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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 11, 2006, 10:14 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 431
Default

all distances <20yd and Center Pt AF

1. f2.8 1/400 ISO200 175mm





2. f2.8 1/320 ISO200 110mm





3.f5.6 1/800 ISO1600 146mm



urbanaries is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2006, 4:21 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 431
Default

any opinions on whether i should keep it and hone my skills or return it???
urbanaries is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2006, 5:25 PM   #13
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

I would definitely be concerned. The portrait shot has me concerned. With that amount of light you should have no problems getting a better focus than that. It's difficult to say just on these photos, but I would suggest maybe the following:

take the camera & lens to a camera store that sells the Canon 70-200 2.8. Take some test shots at 2.8 with both lenses and compare - you should even be able to tell on the LCD. That gives you something to compare against. Just an idea.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2006, 10:17 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 431
Default

I emailed KEH for a return auth, hopefully it will go smoothly. I also thought about doing a testin a store like you said John but I'm fairly sure after some more testing that I don't want the lens.

Expensive (shipping) lesson, but I did learn I am not keen on the heft of this lens, i didn't think the weight would be an issue but my wrist hurts from fairly limited use...weak girl muscles, yeah yeah.

I'm also thinking70-200 is an unnecessarily wide range for me. I like primes because I start to "think" in terms of what the lens will see.

I'm considering the Sigma 150 2.8 macro....anyone have experience with this? I do wish it was 2.0 but there's nothing that fast beyond theCanon 100 2.0...and I think I needa bit more focal length. The fast telephoto need is mostly for indoor/no flash wedding ceremonies. I'd also use it secondarily for portraits and (little league) sports. Thoughts?

urbanaries is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2006, 10:48 AM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 25
Default

How about the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 ? . . .

Decent range, lightweight, compact, fast, gets good reviews.




HiltonP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2006, 12:23 PM   #16
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

urbanaries wrote:
Quote:
I'm considering the Sigma 150 2.8 macro....anyone have experience with this?
All my macros are shot with this lens
(i.e. not wide open...)




-> This Sigma lens is faster and sharper than the EF-180 Macro - and you are saving some weight by not having that extra 30mm !!!
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...0_35/index.htm
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...0_28/index.htm

... Have you considered the EF-85mm f/1.8 for indoor? :idea:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2006, 1:01 PM   #17
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

BTW this is a picture with my 70-200 f/2.8 EX (200mm @ f/2.8 in good light) - non DG:


NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2006, 1:50 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 431
Default

Thanks for posting the pics NHL. I have/am definitely considering the 85mm. Every argument in my head seems to come back to that lens. My hesitance is duplication...I have that focal length covered though with my 17-85...and while it's certainly not fast, it is sharp, quietand produces some bokeh at 85mm.

I just feel like I need something on the TP end, since my only other lenses are the 17-85 and the 50mm 1.8.

The macro feature on a lens isn't necessary by any means but it would still come in handy. Dress/ring details come to mind.
urbanaries is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2006, 2:46 PM   #19
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Why not the Canon 135mm 2.0? Stellar performer and seems to meet your requirements. Sells for around $1000
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 10:41 AM.