winn

I own the 70-300 IS and I've gotten some decent shots. You mention portraits; this lens, however is too slow for indoor shots (without extra lighting).

"That suggests there may be something wrong with the lens you're using. "

Actually you are supposed to wait (I believe 1 second) for the IS to stablize. I'm sure this is included with the instructions that come with the lense. I've notice issues if I don't wait.

When using my 70-300 on a tripod, it seemed to do better with the IS on. I don't know if I was picking up vibrations from the ground or when I realeased the shutter or if it is just my imagination...

Thanks for all of the responses. I was also reviewing the Focal Lengths of the shots I took. (If I was smart, I would have set my FL to match only the series of lenses I was considering.) William, your courtside experience is a big help. Glen, I'll have to experiment with your options. I've decided to start with the 50mmF1.8 and the 85F2.0 and add lenses from there. It is a tough choice between the 100mm and 85 mm. (I still want the 70-200F2.8 IS!)

I would be willing to go to ISO 1600, which is the maximum for my 400D camera, but according the results of the pictures I took, that would have me at the "ragged edge" at f/2.8.

I took some pictures at a H.S basketball game (including the cheerleadering

stunts) with the Canon 17-55 f/3.5-5.6 kit lens and the Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS

USM lens. Of course these lenses were too slow and a large portion of the

pictures did not turn out. In reading through the posts in this forum, the 70-

200 f/2.8 seems to be acceptable for indoor basketball games. However, when I

estimate the f/stop needed from these photos I took with the slow lenses to

obtain at least 1/250s and 800 ISO (the 1600 ISO seems too noisey), it comes

out to be 2.0. Am I on the right track? Is it correct to calculate the f/stop

for one type of lens based on the performance of a different type of len? I

would love to get the 70-200 IS USM; however the data is pushing me to a series

of prime lenses including Canon's 135 f/2 USM and the 85 f/1.8 USM lenses.

Thanks...

"If you are shooting fast action sports in low light the non-IS f/2.8 version might be best." This is what I'm interested in. Wouldn't the f/2.8 IS be better? This would be handheld in a gymnasium and also under stadium lighting.

Comments on the last two questions - When critiquing a specific photo, it should be judged on its own. However, looking at the photographer's portfolio may give a better understanding of what the photographer was trying to do. It will also help in communication, especially if comparing to other pictures in the protfolio.

 

Myself, I am more concerned with the individual image than its place in my body of work. However, I am not a professional trying to sell my services, nor am I trying to make a statement with my portfolio.

<div></div>

I've been excited with my captures of the Moon; at the same time, I realize they are not near the level of Walang's above image. I plan on trying the f11-16 settings suggested above. However, I still don't understand why the lower apeature setting isn't better in this case. Since the Moon is not filling the frame, isn't it being captured by the "sweet spot" (center) of the lens? And because of the background and distance, is the DOF in this situation not an issue? (I've had my camera for about 6 weeks and I think I've now learned enough to be dangerous!) Thanks...

I'll try shooting the moon at f/11 with the ISO setting matching the shutter speed and adjust from there. I've been having better luck in the past with the ISO setting at 200 or 400 with my set up, (including my not so steady tripod). I'll start playing around with stacking lenses and the exposures (that will be new ground for me). As for the 500mm and beyond lenses, that will have to wait until I recover from my initial camera purchases. I don't know what it takes to "piggyback" on to a telescope.

 

Thanks again....

I have been trying to capture the moon with a Canon 400D and their EF70-300mm

f/4-5.6 IS USM lens at the 300mm zoom. The image is not filling the frame and I

heavily crop the photo to get what I want. Since I am only using the center of

the frame, should I be setting the f/stop at the lowest setting (f5.6)to get

the faster shutter speed and/or lower ISO setting?

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

Thanks.....

I have a question along the same lines. I am a beginner and have a Canon Digital Rebel XTi,the 18-55mm kit lens and the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM lens (for action shots from the bleachers). I am interested in taking portrait, candid portrait, and candid action shots of the family. I am trying to decide between the 17-55 f/4-5.6 IS USM and the 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens. Any suggestions....a different lens? - I would like to stay under the $600 price range. (I've already spent more than I should have.)