For an aftermarket 70-200mm 2.8, stick with the Sigma line of lenses.
[Sticky] Digital Camera FAQ
224,279 Views |
3079 Replies |
Last: 11 yr ago by Ag CPA
thanks gs.
quote:liked to needed new shorts....
That would scare the crap out of me.
Dave- always welcome to use my lens till you get one in. Drop me a line if you need it. I second the sigma btw. The tamron is nice but the sigma is a better lens all around.
[This message has been edited by Ag_of_08 (edited 3/18/2009 8:58p).]
10 Year Anniversary is today, which means that I ordered my lens!
Sigma 70-200 and filter.
Now, I get to wait about a week!
Excited, to say the least!
Sigma 70-200 and filter.
Now, I get to wait about a week!
Excited, to say the least!
I ran by B&H yesterday to take a look at the Tokina 11-16mm. The guy helping me said it is easily the best "bang for the buck" as far as ultra-wides go. He also claimed Tokina is going to discontinue the lens because it's too expensive to manufacture.
I'm not sure if that was just a sales pitch, but I would tend to believe him. Just thought I'd pass along the info for anybody thinking about that lens.
I'm not sure if that was just a sales pitch, but I would tend to believe him. Just thought I'd pass along the info for anybody thinking about that lens.
The manufacturers are very tight lipped about what they tell retailers. BH may get more notice than others, but generally, the big companies dont disclose much outside of their press releases.
quote:I love mine, and I tend to believe him. There was a waiting list when I bought mine.
I ran by B&H yesterday to take a look at the Tokina 11-16mm. The guy helping me said it is easily the best "bang for the buck" as far as ultra-wides go.
I was reading something from Scott Kelby about calibrating your computer monitor. Is there a cheap way to do this?
Check out Sypder Monitor Calibration.
My Sigma arrived!
I took about 5 pics with it and that is about all the time I have had!
I took about 5 pics with it and that is about all the time I have had!
I'm thinking about getting more serious with digital photography. Other than websites, are there any books or magazines worth reading that provide lots of good/different tips? Is there one that is a must have/read? Pretty pictures are nice but content is better though it's gotta be good for an amateur.
Most of the magazines I really like are British Magazines at Borders for like $15.
I also get Photoshop User, Rangefinder, NewsPhotographer, Pro Photographer, but generally dont have the time to read them. Those come free with various memberships. (NAPP, NPPA, PPA)
As far as books, it really depends on the focus.
Check out Joe McNally's The Moment it Clicks for general/inspirational, but it is not a how to manual at all.
Joe McNally's The Hot Shoe Diaries is the best for small flash technique.
Thomson Digital Photography has a nice series in different areas.
I also get Photoshop User, Rangefinder, NewsPhotographer, Pro Photographer, but generally dont have the time to read them. Those come free with various memberships. (NAPP, NPPA, PPA)
As far as books, it really depends on the focus.
Check out Joe McNally's The Moment it Clicks for general/inspirational, but it is not a how to manual at all.
Joe McNally's The Hot Shoe Diaries is the best for small flash technique.
Thomson Digital Photography has a nice series in different areas.
The Digital Photography Book volumes 1 & 2 by Scott Kelby have some great tips in them on how to shoot certain subjects and situations, like landscapes, panoramas, weddings, flowers, portraits, etc. I just bought a set with Volume 1 & 2 off of Amazon.
What I like about them is the sections are so quick and easy, that you can take them with you and scan them just before you shoot if you need a refresher. They are very non-technical.
What I like about them is the sections are so quick and easy, that you can take them with you and scan them just before you shoot if you need a refresher. They are very non-technical.
Pretty much anything by Scott Kelby is going to be money.
Thanks! The Kelby books sound like that is something worth getting. I'll look into that.
As for the magazines listed by GS, they seem a little too hardcore for me.
Don't laugh but sitting in the dr's office, I thumbed through a copy of Popular Photography and thought it was pretty good. Not hard to understand, some good looking photos, not expensive. I'm sure you pro's would think that is junk but any recommendations along those lines?
As for the magazines listed by GS, they seem a little too hardcore for me.
Don't laugh but sitting in the dr's office, I thumbed through a copy of Popular Photography and thought it was pretty good. Not hard to understand, some good looking photos, not expensive. I'm sure you pro's would think that is junk but any recommendations along those lines?
American Photo comes out 6/year and is pretty good, but I dont think many of those magazines are going to teach you much, and definitely not as much as a Kelby book.
Kelby's books are great. He writes it like he is out with you shooting and you aren't sure what to do. Very easy to read and great tips overall. I recommend them for anyone getting started.
+1 for the Kelby books. I have The Digital Photography Book (1 & 2) and his Lightroom 2 book.
I also really got a lot out of quite a few books by Bryan Peterson. I would suggest starting out with Understanding Exposure & Understanding Shutter Speed. John Shaw also has some great, very detailed books but they're somewhat dated (film based, no digital).
I also really got a lot out of quite a few books by Bryan Peterson. I would suggest starting out with Understanding Exposure & Understanding Shutter Speed. John Shaw also has some great, very detailed books but they're somewhat dated (film based, no digital).
All -
I am looking to add a good walk around lens to my bag. I have a Nikon D70s and an 80-200 f2.8. I have been using it for sports - ice hockey, soccer and baseball but I want to start using this body instead of the pns for everything else. What do you think of this -
Nikon - 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S DX?
Thanks.
I am looking to add a good walk around lens to my bag. I have a Nikon D70s and an 80-200 f2.8. I have been using it for sports - ice hockey, soccer and baseball but I want to start using this body instead of the pns for everything else. What do you think of this -
Nikon - 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S DX?
Thanks.
By rule, lenses with that wide range of zoom generally suck.
How much do you want to spend on the lens.
A lot of people like the 18-200 VR walk around lens, but it is soft and slow.
As always, the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 is a fabulous lens for the money.
The 24-120 Nikon lens is a step up from the 18-135.
I you have the money, the 24-70 2.8 is obviously great. So is the 17-55 2.8.
How much do you want to spend on the lens.
A lot of people like the 18-200 VR walk around lens, but it is soft and slow.
As always, the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 is a fabulous lens for the money.
The 24-120 Nikon lens is a step up from the 18-135.
I you have the money, the 24-70 2.8 is obviously great. So is the 17-55 2.8.
Having used the 28-75mm f/2.8 on both a crop body and now a full frame, I'd suggest something wider for a walk around lens for the D70s. Having a decently wide end is great now, and 28mm on a crop just doesn't cut it. My Tammy rarely comes off now, unless I'm doing some specific shooting.
[This message has been edited by ItsRainingBBQ (edited 4/6/2009 10:36a).]
[This message has been edited by ItsRainingBBQ (edited 4/6/2009 10:36a).]
I'm gonna have to disagree. It is all about the person and their shooting styles. For some people it wont be wide enough, some people it wont be long enough.
As a rule, lenses with along zoom ranges like the 18-200, 18-85, 18-135, etc are all 1. soft and 2 slow. I've seen good things about shorter zoom wide angles like the 17-55 and obviously the 17-40L and 16-35L are great, but I consider those wide angle lenses and not walk around. For a walk around, most people want the 20-100ish area covered, and in that range, the best value lens is easily the 28-75mm 2.8 Tamron. I think my favorite lens in that area would be the 24-105mm F/4L IS , but it will run you over $800.
As a rule, lenses with along zoom ranges like the 18-200, 18-85, 18-135, etc are all 1. soft and 2 slow. I've seen good things about shorter zoom wide angles like the 17-55 and obviously the 17-40L and 16-35L are great, but I consider those wide angle lenses and not walk around. For a walk around, most people want the 20-100ish area covered, and in that range, the best value lens is easily the 28-75mm 2.8 Tamron. I think my favorite lens in that area would be the 24-105mm F/4L IS , but it will run you over $800.
I just picked up the tamron 28-75 a couple weeks ago, and I'm loving it. It's replacing a Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM in my bag, and the range fits well.
Edit: This is on an Xsi. I've never shot full frame, so I guess I can't really compare with what I'm 'missing' on the wide end. The only wider lens I have is the kit lens, and that stays in a drawer at home.
[This message has been edited by Karrde (edited 4/6/2009 7:07p).]
Edit: This is on an Xsi. I've never shot full frame, so I guess I can't really compare with what I'm 'missing' on the wide end. The only wider lens I have is the kit lens, and that stays in a drawer at home.
[This message has been edited by Karrde (edited 4/6/2009 7:07p).]
I wouldn't call the 18-135 a soft lens. I know several people who shoot with them and do not have issues with it being soft in the least. It's really one of nikons nicer sub 600$ lenses. I know quite a few people locally who carry them and love them, some of them are quite good hobbyists/ low level paid shooters. It is what it is, but it's not a bad lens in the least. Nikon has done a really nice job in there mid range super-range lenses(except the 18-105 on the d90.....that is the biggest POS....). That's actually one of there few selling points to a "big point and shoot" type person to me, they have a couple of multi-purpose lenses that are worth the while.
[This message has been edited by Ag_of_08 (edited 4/6/2009 7:09p).]
[This message has been edited by Ag_of_08 (edited 4/6/2009 7:09p).]
I finally bit the bullet last night... This should be arriving tomorrow morning!
My wife also got me the Canon 10-22 EF-S for my birthday so now I have a decent setup:
XSi w/ Grip
10-22 f3.5 - 5.6
24-105 f4 IS
50 f1.8
Now its time to start saving up for the 70-200 2.8 IS.
Thanks GS and others for all the help!
My wife also got me the Canon 10-22 EF-S for my birthday so now I have a decent setup:
XSi w/ Grip
10-22 f3.5 - 5.6
24-105 f4 IS
50 f1.8
Now its time to start saving up for the 70-200 2.8 IS.
Thanks GS and others for all the help!
Awesome. You have a better setup than I started out with in the digital age.
Originally, I had a 10D, kit lens, 70-300 POS, then got a 50mm 1.8. Then over the course of a year, got a Tamron 28-75, a Tokina 70-200mm 2.8 (which had all kinds of CA and focused slowly), a Tokina 100mm 2.8 macro, which I never used, then my Sigma 70-200 2.8 and my 300mm 2.8 once I started getting some business.
Somewhere, I still have those kit lenses and the macro. I sold the Tokina 70-200 2.8 for more than I paid for it.
Enjoy it and shoot a lot.
Some point in the near future, I am starting a blog for beginner and intermediate photography tips/lessons. I will let you know when that comes about.
Originally, I had a 10D, kit lens, 70-300 POS, then got a 50mm 1.8. Then over the course of a year, got a Tamron 28-75, a Tokina 70-200mm 2.8 (which had all kinds of CA and focused slowly), a Tokina 100mm 2.8 macro, which I never used, then my Sigma 70-200 2.8 and my 300mm 2.8 once I started getting some business.
Somewhere, I still have those kit lenses and the macro. I sold the Tokina 70-200 2.8 for more than I paid for it.
Enjoy it and shoot a lot.
Some point in the near future, I am starting a blog for beginner and intermediate photography tips/lessons. I will let you know when that comes about.
haha
GS, which 70-300 POS are you referring too? I just got the latest one with IS & USM and I'm loving it.
I also have the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro on the way, I'm so pumped...
I also have the Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro on the way, I'm so pumped...
Not that one. The older one that is not IS or USM. I got it back when I shot film when the EOS system first came out.
Although, in general, I am not a fan of lenses that have a long zoom range and slow apertures, but that is more personal preference more than anything.
Although, in general, I am not a fan of lenses that have a long zoom range and slow apertures, but that is more personal preference more than anything.
no more ritz camera for me HAHA!I'll come around to help but that is it, I'm done and good riddance!
I have a Vivitar 60-300mm for my Canon T50 film SLR. THAT thing is a POS. Of course, I haven't shot with my T50 for about 17 years or so.
I got that sucker for my 15th birthday in December of 1983. Now, I'm showing my age.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Canon_T50.jpg
Have to just link to it because apparently Wikipedia doesn't allow hot-linking of images.
[This message has been edited by Rex Racer (edited 4/10/2009 12:31p).]
I got that sucker for my 15th birthday in December of 1983. Now, I'm showing my age.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Canon_T50.jpg
Have to just link to it because apparently Wikipedia doesn't allow hot-linking of images.
[This message has been edited by Rex Racer (edited 4/10/2009 12:31p).]
just to test what you said about wikipedia
Well, it didn't allow that particular link that I tried.
But holy crap, that's a huge T50!!!!!!!!!
[This message has been edited by Rex Racer (edited 4/10/2009 10:19p).]
But holy crap, that's a huge T50!!!!!!!!!
[This message has been edited by Rex Racer (edited 4/10/2009 10:19p).]
I use the texags greasemonkey with firefox, and it does an auto resize on my monitor. I am assuming it is one of those giant pics for you... sorry.
2962px × 1975px to be exact.
Featured Stories
See All
9:36
6h ago
2.6k
Sims shoves as A&M pitching dominates entire series vs. Penn
by Richard Zane
14:45
1d ago
6.1k
A&M holds off Oklahoma to secure resume-boosting win in Norman
by Olin Buchanan
16:01
6h ago
888
12:41
6h ago
1.5k
5 Thoughts: Texas A&M 75, Oklahoma 71
by Luke Evangelist
Wrecking Crew 21
Photo Gallery: No. 5 Aggies claim top-10 Lone Star Showdown
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
2