0
DSE

cheap dig w/remote

Recommended Posts

In stills getting sub f2.0 the price goes way up. Then again looking at my skydiving stills I'm usually at about f11 so I'm not about to shell out $1200+ for high end Canon L glass for toying around today. ;)
Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Anyway, in our world



Thought we were talking about our skydiving world in this forum. :S

On the other question, Phree answered it very nicely. Personally I stay around the 8.0 mark with the aperture (when skydiving). If you get much higher the shutter speed goes down too low (IMO)...unless you have a larger ASA (ISO) in which the enlargements come out crappy.

ltdiver

Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Anyway, in our world



Thought we were talking about our skydiving world in this forum. :S



We are. You read something in my post that made you think I didn't understand DOF.
My question was if there is a lens for the XT that can open to 1.4 or even 1.2, or heck, i'd probably be happy with 2.0, so that when I'm *not* skydiving, it would be equally useful. I'd imagine that shooting around f8 gives you a great close to infinity shooting a focal length of around 28mm or so, but if the lens kit is only f3.5 I'd like something more opened up for day to day/field use, or for when I'm on the ground shooting landings.
Should I just shut up and buy the lens kit, and then seek out what lenses are best? At a max of f3.5, I'd imagine the C/A is pretty prevalent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Compared to the video side its not as bad as I thought it would be at a f3.5. Getting less then f2 is very, very expensive and you are typically looking at fixed lens and not zoom. It took me acrually searching it down to find an lens at sub 1.8 (I never knew this one existed) 85mm f/1.2L that lists at $2500 and street is still over $1600

For example the 135mm F2.0 lens is only $1,019.00 and the 16-35mm f2.8L is a cheap $1500. Even the modest 28mm f/2.8 EF Lens is over $225 and the 85mm f/1.8 Lens is $450.

Granted you almost always get what you pay for in glass, but from my talking with a few photographers they seldom have to ever go sub f3.0 and in most those times they are bringing in Flashes, lights or trying to orient the subject to work better.

If you are going SLR its easy to spend more on a single lens then you do on the body to get good glass. I'm still trying to justify some L glass to myself since I'm yet to sell a single picture (other then tandems)
Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
f2.8 is as low as you need to go in the majority of cases. In the canon L glass there is a kind of division between the f4 and the f2.8 glass. If you are doing a lot of low light photography then the f2.8 is obviously preferable, but then you can kind of bodge round this by adding a stop onto your ISO, although you are then risking increased noise.... compromises. In general, the f2.8 lenses tend to be a good 500 dollars more than the f4 versions (check the 70-200 for a good example).

If you do want a very fast but reasonably affordable lens, then this is a good option
http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Fixed_Focal_Length/EF_50mm_f14_USM/index.asp?ComponentID=25524&SourcePageID=26126#1
A lot of people term it "L glass without the L"

One other thing to add is that IS can give you a stop or two extra to play with for hand holding - something like the 17-85 IS is a nice walkaround lens.

For loads of really useful info that is Canon focussed, i subscribe to this forum:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/. They have pretty much got reviews and opinions on virtually every lens available for canon, as well as bodies, rumours of new stuff, etc etc etc. I know there are a couple of other skydiving photographers that post on there as well.

Hope this helps
Never try to eat more than you can lift

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That helps a lot. More than that, it caused me to realize that f2.4 on a .8" sensor is close to the same as 1.2 on a .25 sensor anyway, so I can see why f2.8 is just fine, and will provide an approximate focal length.

Thx for the help! Although I'm a good 500.00 over where I wanted to be, I've got a much nicer camera to work with now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

In stills getting sub f2.0 the price goes way up. Then again looking at my skydiving stills I'm usually at about f11 so I'm not about to shell out $1200+ for high end Canon L glass for toying around today.



Are we forgetting the nifty fifty? The 50mm 1.8 is under $100 and is considered an excellent lens

Another good site besides POTN I used is here. It categorizes most of the Canon lenses in use and gives some good recommendations.
I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0