goldwyn_t

To add another caveat to the inbody IS, i've been checking prices for KM long lenses for the Sony Alpha and they're equally (if not more expensive) than inlens IS equivalents.

Yeah what Puppy Face said. Yee-haa!

Just got the EW-83J hood over the weekend and it fits great. Excellent recommendation!

The 17-40mm and 50mm are absolute keepers - since there's essentially no overlap in that case. I would try and keep track of how often the 35mm is on the camera compared to the 17-40mm. If you find yourself using one much more than the other (eg. one lens gathers dust), then by all means sell one.

 

I have an even larger overlap actually... 17-40 and 24-105. Both see their respective uses on a 1.6x crop sensor. I was really afraid that one would be relegated to the bag (or worse the shelf!) but have so far found very useful applications for both. As for the 50mm... well, it's f/1.4

Yeah same here, but after a dozen lens changes it seemed to loosen up. Now it's silky

Ok... to make a long question short.

 

Which one should i get?! =P

 

I hear the 24L hood fits too snuggly and some modification is needed. i don't want to take a file to a $50 hood!

Thanks for all the input guys,

 

I think the 17-40 will be my best bet. Seems many of you have this combination and infact enjoy the focal length overlap =)

 

Cheers guys!

Thanks for more replies guys,

 

I just checked photozone.de and indeed the sigman 10-20 has less barrel distortion than 17-40... but i was curious to the actual effect of a 16mm lens (10mm on 1.6x crop) for closed quarter shooting.

 

As for my reason in purchasing a 24-105 4.0, i was using a 28-105 USM II on my old elan7 and have always wanted an IS walkaround lens, therefore this was the natural choice. (talk about over overlap!) Max aperture was low on my list of considerations when purchasing this lens. Right now however, it is painfully obvious that 24-105 is too long for group shots (eg. toasts, cheers, table full of kids, etc.)

 

My decision is biased towards focal length rather than aperture, like Alistair said, even 2.8 wouldn't be much use for indoor shots. Furthermore, going back to Steve's comment, at 2.8 over half the subjects will be out of focus. I will be submitting a series of portraits rather than group photos.

 

It's again good to read that you guys don't mind the focal length overlap at all!

 

I also have a 50mm 1.4 btw... and while i can "zoom in" with my feet, i can't "zoom out" - people, tables, and building supports =P, get in the way. Therefore the 17-40 or something equivalent.

Regarding Geoff's response,

 

i was also looking at the 10-20 but couldn't find a local shop with the lens in stock to test. I was afraid the ultra-wide might offend guests on the frame's edge, they're usually not looking for abstract barrel distortions. =)

Thanks for the quick responses guys

 

The 16-35 is tempting, but i can't justify the cost for the light.

 

Steve's example was very well taken (though most ballrooms enjoy more space =P), indeed the DOF is too shallow even at f4. i have yet to thoroughly test the 30D's image noise in my particular lightings. Having said that, i've been shooting at ISO400 last weekend and the photos were already miles beyond my 100-film scans. Use of flash is limited at best, since performers for the banquets don't appreciate being blinded... furthermore, the ceilings are usually too tall for bounces...

 

It makes sense that focal length overlap can reduce lens changes. From previous posts, there were many complaints regarding "loss of focal lengths" as a result - which certainly is true. Good to hear i'm not the only one who's considering pairing these lenses. If anything, at least i don't have to spend another $180 on a polarizer =P

Hi guys, just got a new 30D, it's only been a week but i'm already missing my

wide angles <35mm... Shoot mostly indoor banquets and such... do you guys think

4.0 will be fast enough? and will the focal length be too much overlap with the

24-105?

 

Thanks guys

Hi guys,

 

Anybody with experience with both these cameras' viewfinders? Keep

reading things about the 20D having a dim finder, is this only

compared to highend models like the EOS-1's?

 

The 20D's finder was a huge improvement from the XT's. Will it be a

downgrade from the Elan's?

 

Thanks

Hey thanks for the responses guys.

(i'm always amazed at how fast this forum returns answers!)

 

Seems like most of you agree that the 100macro is indeed a better macro than a portrait lens, and Grant's observation that it takes only ~1/9 turn to loose/achieve focus was a factor that i did not consider. Thanks for the insight!

 

As for renting the lens... well... i have a 28-105 zoom and have checked out the perspectives. It seems like i'm usually around 50mm or ~90mm on the zoom that's why i started considering an 85mm portrait lens. Furthermore, the local shops here only rent the really big 200mm+ L lenses (each going for about $30 a day, i figure that money can just go to a hood or something).

 

I'm gonna put in the order for an 85 tonight. Hooked on primes! Argh!

 

Thanks again for the (extremely quick) response. Happy Valentines! =P

I would say keep the 28-105 until something goes wrong with it. It's not worth the money to 'upgrade' 30mm on the long end and the added IS.

Hi guys

 

Need owners' experience on this - preferably those who have used

50mm, 85mm, and 100mm primes.

 

I was looking at the 85mm 1.8 as well as the 100mm USM macro and got

real excited about these lens' praises. I take mostly portraits and

candids during events, which seems to fit these two lens'

characteristics perfectly.

 

The thing is I already own a 50mm1.4 (which has served me very well

for about 2 years now). Would getting an 85mm lens be redundant?

They are obviously not the same, but given the small difference 35mm

makes on the long end I was wondering if a 100mm macro (or just the

plain 100mm USM) would be more suitable. I have never really been

interested in macro photography, but having a lens that can do it

wouldn't hurt.

 

Thanks for the feedback guys

Hey thanks guys for the responses. I think it's gonna be a good UV filter for me. None of the color correcting ones though... just a good coated clear UV.

 

The polarizer on the 50? haha. it's been on there for at least 100 shots now. Yeah i loose about 1-2 stops of light, but with the 50 1.4 i can open up to 1.8 and it's still fine indoors lol.

 

Thanks again guys.

Hi guys,

 

Please bare with me on this (yet another) lens purchasing question.

I've finally saved enough money to get a 70-200 4L zoom. =) Would

you recommend a cir-polarizer for it? i really would like to know if

your experiences with this lens have convinced you to a)use a

polarizer regardless or b)UV protector or c)just count on the front

element. Which polarizer/UV protector would you recommend?

 

I have always counted on a cir-polarizer for my 50mm prime, and have

often made indoor flash photos with it (gasp).

 

Thanks for your comments

Goldwyn

Hope Canon's DO will boost image quality for this compact zoom over the previous 70-300IS which was a disaster when it came to sharpness.

 

Sounds almost too good to be true. HUGE zoome range, IS, and a new optical technology rolled into a lens equal in size to 28-105USM??

 

Wonder what kind of L lens they are brewing with DO...

The movement is normal. I just had my lens serviced and the technician told me all Canon "extending" zooms would wobble and even make a slight click when you turn the ring. It's just part of Canon's zoom mechanism. Don't worry! =)

 

The FD's are tanks compare to most consumer autofocus zooms - a fact, not a problem.

Thanks for that insight... it really did sound like a "flick" of a ribbon or something plastic like that. Just called the service centre, they said it definitely was not normal... into the shop it goes. At least i've still got a month of warranty on it.

Upon closer examination... the "click" sound only occurs in a very specific situation.

 

1. Zoom closer (decrease focal lenght)

2. NO USM/Focus Ring movement

3. Zoom the lens out

 

i found that if i press the autofocus button and let the USM work and/or play with the manual focus ring a bit the sound went away. Perhaps there's a clutch mechanism inside the barrel that engages when the lens changes length while maintaining focus?

Hello,

 

Had the 28-105USM for about half a year now and just noticed that

when i extend the focal length(turn the zoom ring counter-clockwise)

the mechanism makes a tiny "click/pop" sound.

 

i didn't notice this sound before and found it weird that it only

occurs when i'm zooming-in. Turning the zoom clockwise did not

produce such a sound and the action was quite smooth. i placed the

camera down and examined the barrel but nothing unusual can be seen.

Hence i repeated the zooming-in / zooming-out several more time and

noticed that this "click" sound went away for a bit. To my horror,

it returned and sounded even louder as i continued turning the zoom

ring...

 

Have you guys experienced this before? Is my lens dying?

Autofocus and the focus ring works just fine, and the lens was

properly connected to the camera body.

 

please help!

thank you

i'm a poor student so i have a 50/1.4 (although some might beg the differ since i opted for a 50/1.4 and not a 1.8 lol)

 

But if i had the means, it would be the 24-70. PERIOD. HANDS DOWN. Framing with the zoom is handy enough to justify the lost in aperture.

Hmm... sounds alot like mirror lockup with a remote switch. When i use mirror lock up with the remote, the mirror locks up, and i have to press the (exposure lock and) shutter buttons again to take the photo and release the mirror. The mirror will stay locked up for as long as you don't press the shutter again.

 

In anycase, since you have DISABLED mirror lockup, i would seriously have the camera looked at by a professional (not the sales people at the camera store!). Perhaps there's a short and the mirror is always in lockup mode?

Puppy face said it all in the review.

The Elan is an excellent camera. Solid and usable. Not too heavy but substantial enough to hold itself together.

 

Canon should subsidize puppy face for his reviews!

 

Man...! You've got a great site Puppy Face!