Which digital camera do you have? (2 Viewers)

[Phil Kim]

It was initially difficult to justify twice the price tag for IS, but at 200mm, IS is a must for tripod-less operation. IS on EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM works great... I get up to full 4 stops, that's one more than state-of-the-art EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM! And surprisingly, it weighs about the same as non-IS version, making it fairly portable. And IQ speaks for themselves.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Two Canon flashes and the infared wireless make for interesting flash fun. Here's a spider the size of my little fingernail with a little off camera remote flash:

Nice photo. Wireless flash is definitely lots of fun to use (and experiment).

_Man_

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I had debated about getting one for my Nikon's primarily for indoor situations

Wide angle lenses can be a lot of fun. I've used the Canon 10-22mm for mostly outdoor landscapes. The perspective can provide some amazing shots.

Nice photo, Robert!

 

[Harpozep]

Thanks for the kind words folks. I love creating photos that say something to me and hopefully others as well!

I have to agree the 20mm works real well on the x 1.3 1DMKII, but I often use the Sigma 15-30 to get even wider with no vignetting. The 15-30 is slow, so of no real use indoors, but great out of doors.

I do see the slight amber the Sigmas have, but it does not concern me much. Usually it adds to a scene, or since I'm shooting RAW anyway, color correcting, etc makes it a non issue. Don't shy away from Sigma, they are a great value

Belive it or not, the 20mm almost lives on the x 1.6 350 XT. It makes for a reasonable wide and fast Lens for indoor and out.

Hopefully I'm not overstepping any bounds here, but I'll post a another shot or two. I know this is not a photo posting site, but I think photos will fit in this thread:

This is made from a number of overlapping 20mm images:


A larger size can be found here:
http://www.pbase.com/harpozep/image/65506320/original


Here's a nearly sixteen minute exposure from the Canon 1DMKII and the 70-200 2.8 l IS. This is why I go for DSLRs, you can push them and get results!

 

[Brian Perry]

Man-Fai,

Too bad you still have your D70...I would have been interested in swapping your D200 for my D70 (plus cash). If you want to sell the D200 outright, please send me an e-mail.

Thanks!

 

[Rob Gillespie]

Hey, Rob. Looks like you made some major upgrades on your camera equipment. Niiiice!

Yeah, crazy money really, none of which I can really afford in strict technical fincancial terms

I decided a little under a year ago that I wanted to take this a lot more seriously. You know when you just reach a point in your life when you decide the job you're doing isn't something you want to do for the rest of your days?

My job in IT isn't looking that secure for the long term (virtually nothing in IT is safe, it can all be done from India or Poland) and I figured that if I was to ever get out of fixing other people's computer problems all day then this was perhaps the opportunity to do it. I'm slowly but surely building up little bits of work and I'm hoping that when I do get that tap on the shoulder I'll be in a position to have a go at being a full time photographer in some way shape or form.

I've sold some prints of landscape work - small amounts, but it's a start - and I'm building a stock library. I've just taken delivery of a small studio lighting setup (Elinchrom D-Lite 2s with backgrounds, reflectors etc) and in the new year I'll be starting to do portrait work for cash. The feedback I've had so far has been very positive. I've done quite a few photo restoration jobs too - again, it's an extra bit of income.

It may never work however and in a few years I may be back being bored brainless on computers, but I have to give it a try if for no other reason than to say I did. I'm studying a formal qualification in photography at a night class and after that I'll be looking at gaining a formally recognised professional qualification such as with the British Guild of Wedding Photographers. Yes, I'm taking it pretty seriously, hence the nice glass

 

[Brian Perry]

I've just taken delivery of a small studio lighting setup (Elinchrom D-Lite 2s with backgrounds, reflectors etc)

I bought a single Elinchrom light and am amazed at how much improvement my portrait photos have shown. A side light gives a three-dimensionality that an on-camera flash can't compete with.

Do you think the second light would be worth it?

 

[Rob Gillespie]

Elinchrom - as with Bowens and 'lower' manufacturers - now do starter kits which gives you far better value than buying the items seperately. The D-Lite 2 kit gives me 2x200w strobes, 2 softboxes, the stands, cables and a neat instructional DVD on how to use the lights properly. This cost £400. One of the D-Lites on it's own costs £200.

I agree that a single strobe used well can yield great results, but I didn't see much point in saving what literally would have been a few tens of pounds for something I may decide I need later.

I'm currently waiting on delivery of a snoot which means the second light can be used as a hairlight.

 

[AlejandroK]

Nikon D2Hs
Nikon D200
Fuji F31D

My wife primarily uses the Fuji. I typically use the D2Hs; the 4mp is more than enough and the speed is amazing.

 

[Jeff_HR]

Canon 20D.

 

[Sam Posten]

Thought I had replied to this thread a year ago, I guess not.

Canon 20D
530 flash
Tamron 28-75 F2.8 is my primary walkaround lens (best value for money lens out there I swear!)
85 F1.8
17-40 F4L
Lensbaby 2.0

I really want the 70-200 2.8 IS and the 100-400 for long shots and eventually a full frame 5D or equivalent for non telephoto work, but until I hit the lottery the 20D is a fantastic camera and I make the most of what I've got. The 100 Macro is probably my next lens purchase, I love taking insect pictures with my Tamron:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kadath/...7594297058909/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kadath/238798673/

 

[bassman99floyd]

Wife bought me an Olympus top of the line digital SLR, the Evolt 330. I can't believe there big zoom lens, 90-250 sells for $6000.00! That's just insane, yet I want it!!
Very sweet camera. Check it out...
http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_se...p?product=1226

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Wife bought me an Olympus top of the line digital SLR, the Evolt 330. I can't believe there big zoom lens, 90-250 sells for $6000.00! That's just insane, yet I want it!!

Hey, B&H sells the lens for only $5,500. What a bargain!

I have never looked at Olympus lens prices, so that cost really surprised me for a 90-250mm f/2.8 zoom. By comparison, Canon sells a 70-200mm f/2.8 L with image stabilization for about $1,650.

 

[Harpozep]

Oly must not make many of those 6K lenses. Canon sells a lot of their 70-200L 2.8 Is ones. I have one of the Canon ones and it often does not come off the camera for weeks! It is such a cool lens.

I'm sure the Oly is too, but I'm sure not too many folks are buying it at 6k. Don't get me wrong, I like the 4/3 Oly camera system , but that glass is a way big investment into a system that already seems to be growing long in the tooth. Where as the Canon lens, which costs less, can go on any DSLR or film camera Canon has made since the mid '80's. The larger user base makes R&D and production costs get amortized over a longer period with wider platform support than the much smaller Oly 4/3 system .

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I don't think you can compare the Canon 70-200L f/2.8 to that Oly 90-250 f/2.8 though. That Oly is equiv to 180-500mm after accounting for "crop factor", and it weighs 2x(!) as much to boot. You figure the weight itself tells you to probably expect it to cost at least 2x as much -- and these things of course do follow the law of diminishing returns, so it starts to become exponential at some point. Admittedly, I did *not* expect it to weight *that* much. Had thought it might weigh as much as typical 70-200 f/2.8 glass, which is 3-3.5lb.

Find a truly comparable Canon (or Nikon) telezoom, and it'll probably come much closer to that price, eg. Nikon 200-400 f/4 VR though it's not f/2.8, but is effectively a longer lens on a DX body. Of course, it doesn't look like Canon has anything resembling that Oly telezoom at the pro level (for the moment anyway). I guess one could opt for the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 as something close enough at a far more affordable price, if one went w/ a 35mm DSLR system. Otherwise, you'll be looking at an expensive 300mm f/2.8 prime on top of a 70-200 f/2.8 to cover that range at f/2.8 for most of them...

_Man_

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I guess one could opt for the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 as something close enough at a far more affordable price, if one went w/ a 35mm DSLR system.

The Sigma is a good comparison, although it's still not exactly the same focal length. It sells on B&H for $2,700. Considering it's a 3rd party lens, if Canon made an equivalent, it would probably sell for around $3,500 - $4,000.

 

[gvw]

I use a SONY DSC-H2 6.0 MP Digital Camera 12X Optical Zoom, it may not be the greatest around, but it has been good to me and a blast to work with.

 

[dubge]

Canon Rebel XT
Sigma 24-70 2.8
Sigma 70-200 2.8
Sigma 100mm macro 2.8
Canon 50mm 1.8

Plus a few other misc things to play with

 

[ErichH]

Nikon D40 - if this is a toy/family camera, I can't wait to see what a D200/300 is like. My Ol friend the Coolpix995 is going to auction.

I stayed away from DSLR for a very good reason all these years. Friends told me that once you get real glass, a fever starts. I can feel it already. Darn It.

E

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Erich,

The D200 will feel and perform like a serious camera(!), but the image quality is not necessarily noticeably better than what you can get w/ the D40 unless you're shooting in bright outdoor conditions (or regularly use a good tripod w/ good technique and/or good use of strobes) and need to blow up the prints to something much larger than 8x10. There will be more visible details in such cases (ie. 10MP vs 6MP), but you probably won't miss it in the large majority of such photos unless you're trying to do pro work.

Depending on exactly what you're after, you might be better off going for a Fuji S5Pro instead, which is a D200 w/ a high dynamic range 6MP Fuji SuperCCD sensor inside (that performs more like 8MP in most situations). It doesn't perform as fast/responsively as a D200 though from what I hear...

_Man_