recommendations for 40d

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by mary_taft, Jun 20, 2009.

  1. HI, I am totally confused looking at the different lenses for my 40d (almost). I am new and learning every day, I have the 28-135 IS USM that came with the camera and I picked up a used 75-300.
    What I really want to do is shoot horses-the hunter/jumpers, mostly outside, I think I need a faster lens, but what is confusing me is the reviews I have seen about a lot of "blur" and the subject not coming out clear for shooting sports with a lens with lower F#..- In looking at the info on the shots I have taken using the 28-135 -at home the focal length I am using is very consistent- about 50mm every shot, at the shows it varies 70-100mm. At home -it is totally outside-I can put myself pretty much wherever I want, at shows I am somewhat limited to how close, and generally we are there just in the mornings.
    Is that enough to go on for suggestions? If not let me know.
  2. I would say that if you are getting the shots you want at 70-100mm that you are really quite close already. I would have expected you might have needed more telephoto than that.
    Anyway, if that is the case, there are three possibilities (well, actually there are a lot more than that, but there are only three that I am going to propose):
    • 85/1.8
    • 100/2.0
    • Something in the ballpark range of your 75-300, but with IS
    Personally, I recommend the 85/1.8.
  3. Hi, Mary.
    I can't tell from your message if you're wanting to shoot h/j professionally or not. First off, don't shoot at 50mm unless you're shooting landscapes! It distorts the horses, makes legs look spindly, bodies like sausages, heads long and coarse.
    I'd recommend the Canon 70-200 f4L. Lightweight, fast autofocus (although not as fast as the 2.8), gorgeous lens; I use one as backup to the 2.8 and started with it as my primary. I call mine my "Disneyland lens" as it's comfortable to schlep all day. The resale value on it is excellent. It is 67mm compared to the 77mm of the 2.8 with the same focal length.
    A "faster" (wider aperture) lens will be heavier, too. Use higher ISO when necessary to keep your shutter speed above or at 500 minimum. Hope that helps!
  4. No, not wanting to do it professionally-just for myself and the folks I work with. I don't intentionally shoot at 50mm (this is where I am learning! using it on auto/action, that is what the info on the shot says-but I am learning my camera slowly but surely and working on getting off of auto) home when I am in the ring, I have been situating myself in between a couple jumps which puts me about 20 feet or less from them, at the shows I usually stand near the rail closest to which ever jump/s the trainer thinks the horses will be best.
  5. Lynne- after my last post I saw you had a website and I went to "check it out"...Oh My Gosh- you do beautiful work! I have spent the last hour just looking at your site and I don't think I have seen a quarter of it. The shots from Cavalia are amazing!
  6. I'm with Lynne,
    The 70-200 f/4 IS is one of my favourites & should be ideal, if you are shooting shows outdoors.
    If indoors, you may want to consider the (faster but heavier) 70-200 f/2.8.
  7. Depends also on how much you are wanting to spend. I also think the 85mm 1.8 or even the 100mm f2.8 macro would work pretty well when you can move wherever you want, and since most of the time. Either lens is under $500. If you can spend more and think you'll shoot more during the day, the 70-200 f4 would be great; or either the Canon or maybe a third party 70-200 f2.8. All depends on how much you are looking to spend. Since you are shooting at pretty high speeds to stop the motion, I don't think IS wold be needed.
  8. Not knowing what your budget might be I initially suggested something in the range with IS for a zoom.
    Based on the suggestions since I recommend the 70-200/2.8 over the 70-200/4.
    But I would still go with the 85/1.8 before the zoom.
  9. Heres my 2 cents . I dont know much about the lens i have several, none of them are L series or expensive so to speak, I do know that the lens you got wiht the 40d is nice lens for the money, I had a lot of blur myself , until i figured out that if you shoot with the shutter at 250 in manual and depending on how sunny it is, the aperture will have to be tinkered with, if you shoot with your flash the fastest shutter you can shoot with is 250 but if not I like to shoot with a 500 shutter and work with the aperture, and of course the lens works best a liitle past 28mm but it will focus well at the high end but not fast, i shoot drag car photos for a buck or so here and there and it works well for me, the tripod is a big asset , and if you use remote you can get some super shots with out breaking the bank, if you want I can link you to some cars going at 150 pmh that look like they are standing still, with manual focus ring on the lens you have you can lock your focus ahead of time then shoot the shot and I have had really greta luck, of course im no pro just someone who gets lucky a lot, but hey it works,
  10. I will put up a shot I took last week...or try to :eek:) with the info on the shot, it is one where I am "experimenting" outside of far as timing...totally my fault- I am a fraction of a second off- the horse isn't as round and he is starting to unfold his legs.
  11. I will put up a shot I took last week...or try to :eek:) with the info on the shot, it is one where I am "experimenting" outside of far as timing...totally my fault- I am a fraction of a second off- the horse isn't as round and he is starting to unfold his legs.
  12. Yeah...I did it...OK, here is the shot info:
    Shooting Date/Time
    6/10/2009 01:39:33
    Tv(Shutter Speed)
    Av(Aperture Value)
    Metering Modes
    Exposure Compensation
    +1 1/3
    ISO Speed
    Focal Length
    35.0 mm
    Image size
    2592 x 1839
    Image Quality
  13. Hi Jim...I do think this is a nice lens, I know I am learning- but I am very hard on myself- I compare mine to the pro shots and I have a LOT of learning to do. I am consistantly behind by that fraction of a second, I haven't tried panning my shots, not sure if that would help. Something just tells me if I had a faster lens it would help.
    I think ultimately if I get a new lens I want to stick with Canon- unless you can tell me another maker has just as good a quality. I have seen the prices, so I guess I am prepared to pay the price- I think all the lenses mentioned are under the $1500 range.
  14. Mary
    The lenses you have will do what you need outdoors. A faster lens is really only needed in lower light to make sure you can get the shutter speed necessary for this type of photography. And to get the depth of field for the horses you need about f4/5.6.
    My suggestion would be to keep working with what you have. Geat pictures are made by what is behind the camera body, not what's in front of it.
  15. Those lens caps get missing easily. I once dropped one in a pond when I was changing a lens on a walkway over the pond. But a friend once could not find his lenscap at a hotpot (Chinese fondue kind a thing) and kept on looking, eventually left and the waitress came running after him with the lens cap full of spices. It had been boiling for a while.
  16. I'm surprised no one has discussed what AF setting is being used. Most people don't know how to shoot action pics and the first reaction is they need a "faster" lens for higher shutter speeds. Most of my photography work is motorsports where things are moving quite fast! I have a 40D and use a 70-200 F/4L as the bread and butter lens, and also use a 400 F/5.6L which is fabulous. The most important thing you can do when shooting moving objects is having AF set in servo mode. Hold the shutter halfway down and the camera constantly adjusts focus and exposure. Shutter speeds of as little as 1/250 of a second work well with moving objects as long as you pan with the subject. I have found that IS is also not needed for quick moving objects. I've included a sample photo of something with a lot of horses!
  17. I forgot to mention using the center focal point only.....this will keep the camera focused on the object itself and not on the background.
  18. How about this...the 70-200 F4 L for what I would use outside and the 85 1.8 for the inside/evenings?
    My new questions are: What is and how do you figure how close (in feet) you can get to the subject with the 85mm (On the 40d)? I also find in the evenings when light is low but not dark when I take random- (not necissarily the horses, like for example of the kids playing) - shots they are awful without a tripod or something to set the camera on (using the 28-135), we like to go for walks in the evening so having something to stabilize the camera isn't always available. Just looking at what I can do with my 28-135 setting at 85...would that compare to what having a fixed 85mm can do (as far as distance and the amount of the subject you can or can not get depending on how close you are).
    Ohh, and would you compare the standard uv to the multi coated? (i currently only have the standard uv filters on my lenses).
    That is all I can think of at the moment!
    Thanks ahead for the info!
  19. Hello Mary...welcome to
    If you are new to this camera and lens, I would say that you might be better-off to stick with what you have and get some experience shooting with your kit. Then, you may decide that you don't need to spend more money on kit, or, you will have a better idea as to your exact needs.
    Modern camera/lens systems are complex and it may take time (and hundreds of images) before you can expect consistent results. Rapidly moving subjects present even more challenges, for both equipment and photographer.
    You obviously have a passion for equestrian photography, so, making lots of images will likely be a joy for you (and it looks like you are off to very good start).
    If you feel strongly about trying other lenses, they are inexpensive to rent (if you are in the USA). I have used this rental company several times and have no qualms about recommending them:
    As for the 28-135 (and probably most other lenses) don't put too much stock into what you read in the internet reviews. Since you have this lens, use it and learn all you can about it, then, decide for yourself.
    Just my 2 cents...
    Cheers! Jay
  20. Mary, I don't think you are giving enough information for anyone to tell you whats wrong with your pics. When you say your shots of the kids are awful you need to tell us how your camera is set up. What ISO are you using? Flash or not? Are you using shutter or aperture priority? How is your autofocus set up? The 28-135 is not a bad lens, seems to me you need more experience using the camera and understanding its settings before you buy any new lenses.

Share This Page