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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 12, 2005, 2:02 AM   #11
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

If you haven't seen this yet I think you'll find it very interesting.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...location.shtml

Some amazing low-light shots with the 20D + 17-85.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2005, 8:52 AM   #12
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

After seeing Mr Saginaw's results I downloaded a copy of NeatImage and did a little experiment.

I took a set of shots of the same high-contrast scene at
different ISO settings from 100 to 1600 on my 20D.

I have put a 100% crop of the image at ISO 100, 1600 and
1600 with NR applied by NeatImage. (Note that this is my
first use of NeatImage, I'm sure an expert could get
better results.)

The results are pretty impressive I think,
the ISO 100 and ISO 1600 NR are not that different except
for a slight loss of detail on the high ISO. I think there
is very little apparent noise visible after the NR has been applied.

When one considers the price and (more significantly for
me) the weight difference between the 70-200 f4 L and the
70-200 f2.8 it seems clear to me that a single f-stop is
not as important as it used to be on film.

Of course the same techniques can be applied to whichever
lens one gets, so the f2.8 maintains its advantage, and it
would be much faster focussing.

So the conclusions I have drawn are:
1. For a digital SLR and a given lens you probably get a
couple or three of f-stops for "free" compared to film, so
make a 2-to-3 stop mental adjustment on lens considerations.
2. Lenses are much better value for money if you're using them on a DSLR.
Attached Images
 
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2005, 10:44 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

TC's are generally not recommended for short lenses <200mm.

And if you want something in the 28-75 F2.8 range take a look at the Tamron. 1/3 the cost of the equivalent Canon L lens. The Tamron is an excellent piece of glass but does not have USM. For going Walkabout it gives you a 45mm-120mm equivalent.


PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2005, 11:12 AM   #14
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
When one considers the price and (more significantly for me) the weight difference between the 70-200 f4 L and the 70-200 f2.8 it seems clear to me that a single f-stop is not as important as it used to be on film.
While the difference between film and digital is quite visible, IMO the weight difference between f/2.8 and f/4 is not as clear

1. I agree on the faster focus (especially on dimmer light)
2. How about the better 'Bokeh'?
3. ... and what about the TeleConverters?
Remember a 2x TC is not quite a bugaboo as it used to be on film either: Take for example the obligatory darkening of corners when this device is inserted, is now cropped by the 'digital' cameras, while only the center portion of the lens is effective proved to be quite adequate like in the images that I posted :?

Which has more poundage then - a 70-200 f/2.8 and when needed a 2x teleconverter or a 70-200 f/4 with the need for an extra lens @ 400mm since you might lose the AF with a TC?
... a lens/teleconverter combination get better as a lens is stopped down so again here the avantage of the faster lens still hold with an f/2.8


-> I did just that - the 120-300 f/2.8 EX is quite hefty, but then I don't need to lug around the weight of another 600 f/5.6!
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/168829
NHL 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 4:11 AM.