lou_miller

<p>If you want to take avaliable light pics, the 50 1.8 set at around f2.8 produces very nice results, especially if you can get your three year old to sit by the window or for outside action shots. If you want to extend your ability to take indoor photos, get the flash. Also consider the 380EX which I have been using for 10 years, currently on a 40D, with success (I assume it would work with a Rebel--I am sure someone else will respond if not). I would assume that you could pick one up quite cheap on KEH or ebay.<br>

As a father of four, all of whom were once fickle 3 year old photo subjects, I would buy the lens if I could only get one. You can get quite a bit of indoor coverage with the 50 by adjusting the ISO, as someone else mentioned. I like the look of an available light photo with an open aperture, so it is an easy choice for me. But it will ultimately depend on the type of photos you like. Good luck!</p>

<p>I just bought Cybersync's from Alien Bees a couple weeks ago and I am very happy with them as radio flash triggers. Having tried the ebay radio triggers and finding them unreliable, I was looking for something better than the ebay "ghetto wizards" but not as expensive as the Pocket Wizards. These fit the bill at 59-69 per unit. I am not sure if you are trying to fire camera or flash, but apparently the cybersync's can do both. I can only personally attest to their quality build and effectiveness as a flash trigger, but the following link gives instructions on how to use them to trigger a camera remotely as well. Good luck<br>

<a href="http://www.paulcbuff.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6016&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0">http://www.paulcbuff.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6016&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0</a></p>

<p>Thanks to all for your responses. They are all helpful. I am going to explore the Pentax and Olympus waterproof options as well as the new Canon. As much as I like the G series, the way I use them, I think I would find myself waterlogging it and back to buying another next year. What a great resource to have so many helpful people with such a wealth of experience! </p>

<p>My two hobbies are photography and fishing. I would like to capture a lot of the beauty that I see either while wading in my favorite trout stream or fishing on lakes in my kayak. I have a 40D and full complement of lenses that I am a little nervous about hanging around my neck while wading waist deep in a fast moving stream. It is also a little heavy for such pursuits and I find that handling all the fishing equipment makes a complicated camera tough to use properly. I used to bring along a G4 for such ventures, until a spill into an upper peninsula lake last May which left me cold but okay and the G4 dead. I have considered looking for a used G series on ebay or keh. I have also thought about an older digital rebel and even thought about something waterproof. I want portability, ruggedness, simplicity, good quality for up to 8X10, and either waterproof or cheap (replaceable). Anyone else have experience or thoughts? Thanks.</p>

 

<p>I personally find the 24-105 to provide a great range for getting candid close ups of people (esp. kids). Also, based on your photos, It doesn't look like you need an extra stop to get the shot when out in the sand (ie, I assume all that sunlight gives you plenty of flexibility to get action stopping shutter speeds when necessary, even at F4). I spend more time in the woods than in the desert, but I don't usually bring a tripod on such adventures. As such, I find that the 24-105's IS is nice when trying to get a still-life pic in low light at the optimal f stop (like F8). So it seems like the longer reach and IS might be more useful than the extra stop for your stated purposes. Also, your 50 1.4 gives that fast lens to use indoors without flash when you need it. I agree with the earlier comment that a review of your photos to see how much you are shooting at the longer focal lengths (and also how much you are at f 2.8) would be a great exercise as well.</p>

I have the 10-22 and use the 24-105 as my main lens. I find it an excellent range even in a 1.6 crop body. I personally do not find myself swapping it out a lot for want of more range on the wide side but I think it depends on your use. I use the 24-105 for candid and posed people shots as well as landscapes. Having used a 17-55 for a few weeks, I found that I missed the long side and was swapping to a 70-200 quite a bit so I moved to the 24-105 and have been very happy with this decision. I may be in the minority on this forum with this opinion, but I really think it depends on whether you like to shoot more on the telephoto side or the wide side in your everyday use.

Thank you Ken Munn for answering my question.

I recently moved from the 20D to the 40D and am quite happy with the upgrade.

One option that is great is the ability to assign 3 different custom shooting

settings. I am curious to hear how others have used the 3 open spots.

 

I set one up for landscape, architecture and other still life subjects with

MLU, 2 sec timer, AV set at 9.0, Highlight Tone Priority, ISO 2oo. I also set

up a sports shooting one with Av 2.8, AF Servo, Auto ISO and High speeed

drive.

 

Trying to think about the third and I would like to hear how some of you have

used this useful function.

 

Thanks!

Adorama has been advertising the teleconverter referenced below on their main

page. There was a brief write up in the January (I think it was Jan.) issue

of Shutterbug that was favorable, although I am not sure how much effort went

into the review. I am thinking of getting it for extra reach on my 70-200

f4L, mainly for kids outdoor sports and other relatively rare times when I

need it. I am not concened too much about the small effective aperture

because most of the time I will have plenty of light to get an acceptable

shutter speed. I am mainly wondering about image quality. Any direct

experience that anyone can share (possibly examples?) would be appreciated.

Also, it says that you retain AF on lenses faster than f5.6...I assume this

means 5.6 before adding the tele--right?

 

Not sure if relevant, but I shoot with a 40D.

 

http://www.adorama.com/PRO2XEOS.html

 

Thanks!

I have the Canon and have been happy with it. I own all Canon lenses and over the years have tried and returned a few Sigmas and other third party lenses. While not necessarily a functional issue, one thing that always annoys me with the non-Canon's that I have tried is the noise of the focusing motor vs Canon USM and my perception that they tend to hunt more. I don't have specific knowledge in this area in relation to the Tokina that you are considering, but it is somethig to think about. Maybe it is not as big of a deal if you are only using it for landscapes, but worth at least hearing some of the more experienced users thoughts.

I have typically found that my 50 1.8 works well in this environment, which you can get for $70. When the baby is on the table being cleaned up with the bright warming light on him, you will have plenty of light, the challenge comes in the recovery room, but if you have a window or can turn on some lights you should be able to get some available light shots. I set aperture to 2.8 and I believe 800 ISO and find that works well--you should be able to get in the 1/80 shutter speed range. I concur with others that wider is better with the crop sensor and the sometimes small hospital rooms so if you can get a wider prime, that would work well. I also agree with others that the lattitude of shooting raw with regard to your control over white balance and exposure will be helpful. I have the good fortune of taking such pictures on four separate occasions. Good luck!

Thanks to all for your answers. I think I will pull the trigger now. I like the idea of defraying the cost by buying the 28-135 IS kit and ebay-ing the lens.

I have a year old 20D that I would like to replace with a 40D. I can sell the

20D today for $450 (I have a buyer) and I beleive I can get a 40D today for

$1299 versus waiting a month or two in hopes that the 40D price drops( risking

the 20D price dropping further). What have historical trends on new Canon

cameras suggested relating to price drops this close to introduction? Also,

do you think that the 20D has hit a plateau in pricing on the used market?

 

Thanks

I looked at these two lenses and ended up with the 24-105 to go with my 10-22. I am happy with the decision and find that the extra reach on the 24-105 is worth the trade-off of losing a stop...especially with travel photography where you are often photographing static subjects so that the benefit of IS can be more fully realized. I supplemented with some quick primes (50 f1.8 and 100 f2.8 Macro)for the times that I really need that extra stop or two.

I would second the suggestion of the 380EX. I purchased one 8 years ago and it is still working without problem. It would work well for any indoor photography, but is not strong enough for long shots or other uses where you need a lot of power. I also own a Canon 540EZ (also significantly under $100)which is very powerful and I have used with success to photograph my kids playing soccer, but it lacks E-TTL which means that you need to work in manual mode or otherwise compensate through exposure adjustment. Unless you are comfortable doing this, I would go with the 380EX--it is reliable and will be the most compatible with your EOS camera of anything in the sub-$100 range. I have had great luck buying used ones from KEH.

When shooting on a tripod, it seems that conventional wisdom is to turn off

the image stabilization feature to save battery life. However, is there any

advantage to leaving the IS on even when on a tripod to mitigate mirror slap

vibrations? If so, can this be a substitute for using mirror lock up function

in particularly vibration-sensitive situations?

 

Thanks for any thoughts.

I get great baby shots from a working distance of beween 3-8 feet with the 50 1.8. I find quality to be fair wide open until about f2.8 when it becomes very sharp. In a dim hospital room set at 400 or 800 speed (or maybe 200 with a sleeping baby), it is a good no-flash option and you can't beat the price. I also have the 24-105 L which at F4 can work without a flash in a normal well-lit room, but might struggle in a hospital room like the ones that my 4 kids have been born in in IN.

My one caution is related to your comment that you like bokeh. I own the 50 1.8 and it is a nice lens for the money, but if you are looking for smooth, clean out of focus background, you might need to consider one of the more expensive 50's. Also related, the out of focus highlights will be pentagon-shaped instead of the nice circles that you get from the more expensive lenses. The following article might be helpful http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/

 

I also have four little ones (all under 7!) and while you can't beat a good prime for top quality images, I find the zoom to be very valuable in framing a good shot of restless kids. I have the 24-105 f4L and would highly recommend it or the 24-70 f2.8 L.

I own the 10-22 to go with my 20D, along with the 24-105L. I have no experience with the 17-40, but have owned other lenses in this general focal range. Both ranges can capture excellent landscapes, but the 10-22 is going to give you the ridiculously wide angles that can be fun. Interestingly distorted portraits and incredible coverages at close range that you won't get with the 17-40. My uses may be slightly gimmicky, but fun. It is so wide at 10 that you will need to make sure you are not capturing your own feet in the frame. I enjoy it as a landscape and fun lens with my 24-105 being my walkaround lens.

I owned the 28-105 for a number of years and recently traded it, eventually for the 24-105L. I had initially convinced myself that the 24-105L would not be a good choice because I needed something faster than F4 and something that ranged down lower than an effective focal length of 38 on my 20D due to the APS sensor. After using the Sigma 18-50 2.8 for a few weeks, I found that:

 

1) The 18-50 did not provide enough telephoto range to be an effective "walkaround lens."

2) The APS sensor made my little 50 1.8 a great general, social indoor lens, being light and fast with good quality, removing the need for the extra stop of the 2.8.

3) The IS functionality is extremely beneficial in getting a higher number of acceptable shots when doing handheld and when you don't have time for a lot of setup. The 20D's ability to provide relatively noise free images allows using higher ISO speeds (400,800) giving quite a bit of indoor range.

 

For these reasons, I returned the Sigma for the 24-105L, filling the lower focal lengths with a EF-S 10-22. I have been very happy with the 24-105 and at the price you quote, you could sell it on ebay and make a profit if it doesn't work out. I would agree with Joe though that the price sounds too good to be true.