rob 101

<p>Plain and simple this lens is amazing. Ran test on it through out the aperture and zoom range and it is tack sharp. I even hand hold this with confidence at a 60th. This is my primary lens during the ceremony for all of my candids. Also when shooting sports it's very fast when focusing.</p>

<p>PC is the way to go especialy if your on a limeted budget. For the price you are going to pay for the IMAC you can build a great PC from HP. I priced out a PC with 8GBs of ram and a 2.5 Mhz Quadcore processor running Vista which by the way I love for only $1200. This is more than enough to run CS3 or CS4. You also get the added benifit of being able to upgrade. IMAC's dont upgread they are all in one computers. I worked as a MAC and PC desktop tech for many years and yes the MAC OS is a lot simpler to use but is that worth the high cost. As long as you keep your PC up to date and you have good Virus protection you should be fine. Alwasy take the rumors with a grain of salt your going to have problems with your computer if you dont know what your doing. I love Vista and the only problem that I have had with it is that my scanner did not work. But that did not matter because I switched to digital. Shop around check out HP you can build a sweet PC for a great price. You can also check out the Dell outlet and get a discounted PC.</p>

Don't be too dissapointed with the 40D it's a great camera and produces amazing color. I worked for about a year at a small company color correcting and retouching images and i've seen a lot of camera profiles when the 40D came out I was blown away. I thought that the 5D and the Mark III were the best.

As for the lens think about the 24-70 2.8. I have this lens and I love it. Stopped down its amazing produceing extreamly sharp rich photos. It is heavy but not to bad. Also the 17-40 L is a great lens and will provide the coverage you will need.

I would recommend the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8. Its light and compact and pretty sharp for $350. If you want a wide check out sigma 17-40mm it's a decent lens and stopped down its fairly sharp. I have owned both of these lens and did well with them.

35 1.4

Check out the 35 1.4. It's a little hard to get but on the 40D its a 56mm and it's tack sharp.

I’m sorry if I sounded a arrogant about my experience but I was letting you know that I’ve used a lot of different cameras and a lot of different glass and from my experience the best way to shop is to shop with a need. Your original post said you were shooting skiing, snowboarding, and school sporting events. You also mentioned you owned your current equipment for four months so I took that to mean that you were only shooting for four months.

 

In my opinion those sporting events would benefit from a fast 2.8 lens. You’re going to need the speed to stop the action. The 55-250 is a 4-5.6 which is not considered a fast lens for its focal length. I see that your concern is getting in closer to the action but you may want to consider how well you can stop the action in various lighting conditions. You may also want to consider how well you can isolate your subject’s action. One other thing to consider is that your equipment may get banged around or at least dropped a few times running to grab a shot. That’s why some of those L lens are made of metal.

 

As for the Sigma its value has not changed for me seeing that I still use the lens. I recently sold all of my pro film bodies and got less that 20 percent of their original value but out of a need to upgrade I had to accept that fact. That’s the way of technology. Once I make a purchase I don't think about how much I can get for it later I just concentrate on what I'm getting from it now. Lens isn’t really things that become obsolete as fast as camera bodies. The 70-200 has been around for many years and it’s still a great lens. Yes it's heavy but it's also a 2.8, with IS and mostly metal. The Sigma is slightly lighter but had the same MTF rating as the Canon and has performed very well. I admit it’s a little slow in its focusing compared to the Canon but it is still a very sharp lens.

 

As for the F4 it’s a great lens and tested better for flare than the 2.8, it’s also lighter and is IS. Do you want the speed of a 2.8 or are you going to rely on the IS. Remember the IS is for camera shake and not for moving subjects which might be a consideration when shooting sports.

What sport? and are you using a cropped body or a full frame. I own this lens and on my film body its beautiful but on my digital cropped body its a little tight. You may want something longer depending on what sport your shooting.

I have found in my 15 years of shooting that growing out of your equipment always leads to better choices when shopping for new stuff. Buying the latest and greatest dosent make you a good photographer shooting will. Knowing the limitations of your equipment will create a need and doing some online and hands on research works well. The 70-200F4 is a great lens and light but if your concern with taping over a stripe on your lens for vanity you may want to reevaluate a $1000 purchase. Sigma makes a 70-200 2.8 that is great and its around $800. I own this lens and just recently purchased the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS because I wanted IS and am in love with L optics. It was a pricier investment but one made based on a year of research and evaluating my needs. I use my Sigma on my tripod body and I walk around with the IS.

 

So I guess the moral of the story is don't worry so much about what other people are going to think about your equipment worry about what kind of images your taking. A pro can spot newbie ( not to say that being a newbie is bad we were all newbie’s at one point) by the way they react to the photographic scene and the images they produce.

 

Believe me I’ve seen amazing images taken with the simplest cheapest cameras and crappy images taken with the most expensive.

So I will be buying a 70-200 2.8IS to replace my 70-200 sigma but I'm not sure

when to do this. I'm in the middle of my season so the purchase will be for next

season. I want to know if you think Canon will be updating the 2.8 IS soon and

what might be a new or better feature you think may be added or liked to be

added. I have read all your reviews on the lens and I'm sold but I want to make

a good buy.

What do you think?

 

P.S. There is nothing wrong with my sigma I really want the IS and I know the

optics are the best. I may not replace the lens but use it on a second body. I

still shoot film and it's nice to have the same lens on two bodies with

different film in each.

I hate my bracket and I hate using the Canon off camera shoe cord. I've gone

through 4 of them and I always get a connection problem. I'm looking at the

Lightsphere and wanted to know if you get red eye when using it pointed toward

the subject. I know your not suppose to use it that way but I shoot a lot of

outdoor night weddings so there is no bounce opportunities.

As a side note I use my 70-200mm for most of my candid what type of reach

limitations will I face?

Thanks

Rob

I hate my bracket and I hate using the Canon off camera shoe cord. I've gone

through 4 of them and I always get a connection problem. I'm looking at the

Lightsphere and wanted to know if you get red eye when using it pointed toward

the subject. I know your not suppose to use it that way but I shoot a lot of

outdoor night weddings so there is no bounce opportunities.

As a side note I use my 70-200mm for most of my candid what type of reach

limitations will I face?

Thanks

Rob