allen

Sometimes life has a way of making decisions for you. I returned to the store to test the tri-elmar on my M4-P and someone had just bought it. So at least one other person thought it was worth the $1095!

 

Scott

Thanks to everyone for the prompt and helpful replies.

Contrasting viewpoints have been outlined very artfully, and I must now decide how important the f4 maximum aperture is to me versus the utility that the tri-elmar would bring to my Leica kit (which now consists only of a user M4-P waiting for a lens).

 

Scott

I have found a very nice used tri-elmar (1st ver.) at a local camera

store. It's in the box with case. Like new. Asking price is

$1095.

 

Is this a reasonable price for a 1st ver. 3E?

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Scott

I shoot a lot of motorsports photography at nigh at my local 1/4 mile oval. You can't expect to have any good sharp work at night without flash. At most smaller tracks the lighting is simply not sufficient. I usually get to the track early to get ambient light photos during practice and qualifying.

 

Usually I carry three lenses to the track, a 16-35 2.8l, a 50 1.4, and a 70-200 2.8L. I use these with a 10D and an Elan 7. On the 10D I have settled on ISO 400 as a good compromise between noise and speed. (I have tried 800 and 1600 and was not happy, even after using various noise reducing utilities.) I use 400 film in the Elan 7 too, but I only use it as a backup camera.

 

I have had very good success with a 420ex from the ranges you are talking about. The 550ex is even better. At night under the speedway lights I would not call this fill flash, I am using the flash as the primary light source.

 

So, regardless of the EOS camera you end up with, I suggest you consider first the 70-200 2.8L then the 70-2004L or the Sigma 70-200 2.8 HSM for nighttime motorsports (in that order). I suggest at least a 420ex but to be safe consider a 550ex. If you really need power then look at a Metz 60.

 

Good luck!

 

Scott

Jacob,

 

Have you considered using Photoshop for perspecive correction? It may not be ideal, but it's an idea you might want to explore.

 

Scott

"The short version is it rocks! Appears to be better than the 16-35L zoom, except for the one F stop loss.

 

-- Gerry Szarek , May 02, 2003; 02:23 P.M. Eastern"

 

On what do you base this opinion?

 

Thanks,

 

Scott

Why don't you ask to try the lens out before you buy with a roll of film and then make the decision yourself? It might be good enough for your needs, only you can determine that.

Phase One has a program that works with the 10D/D60/D30 RAW files called Capture One DSLR LE and there is a fifteen day free trial you can download at http://www.phaseone.com/dslrle/ Seems to be a nice application, but I have not finished testing it.

I ordered a 10D from PhotoVillage on Tuesday, April 15, and got it on Thursday, April 17.

Check the camera and lens contacts to make sure they are clean. Try it on another body. At least it's under warranty.

I think better lenses are generally a better investment than a better body, especially when you already have a perfectly good film camera like your EOS30. Furthermore, if you like low-light shooting without flash and you are trying to do it handheld, a sharpley-focused image is no good if you have to use a shutter speed so slow that you can't avoid shake.

I suggest the 24-70 2.8L. If you want to save a few hundred dollars, buy the 8-70 2.8L.

You didn't say what lens you are using. I assume you have tried AI Servo mode? Make sure to turn eye control off. You could pre-select your focusing point in the camera and try to place that on each skier as you shoot. (I think the 7e allows you to select the focus point manually.) Also, you could turn the AF off and and set the hyperfocal distance of the lens so that it covers your subject where you want to take the shot. The effectiveness of this depends on your aperture setting, of course.

It has never been clear to me that there is a real world difference in speed between CF cards. I have used Lexar, Sandisk and PYA (I think that's what it's called.) Other's may have noticed a differnce, but I haven't.

Check out: http://www.photo.net/making-photographs/exposure<p>

Scott

You are putting about $1500 into a camera body. Resist the temptation to put a cheap lens on it. I have a 28-70 2.8L lens and it is wonderful. It is heavy, it is big, but it is an excellent lens. That normal to short telephoto (approx 45-110 equivalent) combination on a D30, D60, or 10D is an excellent lens for what you have in mind, and you will come to appreciate the advantages of a reasonably fast zoom lens. It is expensive ~1200 more or less, but rest assured it will retain value much longer than any digital body you buy.

 

Scott