ejchem101

<p>The biggest recommendation i can give is... ask yourself what you are wanting to improve. If you already have the 17-85 and a 40D, what are you hoping to get from the 35 and 85? Faster glass? ok. Sharpness... depends on how large you print. </p>

<p>Just wanting to get the newest and best, that's ok too I suppose but, what specifically is your 40D and 17-85 lacking that you hope to get?<br>

Maybe think of just getting the 70-200 2.8 ? Also I would recommend not overlooking the 70-200 F4 unless you shoot often without flash in a dim setting.</p>

<p>Alan has a lot of great information in that post. To add to it:</p>

<p>Lets say that you are handholding your 70-200 at 200mm focal length. The rule is that you need "about" 1/200th of a second for a shutter speed to keep from having blur from camera shake. (We say about because some people can hand hold the camera better than others).</p>

<p>With figure skating, 1/200th will not stop all the blurring from the motion of the skater (especially the faster spin moves etc). In order to "stop" the blurring from motion you are going to need 1/400th or higher, meaning that if you only want the IS for figure skating, it really wont help you (because your shutter speed will be fast enough to not have blur from camera shake)</p>

<p>That being said, if you can afford the extra expense, I'm sure you'll find times where it is useful, just most likely not for action sports unless you're panning.</p>

<p>From what I have read on here... you do not want to do this. I am not a wedding photographer, but here is what I've learned by reading on here:</p>

<p>Those images represent you. If you give her all of your photos, and she shows he friends some of the "not so good" photos... that makes a bad reputation for you. </p>

<p>Maybe you could ask her to proof them and pick out some more specific photos for you to print off? That way you could go through the editing etc before you give them to her. I know at my wedding, we had a relative take the photos. We received a couple of cd's with all of the photos. That being said, I think less of him as a photographer today because they were not edited and... I thought could have been much better.</p>

<p>I stay away from EFS lenses only for two reasons. I still shoot some film and want to be able to use all my lenses on my film eos body. I also have dreams of a FF camera some day.</p>

<p>Another vote for the 17-40. Great landscape lens, and I use it quite often as an outdoor walk-around lens and don't mind only going to f4 for the widest aperture.</p>

<p>The Xt should be fine for you to learn on. Here are a couple of suggestions.</p>

<p>Take your kit lens and set it to 50mm. If you like that focal length, there is a very good prime lens that only costs around $100. It is the 50 1.8</p>

<p>If you want something a little wider, set your lens to 35mm. If you like this focal length there is also a good prime lens at this focal length that will give you a "normal" perspective. <br>

If you really must have a zoom (although I think everyone should have a 50mm 1.8) there are a few options but... if you are just worried about sharpness. Get into some good light, set your camera to 200-400 iso, and then in Av (aperture priority) set the aperture to f8. This will likely give you sharper results.</p>

<p>Along these same lines... as has already been said. Never... ever release the shutter during the backswing. As a general rule of thumb, as soon as the club contacts the ball... go for it, but not a second before.</p>

<p>JDM, don't forget there are older digitals than the 10D. I used the D60, and there is even a D30. However the OP is talking about the EOS 10, not the 10D.</p>

<p>Biggest thing is you may only use the EF lenses on both, EFS will only work on your 20D.<br>

I love my 17-40 F4 on both my digital and on my film bodies. I chose that particular lens instead of the 17-55 2.8 just due to the fact that I want to be able to use it on my A2.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hello Keith,</p>

<p>As for the lens, I think a 70-200 2.8 would be a great choice. You will need to be on the same end of the rink in order to get your best shots (other end of the rink will be too far) but you will be happy with 2.8. F4 would be pushing it in some rinks. In order to get only the skater's body you may need to do some extra cropping, but that shouldn't be a problem with the 7D. I use a 20D and can crop plenty off and not look pixelated. </p>

<p>As for extenders... it may start causing you to use very high ISO. I think you have got it fairly well figured out.</p>

<p>Final thing I will say is that even with a 20D and a 70-200 F4 I was able to get some decent hockey pictures in a fairly well lit rink. So you should be fine with a 7D and 70-200 2.8</p>

<p>Faysal,</p>

<p>I have the 70-200 F4 non-IS and while some here would recommend that you spend the money for the IS, I have rarely found that I miss it. It all depends on your shooting style. For me, when I'm using the 70-200 I am probably shooting outdoor sports. For sports, IS really doesn't matter due to the fact that you need a faster shutter speed to stop the action (I do understand that for some panning shots, IS can be very helpful).</p>

<p>If I did more portraits I might consider the 85 1.8 but, the 70-200 covers all of my needs.</p>

<p>Good luck in your decision. Remember that these lenses need to match with YOUR shooting style. And personally, I don't mind using a tripod at all.</p>

<p>IMHO I think it is more of a feel / preference thing. If you are comfortable with canon, most people stick with them. For me, I chose canon due to one main factor: My grandfather shoots canon, which means he has some lenses I may not.<br>

I guess you could say I was grandfathered in!<br>

Really though, from everything I've read/heard they both make amazing products, and I am thankful both are around to give each other competition. Don't forget to put Pentax and other brands in your mind as makers of great cameras.</p>

<p>First ask yourself what you want a FF camera for. For me, I would really only want the FF for landscapes and to exploit all of the potential my 17-40 F4L has. Other than that, I find that even my lowly old 20D does well.</p>

<p>The fact is... I do have a FF camera, much like the free one found here<br>

<a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/free-digital-camera.htm">http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/free-digital-camera.htm</a><br>

<a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/free-digital-camera.htm"></a>(except the canon version)<br>

GL and Have fun!</p>

<p>Andrew-</p>

<p>I dont have experience with developing, but coming from a chemistry background, I would doubt it. the ISO refers to the shape of the molecule, shapes can make a large difference in the chemicals react (same molecules but different shapes can effect things like smell). While it may be the same chemical in name it could react very differently. However, I would guess there is really only one way to find out... and that would be to test it. Just make sure you look over the MSDS and see how it goes.</p>

<p>My latest photography work has been focused in many different areas. However one thing that I notice, and that many of the people who view my work notice, is that there is a quality difference from what they normally see.</p>

<p>Usually this is just expressed as "wow, that is a great photo". I believe that most non-shutterbugs rarely understand why they like the photo, just that they do. Much like me with painting, why do I like some watercolors more than oils?</p>

<p>For me, using the highest quality lenses will help in the overall photo IQ. That doesn't mean that composition or technicalities dont matter (they do), but most of the time, sharpness and understanding how to create pleasing bokeh will make a large difference.</p>

<p>I couldn't stand using P&S because a majority of the time it was difficult to separate my subject from the background. Sometimes the quality of gear matters, most of the time you use what you have and a great photographer will be able to get the art with what is available.</p>

<p>I wouldn't recommend someone with no background knowledge of cameras to buy a used camera, due to the fact that you may overlook some important things to check before you buy it. </p>

<p>I would also assume that the rebels such as the T1i T2i etc would be probably the most user friendly. </p>

<p>However I did completely the opposite. I bought everything used, and went with a 20D instead of a rebel.</p>

<p>Thats my problem steve, I have it Turned off, but still will press the preview button more often than I would like.</p>

<p>Yea Jay, I've got an older camera (the canon 20D) maybe my problem is I need a larger screen!</p>

<p>I don't argue that the LCD, review and Histograms can be a useful tool. But it can also be a distraction.</p>

<p>Dick, to use your analogy. I would assume when you went to the computer generated displays, that there could be the danger of putting too much attention toward them and forget to actually look outside and make sure what you were seeing lined up with the instruments.</p>

<p>My problem isn't that the LCD and Histogram is useful (it is almost too useful). I find myself tempted to look after every single shot, even though the lighting hasn't changed, and my settings haven't changed, just the object has changed. Is it really necessary to check the review and histogram for every single shot?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I actually just grabbed my Elan 7 yesterday (borrowing from a relative). I normally shoot with a 20D but miss the days of film and not thinking too much about the shot after I've taken it. I also love the surprise of "wow, I forgot I even took that" when I get film developed. And I've just found myself spending too much time wanting to immediately pp all my digital shots.</p>

<p>Anyway, the 7e works beutifully with my EF lenses and I especially like that my 17-40mm is actually a wide angle lens! Wohoo.</p>

<p>If the 7 was taken care of it's a nice little camera. In terms of Lenses... The only one I could recommend out of my lens line-up would be the 50 1.8 You can find them for around $75-$100. I would take that prime over any plastic zoom IMO.</p>

<p>John - I do have the LCD shut off, my problem comes in that I am a perfectionist and it is just way too easy to hit that "play" button to make sure everything is perfect.</p>

<p>William - I think I may have to look at picking up the folding hood, I just need something that will take a little more effort than just hitting the play button I believe. At least at this point in my photography, every photo doesn't have to be "perfect".</p>

<p>I love photography, and have grown up with film. I have been using digital for around 5-6 years. </p>

<p>Instead of spending time taking photos, instead what I find myself doing is taking a photo, and then stressing about my LCD to make sure that everything is perfect. </p>

<p>I'm thinking about covering my LCD for the next week so that I can enjoy the time of shooting photos without being tempted to look at the LCD. Or maybe I will just pick up a couple of rolls of film and borrow my grandfathers ELAN.</p>

<p>Do you ever find yourself too occupied by the LCD and "Chimping" ? What do you do to not be so tempted to look at every single picture?</p>

<p>I feel like it takes away from that moment when you see the actual photo and think to yourself, YEAH that's what I was looking for!</p>

<p>ZING! Nice John, I have to say, that is one of the best smiles I've had in a while.</p>

<p>Maybe BP should just use some dawn?</p>

<p>Oh, and to follow up on my last post... I would only use one tiny drop of dish soap as a last resort (if alcohol and lens cleaning kits don't work).</p>

<p>Just for a little backgound, I'm coming at this from a chemistry background (i'm a chem teacher).</p>

<p>The rule is... "like dissolves like" which means, things like water will remove stains and other things that are water-like. Grease... is not like water, which means water-like substances will not work well to remove grease.</p>

<p>I would recommend using a very light and diluted dish soap. I am not sure how this will react with the lens material itself, and I have not personally used it on a lens, but it will take care of the grease, once the grease is off of it, you could then use normal lens cleaner material. One thing to make sure of it that you are using a very fine microfiber cloth.<br>

As far as alcohol goes, it is closer to water than it is to grease, it may work, but not as well as something such as dish soap would.<br>

Remember, I don't know how something like dish soap will react with the lens surface itself, that is something you may want to research farther.</p>

I agree with Scott. Go the used rout if you want the best bang for your buck