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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 16, 2004, 5:56 AM   #21
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Just my 2c! :P

May be I'm paranoid... but how do you guys know that she'll take a perfect shot everytime?
1. The picture could be out-of-focus (we've seen a lot of posting on this)
2. She could snap a wrong expression on her subject face, or a bad composition (the horse jump out of the frame)
3. The camera can screw up with the wrong exposure (we've seen a lot of postings here too)

Taking multiple exposures can guarantee an in-focus shot especially when the horse is in a fast pace or jumping... It also allows one to capture the correct expression on a competitor face... Exposure bracketing can help the exposure, but then it does it in 3-shots sequences... Chako is correct it's not a neccessity, but I can see where the larger buffer help as well.

After all storage is cheap... just fill it up. If you don't like them delete them. The worst thing is coming back to the PC and finding out that you "missed" a memorable moment...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 8:07 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
Chako's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 301
Default

My original comment was aimedat NHL'srecommendation for L Glass.

Ifrequentotherforums full of L fanatics, and I guess I am peeved at how most of them recommend and eventually persuade people who do not need top of the line equipment, to buy them. I see it way too often, and I have to shake my head at it. This site isn't 1/4 as bad. I guess I felt compelled to state that she does not need L optics after your predictable push for the best. It usually goes like this "I need something that will work for this subject, I only want to use it to take photos of my friends and family, and possibly for general use". Others will then reply that "Might I recommend this L lens. It isa great lens, and it is fast too". Eventually others jump on the bandwagon, and before you know it, he/she has the best lens to take family photos which a far cheaper lens could have done for 1/3 the price. I just felt a different opinion was needed. I will note nobody did specify a specific L lens...but I also have to note that I am having to defend my opinions.

I do not view the 10D body as top of the line, however, all DSLRs are super expensive. You can get a pro level camera for the price of the cheapest DSLR out there. So it beingtop of the line or not is a non issue, the price still is.I do think however, that most people do not need super expensive L glass. There seems to be aweird Lnet craze going on. Don't believe me? visit other Canon forums on the Internet.

Now, yes Eric, I was used to shooting with very slow 4x flash cards. With those, I could shoot 4 shots, then after wards, i was lucky to get another 4. Subsequent shots would be fewer and would take longer to shoot. I then bought Sandisk Ultra2s and was very surprised that I could take 4 shots, wait a second, take another 4, etc. I do believe that the DRebel as 2 internal memory buffers. The faster 60x or 66x (not sure which is read and which is write) flash cards, seems to either write just as fast or faster then the camera can write to it. Thus, the flash card is not the bottle neck. So believe me or not, I am not in the habit of lying to strangers...there is nothing to gain from it.

So sorry if others felt I was attacking them. Not my intention. My intention was to put out another viewpoint/opinion. I will not apologize for my viewpoints or opinions.
Chako is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 8:41 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

The point isn't to use burst to get 9 perfectly composed iamges, but to increase the chance that you get that one perfectly composed shot. You see the rider approaching a barrel. You know they are going to turn right. You also know they will be around and through the turn in a second. So when they approach the barrel you start firing. You get them nicely composed with the barrel (but less action), then you catch them almost entering the turn (facing you) partially through the turn (almost parallel to the turn) and maybe if you're lucky on with the riders head turned as they start away.

And then, since the buffer is 9 deep, you can be ready for the next set quickly (or you can turn and take shots of something else.)

It remindes me of a story I read from a professional hockey photographer. How he took pictures of a player who ended up flipping head over skates. He got one picture of the flip starting, one with the player horizontal and one facing upwards just landing. He wanted the one with the head down, but it just happened too fast. Some times it's just to fast, so you press the button and pray (this was just when the 1D came out and he didn't have one yet. It was his argument to people that "yes, some people do need that framerate.") I almost never need the speed of the 1D, but when I do... there is nothing that can replace it (and I probably miss the shot.)

Chako
The hardest part I have with recommending lenses is knowing what quality the person wants. You can usually figure out if they would benefit from an f2.8 lens by how they use it. Some people really don't care that it's the sharpest thing on the planet. Others (like me) have really high standards and even the low end L glass eventually bugs them. Those standards are expensive, so I plan for them and save.

I know some sites that have detailed reviews of lenses (sharpness, AF speed, distortion... lots of good info), and I used to go there all the time and pick apart which lens was better (when the poster would offer up several.) I don't do it any more because while those things matter I can't really tell how they fit with what the user wants. It's a little frustrating because I know the person wants an answer... I've just learned that I can't give an answer that fits my criteria as "good" on the technicals so instead I concentrate on how well it will fit their needs. But a nagging voice always said "yes, but those qualities effect how well it fits their needs".

Actually the 10D has a double buffer as well. I read about it once in a writeup on how the data is prepared. If I recall correctly, its not used for writing data but for processing the data when read off the sensor. From all I've read, the subsystem of the 10D and Drebel are exactly the same (and Rob Galbraith's site shows the through puts on the two cameras are almost identical for the various cards.)

I wonder if that card's write pattern to the flash that fits better with the way the camera writes. That card is much faster than mine (at 32x) yet the increase in write speed isn't even 100K. Personally, I'd say that the camera is write limited long before your card (or mine), and it's more a nature of the card thing than the inherent speed the card is capable of.

Eric

ps. And you shouldn't appoligize for your opinions. That should be saved for the David Dukes of the world.
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 8:44 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

I have the Canon 28-135 USM IS for my walk around lens. I also like to use it to shoot fast events. Attached is a photo at a Polo Match. I was about 75 yards away from the action when I took this shot. I have since added a Tamron teleconver 1.4x to allow me to reach out a little further.
Attached Images
 
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 12:18 PM   #25
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Chako wrote:
Quote:
My original comment was aimed at NHL's recommendation for L Glass.
Does this sound like a recommentation for 'L' glass?
"If you can afford it, stick with the L-series from Canon for lenses.
Stay away from the cheap Canon's except may be a 50mm or two. Most 3rd party carries excellent lenses (slotted between the entry level Canon's and their "L") which are affordable, but you must select them carefully... The rule of thumb is faster lenses (ie with the wider aperture) from theses folks, usually have better glass behind them and they won't break your family budget!"

I've been known to push Sigma: http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...72&forum_id=65
... and Tamron as well: http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...97&forum_id=65

It's just too bad the DRebel EF's kit lens doesn't fit the 10D... but the lens that was suggested, the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM is not one their best effort.
I do have a single L at this time however, an EF-85mm f/1.2 :crazy:

NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 3:04 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
hedwards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 190
Default

I suspect that the tamron lenses for this use will not be very useful during a 16 second event. I have seen some shots with sigma lenses that indicate that they might be better in terms of focusing speed. Although not owning any sigmas i can't really comment on that.
I tend to steer clear of the lower end canon lenses. The shots i see of them are never as impressive as i think they should be for the price. Though, admittedly i do have that 50mm f/1.8 .
hedwards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 4:38 PM   #27
Member
 
JodyQ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 57
Default

Amy,

I thought I'd throw my nickel's worthin on this. I too have the 10D, and think it is a great camera for beginners through professionals. Once you've read up on how to use the different modes, you'll get some great shots of your friends riding. (The AI Servo AutoFocus should be of use keeping them in focus, while they are moving.) It works for kids running around (or birds flying for me), so I would certainly think it could follow a horse!!

I tend to agree on possibly picking the 28-135 lens over the 75-300. I have both. The 75-300 is longer, heavier, and slower to grab focus. Seeing as the cameras you've been using are all much smaller and lighter than the 10D, I would think the 28--135 would be easier to handle, especially when you consider the extra size / weightof the whole setup. It also makes for a great walk-around lens.

I don't believe that you'll be far enough away from the barrels to need the full 300 anyway. And at the long end, the 75-300 isn't quite as sharp (much softer image) as it is at lesser lengths.

On the matter of the 9 vs 4 shot sequence, you'll find even those 9 shots will go real quick. I've used 9 shot sequences of people making 8 foot putts (golfers..) andused all 9ofthem (that is still only 3 seconds), and sometimes wanted more. Combining them you can turn them into a animated gif that looks pretty good.

If you are doing a full run around the barrels, you would be best off with the 10D shooting in spurts around the barrels (what's it take per barrel, less than 2 seconds?), where you would get like 5 or 6 shots, then during the time to the next barrel, the buffer would bealmost empty, and you could do it again, and then again.

Oh, one last selling point for the 28-135, it will also be better for indoors, and lower light situations than the 75-300.

Regardless of what you and your father decide, keep on shooting. I enjoy seeing your photos.

JodyQ


JodyQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 8:04 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
discodudette's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,420
Default

Thanks, Jody!
discodudette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 10:37 PM   #29
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 54
Default

Actually, that's a good question. How far away will you be from the barrels? It will give a better idea if 135mm or 200mm or 300mm will be long enough.

We already know that 16s max for a run means that you'll want fast AF. One thing that no-one has pointed out yet is that you'll probably want the ability to select AI Servo Autofocus if you are shooting that kind of event (another vote for the 10D). But you'll want to have a fast focusing lens. I've had the 28-135, and it was pretty good in that regard. I've tested the 75-300...it was less, um, good in that regard.

Anyway, if 200mm is long enough, perhaps looking at the 70-200f4L? VERY fast autofocussing, but a $150 premium over the 75-300 at around $575.

Anyway, my #1 suggestion is to take a hard look at the kind of photos you will take before buying lenses. So often I see folks (not on this site, but on the larger "other" site) with an insane (or inane) number of lenses. Research, save and get what you really want or you'll end up buying it anyway (after buying what you really didn't want).

Graeme
Graeme Shiomi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2004, 10:57 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
discodudette's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,420
Default

Thank you everyone! You convinced my father and I out of buying the 300... we're goign to get the 28-135 because we discussed our priorities and we're pretty sure that it will work great! My dad want's to add to shis post:

"Tell them that they eed to suggest something that even the prehistoric dad can figure out!"

AHA so he does wan't it for him, too!

Thank you so much for al of your help! I don't know what I would have done without you all! Big, big, huge thanks!
discodudette 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 4:05 AM.