45mm
75mm
100mm macro
165 leaf shutter
300 f4
Mamiya RZ67
50mm
65mm
105mm
180mm
Lighting is all dyna-lite studio lights.
Think that's it. |
|
|
|
03/24/2004 06:32:22 PM · #62 |
cool, thanks for posting those. i find 200 to be fairly long on my 10D for a lot of what I do - track and field, cross country etc. but I could make it work ;). maybe some day.
Originally posted by dadas115:
Jimmy,
Here are a couple of shots that I happened to have on line from my 200mm f/1.8L.
//www.pbase.com/dadas115/dogs
The first two were with the 200 and the last two are from the EF 50mm f/1.8 wide open. The 200 is a really nice lens to say the least.
Greg |
Message edited by author 2004-03-24 18:54:59. |
|
|
|
03/24/2004 08:00:28 PM · #63 |
For the D100:
Nikkor 24-85 f3.5/4.6 G General and Portrait
Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 Zoom for outdoor wildlife
Nikkor 60 Macro
|
|
|
|
03/24/2004 08:51:58 PM · #64 |
For my 10D, in ascending order of focal length:
8mm Peleng fisheye (for those REALLY wide perspectives!)
Tamron 19-35mm f/3.5-5.6 (landscape & general WA work in good light)
Canon 28-200 f/3.5-5.6 USM (Travel lens, and my initial "mistake")
Canon 50mm f/1.4 (portraits and general low light work)
Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS (gotta love this lens, a multitude of uses including candid portraits, outdoor and some indoor sports, short range wildlife, airshows (w 1.4x converter), etc...)
Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro (for, well, macro as well as general short tele and let's not forget outstanding portraits!)
Also:
Tamron 1.4x converter (the cheap one)
Canon 2.0x II converter
Extension tubes
macro coupling ring
|
|
|
|
03/24/2004 09:52:23 PM · #65 |
Canon 10D body (would have gone with a Digital Rebel, but I didn't really like the idea of an all plastic body. Also has more features)
Canon EF 35-350mm f/3.5-5.6L USM (I wanted a do-it-all lens. Very nice, but doesn't do it all)
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro (just received this as a birthday present on the 19th. I've only had time to do a few test shots, but so far I like it very much)
Canon 550EX flash
Canon LC-4 wireless controller
I still want a nice, bright wide angle lens, and an even longer telephoto lens. Like maybe a Canon EF 600mm f/4.0L IS. I'll have to wait until the wife isn't looking for that one. ;^)
|
|
|
|
03/24/2004 10:20:23 PM · #66 |
CAMERAS
Nikon D-1x Digital CCD 5.33 megapixels
Nikon D-1x Digital CCD 5.33 megapixels
Nikon D-100 Digital CCD 6.1 megapixels
Nikon 5700 Digital CCD 5.8 megapixels
Nikon F-100 Film 35mm Professional SLR
Nikon F Film 35mm Vintage
Nikon F Film 35mm Vintage
Nikon F Film 35mm Vintage
Nikon F Film 35mm Vintage
Nikon Rangefinder Film 35mm Waterproof
Nikon Rangefinder Film 35mm Compact
Hasselblad XPan Film 35mm Panoramic
LENSES
Nikkor 17-35 mm f2.8 D AFS
Nikkor 28-70 mm f2.8 D AFS
Nikkor 28-200mm f3.5-f5.6 D IF
Nikkor 80-200 mm f2.8 D AFS
Nikkor 80-400 mm f4.5-f5.6 D VR
Nikkor 28 mm f1.4 D Fast F-Stop
Nikkor 60 mm f2.8 D Micro
Nikkor 85 mm f1.4 D Fast F-Stop
Nikkor 105 mm f2.0 D DC
Nikkor 200 mm f4.0 D Micro
Nikkor 500 mm f8.0 M Catadioptric
Nikkor 1000 mm f11.0 M Catadioptric
Nikkor 50 mm F1.4 M Vintage
Hasselblad 45mm f4.0 M XPan
Hasselblad 90mm f4.0 M XPan
6x6 STUFF
Hasselblad Body 501 CM 6 x 6 Black
Hasselblad Body 501 CM 6 x 6 Black
Hasselblad Back A12 120 Black
Hasselblad Back A12 120 Black
Hasselblad Back A12 120 Black
Hasselblad Lens 50 mm f4.0 FLE
Hasselblad Lens 80 mm f2.8 Black
Hasselblad Lens 150 mm f4.0 Black
Hasselblad Prism / Meter 45° Black
MAJOR ACCESSORIES
2 Nikon SB-80 Flash 35 mm Digital
1 Nikon SB-28x Flash 35 mm Digital
1 Nikon SB-29 Flash 35 mm
1 Sunpak 5000 Flash
1 Sunpak Flash
1 Vivitar Flash
3 Elinchrom 600S Strobe
5 Manfrotto MP4 Stand
...and a ton of accessories to numerous to list. Mostly stuff like x2 converters, filters, light meters, tripods, cases, etc.
My digital darkroom is well equipped too. Nikon 8000 scanner, Agfa commercial flatbed, four printers and lots of software and serious Win 2k PC.
What can I say, it is a sickness. My wife says that I have an addiction, it just happens to be to "photo chemicals". The humourous part is that I still suck as a photographer, no ribbons and it will be two years this summer - oh the shame of it all...
Message edited by author 2004-03-24 22:28:54.
|
|
|
|
03/24/2004 10:48:41 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by Morgan:
What can I say, it is a sickness. My wife says that I have an addiction, it just happens to be to "photo chemicals". The humourous part is that I still suck as a photographer, no ribbons and it will be two years this summer - oh the shame of it all... |
Well, if the shame ever gets to be too much you can always sell your camera gear and go buy yourself a nice little island as a consolation prize. ;^)
|
|
|
|
03/24/2004 11:40:08 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by justine:
Originally posted by ellamay:
are 62- i have had both lens', i prefer the sigma because it feels smoother to me, it has a macro feature, I think it is equally sharp and it costs less than the canon. So I guess I think you get more for the bang/buck. |
I also have the Sigma 70-300 it is very nice for my style of shooting. |
This lens works great for me also!! |
|
|
|
03/24/2004 11:41:13 PM · #69 |
OK Morgan you win!
I have the kit lens,
50mm1.8,
Sigma70-300
I was going to get the 200mm2.8 but it took to long to arrive and I decided to get lasik eye surgery instead,So you could say I am getting to more old lenses reconditioned! LOL
Neil
Message edited by author 2004-03-24 23:46:24. |
|
|
|
03/25/2004 02:12:11 AM · #70 |
Currently...
EF 50mm f/1.8 II (low-light/portrait)
EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM ('all-purpose')
Arriving soon...
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L (wide landscapes/architecture)
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L (new 'all-purpose' lens)
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS (wildlife, sports)
MPE 65mm f/2.8 (macro fun!)
EF 1.4x Extender (extra reach with the 70-200)
Who says student loans are for tuition?
|
|
|
|
03/25/2004 06:29:21 AM · #71 |
Originally posted by Dim7:
OK Morgan you win!
I have the kit lens,
50mm1.8,
Sigma70-300
I was going to get the 200mm2.8 but it took to long to arrive and I decided to get lasik eye surgery instead,So you could say I am getting to more old lenses reconditioned! LOL
Neil |
Sorry Neil,
I got you here again. Last March / May 2003, I had optical lens implants inserted in to each of my eyes to correct for defects that resulted from cataracts.
Normally, cataracts are an old persons problem. But after years of working within heavy RF environments, sailing and skiing all over the world in excessive sunlight without correct vision protection, and a bit of heredity thrown in for good measure, my eyes needed an optical overhaul.
Cheers,
Michael
|
|
|
|
03/25/2004 07:46:19 AM · #72 |
Originally posted by Morgan:
Originally posted by Dim7:
OK Morgan you win!
I have the kit lens,
50mm1.8,
Sigma70-300
I was going to get the 200mm2.8 but it took to long to arrive and I decided to get lasik eye surgery instead,So you could say I am getting to more old lenses reconditioned! LOL
Neil |
Sorry Neil,
I got you here again. Last March / May 2003, I had optical lens implants inserted in to each of my eyes to correct for defects that resulted from cataracts.
Normally, cataracts are an old persons problem. But after years of working within heavy RF environments, sailing and skiing all over the world in excessive sunlight without correct vision protection, and a bit of heredity thrown in for good measure, my eyes needed an optical overhaul.
Cheers,
Michael |
And everything is perfect now? I am sure OHIP covered this also so you certainly did win!! Good for you.
;-) |
|
|
|
03/25/2004 08:48:23 AM · #73 |
Bought a camera in November 2003, started taking pictures for real in january. I feel I'm learning something new everyday, and have 1-2 photosessions with friends per week.
List so far:
Canon 300D
Silk tripod (unsure model name)
Noname Monopod
1GB Compact Flash
Canon 17-40mm L 4.0
Canon 75-300mm USM IS
Canon 28-80mm 2.8
Sigma 28-300mm 3.5-5.6
Canon 50mm 1.4 USM
Hope to buy soon:
Canon 100mm Macro 2.8
20GB X-Drive
A large photo backpack, hopefully the Tarmac Pro 9 (laptop/camera bag)
Manfrotto 505 tripod
550 EX Flash
RC-5
Terje
[url=www.mrx.no]My pictures[/url]
Message edited by author 2004-03-25 08:48:37. |
|
|
|
03/25/2004 06:58:27 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by Dim7:
Originally posted by Morgan:
Originally posted by Dim7:
OK Morgan you win!
I have the kit lens,
50mm1.8,
Sigma70-300
I was going to get the 200mm2.8 but it took to long to arrive and I decided to get lasik eye surgery instead,So you could say I am getting to more old lenses reconditioned! LOL
Neil |
Sorry Neil,
I got you here again. Last March / May 2003, I had optical lens implants inserted in to each of my eyes to correct for defects that resulted from cataracts.
Normally, cataracts are an old persons problem. But after years of working within heavy RF environments, sailing and skiing all over the world in excessive sunlight without correct vision protection, and a bit of heredity thrown in for good measure, my eyes needed an optical overhaul.
Cheers,
Michael |
And everything is perfect now? I am sure OHIP covered this also so you certainly did win!! Good for you.
;-) |
Well it is never PERFECT. My close-up vision (less than 3 feet) is gone, even though it was great before the surgery. You are right, OHIP did cover the cost of the surgery, but the out of pockets costs were still sizable, what with prescriptions, time off work, etc. And my wife's complaints about my whining - guys are never at their best when sick! My night vision is now impaired. Every light is like I see it through multiple star filters. And, I have floaters everywhere, but they are still deemed to be normal.
The alternative was to lose my driver's license, so in light of that point, it is much better than before. Who wants to be declared legally blind. But, then, maybe that's why I suck at photography??? Sounds like a good excuse, I may use it?
Technology still amazes me. Each eye took just 25 minutes for the actual procedure; with 2 hours of post- and pre-surgery. (It was like flying Air Canada from Toronto to Ottawa, more waiting then actual flight time.)
And all of it was done by the surgeon with the aid of a high-power microscope. I was awake for the first eye, but he put me out for the second eye because I moved too much. He complained that every movement was magnified over 100 times to him. Now that would be a neat picture for the motion blur challenge. Oh well, too late now.
|
|
|
|
03/26/2004 08:46:22 AM · #75 |
For my Minolta Maxxum bodies (7xi and 7):
Tokina 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 AT-X - wide open western scenics
Tokina 80-200mm f/2.8 AT-X - mainly kids sports
Sigma 400mm f/5.6 APO - Wildlife & outdoor sports
Minolta 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 - scenics and some macro use
Minolta 100mm f/2.8 macro "D" - macro baby!!
Currently deciding between a 35mm or 50mm prime for scenics.
For my Mayima 645 1000S:
80mm f/2.8
Message edited by author 2004-03-26 08:57:22. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/18/2025 05:02:20 PM EDT.
