jon_erik_lido

<p>What's your budget? Individual portraits or group? Studio or candid?</p>

<p>You might be happy with something like:</p>

<ul>

<li>Canon EF-S 10-22mm</li>

<li>Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 (I'm not a huge fan of the Canon f/1.8- focussing and bokeh being the main issues)</li>

<li>Your favorite "normal zoom" (Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4, Canon 17-55 f/2.8, Canon 15-85 f/3.5-5.6, or even Canon 24-105L f/4)</li>

</ul>

<p>The choice of the normal zoom depends on your favorite focal lengths and apertures. If I shot outdoors mostly I might go for the Canon 15-85 or 24-105 for a little extra reach. If I wanted more emphasis on portraits and indoor shoting I'd go with the Tamron 17-50 or the Canon 17-55. The Sigma is the compromise between the faster zooms and the wider zoom ranges.</p>

 

<p>Before you go out and get the 17-55 consider the reliability. This is not a rock-solid lens.<br>

http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2009.11.01/lens-repair-data-35</p>

 

<p>Well, when I posted this message I didn't quite expect all of the passion in the responses I got. I appreciate the enthusiasm, but please, everyone, there's no need for personal attacks- we're just talking about camera lenses after all.<br>

At any rate, I'm glad I posted because gained some new perspectives. Here's some of what landed for me:</p>

<ul>

<li> Canon EF 35mm f/2 can be used wide-open when bokeh is important</li>

<li> Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM looks better as an option if I just clean up any CA in post</li>

<li> I can rent or buy (and later sell, if necessary) any of these options and see for myself. Low risk to try.</li>

</ul>

<p>For the record, I have a Rebel rather than some fancier body because I'm putting my money into glass. Apart from some metering issues, I have not regretted that decision. I realize that my lenses will probably stick around in my camera bag for a while, hence all of the scrutiny.</p>

<p>Thanks for the input, everyone. No, I have not used any of these lenses. My comments are based on reading multiple reviews and pixel-peeping lots of photos online. I'm not looking for perfection. I just want any flaws to be ones that I can work around with technique and the price should be in-line with the quality I'm getting.</p>

<p>Bob: the EF 35mm f/1.4 L is absolutely up to snuff. I just didn't list it because it's so expensive it's not really in the same class as these other lenses. I know you've espoused that it's not the lens that makes great photos. But then I've also noticed you host a lens review site... ;)</p>

<p>Tommy: Yeah, I've wondered if I'm not being too harsh on the 28mm, in particular. Do you (or anyone else) know how well the CA cleans up in software with this lens?</p>

<p>Mendel and Anders: I'd love a EF-S 25mm f/2. A little wider would distinguish it from all of the other options. Are you listening Canon, Sigma, etc?</p>

<p>A Novisto: You forgot to mention low contrast! :) But, unlike the lenses I've mentioned, the 50mm almost completely cleans up it's act by f/2, which is still quite fast. This thread isn't about the 50mm, though. At any rate, I get your point- all lenses have a "personality"- strengths and weaknesses. I just don't want a lens with a personality disorder!</p>

<p>For some reason, Canon (and most manufacturers) seems to have ignored the market for a normal prime for APS-C dSLRs. I have the Canon 50mm f/1.4 lens and love it, but on my Rebel it's a mid-telephoto- not a normal.</p>

<p>What are my options? Here are the lenses that I know of, and how they disappoint me:</p>

<p>Sigma 30mm f/1.4- Everyone seems to love this lens for some reason, but it's not cheap, it's not small, it vignettes, is EXTREMELY soft in the corners, and for a prime, shows a lot of CA! By the time I stop down enough to get these issues under control, I could have shot the same photo with any one of a number of cheap zooms at the same settings.</p>

<p>Canon 28mm f/1.8 USM- CA is completely dreadful, and like the Sigma, this lens shows really soft corners, even on an APS-C camera.</p>

<p>Canon 35mm f/2- Okay, now here's a cheap, sharp, fast, light lens. Too bad it's got a 5-blade uncurved diaphragm that produces pretty ugly out-of-focus backgrounds (bokeh). I guess it would be okay for snapshots of indoor family gatherings, but I could probably do just as well with a kit zoom and bounce flash.</p>

<p>Sigma 28mm f/1.8- big, heavy, expensive, and still soft</p>

<p>What to do? I guess I could throw down over a grand ($1000) for a Canon EF-S 17-55 or a Canon 24-70 L. But even those are big lenses and are at least a whole stop slower than these lenses. For those prices I could by a used 5D mark I and slap my 50mm on it.</p>

<p>Am I missing something here? Is this a conspiracy to get people to buy expensive fast zooms? Am I nit-picking the problems with these lenses? I just want a nice fast normal prime. Is that too much to ask?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>HSM is Sigma's version of USM (Ultrasonic focus motor). Sigma's IS is called "OS", and I don't know if their 17-50 has it yet. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>The new Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 HSM OS has "Optical Stabilization". The Sigma makes a nice choice. I have the older Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 model. I think the new one would make a great choice. The two focal lengths I find myself shooting with most with this lens are 17mm and 70mm. I would not want to give up that extra reach to a lens that went 55mm or 50mm lens at its longest setting. The Canon 17-55 and Tamron 17-50 are really nice lenses, but do not discount the value of those extra 20mm.<br>

The Canon 15-85 is also a nice choice, but it's also a lot slower than the Sigma 17-70.</p>

<p>Thank you, everyone for the very helpful information. Special thanks to G Dan Mitchell for the link to your night photography page. There are some good tips there that I had to discover for myself!</p>

<p>I don't do much night-time photography using long exposures, but every once-and-a-while I will experiment with it. However, I'm never sure of what ISO to use on my DSLR (an XTi) when doing a long exposure from a tripod.</p>

<p>I know that, in general, higher ISO settings lead to greater image noise. I also know that longer exposures lead to greater image noise (including hot-pixels). And of course, higher ISOs mean you can use shorter exposure times. So ISO 100 might be best because it is the lowest ISO setting... or maybe ISO 1600 might be best because it is the highest ISO setting, yielding the shortest exposure. Or maybe something in between is a better compromise.</p>

<p>This brings me to my question. If I have the camera on a tripod, and I'm planning on taking a long exposure (in the range of, say 3sec to 10min) in low light, what ISO setting will yield the lowest noise image?</p>

<p>Also, what is the effect of using the "long exposure noise reduction" feature? I understand it has something to do with reducing pattern noise somehow. For long exposures, this option really takes a long time!</p>

<p>With the release of the RadioPopper JrX system, I am trying to figure out how to build a cable to remotely vary the power of Metz handle-mount flashes. I have a Metz 45 CT-4, but I understand the pin-outs should be the same for all of these models (and maybe more?):</p>

<ul>

<li>Metz 32 CT-4 </li>

<li>Metz 45 CT-3</li>

<li>Metz 45 CT-4</li>

<li>Metz 45 CL-3</li>

<li>Metz 45 CL-4 </li>

<li>Metz 45 CL-4</li>

<li>Metz 60 CT-4</li>

</ul>

<p>The sync cable for these flashes ends in a flat plug with two rows of six electrical contacts (or pins, for lack of a better word.) My question is this:<br>

Which pin on this connector is the quench pin? Any help would be appreciated and would help breathe new life into these trusty, portable and powerful flashes.</p>

<p>Thanks, Danny! So the Minicycler/Metz combo is intended to be run with the AA batteries installed an the unit turned on. I did not realize (since I don't own one) that the AC adapter (unlike the Minicycler) provided power to both the control circuit and to the capacitors. Good to know it is safe to use the Metz with the control circuit turned on. The flash would be barely usable if it was limited to full power output only!</p>

<p>I have a Metz 45 CT-4 that I picked up used along with a Lumedyne Minicycler high voltage battery pack and the appropriate HV cable. The Metz manual says to leave the 45 CT-4's power switch in the off position when using the AC power adapter. (It doesn't say anything about the Lumedyne, of course, but I assume they provide the same power.) No further explanation is provided in the manual. There are no dire warnings about using it in the "on" position, and no consequences of doing so are listed.<br>

The problem is, with the flash "off" it seems to only fire at full power, even in the 1/2, 1/4 power and "auto" positions. These modes work fine when the flash operates on AA battery power, however. So, when running on the Minicycler I've tried turning the power switch "on". In this case the flash seems to get the fast cycle times from the Minicycler, but the various modes still work.<br>

Is this safe to do? I noticed that the batteries that I've used to do this test stopped accepting a charge shortly after. Coincidence? What's going on here?</p>