Lenses thread

Discussion in 'Creative Arts' started by Cozmic_Kid, Apr 2, 2012.

  1. ATTENTION: http/https Bug Fix! Most of us have been experiencing problems staying logged in as we navigate the site. That is simply the result of links varying between http and https, which each require different logons. To resolve we are going to force https starting sometime Wednesday. However, you may have problems accessing FerrariChat until after you log out, clear cookies/browser cache, and log back on. Keep in mind my email is admin@ferrarichat.com if you do have access problems after Wednesday. Thanks!
  1. Cozmic_Kid

    Cozmic_Kid F1 Veteran

    Dec 1, 2005
    7,490
    Denmark
    Full Name:
    B. Frandsen
    So, which lenses are the best to get? Which ones do you have?

    I am looking for a bit of inspiration.

    I really, REALLY want to try out TS as I just love architecture.

    What's the best possible alround prime for Canon?

    Tele?

    Makro??

    I am drooling a bit over the 180mm makro since you obviously get a fair distance to the object. Being close usually scare the object away.

    I am of course also drooling over the 70-200mm f/2.8 from Canon.

    They are pricey here though.

    It does not have to be Canon. Could also be Sigma, Tamron or Tokina for that matter.

    Nikon users are welcome to give input about their cameras and lenses as well. :)
     
  2. 4REphotographer

    4REphotographer F1 Veteran

    Oct 22, 2006
    6,070
    Centreville, VA
    Full Name:
    Chris
    I think one of the most underrated lenses I've ever owned was the Canon 100mm f2. That single $350 lens is my biggest disappointment in switching to Nikon. It's by far the sharpest lens I've ever owned and is tack sharp wide open, I miss it so much. :(

    Damnit, now I'm looking at 5DIIs when I really can't afford to.
     
  3. Pars

    Pars Formula Junior

    Sep 25, 2006
    413
    KY
    Full Name:
    Brian
    I shoot Nikon, but have done a lot of lens research, have owned quite a few lenses and have some friends who shoot Canon, so here is a little of what I have found out.

    Super Wide Angle: Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 is exceptional, it is fast and wide but it doesn't have much zoom, so if you need more range, you will have to look elsewhere.

    Macro: The Canon 100mm F/2.8 L is an amazing piece of glass. It also doubles as a great portrait lens as well. Fairly pricey though. I hear the non L version is still a very nice lens for half the price.

    The best Canon prime is the 85mm F/1.2, though it focuses slowly. I also hear the 135mm F/2 L is a beast of a lens. Non Canon primes, the Sigma 50mm F/1.4 and 85mm F/1.4 are very good. I also enjoy shooting with the Sigma 30mm F/1.4 lens, I don't think its image quality is as good as the others I mentioned.

    The newest Canon 70-200 F/2.8 IS is one of Canon's best lenses period. Same can be said for Nikon's version.

    I have no experience with tilt/shift lens but would love to hear from others because I wouldn't mind learning more about them.

    I shoot mainly with the Nikkor 17-55 F/2.8, Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR 1 & Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 micro lens. I prefer the zooms and those give images about as good as any prime will. I also use a 1.7 x teleconverter which works on both the 70-200 and the the 105mm micro making them effectively a 119mm-340mm F/4.8 and the other a 178.5mm F/4.8 macro lens. I am not sure if the Canon teleconverters work with the Canon macro lenses, but that would be worth looking into.

    What it really boils down to is what you shoot and what tools you need for that. I don't know if you have lens rental places over there, but that is a decent way to try things out as well.
     
  4. Cozmic_Kid

    Cozmic_Kid F1 Veteran

    Dec 1, 2005
    7,490
    Denmark
    Full Name:
    B. Frandsen
    Lots of info. Thanks :D

    We do have lens rental places. I have thought about trying them out :)

    I will try and look into some of those lenses you mentioned.

    I will shoot pretty much anything :D

    Mostly I use my cheap 135mm and my 100-400mm. But when I am in the mood I dig out the 60mm makro. It just require a lot of patience as manual focus is SO much better than auto focus.
     
  5. Pars

    Pars Formula Junior

    Sep 25, 2006
    413
    KY
    Full Name:
    Brian
  6. Cozmic_Kid

    Cozmic_Kid F1 Veteran

    Dec 1, 2005
    7,490
    Denmark
    Full Name:
    B. Frandsen
    Please feel free to do so :)

    I checked up on a couple of pics and prices of those you mentioned. Found an inasnely good pic of a car taken with the Tokina 11-16.

    Then I found an even better pic of a cat taken with the canon 85mm.

    But, damn!!! In DKK it is as much a the big TS I am eyeing. That would mean roughly 48k DKK ($ 8.5k) for he canon 85mm, the TS and the 70-200 f/2.8. OMG!

    Car http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k76/moog177/Bluebeard/ca9cf33a.jpg

    Cat http://rudiphoto.zenfolio.com/img/v0/p881825321.jpg
     
  7. Tired of seeing this ad? Upgrade now
  8. Pars

    Pars Formula Junior

    Sep 25, 2006
    413
    KY
    Full Name:
    Brian
    Those pics are great, I especially like the cat one. That is the problem with photography, it is an expensive hobby.

    The Canon 85mm F/1.2 is pretty expensive, an alternative would be the Sigma 85mm F/1.4. It is not as good as the Canon, but still very respectable and probably costs half as much. Canon also offers an 85mm F/1.8, which I know nothing about. I have the Nikkor 85mm F/1.8 and really like it though. A fast 85mm lens is great for portraits and you can get some great out of focus backgrounds with it.

    You could also try the Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 lens as Blackwood has his review of it in another thread in this forum. It seems to be a winner. A cheaper Canon alternative would be the Canon 70-200 F/4. You lose a stop of light, but I suspect that lens is still a good lens to have.

    One more budget lens that is great to have is the Canon 50mm F/1.8. Typically they are cheap, as far as lenses go, and can take quality pictures in low light. Also, good for portraits. That would be another one to consider.
     
  9. 4REphotographer

    4REphotographer F1 Veteran

    Oct 22, 2006
    6,070
    Centreville, VA
    Full Name:
    Chris
    I was not super impressed with Canon's 85mm f1.8.
     
  10. Cozmic_Kid

    Cozmic_Kid F1 Veteran

    Dec 1, 2005
    7,490
    Denmark
    Full Name:
    B. Frandsen
    I read up on the Canon 85mm 1.2 and 1.8 and they said one should go with the 1.2 or find something different. That was basically what i got from it. The 1.8 was okay, but nowhere near the quality of the other.

    I actually thought about the Sigma thread earlier, and it is also what made me start this thread I guess. I don't want to make any mistakes and buy something I will never us, so I want to be pretty muh 100% certain on what I want before I decide to buy :)
     
  11. Pars

    Pars Formula Junior

    Sep 25, 2006
    413
    KY
    Full Name:
    Brian
    Makes sense to me. Hopefully someone who shoots Canon can give you a little more info on the Canon lenses. Otherwise, hopefully this will give you a good place to start :)
     
  12. Cozmic_Kid

    Cozmic_Kid F1 Veteran

    Dec 1, 2005
    7,490
    Denmark
    Full Name:
    B. Frandsen
  13. 4REphotographer

    4REphotographer F1 Veteran

    Oct 22, 2006
    6,070
    Centreville, VA
    Full Name:
    Chris
    Very true, but the 1.2 carries a $2k price tag vs about $400 for the 1.8. You must think if it's really more than 4x as good. Prices are USD btw.
     
  14. Tired of seeing this ad? Upgrade now
  15. blackwood

    blackwood Formula 3

    Dec 15, 2005
    1,814
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Full Name:
    Marc
    #13 blackwood, Apr 2, 2012
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2012
    My go to walk around for the last 7 years or so has been canon's EF 24-105mm f/4L. Pretty sharp even wide open, not a terrible amount of distortion, pretty fast, good IS. I used it enough that the red ring fell off.

    Since my son was born, I've been using mostly the canon EF 50mm f/1.4. I played with the 1.8 "nifty fifty" and it's a nice lens particularly for the price, but the AF motor wasn't quick enough to keep up with my son's unpredictable movements, and shooting with a wide aperture meant I lost a lot of great expressions to OOF. The 1.4 is generally quick enough, and is pretty damn sharp. Here's a photo I took a few minutes ago:

    I used to use the 17-40 f/4L for static cars, but stopped taking those types of photos and the lens wasn't getting much use (I favored the 24 for the IS, and stitched panos when 24mm wasn't wide enough).

    I also have the 70-300DO IS. Something like f/3.5-5.6, not sure off hand. It's the compact tele zoom. Nice for its portability, great IS, decent sharpness stopped down around 7, but slow AF. Works great as a zoo lens, but not quick enough for real wildlife photography.

    The newest addition (sigma 70-200 alphabet edition) is great. I can't say enough about it, though I've only really used it one time so far.


    I'm in the market for a new wide angle. Probably will take the prime route.
     
  16. 4REphotographer

    4REphotographer F1 Veteran

    Oct 22, 2006
    6,070
    Centreville, VA
    Full Name:
    Chris
    I've always wanted the 24L or even the 28mm 1.8
     
  17. blackwood

    blackwood Formula 3

    Dec 15, 2005
    1,814
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Full Name:
    Marc
    Now that I'm on a full frame, the 17-40 seems like a good choice again. But I love the quality they can get out of primes.

    Here's one from a few minutes ago with the 50mm 1.4.

    http://www.hypercontrast.com/WilliamJosephBlackwood/MostRecent/i-P98XXKR/0/O/MAB-20120402-0776.jpg

    At 2.8 (above), it's probably sharper than the 24-105 (L glass) is at 4 (below).

    http://www.hypercontrast.com/WilliamJosephBlackwood/October-2011/i-rgMdBP9/0/O/MAB-20111025-3292.jpg
     
  18. 4REphotographer

    4REphotographer F1 Veteran

    Oct 22, 2006
    6,070
    Centreville, VA
    Full Name:
    Chris
    I loved the 17-40 but i found it was too wide on ff.
     
  19. agup48

    agup48 Two Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Apr 15, 2006
    26,142
    Phoenix
    Full Name:
    AG
    So am I, I'm going to try to rent one soon.
     
  20. alfas

    alfas Formula Junior

    Sep 17, 2009
    630
    chicago
    no such thing as too wide... wide is fun
     
  21. blackwood

    blackwood Formula 3

    Dec 15, 2005
    1,814
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Full Name:
    Marc
    Haha I was thinking the same thing. As long as distortion is kept under control.
     
  22. alfas

    alfas Formula Junior

    Sep 17, 2009
    630
    chicago
    #20 alfas, Apr 2, 2012
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2012
    distortion is only part of it, you need sharp corners too. ;-)
     
  23. dozzina

    dozzina F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Aug 14, 2005
    4,506
    In a vortex
    Full Name:
    Dave

    Typically the shift function is used in architectural photography to shift the perspective such that the vertical lines do not converge. In the past, performing this with film on a SLR camera required a shift lens. In the digital era we are now in, this perspective shift can be done in post processing, and is much easier than using the lens.

    The other function, tilt, which is often used for landscape shots shifts the focus plane and this effect cannot be accurately replicated in post processing.

    I don't want to discourage you from getting a T/S lens if you want to have one, it's just to give you another option in cracking the perspective issue. They are quite a bit of fun to play with.
     
  24. dozzina

    dozzina F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Aug 14, 2005
    4,506
    In a vortex
    Full Name:
    Dave
    I rather like it. Super fast focus (unlike the 1.2) and very sharp indeed. It's weakness is purple fringing on strongly backlit subjects, though there is now software to fix that.
     
  25. Cozmic_Kid

    Cozmic_Kid F1 Veteran

    Dec 1, 2005
    7,490
    Denmark
    Full Name:
    B. Frandsen
    How do you fix it on post processing? And does it require alot more space around the object you photograph?

    Would be cheaper to do it that way and I could focus on other lenses instead first :)
     
  26. 4REphotographer

    4REphotographer F1 Veteran

    Oct 22, 2006
    6,070
    Centreville, VA
    Full Name:
    Chris
    Yeah, I just found myself toward the 40mm much more than the 17mm.

    The chromatic abrasion was my main issue with it and I wasn't a huge fan of the focal length, it seemed to be either too much or too little.
     
  27. Pars

    Pars Formula Junior

    Sep 25, 2006
    413
    KY
    Full Name:
    Brian
    Adobe lightroom does an excellent job correcting lens distortions, see here:
    http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Lightroom/3.0/Using/WS43660fa5a9ec95a81172e081210db09b94-7feb.html

    Fixing the wide angle, where everything appears tilted in a photograph is easy. Check out this video around the 6:40 mark, it shows how to fix it:
    http://tv.adobe.com/watch/learn-lightroom-3/lens-correction-perspective-correction/
     

Share This Page