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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 10, 2007, 4:17 PM   #11
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Rico1Bad
I made some major booboo up there
-> Those #, I posted are guide number (GN) in meter and not the actual distance but the general idea remains the same - You'll have to divide thoses # by the actual aperture to get the correct distances:

i.e. 28/2.8 = 10m, and 14/2.8 = 5m for f/2.8
or 28/5.6 = 5m, and 14/5.6 = 2.5m for f/5.6 and so on...


BTW this is why the Metz series handle mount flashes are so popular with wedding photographers because their GN remain relatively large even at the wide end for large parties and do not rely on the internal zoom head to artificially boost this GN like the EX's (as well as most shoe-mounted flashes)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2007, 11:32 PM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 69
Default

.
This sounds like an improved version of a nice wide angle lens range for someone with a 24 x 36 sensor camera, like the D1s Mark II or the 5D.

For a cropped sensor camera, a Canon 10 - 22mm or Tokina 12 - 24mm would be a far less costly & truly wide angle lens, though "slightly" slower.

Best.


imo
fastglass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 29, 2007, 9:32 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 16
Default

No doubt, you are asking for more light than the 580 EX can deliver. A wide lens like the (awesome) 17-55 f/2.8 IS needs an enormous amount of light to paint the scene, compared to that needed by the 70-200 f/2.8 IS lens. You might be better served by a handle mount flash, or you can try one of the high powered ringlight flash units with an external battery pack to really deliver the light you need.

The cheapest option is to run the highest ISO that you can stand, at the widest aperture, and slowest shutter speed that the action requires. Do that in AV mode, and your 580 EX flash will light up the world to your satisfaction.

The limiting factor is shutter speed vs speed of action in the scene, but I think you will be pleased with the number of keeper shots that you get if you push it to the limit.

One other advantage to the 17-55 f/2.8 IS lens is that the IS really helps when you push the speed/aperture envelope for low light work of any kind. Yes, IS cannot freeze subject motion, but so far as the final IQ goes, motion degradation is the combined effect of camera shake, and subject motion. Having IS goes a long way to eliminating any contribution that camera shake would add to your image.

Also, some people have complained about having a dust issue with the 17-55. I have not seen any evidence of this problem with my lens (S/N 20600622), even though I abuse it by virtue of it being my favorite standard lens, and drag it through every situation I meet, no matter how nasty. I wonder if the dust problems were limited to a particular production run? Granted, it isn't sealed like some L lenses, but it isn't a dust vacuum by any stretch. Maybe people who have had the dust problem could post their S/N, and we can all get a handle on why some people have dust issues, and most don't.

Volk
Volk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 30, 2007, 4:42 AM   #14
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Volk wrote:
Quote:
Yes, IS cannot freeze subject motion, but so far as the final IQ goes, motion degradation is the combined effect of camera shake, and subject motion. Having IS goes a long way to eliminating any contribution that camera shake would add to your image.
I have to disagree here:

I shoot lot of actions at high-speeds and could have sworn my subjects are in focus, but the pictures sometime came out of focus with IS. Lately I've been experimenting with IS OFF (including my 500 f/4L) at higher shutter speeds and I ended up with more keepers. I believe the IS is having the negative effect of fighting the intended camera motion (which is required to follow the action).

-> This may be anecdotal but why then so many sport shooters tape their IS switch in the OFF position? :idea:
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=11
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2007, 7:02 PM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 16
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
Volk wrote:*
Quote:
Yes, IS cannot freeze subject motion, but so far as the final IQ goes, motion degradation is the combined effect of camera shake, and subject motion. Having IS goes a long way to eliminating any contribution that camera shake would add to your image.
I have to disagree here:

I shoot lot of actions at high-speeds and could have sworn my subjects are in focus, but the pictures sometime came out of focus with IS. Lately I've been experimenting with IS OFF (including my 500 f/4L) at higher shutter speeds and I ended up with more keepers. I believe the IS is having the negative effect of fighting the intended camera motion (which is required to follow the action).

-> This may be anecdotal but why then so many sport shooters tape their IS switch in the OFF position? * :idea:
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...04&forum_id=11
If you are using the 17-55 for panning shots, you might well be having that kind of an issue, as the 17-55 does not support type II IS. I would not rely on IS for panning shots with the 17-55. It works great for shots that require a steady camera though.

The IS on the 70-200 f/2.8 lens does offer type 2 stabilization though, and I use it with servo AF for panning sports shots of all kinds. In that case, the IS (for me) is a great bonus.

Why do so many tape their IS to the off position? I don't know, as I really have not noticed many IS lenses with tape on them. Why is it that so many sports photographers use IS to their advantage? Maybe it depends on the lens used, or just personal choice.

Volk
Volk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 4:48 AM   #16
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Volk wrote:
Quote:
If you are using the 17-55 for panning shots, you might well be having that kind of an issue, as the 17-55 does not support type II IS. I would not rely on IS for panning shots with the 17-55. It works great for shots that require a steady camera though.
I'm not talking about the 17-55:
-> I'm refering to my 100-400L and 500L f/4 both with mode 2 IS !!!

In mode 2 the IS is turned OFF only in the horizontal axis - Problem is in wildlife subjects do not folllow a set track from side to side, but when they take flight they also head toward the sky or dive down for fishes (i.e. displacement in the vertical axis which also need IS to be OFF in theses directions)
-> In action shots you never hold a camera steady. The camera has to follow the subjects so that the relative postion of the camera remains fix with the moving subject!

When IS is ON, it tends to counter theses intended movements as if the camera needed to be steady in its original fixed position which creates more 'shake' as it cancel out your intentional movements to follow and keep the subject steady in relation to the camera! :shock:
-> This is very critical when you don't want to use the maximum shutter speed as to blur the background or keep the feather on the wing tips flowing - You don't want to take picture of a race car as if it sit in the parking lot at high-speed or a bird frozen in the sky - You want to convey their movements instead in the capture...




Quote:
Why do so many tape their IS to the off position? I don't know, as I really have not noticed many IS lenses with tape on them...
Here's at least one:
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...hlight=panning
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 7:10 AM   #17
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Yep,

I'm in agreement with NHL. The preference for most pro sports shooters with a heavy lens is to use a monopod with IS turned OFF. Precisely for the reasons NHL states - subjects don't always move in strait horizontal lines. The monopod provides all the stability necessary and they don't have to worry about IS fighting the movement when the subject suddenly cuts vertical and they try to follow.

Now, when hand-holding a 300mm lens (for versatility) then some will use the IS.

But, we're not talking heavy lenses here - we're talking the 17-55. If you're shooting action you want at least 1/400. If you can't hand-hold that lens at 1/400 then shooting action isn't for you. If you're ot getting speeds of 1/400 then you have the wrong tool for the job - you need to be using a fast prime instead.

For non action I agree - IS can be helpful. But for action shots with a lens that size/weight IS is the wrong tool for the job.
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 10:57 PM.