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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 7, 2005, 12:30 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 13
Default

I am going to California Speedway and am going to be taking some images. I just got a 20D with the 17-85 IS USM. I like the camera and the lens seems pretty good to me so far. I am not that knowledable with camera and am trying to learn quick.

I do have considerable photoshop talents and have found that I have an "eye"(Let's hold that ego in check Alan):G. I think that 95% of good photography is being able to "see" the shot. Like in that movie, I "see things". Anyway, the compositions are pretty good and then I paint them in photoshop and turn em into art.

So... here's the story, I want a telephoto lens so I can get some action shots at the track. I want to pan and get the old blurred background, with the spinning wheels, you've seen em a thousand times, eh? I want the too but want to paint them when I'm done.

I have been thinking about the Canon DO 70-300 IS USM, yada yada. Pretty expensive lens but I figure it would complement the camera and the weight and size factor are very attractive to me. However, I don't want to sacrafice too much quality insamuch as I sell my "werks" and want to provide the best product that I can within reason. This lens is way over what I want to spend but I don't want to regret not getting what I should have.

I have read a bit about the Sigma lens. There seems to be a war around here about who is better.

There seems to be some that like the Sigma APO II and I guess you can't beat that price fer gawds sake. Someone PLEASE tell my why I should be spending a grand more for the Canon.:?

Here is one of my werks so you can see what I do.




Attached Images
 
mnmblu is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 7, 2005, 3:33 PM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,541
Default

mnmblu wrote:
Quote:
... Someone PLEASE tell my why I should be spending a grand more for the Canon.:?
Three reasons actually:
1. USM - faster & quieter focusing
2. IS - Image Stabilization
3. DO - Optic


All other Canon in this 70-300 range are sub-average as compared to the <$200 Sigma APO II
... but then there's also an excellent and faster Sigma 100-300 f/4 EX (and even a faster still 120-300 f/2.8 EX) :idea:
NHL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2005, 5:00 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 13
Default

Thanks NHL.

I realize those are the obvious advantages and that is why I am condidering that lens for that kind ofmoney. But... Is the extra grand worth those features? Would I be better served spending my money on something else that would provide me the quality I am looking for? Is there anything else that would serve my purposes? How bout that Sigma with their version of the USM?

And... another question. Won't the Canon hold it's value better than the Sigma?

On Ebay, I saw a perfect condition usedCanon DO go for $50 less than I can get one new. Would a Sigma hold that kind of value?



Thanks.

AG

Here is another I will offer up for critique. I may be sorry I did.



Attached Images
 
mnmblu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2005, 8:31 PM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,541
Default

Can you even find a Sigma 100-300 f/4 EX used? They are always out of stock @ B&H... Almost a perfect score here:
http://www.photographyreview.com/PRD_85165_3128crx.aspx

There seem to be a lot of regular EF 70-300 that do not hold their value on E-bay though!


BTW this is what I use, but I don't think you'll appreciate its price (nor its weight): :?
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...c.php?id=30682
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...c.php?id=32296

NHL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2005, 9:46 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 13
Default

Thanks again NHL.

So... if it were you making the choice between the two lens' you would pick the Sigma over the Canon DO? The 2.8 would just be too much and weigh too much fo me. the size and weight is a big deal for me, I am lazy and the more convenient the better!

Now... based on knowing that, what would you do?



Thanks,

Anyone else can jump in with an opinion. I think I know that L guy will say L LENS ONLY. :-)
mnmblu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2005, 10:29 PM   #6
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,541
Default

mnmblu wrote:
Quote:
... the size and weight is a big deal for me, I am lazy and the more convenient the better!
Well you should go for the DO then

The 100-300 f/4 although heavier is still quite flexible though since it's can also double as a 420mm with a 1.4x TC @ f/5.6, and still pretty sharp... As to the L I think you're probably refering to the 100-400mm IS
NHL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 7, 2005, 11:02 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 13
Default

I have been reading about the HMS you mentioned. Seems like it's getting some nice reviews.

But... 8.5 inches long and 3 lbs!! I dunno but that seems like a lot of haulin around. I am tempted ... Could save a buck and I do want quality. Would like to avoid visits to the orthopedic surgeon for work related injuries due to Sigmatosis though.

Do you think that the DO would perform as well as the Sig? If I can get as good a result with the DO, I would pay the diff for the convenience. So... would I be giving up any performance with the DO and where would I notice it most? I have read about problems with backlighting and bokeh? Is this anything that I should be worried about or is it just critics being to critical?

Again, this is in comparison to the100-300mm F/4 EX IF HSM APO. Whatkinda bag do you get for that submarine anyway, a tent?:-)


mnmblu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 8, 2005, 5:16 AM   #8
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,541
Default

mnmblu wrote:
Quote:
But... 8.5 inches long and 3 lbs!! I dunno but that seems like a lot of haulin around. I am tempted ... Could save a buck and I do want quality. Would like to avoid visits to the orthopedic surgeon for work related injuries due to Sigmatosis though.
Remember you're comparing apples and oranges here - The Sigma is faster by 1-stop and by default it has to be larger and heavier since the aperture is a ratio of the focal lenght over a lens effective opening - Check out the EF 300 f/4 equivalent and you'll see that it's really more in line here. May be 5.6 vs 4 may not looks much but it's effectively double the light!!!
Also check out the weight of others EF 70-300 or the Sigma 70-300 APO II (which everyone raves about for only $200) their size and weight at f/5.6 is much less and more in line with the DO (with some even lighter) as well.

As to the lenght it has it plus and minuses - The Sigma has internal zooming and focusing (similar to most 70-200) which means its lenght stay relatively constant and well balanced throughout its operation range while most compact zooms 'trombone' in and out to the required focal lenght - theses designs shift weight toward the end of the lens and tend to s_uck dust in the barrel very much like a bicycle pump by the vacuum they created...








Quote:
So... would I be giving up any performance with the DO and where would I notice it most? I have read about problems with backlighting and bokeh?
It has a 'different' bokeh, but this could be good effect too: :idea:
http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/70-300do_2/


-> I don't think you can go wrong with either lens... if you really like the weight saving and IS go for it - If you want more reach and save some $ then the Sigma is also an excellent alternate :G

NHL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 8, 2005, 8:23 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
LBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 661
Default

Quote:
Anyone else can jump in with an opinion. I think I know that L guy will say L LENS ONLY. :-)
hahaha, Yip well if anything I'm consistent. Really I had thought recently there was not a lot of backing for the canon lenses so I thought I would, but the joke was lost.

Anyway have learned lesson and an not going there unless ....... provoked :-).

Anyway the advice you have been given so far is as good as you'll get.

Your work is excellent. The first shot is superb, more so than the second which is more obviously "processed " in photo-shop. I know its not easy but if you could motion blur the static wheel of the red car or patch in another it would feel better. Just my thoughts on that one. I would be interested to know many shots you used on that first image. ?


LBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 8, 2005, 10:18 AM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 13
Default

Thanks guys, this has been very good advice and has helped me narrow down my choices... to the original three :-):G

Man this is a tough one. I started leaning towards the Sigma last night and the comment about twice the light almost locked in my decision. Then.......... you mentioned the $200 sigma, "everyone is raving about". Oh my gawd, is this the way to go and really just save a bundle to spend on others lens' or maybe add to my mod fund for the Porsche. I need a good coil-over suspension too.:O

I hate these decisions.

Lboy, thanks! The first shot is just one image... in a parking lot. The second image I wanted to remain static with just the background car in motion. All my werks are heavily processed... not trying to hide that fact, just want it to look appealing not necessarily real, ya know?



Here is another






Attached Images
 
mnmblu 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 7:04 AM.