todd_fox

I want to purchase a 300-400mm lens with IS in the $800-$1200 range. I am

dissapointed with the offerings available from Canon, which are:

 

100-400 f4.5-f5.6 L IS -- I would prefer a prime lens for better image

quality. Plus there is better IS technology now.

 

400 f5.6 L -- older lens with no IS, but still about $1200. I really want IS,

and this would be a fantastic lens if it was updated with IS.

 

300 f4.0 L -- probably the best option, but when will Canon update the older

2nd generation IS? I'm not sure I want to spend $1200 on a lens know there is

better IS technology available that simply has not made it into this lens yet.

 

Does anyone think this is an unfair judgement? Am I being too picky? I guess

the bottom line is that I wish Canon would update the IS in one of these

lenses.

 

If anyone is interested in making suggestions, I plan to use the lens for

wildlife (usually not birds) and occasional sports photography.

Hi,

 

I am an amateur photographer and former graphic designer interested in making

some albums. I want to design my own album of my work and have it printed and

bound. It seems that all the quality products are available only to

professional photographers. Are there any companies who will sell quality

digital printing/binding services to amateurs? I want something like a flush

mounted, leather bound book.

 

thanks

I would like to offer some advice that is counter to the rest. First, you do not NEED L lenses. They do not make the pictures look great by themselves. Do not assume that if you stick an L zoom on your camera then your pictures will suddenly turn into eye-popping, dramatic, beautiful photos. It sounds like you have a lot to learn about photography in general before you start selling anything. What is your budget? If you cannot decifer the 28- 80 mm / F/3.5-5.6 shorthand, how do you know you need "fast glass"? Fast glass equals big money (at least $1000 for an f2.8 telephoto zoom). I would recommend getting a film or digital SLR with a 50 mm prime lense and learning photography from scratch. If you are on a tight budget you can pick up a used 35mm manual SLR and lens for $100-$200 now. I guarantee if you know how to take photos, the quality from an old manual SLR will equal any digital camera today.

If your friend is excited about the 12x zoom, IS, movies, etc then the S3 is probably right for him/her. The S3 does not have an "L" lens though. The way I see it is that SLRs are favored by people who are interested in photography while point and shoot are favored by people who just want to take pictures. I know that is a generalization, but you have to draw the line somewhere. Your best bet is to find out what they want to take photos of and why.

Kevin,

 

I am not insulting anyone who uses EF-s lenses. I would buy one if I didnt think they were overpriced. My point is that Canon specifically designates professional bodies (1 series) and lenses (L). None of the professional bodies are compatible with the EF-s lenses. Perhaps I should have said that it does not seem logical from Canon's perspective to offer professional EF-s lenses without an EF-s pro body.

 

It doesnt seem right that 2 of the first handful of EF-s lenses go for $700-$1200 without pro quality. The only non-L 35mm lenses in that price range are the 70-300 DO IS and the tilt-shift lenses. Would you pay $1200 for 24-70 f2.8 if it was not build with L quality? Or would you pay $700 for a 16-35 f3.5-4.5 without L build quality?

I have been unimpressed with sharpening RAW files with DPP. I don't even know

what kind of sharpening it is (like unsharp mask). Can anyone recommend good

software for sharpening (other than Photoshop)? Ideally I would also use the

softare for adjusting levels, contrast, saturation in RAW format, but I could

use DPP and another program if necessary. Thanks!

Being realistic (no 10-40 f2.8 or 17-80 f2.8 L IS for under $700), I would like:

 

70-200 F4 L with IS

 

Lower priced EF-S lenses. I have a real problem spending $700 plus on these lenses for non-L build quality. The 10-22 should be priced comparable to the 20-35. The 17-55 f2.8 should have L build quality for that price range, although arguably a pro would not be interested in an EF-S lens.

 

New wide angle primes, especially something wider than 20 mm. Or maybe an EF-F prime that would be equivalent to 20 mm.

It seems like the 135L must be very useful for indoor sports. The 12-24 is useful for wide angle work. I think you need to decide what you need first. Is 135 long enough? Is 24 wide enough? Is f2.8 fast enough? Answer those questions first, and the rest should be easy.

Could you also provide the following information?

 

What is your budget?

 

How do you feel about the crop factor of 1x vs. 1.3x vs. 1.6x?

 

Being techno savy is not necessary, but do you have the computer equipment needed for digital editing?

20d can trigger a flash with a voltage of up to 250V, so almost anything works.

Actually, f/1.8 to f/1.4 only buys you a half stop. I think it would be more useful to ad a 35mm or 85mm lens since you have a 50mm that works well.

Hi all,

 

I am new to digital from the film world, and I have a 350d body. I am

currently using a 50mm prime as well as some older lenses. My problem is at

the wide end because of the 1.6x factor. I am interested in the 17-40 f4 L

because it would give me coverage from about 27-64, and I could still use the

lens on my film body or a future full frame. I've read a lot about the lens

on here, I have tried it in the store. My question is, are there any other

alternatives (a single lens or multiple lenses) for around $600-$1000 that

would give me the same or better coverage? Photography has been my hobby for

about 8 years, and this is the most challenging lens decision I have been

faced with because there seems to be a severe lack of lenses that are wide on

a 1.6x camera. I would prefer to stay away from the EF-s lenses like the 10-

22 because they seem to carry a premium price tag of an L lens without being

one, and I'm not sure how long I would actually keep an EF-s sensor.

 

thanks!

Todd

I would suggest taking another lens that you have and shooting at f4. See if the background blur is enough. If you only want the lens for portraits, why not get a prime? It will be sharper with a much larger aperture. For the price of the 24-105L you could either get several primes or one L prime.

There seems to be a paranoia about finding "good" copies of lenses.

 

"...caught with a bad copy of the lens and not even know it."

 

If you can't tell something is wrong, then why would it matter? If you can take the pictures you want with the lens, then it is good.