balthomas

By both, sell the lens. You'll make a little profit selling it on ebay.

That's what I did. The 24-105 is a good lens, it's quite sharp and has good contrast. But

the distortion is just terrible on the wide end, although some users with maybe newer

models haven't complained about it. Performance also suffers above 70mm. IS, on the

other hand, isn't as useful on a wide zoom than on a telezoom. If you shoot people, you

will need to use higher speeds anyway.

So basically, this lens is good from 35mm to 70mm, and IS doesn't pay for the f4

handicap. You're way better off with a faster lens with a smaller range, i.e. a 24-70L, a

Tamron 28-75 (excellent). Or why not get a prime, a 35mm f1.4 L ? The f1.4 is far more

useful to me than the IS.

It's really a delicate matter. If you ask permission, many people will pose or be contrived, if

you don't, some will feel that their intimacy is violated.

People react very differently to photographers; some love it, some hate it. It's also a

cultural thing.In Thailand or Brazil, for exemple, most people are extremely happy to be

photographed, and laugh and show you a thumbs up. People from african or arab descent

sometimes believe photography "steals their souls". You should take the time to get a

feeling for a place, and know how to interact with its people.

I once shot an empty street in Paris, where you could barely guess a dark silhouette

behind the dirty stained glass window of a bar 60 feets away. When I crossed the bar, a

mad lady ran to me with her husband, and menaced me of destroying my camera. I think

they were afraid of being recognized as illegal immigrants, but of course the silhouette

was completley irrecognazible.

In China, I took a shot of men waiting in the entrance of a garage, the guy at the right got

really aggressive, brandishing his fist against me and yelling. Looking at the shot later on,

I realized that at the left corner was another guy smiling and waving his hand towards me

at the same time....you never know the reaction you can get.

i think it's a matter of tact. Don't be obstrusive, but don't hide either. Be friendly and

discreet, smile before and after each shot, if a person seems unhappy with your presence,

let go of your camera.If people are doubtful, you can show them your pictures, if you use

digital. Photography can also be a great way to communicate, to interact. For sure, the

more paranoid you are about the situation, the more the people on the street will be too.

Just yesterday I discovered something that makes me thinking about this again. I have a

website with photos taken throughout China last summer ( http://zhongguo2006.fr ) . I

recently discovered several Chinese pages talking about these photographs, sites from a

city called Kaifeng, which was Chinas capital 1000 years ago. Some were very interested,

since they felt they saw their city from a new angle, from a new perspective. Other's seem

irritated by seeing their city through the eyes of a "stranger".

My Kaifeng photos are here: http://zhongguo2006.fr/kaifeng.html

The Chinese article is here: http://www.hnsc.com.cn/news/378/2007/01/29/154134.htm

and there is a long forum here:

http://www.kfsy.cn/bbs1/dispbbs.asp?

boardid=2&replyid=506548&id=27797&page=3&skin=0&Star=1

The actually reposted reduced version of my shots, and translated all my text. I must

admit that I felt a little uneasy seeing this, also, of course because my mandarin

isn't that good....and google translate isn't either. Meandering through the jungle of

chinese caracters, I couldn't help to wonder how the habitants of this city felt seeing the

image they left on my 5d's sensor...

What Contax lenses do you want to use?

Many, if not most, don't need a mirror shave, and work just fine. The 18mm Distagon f4 is

one problematic case, some clear the mirror, some don't.

Bob: you don't "ruin" the 5D by shaving it. It just looks ugly, that's all. If there's a problem,

you can order a new mirror from Canon, for 300$ or so. Modifying the camera is supposed to

void the warranty, but many users with shaved mirrors have gotten free repairs from Canon

anyway.

Yes it's funny, the 24-105L, which also has IS, doesn't do that and is silent. The 70-300 is

sort of a scary lens when you watch it, handle it, and yes, listen to it. But that makes it even

more surprising it takes such great pictures...

It doesn't make sense to me either to get a rather expensive camera like the30D and then

such a cheapo lens. Why don't you get a 400D instead of the 30D, and add a decent zoom

with constant f2.8 aperture with the money you saved? Canon's 17-55 or the Tamron 17-55

F2.8, which would be just as good but cheaper.

I've shot 300mm shots at 1/15 second with the IS lens, that are acceptably sharp. As much

as

I am an opponent of IS for wide lenses, like the 24-105, where in my eyes it's an only

marginally useful feature, IS is absolutely incredible on telephotos. There is only a stop

difference between the 70-200 f4 and the 70-300IS, this is more than compensated by

the

IS, andd if you want shallow depth of field, the difference is minimal at that long a lens. I

guess DOF at f5.6 at 300mm should equal f4 at 200mm. Also, the 70-300 IS is

exceptionally

sharp for a consumer lens, really L IQ. Of course, it isn't L build, it's cheap, flimsy and

plasticky, really not a pleasure to hold, but then again it is also much lighter than the L

zooms.

It's really a very good lens. Astonishing for the price. IS is a lot of BS for shorter lenses, but

incredible for a lens this long. Definitively a great deal, and, in my humble opinion, a credible

alternative to those huge, heavy, expensive, and WHITE zooms....

M42 lenses work like a charm on Canon 5D's, digitals included. The ones to look for are the

Pentax Super-Takumars.

I read that the Canon zoom is "much sharper wide-open" than the Sigma prime. What does

that mean? Is the Canon better at f4 as the Sigma at f1.8, or at f4?

I would definitively go for the 5D+Tamron combo. The Tamron 28-75 is a very good lens.

Don't get fooled by those that say only Canon makes good lenses, and you should have an "L"

lens. There are some great L lenses, and some not so good ones. Also, most Sigma/Tamron/

Tokina lenses are indeed not very good, but the Tamron 28-75 really is an exception. It's an

outstanding lens. It certainly has less distortion than the Canon 24-105, and is just as sharp.

IS is a great feature for telephotos, only marginally useful on wide zooms. FF + 2.8 aperture

will give you much more control and creativity.

On the test shot links posted, the 24-70 is definitively a LOT sharper than the 24-105,

particularly on the clock.

I have the 24-105. Beside the question of aperture vs IS (which I solved by adding a bag of

fast primes), you should conhsider that the 24-105 has very pronounced barrel distortion

at the wide end, "very pronounced " being an euphemism. It really is not useable at 24mm

if you having anything like a straight line in your frame, be it a horizon. 24-70 distortion

is said to be a LOT better. It's a major drawback of this lens. When people say that

distortion can be corrected in Photoshop, remember that this implies actually cropping the

image: a corrected, equilinear 24mm shot of the 24-105 will have the FOV of a 28mm or

even 35mm shot...

You people seem to forget that Eleta mainly shoots portraits. IS is of no use for portraits,

since portraits by definition are of human subjects, thus living beings, which have the

particularity to MOVE.....So, in any case, you will have to shoot at least at 1/50 of a

second. IS might save you a f-stop when shooting at 100mm, of no use for shorter focal

lenghts. Also, you would want wider aperture for background blur. At the maximal f4 of

the 24-105, Bokeh is OK at 105mm, but nonexistant at 50mm.

Canon's best portrait lenses are the 85l, and the 135L. They are very expensive,

particularly the 85L, but it is peerless ofr portraits. You can get a f1.8 85mm for quite

cheap, and the plasticky 50mm f1.8 will give you a lot of service for almost no money.

The 85mm L f1.2 is an absolutely amazing, unique lens. The sharpness wide open, the

bokeh, and the smooth transition between in and out of focus areas have absolutely no

peer among lenses in any focus range, the Zeiss 85mm f1.2 Anniversary addition put

aside, which costs 6000$, and maybe the Canon 200mm L f1.8, which I haven't tried.

The 85L costs 2000$ new, but having tried it, I know it's worth every penny, no

comparison at all possible to the regular f1.8 Canon 85mm, which I own..., I'm saving up!

So, if the new 50L is as good wide-open as the 85L; no question that it is worth the

money. The difference withe the f1.4 and f1.8 variants should be even larger, since the

85mm 1.8 lens is optically a better lens than it's 50mm equivalents.

Then again, 50mm 1.2 lenses are generally not as good at f1.2 as 85mm ones. There are

the Olympus OM Zuiko 55 and 50mm 1.2, and the Nikkor's, great lenses, but not so good

wide open. Let's see what Canon can do. Also, if one already owns the 85mm L, I doubt if

there would be really a need for a f1.2 50, since those are sort of specialty lenses, that

really shine in portraiture.

You can get a good leica R/EOS adapter for about 30 $ on ebay. If you exchange the standard

focussing screen of the 5D for the EE-S screen, and set the camera function accordinlgy, the

exposure will be consistent through all f-stops. With the standard screen, it will overexpose

the more you stop down.

You should realize that although the 24-105 is a sharp lens, it has horrendous barrel

distortion at the wide end. It's only useable starting at about 35mm, and the tele end isn't

as good either. Also, you pay a premium for the IS, which isn't that useful on a long lens,

except maybe for architectural interiors, or cityscapes at night, museums, churches etc.

But whenever you have subject movement, there's no point in IS. If you want a zoom, you

can buy a Tamron 28-75 for a third the prize, same sharpness, a stop faster and less

distortion. For the price difference, add a 135L, wondeful lens!

I wouldn't advise the Canon 28mm, get a used Contax Zeiss Distagon 28mm rather, with

an adpater, or if you already have that range, an Olympus OM ZUIKO 21mm f3.5. Quite

cheap too, and excellent stopped down.

if you're rich, the 85mm L f1.2 makes simply the most marvelous pictures one could

dream of. on a budget, the 85mm f1.8 would be a good addition, probably better than the

50mm.

I use a Leica Elmarit 180mm f2.8, last version before APO, on my 5D. I didn't buy the

brightscreen, but instead the Canon EE-S screen, which is a little darker and more contrasty

than the standard screen, and makes manual focussing quite easy. While I had exposure

problems while using the standard screen (5D overexposed while stopping down), since

installing the EE-S screen, exposure now is constant thourgh all apertures.

The results with the 180mm Leica on the 5D are simply gorgeous. definitively recommended.

Stop down metering isn't that big a deal really. However, on a Canon body it seems more

reasonable to use the older Contax Zeiss lenses rwith a C/Y adapter rather then the new

nikon mount Zeiss, for the simple reason that you can get them cheaper used. Maybe they

are better too, although this should'nt be the case with the new 25mm f2.8 lens, chich is a

new design, the older one not hhaving been great.

Tere definitively aren't any burnt out higlights in these shots.

Being a very sensitive camera, the 5D is indeed prone tu burnt out higlights. This usually

happens when you shoot a subject that is predominantly in the shadow, on a bright day. If

some sunrays hit a part of the area, they will be burnt out. You just have to be careful

with exposure in these situations, and recover some higlights with your RAW converter.

There usually is quite a bit of headroom. Decrease the Exposure setting ind ACR or C1 pro

untli you get back your higlights. Then, with Curves, select all the points that you want

unchanged. Then, pull up the darker parts (bottom left part of the curve) you now need to

lighten, leaving the lighter parts untouched.

here you have a little bit too lyrical user report about the Sigma35mm f1.4:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/451238

I think some people here don't quite get the point of the Sigma lens.

It's a lens designed for and only useable on x1.5 crop DSLR's. This means, its the

equivalent of a 45mm f1.4. So, this lens is designed to approximativaley have the field of

view of a 50mm standard lens on a full frame camera. Of course, the depth of field will be

wider. But if you like the FOV of a 50mm lens, and have a crop factor DSLR, this is the lens

to get. The only other choice you'd have would be the Canon 35L f1.4, which is much

more expensive.

The Sigma 35 is reputed to be an excellent lens. It is no doubt better than the Canon

50mm f1.8.

Also, some people claim that f1.4 aperture is pointless on a 35mm lens. That is a rather

strage, narrow claim. Yes, wide aperture's are mostly used for portraits, where longer

lenses render a more flattering look. But it can be extremely interesting to blur

backgrounds on photos that have more perspective, not as flat a view as, say a 85, 135,

OR 180 Lens. A lens like this gives incredible flexibility and creative possibilities.

You haven't stated if you use analog, crop factor digital (300,350,400D, 20,30D). Be

reminded that the Sigma 35 only works on crop factor DSLRS, on FF cameras you will get a

black image circle around the frame. But if you like the 50mm range, you don't really have

another choice. I personally shoot full frame, but if I'd only have one lense, it would

definitively be a 50. It's the most versatile lens, more versatile than a zoom: you can shoot

everything, from portrait to landscape, with a natural perspective, you only need to move

your feet, BUT, at the difference of a zoom, you have the choice between extremely narrow

and extremely wide DOF.

Now I understand better, Imram. If you already have the 35L, 85L, and 135L, you have the

best lenses in the Canon lineup, and maybe some of the best lenses ever made. No zoom can

compare image quality wise, and, of course, as far as speed is concerned. So in this case

there really isn't a point in having a 24-70L, what point is having f2.8 when you have f1.2 ?

What you need, to complement your prime, then is a convenient zoom for flexible and fast

shooting in all situations, and, why not, IS. Thus sell the 24-70 and the 28-135 and buy the

24-105. Sharpness, saturation, contrast is excellent, the only drawbawk is the humongous

distortion at the wide end.

If you already have two zooms in that lens, furthermore one with better speed than the

24-105, and the other with larger range and IS, it is absolutely pointless to buy the 24-105!

Its ' agood lens with heavy vignetting and even heavier distortion at the wide end. You don't

need it : keep your zooms, or even sell one of them, you don't need both, and buy yourself a

couple of primes, or a tele zoom, if you wish.

I agree, IS is FANTASTIC on tele zooms, but an almost useless gadget on wide/normal

zooms.

For the Zeiss Distagon 18mm, only the MM version doesn't work on the 5D, the AE version

works without a problem.

The 25mm lens does'nt have a great reputation in the Zeiss world. The 28mm Distagon is

excellent and can be had at a reasonable price (200-300 $)

What breaks the deal for me for the Canon 24-105 is the horrible barrel distortion at the

wide end.

135L is an absolutely awesome lens ﾗ the "magical" quality someone described is actually

quite real. However, you should consider that 135mm, at least on FF body, is a rather

awkard focal length. It's perfect for studio work, but not so great for candids, street work,

etc. The reason, to me, is that with 135mm you are too far to establish communication or

intimacy, and too near to go unnoticed. So, on my current trip to china, I have not taken

this lens, and generally switch from the 50mm or 85mm directly to the 180mm, in my

case a Leica Elmarit, which is awesome on the Canon 5D body.

This being said, the 135L is a truly outstanding lens, and for nothing in the world I would

sell it. i personnally have a prejudice againts huge and heavy white lenses, so that isn't an

option for me. Get a 135L and complement it with the cheap 70-300 9S, which is

excellent, and/or, if you're courageuas enough to delve into manual focus, stop-down

metering, and adapters, a Leica Elmarit 180mm 2.8 of the last series before they went

APO. I got mine on ebay for 320ﾀ.