Film-Tech Cinema Systems
  Home     Products     Store     Forum     Warehouse     Contact Us    
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » D-SLR Lens and Accessory Choices (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: D-SLR Lens and Accessory Choices
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

- posted 12-08-2006 10:59 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I nearly placed this post into another older thread involving affordable digital cameras, but felt this is just a completely different topic.

I ordered a Canon EOS Digital Rebel XTi to wade into the whole D-SLR thing finally. Should have the camera sometime early next week. Got the "kit" package with the cheap EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens and a 1GB CF card from NewEgg for $789. That's about the same price many other retailers are asking for the camera body alone.

There are better and more expensive options but I consider this a starter D-SLR. The intent is to put more money toward lenses and accessories, which can be used on a better camera body purchased in a couple years. I figure I'm going to spend another $1000-$2000 right after getting the camera. The trick is just deciding on what to buy to start off the collection and go from there.

My question for any D-SLR users, particularly those with Canon camera gear, what all did you buy first?

From one perspective, I take most of my photos outdoors and need a really good zoom lens. So I'm thinking about spending $1600 for the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM telephoto zoom lens (and a couple 77mm filters) and getting by with that for a while. It's a fantastic lens and fast enough to even be used for some indoor situations, like a basketball game.

I've also considered the less expensive EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens for around $600. It's a useful zoom lens, but the lower price comes with several trade offs, some of them pretty serious. It isn't weather sealed and risks sucking dust particles into the lens body while zooming.

For a different approach, I may buy a Canon Speedlight, probably the 430EX model, and then get a good general purpose lens, such as the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM standard zoom. I also intend to buy the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM lens at some point. It's a great standard range lens and costs $300. The new L-series 50mm prime costs six times the price but is hardly any better.

I don't want to buy any EF-S series lenses since they are not compatible with full frame sensor D-SLR camera bodies.

 |  IP: Logged
Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

- posted 12-09-2006 03:41 AM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
The Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L is definitely a solid lens to purchase. Make sure to pick up a lens in the 20/30-80mm range at f/2.8 as well. Between those two lenses, you will have most things covered nicely.

 |  IP: Logged
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

- posted 12-10-2006 12:27 AM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I just about have my mind made up about the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM lens as the first purchase for my D-SLR gear. I've read nothing but great things about it. And considering the XTi body has no image stabilization in the camera body alone that makes it a little more crucial to have the IS feature in the lens. Canon's own excuse is their lens IS functions are better built into a lens than into a camera body.

On top of that, the Digital Rebel XTi has some limitations a 2.8L series lens or faster can overcome. The 10.1 megapixel sensor demands some faster lenses for the more tight pixel spacing in the sensor. The somewhat older 8 megapixel sensor bodies had wider pixel spacing and less sensitivity requirements. That equaled in a sense of not demanding so much from the lens attached to the body. Now, I know as much as anyone that a good prime lens is going to be better in most cases than a zoom. But this 70-200mm lens is really tough to beat. I'm going to get some dedicated primes in the long run, but I have to start from somewhere and this very popular lens seems to be a good place to begin for covering a very large and useful focal length.

Even as I am starting to get into this D-SLR thing, I can already see how the camera manufacturers have every user bent over a barrel. We all know very well what we need for a complete camera kit. Those guys know as well. And they're more than willing to make us pay for it. Cha-ching!

The payoff though is checking out the astounding image quality one can gain from purchasing and using truly professional quality gear. With that, and the goal of preserving artistic intention in mind, they're going to make a few thousand dollars off me in the next couple of years. I'm just hoping I can make that money back by way of very pleased customers from industrial jobs noticing how great the job turned out.

 |  IP: Logged
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

- posted 12-10-2006 07:49 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I rented the latest Canon EOS 30 D to try out on a friends wedding. I would NEVER purchase this camera. Aside from being VERY battery hungry the autofocus mode was almnost a joke and the camera weighs a ton with the needed large accessory battery pack that mounts to the bottom of the camera. I disabled the AF for the entire wedding shoot. The body is only 8 mp and you are stuck with the foolish Canon version of the RAW file... a big dis-advantage and another expensive plug in for those with older versions of photoshop.

I am planning on buying the Nikon D-80 digital camera. Its got alot more features and a 10 MP sensor. It si also lighter in weight. The Nikor optics in my experience are also far superior to the Canons. The larger LCD screen on the back is almost actually uselful.

Mark

 |  IP: Logged
Martin Brooks
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 900
From: Forest Hills, NY, USA
Registered: May 2002

- posted 12-10-2006 08:47 PM      Profile for Martin Brooks   Author's Homepage   Email Martin Brooks   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I'm a Nikon guy, not a Canon guy, but before I bought the digital, I bought a mid-range SLR in 2002 (an N80) and I bought it with a 70-300 3.5-5.6 and a 28-105 3.5-4.5.

For shooting outdoors (I went to Hawaii shortly after the N80 purchase), those lenses were fine, but when I started shooting rock shows and other indoor events, they were too slow. I can't remember if I upgraded before or after I went digital, but I went with Nikon's 70-200 2.8 and the 18-70mm 2.8, both AF-S, the longer lens with VR (Vibration Reduction.) Those are expensive lenses, and the 70-200mm is heavy and large, but they're both spectacular. It looks like you made a similar choice in the Canon line. Canon has four 70-200mm lenses: a 2.8 and a 4.0 with and without Image Stabilization. Street price on the 70-200mm 2.8 with IS is about $1700, a bit more than the Nikon.

For the digital body, I first had a Nikon D70, but I later upgraded to the D200.

There are all kinds of Nikon vs. Canon debates, but the general conventional wisdom is that Canon's got lower noise in their sensors at high ISOs and more lens choices, but Nikon's got far better ergonomics and generally better glass, although they seem to be slower at getting out new lenses. Pro sports shooters tend to go Canon (notice all the white lenses at sporting events) and pro journalists tend to go Nikon.

 |  IP: Logged
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

- posted 12-10-2006 09:23 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Martin Brooks
Pro sports shooters tend to go Canon (notice all the white lenses at sporting events) and pro journalists tend to go Nikon.
Martin,
All the white Canon lenses are lightweight Floride glass lenses... ues they are prefered becaise they are lighter and hence allow sports photographers to work faster. Canon pioneered the use of floride glass in high speed telephoto lenses way back in the 70's when I was working there. The 300mm f2.8 was the first long lens they produced. While I can't remember the exact weight I want to say about 6 lbs or there abouts. The 2X extender came with it as standard. Having used almost all of the Canon glass back when I worked there and later alot of Nikor glass the Nikor glass always performed better. Mechanics of the lenses were also far ahead of Canon who used plastic helicoids in many of the more expensive lenses.

Mark

 |  IP: Logged
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

- posted 12-10-2006 11:35 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I rented the latest Canon EOS 30 D to try out on a friends wedding. I would NEVER purchase this camera. Aside from being VERY battery hungry the autofocus mode was almost a joke and the camera weighs a ton with the needed large accessory battery pack that mounts to the bottom of the camera.
I've read that circular polarizer filters can improve auto focus performance by cutting down reflectional glare that can fool the sensor. Were you using anything like that at the time?

Canon and Nikon both make excellent cameras. I'm more familiar with working with some of the older film camera bodies, but I've mainly used Canon. I used a pretty old Canon F-1 in art school.

The higher end Canon bodies, such as the EOS 5D and EOS 1 series have better auto focus designs than the EOS 30D. The 5D model adds a number of supplemental focus points around the central 9 point design. All of the EOS cameras enable more auto focus options when using lenses f/2.8 and faster. I'm not going to worry too much about the limits of the XTi body for now. I figure I'll sell it in a couple years while moving up to a model with a full frame sensor.

Canon's high end telephoto zoom lenses and super telephoto primes are pretty heavy even despite the use of fluorite glass. The EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM lens weighs 3.24 pounds -three times the weight of the Digital Rebel XTi camera body I'm getting.

I did briefly consider Canon's EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM lens. It costs a bit less than the 70-200mm model and has more zoom reach. But I figured I'd be better off getting a really good f/2.8 zoom lens first and then add a lens kind of like that later -after I've already bought another L-series lens or two in the more general purpose range. The EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM lens might be the second expensive lens I purchase. I'm not sure if I'll buy Canon's very fast f/1.4 50mm prime lens before then.

Canon's 300mm to 600mm super telephoto prime lenses cost a fortune. They're out of my league unless someone is paying me a decent amount of money to take photos that require use of such lenses.

Canon says they use white on the bodies of their heavy, high end telephoto lenses because they don't absorb heat from the daytime sun so much. Nevertheless, I guess I would prefer an all black, less conspicuous looking lens. It's not going to draw so many stares from people in a crowd, possibly ruining the natural feel of a camera shot. That kind of lens could even attract attention of would be criminals while you're shooting outdoors in some places. However, I'm probably going to get my conceal carry permit soon and perhaps have my SigSauer P226R .357 handy for such an occasion.

 |  IP: Logged
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

- posted 12-11-2006 07:26 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Bobby Henderson
I've read that circular polarizer filters can improve auto focus performance by cutting down reflectional glare that can fool the sensor. Were you using anything like that at the time?
Nope, but I have tried everything without any filters. The lens I was using was the 17-85 zoom. At this price level I can truely say I was disappointed in the AF part of the camera.

BTW: Here are the specs of the 300mm f2.8 floride telephoto... I wasn't too far off on the weight thingy...

Focal Length & Maximum Aperture
300mm 1:2.8

Lens Construction
17 elements in 13 groups

Diagonal Angle of View
8º 15\'

Focus Adjustment
Inner focusing system with USM

Closest Focusing Distance
2.5m / 8.2 ft.

Lens Hood
ET-120

Filter Size
52mm Drop-in

Max. Diameter x Length, Weight
5.0" x 9.9", 5.6 lbs. / 128.0 x 252.0mm, 2,550g

 |  IP: Logged
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

- posted 12-11-2006 08:15 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
That 300m f/2.8L lens is one of the ones definitely out of my league -at least as far as price is concerned. I'm better off getting the L-series 70-200mm IS USM and 24-70mm f/2.8L USM lenses together for about the same amount of money.

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Nope, but I have tried everything without any filters. The lens I was using was the 17-85 zoom. At this price level I can truely say I was disappointed in the AF part of the camera.
That must be a lens Canon doesn't even make anymore. I can't find it listed in any of their EF lens models. There's a 17-40mm f/4.0L zoom and a more affordable 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 zoom, but the 24-70mm f/2.8L is the real king of that group. In the long run I would consider Canon's 16-35mm f/2.8L zoom for ultra-wide work.

Given all the reviews I've read like crazy over the last few weeks it seems with Canon lenses you either have to go L-series for any zoom and if you're not going to spend in that pain level you have to go with a few select primes. I am going to get that 50mm f/1.4 lens. As fast and sharp as it is, for $300 it seems like a steal.

 |  IP: Logged
Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

- posted 12-11-2006 08:46 PM      Profile for Mark Gulbrandsen   Email Mark Gulbrandsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Sorry Bobby,

It was the 24 to 70 USM zoom. Went back and looked at the Metadata on a shot. If I'm correct that lens is around 2 grand by itself although it is no more accurate than the cameras focus sensors anyway.

Mark

 |  IP: Logged
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

- posted 12-11-2006 11:03 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Amazon.com is offering the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM lens for $1089 (after a $50 rebate).

One thing that has me wondering about that lens is the broad shift from wide angle to telephoto. I've read some complaints about slight softness and light falloff around the edges on that lens around 28mm. Some photographers are actually choosing the slower EF 24-105mm f/4L lens as what they consider the best general purpose Canon zoom lens (provided you get a later model without the flare problems). Still, f/4 is pretty slow if you have to do any shooting indoors.

This issue is another reason why I'm leaning more toward Canon's less expensive primes in that focal length. Canon's EF 50mm 1.4 USM and EF 85mm f/1.8 lenses may not have the prestige of a Red L-series ring on them but they're sharper than those zoom lenses and quite a bit faster. I could buy those two lenses and a 430EX model Speedlight for less money than the L-series 24-70 zoom.

I haven't seen any serious complaints at all about the EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM lens. Too bad it costs $1650 (after rebate).

 |  IP: Logged
Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

- posted 12-12-2006 05:57 AM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Don't forget to buy a good tripod. This is probably one of the most important purchases that you can make and a good one will last a lifetime (or most of it). Expect to spend about $200 or so; the cheapo $30 tripods are useless. B&H Photo in NYC has good prices and a good selection. A cable release ($10) is also an important purchase. A good incident light meter (I like the Sekonic Studio Deluxe, which is an older analog meter) is also worth having.

 |  IP: Logged
Ian Woloschin
Film Handler

Posts: 54
From: Worcester, MA, USA
Registered: Mar 2006

- posted 12-12-2006 08:25 AM      Profile for Ian Woloschin   Author's Homepage   Email Ian Woloschin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I just bought a new XTi this week as well. Unfortunately, I don't have the money right now to go buy a nice lens, so I'm stuck with the kit lens until the summer when I'll actually be working again.

I'm probably going to be using it for a wide range of outdoor to indoor stuff, but I won't have several grand to spend on lenses [Frown] .

 |  IP: Logged
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

- posted 12-12-2006 10:54 AM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Scott Norwood
Don't forget to buy a good tripod. This is probably one of the most important purchases that you can make and a good one will last a lifetime (or most of it). Expect to spend about $200 or so
Tripods are important. I bought a Hakuba tripod a couple years ago for nearly $300 to use with my little video camera. It has a fluid head and carbon graphite extension legs. The main support legs have black padding around them. Another feature I like is how the legs have twist locks on them rather than the flip style locks that snag on things. It's not as nice as a high end Sachtler or Bogen tripod, but it works well.

I also plan to get one of the Canon cable releases for this camera. There's a couple infrared wireless models, but I've read some complaints about them being a little flaky.

I'll probably cave and get the Speedlight 430EX and a decent bounce diffuser pretty quick. I may even order that before I get the big telephoto lens.

A good light meter is highly valuable for portrait work. I'll probably get one a bit later when I can get a good medium range "portrait" style lens. For the time being a lot of the stuff I plan to shoot will be outdoors.

quote: Ian Woloschin
Unfortunately, I don't have the money right now to go buy a nice lens, so I'm stuck with the kit lens until the summer when I'll actually be working again.
If your short term budget allows you might consider that EF 50mm f/1.4 USM lens. It's around $300 (cheap for a good lens). It's a good bit sharper than the EF-S 18-55mm kit lens and doesn't have the issues of chromatic abberation found in the kit lens. That shows up if you take pictures of high contrast items like dark tree branches against a bright sky. The kit lens is still a decent value. It's certainly better than nothing.

 |  IP: Logged
Ian Woloschin
Film Handler

Posts: 54
From: Worcester, MA, USA
Registered: Mar 2006

- posted 12-12-2006 11:59 AM      Profile for Ian Woloschin   Author's Homepage   Email Ian Woloschin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I was considering getting that 50mm lens. The only thing I'd be concerned about is with a 50mm lens (especially on a smaller sensor), would I be able to use it for much indoor (aka, dark) stuff without being kind of far away from where I'm shooting?

I bought this camera to get more into photography, so I'm still learning what's the stuff to be buying. I figured the kit lens is a good start and that I'll figure out from there what else I need. I don't think I'll be buying a new lens for a few months though, as I'll be in London for two months, spending all of my money and not making any.

 |  IP: Logged


All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
- Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.