| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/14/2008 11:54:26 AM · #26 |
Lens Reviews
Check out some reviews
This site has tested lenses.. when you click on a lens you can see 3 evaluations "Contruction Quality, Image Quality, and Overall Rating"
on a 1-10 scale. I think these evaluations on this site are pretty acurate as to what you are getting. Also at the bottom you can read
what other users think of the lenses.
|
|
|
|
08/14/2008 11:58:03 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by plims:
For example i want a certain tree or face to be in focus, so i zoom in, focus, then zoom out. I just think with fixed focus it'd be harder to ensure pin sharp focus. Maybe i've got a parculiar method :) |
First off let me say that the black L glass is just as good as the white L glass. Anyway from what you said above, I think you are confusing Focus and Focal Length, the 50mm F1.8 is a fixed Focal Length lens or better know as a "Prime" lens. The "Focus" is not fixed and the auto focus (AF) works quite well with that one on the 40D. Heres a tip though, if you are focusing on someones face try getting used to using individual focus points rather than all of them at once as you will have a better chance of the camera focusing on what you want rather than what the camera thinks you are focusing on.
Ive rented a lot of the L lenses and personally own one, the 17-40 F4L and have to say that is one kick a** lens and prob one of the top performers Canon makes as far as sharpness goes, as well I have the 50mm F1.8. As far as a zoom goes Ive rented the 70-200 F4L IS, 70-200 F2.8 IS and non IS and many will prob argue this point with me and maybe I got lucky with a good copy but my 70-300 F4-5.6 IS is pretty much just as sharp as the 3 L zoom lenses I mentioned which explains why some call it Canon's hidden L lens.
Lastly a good place for lens reviews can be found at //www.photozone.de
-dave
|
|
|
|
08/14/2008 12:00:11 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by plims:
ye sorry i must've got somthing confused, lol. Basically a non zoom lens. I have always used this method of zooming into my subject and focusing (using the focal ring) to ensure perfect focus, and zooming out for a wider angle. It dosn't change the area of focus. |
Your making an incorrect assumption here that focus does not change however the focus DOES change, depending on the lense and the conditions as well as the amount of zoom you are using. When using a zoom you should fist adjust the zoom to the appropriate amount for the composition that you want, then you should adjust the focus at the selected zoom. With a MF prime you will set your body in the desired position to achieve the composition then focus the shot. I would try this new technique as you may find your images start coming out a LOT better on the lenses you already own. The fancy lenses will not cure poor technique plain and simple.
I think another valuable lesson would be to obtain an old total Manual lense and to make yourself go out and use it. Force yourself to learn what an in focus image looks like on your camera, force yourself to learn the proper aperture selection for your camera and the conditions. Use the Manual setting on your camera for a few weeks and see how much better your photos become as you start to gain some real experience, then when you go back to your AF lenses you will know when the camera has it right and when its wrong and what to do to correct it. You will find yourself making fewer and MUCH better shots.
Message edited by author 2008-08-14 12:04:20.
|
|
|
|
08/14/2008 12:02:22 PM · #29 |
| Thanks both of you. Think we got a little off subject with the zooming and focusing, but you guys have helped alot. cheers :) |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 12:10:25 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by jhomrighaus:
Originally posted by plims:
ye sorry i must've got somthing confused, lol. Basically a non zoom lens. I have always used this method of zooming into my subject and focusing (using the focal ring) to ensure perfect focus, and zooming out for a wider angle. It dosn't change the area of focus. |
Your making an incorrect assumption here that focus does not change however the focus DOES change, depending on the lense and the conditions as well as the amount of zoom you are using. When using a zoom you should fist adjust the zoom to the appropriate amount for the composition that you want, then you should adjust the focus at the selected zoom. With a MF prime you will set your body in the desired position to achieve the composition then focus the shot. I would try this new technique as you may find your images start coming out a LOT better on the lenses you already own. The fancy lenses will not cure poor technique plain and simple.
I think another valuable lesson would be to obtain an old total Manual lense and to make yourself go out and use it. Force yourself to learn what an in focus image looks like on your camera, force yourself to learn the proper aperture selection for your camera and the conditions. Use the Manual setting on your camera for a few weeks and see how much better your photos become as you start to gain some real experience, then when you go back to your AF lenses you will know when the camera has it right and when its wrong and what to do to correct it. You will find yourself making fewer and MUCH better shots. |
I ONLY work manual (on everything) i hate any auto settings unless i have no choice. I shot on a film pentax years ago. With the 400D's poor default lens the 18-55 zoom ive never had an issue with getting things in focus or zooming in to ensure focus then zooming out.
The reason im looking got a new lens is although i have captures some excellent shots with my current lens i want to move up the next step of clarity and quality.
Message edited by author 2008-08-14 12:11:08. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 12:11:05 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by plims:
Hi, ive been studying photography for 1 year now but has been a passion of mine for much longer. I'm looking to invest in my first lens (im sick of the boring canon 18-55) and when I was working with a photographer not so long ago and he said "some people are focusing too much on the camera build for quality rather than a good quality lens" and went on to say how it's the type of glass you should look at. When it comes to image quality, what should i look at/for in a lens? Is there a certain type or order to the glass which makes it alot richer in image quality compared to other? Appreciate any feedback or discussion. Cheers! |
As a follow up to your original comments you might consider picking up a 55-200(or the cannon equivalent)Kit lense, they are inexpensive and for me I find myself using the 55 and over lense lengths much more than the shorts. it will open whole new vistas in your photography. Additionaly I would seriously look at a "normal Prime" in the 50 to 60 mm range otherwise known as a portrait lense. Look for the fastest one you can find and AF should not be a consideration. I have an old Minolta Rokkor 58mm f1.2 that I converted for use on my d40. The lense is over 30 years old and will simply destroy any lense on the market today for the quality of the images and the Bokeh(drools). There are numerous 1.* lenses available for cannon as well that are very high quality and not very expensive on ebay. These lenses are short enough for manual focus work and will really change the way you look at the world.
|
|
|
|
08/14/2008 12:12:47 PM · #32 |
plims, I think they just misunderstood what you were saying. I use the same technique quite frequently with my zoom lenses. I zoom in as tight as I can, focus on my main element, then zoom out and compose. I also find that it helps get the focus where I want it to be.
As for lenses, I can vouch for both the 100mm 1.8 and the 50mm 1.8. I've got both lenses and they are incredibly sharp. I don't have any issues at all with the fixed focal length. It took a little getting used to when I first bought them, since my first lenses were both zooms, but the trade off in clarity is well worth it. You just have to use a different technique when you compose (see my signature below LOL). Since you have the 18-55mm now, I'd reccomend the 100mm prime. That would give you a lense with a little more length on it and open up you possibilities a bit. Since you are into macro I'd also suggest that you get the 50mm and a macro coupler ring at some point. It's fairly inexpensive and I've caught some amazing shots with my 50mm reverse mounted on top of my 100mm.
Good luck on finding the best lens for your bag.
Jack
|
|
|
|
08/14/2008 12:13:28 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by plims:
Originally posted by jhomrighaus:
Originally posted by plims:
ye sorry i must've got somthing confused, lol. Basically a non zoom lens. I have always used this method of zooming into my subject and focusing (using the focal ring) to ensure perfect focus, and zooming out for a wider angle. It dosn't change the area of focus. |
Your making an incorrect assumption here that focus does not change however the focus DOES change, depending on the lense and the conditions as well as the amount of zoom you are using. When using a zoom you should fist adjust the zoom to the appropriate amount for the composition that you want, then you should adjust the focus at the selected zoom. With a MF prime you will set your body in the desired position to achieve the composition then focus the shot. I would try this new technique as you may find your images start coming out a LOT better on the lenses you already own. The fancy lenses will not cure poor technique plain and simple.
I think another valuable lesson would be to obtain an old total Manual lense and to make yourself go out and use it. Force yourself to learn what an in focus image looks like on your camera, force yourself to learn the proper aperture selection for your camera and the conditions. Use the Manual setting on your camera for a few weeks and see how much better your photos become as you start to gain some real experience, then when you go back to your AF lenses you will know when the camera has it right and when its wrong and what to do to correct it. You will find yourself making fewer and MUCH better shots. |
I ONLY work manual (on everything) i hate any auto settings unless i have no choice. I shot on a film pentax years ago. With the 400D's poor default lens the 18-55 zoom ive never had an issue with getting things in focus or zooming in to ensure focus then zooming out.
The reason im looking got a new lens is although i have captures some excellent shots with my current lens i want to move up the next step of clarity and quality. |
For me I find that stepping back into the world of 35mm lenses provides a whole other world of quality and distinctiveness that cannot be matched by most lenses available today. Modern lenses just cant produce the same luminance and glow that the older lenses can(not with out a number of tradeoffs of course)
|
|
|
|
08/14/2008 12:25:09 PM · #34 |
Jaxter: glad i'm not alone on that :) Thanks for the input.
Can't seem to upload anything on here atm so if anyone is interested in viewing some samples visit //flickr.com/photos/27939956@N07/ :) |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 01:04:13 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by JDubsgirl:
make sure you get a lens thats whiteish rather then black. its higher quality. |
This aint true. A 24-104 F4 L(black) is just as quality as a 70-200 F4 L(white)
|
|
|
|
08/14/2008 01:09:51 PM · #36 |
The white designation is for L-lenses over 200mm in focal length not their quality. All L-lenses under 200mm are black. I can think of a number of black L-lenses: 85mm, 24-105, 180mm macro, 16-35, 17-40, 50mm.
Message edited by author 2008-08-14 13:10:16. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 01:34:34 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
Originally posted by JDubsgirl:
make sure you get a lens thats whiteish rather then black. its higher quality. |
This aint true. A 24-104 F4 L(black) is just as quality as a 70-200 F4 L(white) |
well i guess i learned something today:) |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 01:37:33 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The white designation is for L-lenses over 200mm in focal length not their quality. All L-lenses under 200mm are black. I can think of a number of black L-lenses: 85mm, 24-105, 180mm macro, 16-35, 17-40, 50mm. |
Surely thats from 200mm? the 70-200 is not over 200mm
|
|
|
|
08/14/2008 01:51:49 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The white designation is for L-lenses over 200mm in focal length not their quality. All L-lenses under 200mm are black. I can think of a number of black L-lenses: 85mm, 24-105, 180mm macro, 16-35, 17-40, 50mm. |
Surely thats from 200mm? the 70-200 is not over 200mm
|
Also the 200mm 2.8 prime is black.
Message edited by author 2008-08-14 13:52:33. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 01:53:04 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The white designation is for L-lenses over 200mm in focal length not their quality. All L-lenses under 200mm are black. I can think of a number of black L-lenses: 85mm, 24-105, 180mm macro, 16-35, 17-40, 50mm. |
Surely thats from 200mm? the 70-200 is not over 200mm
|
It's not the 70-199.. it's the 70-200 =)
|
|
|
|
08/14/2008 01:59:28 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The white designation is for L-lenses over 200mm in focal length not their quality. All L-lenses under 200mm are black. I can think of a number of black L-lenses: 85mm, 24-105, 180mm macro, 16-35, 17-40, 50mm. |
In fact, Canon's best L-lenses (135L and 35L, and yes, I know, tastes differ) are black.
With respect to all types of anal modes: the 200/2.0 IS is white, whereas the 200/2.8 is black :P
As to manual focus: don't, or at least: why should you? The vewfinder of a digital SLR is not as accurate as the one on your old film SLR, whereas todays lenses are pretty terrific in their autofocus capability. Why make things hard on yourself? Let the camera do what it is good at (focussing), while you can devote your attention to more important things, such as composition and timing.
|
|
|
|
08/14/2008 02:05:12 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by jhomrighaus:
For me I find that stepping back into the world of 35mm lenses provides a whole other world of quality and distinctiveness that cannot be matched by most lenses available today. Modern lenses just cant produce the same luminance and glow that the older lenses can(not with out a number of tradeoffs of course) |
I so totally disagree. I own 6 'old' lenses and not a single one even comes close to the quality that my 'digital' lenses provide. Apart from that, at least two of my current 'digital' lenses were developed for film cameras, but still used in the digital age.
ETA: 'old' lenses are however a cheap and easy way to explore new focal lengths,
Message edited by author 2008-08-14 14:05:48.
|
|
|
|
08/14/2008 02:12:11 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The white designation is for L-lenses over 200mm in focal length not their quality. All L-lenses under 200mm are black. I can think of a number of black L-lenses: 85mm, 24-105, 180mm macro, 16-35, 17-40, 50mm. |
Surely thats from 200mm? the 70-200 is not over 200mm
|
Also the 200mm 2.8 prime is black. |
It's not an L lens. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 03:08:59 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The white designation is for L-lenses over 200mm in focal length not their quality. All L-lenses under 200mm are black. I can think of a number of black L-lenses: 85mm, 24-105, 180mm macro, 16-35, 17-40, 50mm. |
Surely thats from 200mm? the 70-200 is not over 200mm
|
Also the 200mm 2.8 prime is black. |
It's not an L lens. |
The 200mm f2.8 is indeed an L lens. As are the 135mm f2, the 85mm f1.2, the 50mm f1.2, the 35 f1.4, the 24mm f1.4 and the 14mm f 2.8. All are black with a red ring around the barrel.
Message edited by author 2008-08-14 15:11:41. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 03:53:47 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by Camabs:
Originally posted by jhomrighaus:
For me I find that stepping back into the world of 35mm lenses provides a whole other world of quality and distinctiveness that cannot be matched by most lenses available today. Modern lenses just cant produce the same luminance and glow that the older lenses can(not with out a number of tradeoffs of course) |
I so totally disagree. I own 6 'old' lenses and not a single one even comes close to the quality that my 'digital' lenses provide. Apart from that, at least two of my current 'digital' lenses were developed for film cameras, but still used in the digital age.
ETA: 'old' lenses are however a cheap and easy way to explore new focal lengths, |
What are you meaning when you say quality, From the perspective of contrast and resolution, modern lenses win hands down, when it comes to character, glow, luminance or whatever you want to call it, many modern lenses are somewhat cold(at least many that most of us can afford to buy) Older glass has a warmer, softer feel about the pictures and for portraits and people this is noticeable. A $400 300 2.8 tamron will blow away any x-300 modern lense you can buy for the same money, the equivilent lense today would run you several thousand dollars. Also many of the normal human affordable lenses made today are not very fast compared to their older counterparts by 1 to 2 stops.
We are not talking about a comparison to Pro level gear here but dollars for dollars you can buy some incredible old lenses for a fraction of what a mediocre new lense will cost you.
|
|
|
|
08/14/2008 04:28:48 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
The 200mm f2.8 is indeed an L lens. As are the 135mm f2, the 85mm f1.2, the 50mm f1.2, the 35 f1.4, the 24mm f1.4 and the 14mm f 2.8. All are black with a red ring around the barrel. |
My bad. The DPC Lens listing does not carry an "L" designation. The Canon site does say it is an L-lens although they also call it the 200mm f/2.8L II. Don't know if that matters. Bottom line is it is black. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 07:20:36 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
The 200mm f2.8 is indeed an L lens. As are the 135mm f2, the 85mm f1.2, the 50mm f1.2, the 35 f1.4, the 24mm f1.4 and the 14mm f 2.8. All are black with a red ring around the barrel. |
My bad. The DPC Lens listing does not carry an "L" designation. The Canon site does say it is an L-lens although they also call it the 200mm f/2.8L II. Don't know if that matters. Bottom line is it is black. |
The II just means that Canon has updated the lens somewhat, but not totally overhauled it. For the 85mm f1.2, they improved the focusing speed. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/10/2025 07:14:06 PM EDT.
