aljaz_.

Yeah the 3D always pops up around 4 months preceeding a major exhibition.

As of non-Canon offering, I hear good things about the new Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 DI. The 'Di' designation stired some ambiguity about its full frame performance, though. I wonder how this resolved.

Say, are you interested in finding out why there are mixed reviews or are you contemplating your investment into the lens? Perhaps best, in case you are looking into buying one, would be to rent or borrow one and see whether you find it satisfactory. If you just need to know it's performance compared to that of other lenses you may compare how you like your photos across different lenses. Or, in case you trust online-posted tests, you may browse through myriad of those comparing the 28-135 IS with almost any lens within the range.

 

You may also think about whether you need IS, the 24-28 mm range, or half a stop of speed and lower distortion. In the first case you should consider the 28-135 IS, in the second the 24-85, and in the third case the 28-105 f/3.5-4.5, all of which attract virtually equivalent scores and opinions.

Out of curiosity, how did the sand enter your lens?

I've been sold a 70-200 f4 L without the lens shade, by Adorama. They 'forgot' to include it and I received it after a complaint. All else was fine and the lens is great. Yet, I guess one can never be too vigilant.

Good on Jay! Ales, I´ve been repairing a lens at "the only authorized dealer in Slovenia" and they´ve been well nice. Ask them if they can provide a 1D/10D while you wait for a new (non-beta) mark II. Certainly contact Canon on the issue, especially if you have CPS.

I say 28-105mm zoom and the 50mm for the low light moment. That's what I use. If you like buildings the 28mm prime may be added to the bag.

 

Actually I don't think there is much need for a specific setup for Europe. I can think of only one particularity in relation to other planetary locations, which is that the streets in cities may get narrow. And even this is surely found elsewhere just as well.

What's the story with the insulting words, Suman? Actually i also thought you are talking about the lens you are advertising in the classifieds. It's not clear from your ad that you have two equal lenses, it's good you clarified this. So, if you have two, I guess you will be selling the "almost new" one rather than than the one with speckels?

Yeah, zoom for something that runs around perpetually. The 28-105 (the classical usm version with 3.5-4.5 f) is really good and should be a serious option. As for macro vs non-macro I think if it is only to make your puppy fit into the frame the non-macro version will manage that. It is meant to accomodate headshots and the puppy will be larger than a kid's head very soon. Later it will enable those nice shots where only the dog's eyes or its nose are in focus, because of its shallow DOF. Macro desires slowly moving objects and may be a bit of an overkill for your needs.

 

Congrats on your first baby, btw. It seems common in Holland to try it out with a pet (at least in A'dam).

Let me guess: you're not really travelling but just wanted to talk about equipment? Having all the stuff you mentioned I'd abstain from buying more and use the money to pay a student to carry the camera bag.

 

But, seriously, my suggestion would be to get something small and unobtrusive. Take your Leicas and the tri-elmar. If it breaks buy a new one. Avoid making your life difficult by deciding which of the 70-200's to take out of the hotel today.

What about trying them out, both at the same time, and see for yourself which one suits you better? The 85mm is faster both because it opens wider and because it's shorter. But only by a bit. That said, I have the 100 f/2 which suits my need for a sligtly longer reach, and agree with everything said in the previous post. It complements my 70-200 f4 marvelously. Can't comment on performance of the 85mm.

To Vassil: In what exact manner would buying the 70-200mm (I suppose you mean the f/2.8 version to be used for portraits) instead of one of the 100mm ones save the money?

 

To Tania: If macro is not a major interest of yours I'd recommend the 85mm or 100mm f/2 lens, just like Borge. They are just right. One is a bit faster, the other has slightly longer reach for the candid moments. The 135mm f/2 is twice the price, length and weigth, although highly esteemed around here.

http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html for MTF's.

Or the 85 1.8. It's cheaper and it's brighter and it's shorter. It gives 136 in the D world, a sensible perspective for regular use.

On the other issue, what about a separate spot meter as a workaround?

I, on this one, am with Jay. If a 50/1.4 is available used for 200$, or even a cent over that, I´d be taking it. Leica may be 15 times the price but if canon offered the same lens for 500$ I´d be using it.

Tough task. I had my dad pick up a 70-200 f4 at Adorama in nyc and have accompanied him with a photo of the lens. One'd think nothing could go wrong as the purchase was in person and Adorama is reputably decent. Nevertheless I still thank my vigilance to have asked hime to verify if the hood was included. It was not. My poor dad had to go back and was given the hood after a short debate. They have "forgotten" to include the hood. At that time I wondered if I should give Adorama a bad review for tricking my dad or a good one for not being overly difficult admitting their mistake.

My vote for Canon 85mm f1.8. However, are you aware of the danger that fungus reaches the body and infects other lenses?

Give him an award!

Oh, yeah, throw in the in-sensor image stabilization as well.

Great! This is a nice surprise. But, price - where did you see the price? Now lets hear about the autofocus, the sensor edge performance and high iso noise.

 

Maybe this induces someone to finally produce a 6mp full frame sensor with low noise at iso 3200 and install it into a Canon mount body, nicely packaged with a high precision, down to EV -1 autofocus, for usd 2000. Or 2500.

I could surf there and verify your observation if you only tell us what forum it is. As of the autofocus itself, the one on my specimen has been reliable so far.

I have the 70-200, but went on to get 100 f/2 primarily for portraits and low light photography. I was too often frustrated by potential objects of art running away from me when seeing the huge lens. I do find the 70-200 useful for treks and travels, but not for use in the street (even cats run away but maybe it´s me). Since you deal with the dslr crop the 50mm or 85mm would be great, while towards 200 you´re already on the far side.

Ah, 1D´s for sale. Canon should put less s´s in the names of their bodies. In this case the price might just be right for me to also be interested in it.

And where did you see a used 1Ds for 2500$ ? You should realize that, if you did see it, it was a big and ugly scam. Type in the words "1ds", "ebay", and "scam" in the search above and you´ll know that you are better off running away.

You mean anywhere in eu? Several shops in Amsterdam and Barcelona hold it in stock, refrigerated. Let me know if you need addresses.