Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 15, 2008, 7:10 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7
Default

I just returned my Sony A350 and purchased my very first Canon. Iam not knocking Sony at all butI fell into the mega-pixel trap and went for most I could get and was not happy with the results. That being said I purchased the Canon 40D with the 28-135mm lens. I am very excited about my decision and cant wait to start taking pictures but before I jump into it can anyone provide me with with any tips or useful information regarding the Canon 40D and the 28-135mm lens?
TimD57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 16, 2008, 10:11 AM   #2
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
but before I jump into it can anyone provide me with with any tips or useful information regarding the Canon 40D and the 28-135mm lens?
Not really sure what you're looking for with this question. I'm not trying to be mean spirited, but this is kind of like asking "does anyone have any useful tips about photograhy".

I will say this: concentrate on learning photography. People get too hung up on "how does this camera work" or "what's the best way to use this camera". In reality, if you know photography you can spend 1/2 hour with a camera manual and you'll be off flying.

I will also add: don't expect the kit to be a magical solution to all photography problems. It won't be. People expecting a DSLR to be the ultimate point and shoot camera are almost always disappointed. The kit you bought is a great kit - but then so is the A350. So, without more background on why you didn't like the Sony it's impossible to say whether the Canon will give you more pleasing results.


JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 16, 2008, 12:14 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7
Default

Thanks for replying JohnG,

I did not take your comments as beingmean spirited at all. First let me say that the Sony A350 is a fine camera but for what I wanted it was just to slow so Istarted looking for an A700 and could not find one and that's when it was suggested to methat Igo with the Canon 40D. I go to a lot of my grand kidssporting events and like to go to airshows when I can. I guess my questions would be can someone suggest a decent lens for my uses and is the 28-135 a good all around lens for most purposes (birthdays,portraits etc)?

Once again I am a novice andphotography is something I always wanted to do but unfortunately just could never find the time or money until now:-)

Thanks TimD57
TimD57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 16, 2008, 12:26 PM   #4
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Well, the 28-135 is a fine walk-around lens. I used one for several years on 3 different Canon DSLRs. You'll find that on the 40d it can be a bit too cramped for indoor group shots at birthdays and such. The reality though is for indoor party work I would HIGHLY recommend an external flash. That's the best bang-for-the-buck investment you can make for those types of photos. The onboard flash (as with any dslr or digicam) is poor. So if you plan on doing a lot of that type of thing, I would mark a flash as your next potential purchase.

As for sports - I'm afraid the 28-135 is really a poor choice. It's too slow aperture wise (5.6) for indoor sports - meaning you won't be able to get fast enough shutter speeds in indoor lighting to freeze moion and it's way too short for many outdoor sports.

This is why you need to ditch the digicam mentality right off the bat. You're just not going to get a single lens that will do everything. That's the beauty of a DSLR system. But it is a system - and you need to add components to be able to accomplish everything you want to accomplish.

For sports - the right lens purchase depends on what sport you want to shoot (again, no single lens will work for all sports), how close you are to the action (big difference between shooting HS football from the sidelines vs. outside the fence) and what level of quality you want to achieve. So if you could provide that informatiion (sport, level of play, day or night or indoorss, how close to the action you can get and expectation of quality) we can help you with some lens recommendations.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 16, 2008, 1:29 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7
Default

Outside sporting events Football (Night), Baseball (Day,Night). In football I am about 25-40yds from the action and forbaseball I can shoot from the dugout the closest shot being from 15Ft to the furthest 400Ft. I have taken a few shots inside at night and can see were I would need a external flash.

Thanks TimD57
TimD57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 16, 2008, 1:42 PM   #6
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Quote:
In football I am about 25-40yds from the action
Can you elaborate more? Are you right on the sidelines (i.e. right next to the players and yard markers)or behind the fence? It makes a huge difference. If you are right on the sidelines then a 200mm lens is good for about 25 yards of coverage. Remember though, that isn't 25 yards of the football field it's 25 yards from the exact spot you're standing to your subject. So if you're on one sideline it really isn't enough to reach across to the other sideline at the same yard marker, much less across the field and 10 yards down field.

Baseball: The night games can be tough. Depends on how well the field is lit. If it is lit extremely well you can get by with a 2.8 lens (don't ever use flash for baseball). The least expensive option is the Sigma 70-200 2.8 (around $850 I think). The newest Tamron 70-200 2.8 according to reviews will not due well for sports - the focus mechanism is too poor. Now, here's the challenge - depending on the size of the field, 200mm isn't a whole lot of reach. Again, 200mm gets you about 25 yards or 75 feet of coverage. If you consider the dimensions of a HS baseball diamond you really can't get great shots across the field with 200mm. But, at 200mm the Canon 70-200 2.8 will outperform the sigma in my experience. But if the lighting is really poor then even 2.8 isn't enough. In which case the recommendation is to spend your money on longer glass and concentrate on day games. The Sigma 100-300 4.0 ($1000) is a very nice lens. Optically better than the 120-300 2.8 for a lot less money but at f4.0 it will be useless for night games.

A more pricey option is the $2700 Sigma 120-300 2.8. And then the Canon 300mm 2.8 ($4000).

For indoor sports you'll be wanting 50mm 1.8, 85mm 1.8 (best all around bang for the buck), 100mm 2.0 or 135mm 2.0 depending on the sport and your shooting location.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 16, 2008, 1:53 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 16
Default

JohnG wrote:
Quote:
As for sports - I'm afraid the 28-135 is really a poor choice. It's too slow aperture wise (5.6) for indoor sports - meaning you won't be able to get fast enough shutter speeds in indoor lighting to freeze moion and it's way too short for many outdoor sports.
John--I just bought the 40 D as well, but with a different kit lens...

When you say the aperture isn't fast enough in indoor lighting, can't you just boost up the ISO to deliver faster shutter speed and compensate for the lighting?
jang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 16, 2008, 1:58 PM   #8
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

jang wrote:
Quote:
When you say the aperture isn't fast enough in indoor lighting, can't you just boost up the ISO to deliver faster shutter speed and compensate for the lighting?
Well, let's see - I often shoot indoor sports at f2.0 and ISO 1600-2000. So the problem is - you need wide apertures AND high ISO. Tell me what aperture you have available to you and I'll tell you what shutter speed you can expectt at the ISOs the 40d has available to it.

Also there is the matter of focus performance. The less light that gets in to the camera, the worse focus performance becomes - especially true in low light sports.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 16, 2008, 2:11 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 16
Default

This is the kit lens i have

EF-S
17-85mm
f/4-5.6 IS



Because of the slow lens, i'm guessing it wont do well indoors?

But good for 'walk-around' lens outside?
jang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 16, 2008, 2:18 PM   #10
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Yes it's a nice walk-around lens.

No - without flash it won't do well indoors. For indoor stills you'll want to add an external flash. For indoor sports it will be next to useless. I wouldn't recommend counting on ISO 3200 for your indoor sports, so that means you'll be wanting a 2.0 lens for everything except maybe ice hockey (where you might be able to get by with a 70-200 2.8).

The 50mm 1.8 is good for about 10-15 FEET (not yards, feet) of coverage

The 85mm 1.8 is good for about 20-25 feet

The 100mm 2.0 for maybe 30 feet

The 135 2.0 is needed beyond that and is good for about 40 feet.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:28 AM.