Photogs favorite lens and lens quiver

[hhski]

I usually head out with a pocketable camera Canon SD 550. It is good for stills and limited action. i will take tyo the slopes with my 30D I am thinking my 24-105 will be the lens to use a good compromise between reach and wide angle. Also while you're posting what fstop do you like to start with, auto focus mode, camera cover if its snowing, camera bag front carry or backpack and any other advice. I @30+ days and carrying a slr with lens is a pain since I normally dont carry a big pack and I think the learning curve could be long. thanks and I for one would like to see a photo forum

[Viva]

with my 30D I am thinking my 24-105 will be the lens to use a good compromise between reach and wide angle.

On a 30D, that's not much wide angle. ALso, the 24-105 is kinda heavy. Maybe lesser quality (i.e., lighter) zoomy with 17-18 to 70-100 focal length would work best while you're learning.

thanks and I for one would like to see a photo forum

Once you're ready to leave the JONG! forum TGR may be willing to consider your request.

[Baconzoo]

JONG!

http://www.wheelsandwax.com/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl

[4-TEEF]

I usually head out with a pocketable camera Canon SD 550. It is good for stills and limited action. i will take tyo the slopes with my 30D I am thinking my 24-105 will be the lens to use a good compromise between reach and wide angle. Also while you're posting what fstop do you like to start with, auto focus mode, camera cover if its snowing, camera bag front carry or backpack and any other advice. I @30+ days and carrying a slr with lens is a pain since I normally dont carry a big pack and I think the learning curve could be long. thanks and I for one would like to see a photo forum

24mm on a 30D isn't really "wide" but if you're looking for a 1 lens kit I think that the only other lens in that range is the 17-85s. I use a 24-85 and while I like the weight, size and low price the image quality is not as good as some more expensive lenses. I also have a 70-200/f4 and that is a VERY nice and useful lens.

Use the focus that works for the shot. I switch between "one shot" and "predictive" all the time.

Use the aperture that best suits the shot. If you're too lazy to do that then just set it at f8 and "be there."

I use a Lowepro Slingshot 100 to carry my 20D, 70-200, 24-85 and a 50mm prime. It wears as a backpack but opens like a chest pack. It is my favorite camera carrier by far.

[Lane Meyer]

I usually head out with a pocketable camera Canon SD 550. It is good for stills and limited action. i will take tyo the slopes with my 30D I am thinking my 24-105 will be the lens to use a good compromise between reach and wide angle. Also while you're posting what fstop do you like to start with, auto focus mode, camera cover if its snowing, camera bag front carry or backpack and any other advice. I @30+ days and carrying a slr with lens is a pain since I normally dont carry a big pack and I think the learning curve could be long. thanks and I for one would like to see a photo forum

I ususally head out with one of these.



It has a nice f-stop. if it's snowing, I ususally put it in this:


If you wanna get a bigger bag, I suggest this:


Happy shooting!

[summit]

My primary quivers:

My old favorite setup when I wasn't doing any action shooting with my Elan II:
Canon 20mm 2.8 USM (FOR SALE), 28mm 2.8, 50mm 1.8 I, 100mm 2.0 USM (FOR SALE)

When I started doing action with my EOS 3 PB-E2 (FOR SALE):
15mm 2.8 EX fisheye (FOR SALE), 17-35mm 2.8 L USM (for sale), 50mm 1.4 USM, 70-200mm 2.8 L USM

-------------------------------------------------------------

Now with my 20D it will be:
10-22mm 3.5-4.5 USM, 24-105mm 4.0 L USM IS (to buy i think), 50mm 1.4 USM

My other lenses:
17-35mm 2.8 L USM (for sale), 50mm 1.8 I, 70-200mm 2.8 L USM, 105mm 2.8 EX Macro, 2x EX TC

ETA I might add a 24-85 to fill the middle when carrying the 70-200... but then I just found out that Canon released a 17-55mm EFS IS USM 2.8!!! (that is a 28-90mm 2.8 IS USM equivelent) It is that or the 24-105 (38-170mm 4.0 IS L USM)

[4-TEEF]

My primary quivers:
Now with my 20D it will be:
10-22mm 3.5-4.5 USM, 24-105mm 4.0 L USM IS (to buy), 50mm 1.4 USM

How do you like that 10-22? I've been thinking hard about that one... 50/1.4 is such a great lens on the 20D. Everyone should have one!

[grizzle6]

If you're serious about your photography, the bottom line should be image quality--aka clarity, sharpness, color, contrast, etc. That 24-105 is money as a one-lens wonder, but I think you'll find that 105mm just won't cut it on the long end. However--if you just want to sport the chest pack with one lens, I think that would be the best way to go. Regardless--I wouldn't skimp on lenses for weight or price--good glass brings home the bacon.

As far as shooting action, aperture is less important than shutter speed (most of the time).Anything less than tack sharp should hit your recycle bin, and you need quick shutter speeds for stopping action. Use the Shutter priority mode to dial your preferred shutter speed, the camera will take care of the aperture--just make sure you meter for the highlights and not the trees (or even your athletes dark jacket)or you'll get a whiter white room than you want.

Regarding focus--I've gotten the best results from pre-focusing. While the autofocus is legit, sometimes I still don't trust it--if you use it, make sure you have a specific focus zone selected--and put that zone on your subject the whole time--don't let the camera pick the focusing zone, or you might get a tree in focus, and your mom out of focus. If your skier can't pull off the one-turn wonder, or you want to just let him ski and shoot him naturally, I'd still pre-focus on one or two turns and concentrate on composition for those one or two turns. It's pretty tough to get all-around pleasing results otherwise--the best can do it--and that's why they're the best.

[summit]

Grizzle gives some great advice!

How do you like that 10-22? I've been thinking hard about that one... 50/1.4 is such a great lens on the 20D. Everyone should have one!

10-22MM
I immediatly missed my 17-35 when I went from 35 to digital. I was worried about the performance of the variable aperture lens that the 10-22 is. The image quality is stellar though I definately miss the 2.8 solid. What choice do we have though?

50MM
I love 50 range lenses. My very first lens was a 55mm f/1.2 on a Canon FTb QL fully manual camera. The 50mm f/1.8 mk I is a true gem of a lens. The 50mm f/1.4 USM rocks the hosue as well, just wish it had rUSM instead of mUSM.

I miss wide aperture 50mm range lenses on the 20D. My choices are to get a 28mm 1.8 USM (45mm), a 35mm 1.4 L USM (56mm and retarded expensive) or choke and buy the poor performing 30mm 1.4 HSM from the poor performing Sigma.

The 50mm on the 20D makes a wonderfull and small 80mm lens.

15MM FISHEYE
I miss a 180deg full frame fisheye but nobody makes them for the 1.6 crop in the canon mount yet.

NEW CANON EFS 17-55 2.8 L USM IS

Canon just released this lens! It's the equivelent to a 27-90mm.
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...&modelid=12955

$1150
It may not say L but it is.

Nikon released an identically specced lens for $1200 (with the Nikon crop it is a 25-83mm)

Now my decision is harder... do I replace the 17-35mm 2.8 with the 17-55 2.8 IS or the 24-105 4.0 IS!??!?!?!

[truth]

I'll 2nd grizz on the 24-105. I have it and love it. Great lens for street shooting and as a one lens solution for travel but not enough reach for action. 70-200 or bigger unless all you want are landscape shots or the action you shoot is on groomers.

Summit, get the 25-105. It's an amazing lens. Check out the smugmug link in my sig to see a ton of images from that glass.

This was shot a few days ago indoors, handhled under flourescent lighting.



And from yesterday...





Sharp with sweet bokeh. It's my favorite lens.

[Storm11]

I currently have a 3 lens quiver, a 10-22 (yes I love it), a 28-135 and a 70-300. I like all of them, though I wish I had the funding to step up into the L category of lenses. I'd have to say that I use the 28-135 the least, though it is a great one lens set up when I need it.

This is the bag I use when I go skiing... light, durable, fairly water protectant:

http://kgear.com/c/

[pechelman]

The sigma 12-24 is a pretty sweet lense as well

[hhski]

If you're serious about your photography, the bottom line should be image quality--aka clarity, sharpness, color, contrast, etc. That 24-105 is money as a one-lens wonder, but I think you'll find that 105mm just won't cut it on the long end. However--if you just want to sport the chest pack with one lens, I think that would be the best way to go. Regardless--I wouldn't skimp on lenses for weight or price--good glass brings home the bacon.

As far as shooting action, aperture is less important than shutter speed (most of the time).Anything less than tack sharp should hit your recycle bin, and you need quick shutter speeds for stopping action. Use the Shutter priority mode to dial your preferred shutter speed, the camera will take care of the aperture--just make sure you meter for the highlights and not the trees (or even your athletes dark jacket)or you'll get a whiter white room than you want.

Regarding focus--I've gotten the best results from pre-focusing. While the autofocus is legit, sometimes I still don't trust it--if you use it, make sure you have a specific focus zone selected--and put that zone on your subject the whole time--don't let the camera pick the focusing zone, or you might get a tree in focus, and your mom out of focus. If your skier can't pull off the one-turn wonder, or you want to just let him ski and shoot him naturally, I'd still pre-focus on one or two turns and concentrate on composition for those one or two turns. It's pretty tough to get all-around pleasing results otherwise--the best can do it--and that's why they're the best.

Depth of field wont be an issue using that technique. my thought of selecting aperture would be to give more wiggle room for AF error skier speed etc. Would you use center focal point or multi point Again I ask as I have no real experience on the slopes. On the soccer field lacross I do and I use either Shutter or aperture priority depending on the amount of light.
the impression I get is that a longer lens is better for the slopes . Would you go out with a prime such as the 135 f2L with a 1.4x tc or is a zoom better . The thought of skiing with the 70-200 its HEAVY. The 24-105 seems so much lighter. Thanks

[Viva]

The thought of skiing with the 70-200 its HEAVY. The 24-105 seems so much lighter. Thanks

The 70-200 f4 is actually pretty light, lighter than the 24-105. I would think that for day-time skiing pix, f4 ought to be okie-dokie.

[summit]

Remember the 30D/20D/350D/300D lose their cross AF sensor at anything short of f/2.8 and the linear sensors go after 5.6.

Man the EOS 3/1v had the most awesome AF system (2.8 11 cross 34 linear, 4 1 cross 44 linear, 5.6 45 linear, 8 1 linear)...

70-200 L 4 is a fine lens for day action, but you won't get the cross AF speed/precision.

A 70-200 2.8 has mightily shallow DoF at 2.8 on a 1.6 cropping DSLR. I originally purchased my 70-200 as a versatile portrait lens to compliment the 100 2.

However, you cannot throw a 2X TC on a 70-200 L 4 and maintain autofocus.

A 2x on my 70-200 2.8 makes it a 140-400 5.6: a 225-640mm f/5.6 after the 1.6 sensor crop It makes me wish it was the IS version.


Here is the 17-55 IS 2.8 review
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...5_28/index.htm
Here is the 24-105 IS 2.8 review
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...4_is/index.htm

It seems that the 17-55 has vignetting and mild distortion while being redonkulously sharp.
It seems the 24-105 has some chromatic abberation issues and gets a little soft on the long end with slightly better build.
The cost and weight are roughly equal. Neither of these have single axis IS for action panning like the 100-400 IS and the 70-200 IS! :-( :-( WEAK! (oh well, in ski photography one almost always pans on both axis).

The decision is so tough. a 38-170mm (24-105) is not so usefull on its own, though it compliments the 16-35 (10-22) well, it overlaps my 112-320 (70-200). As a single lens, the 28-90 (17-55) is almost more usefull despite the shorter zoom range.

3.25X is the longest range I've ever heard of in a f/2.8 zoom.

[grizzle6]

Depth of field wont be an issue using that technique. my thought of selecting aperture would be to give more wiggle room for AF error skier speed etc. Would you use center focal point or multi point Again I ask as I have no real experience on the slopes. On the soccer field lacross I do and I use either Shutter or aperture priority depending on the amount of light.
the impression I get is that a longer lens is better for the slopes . Would you go out with a prime such as the 135 f2L with a 1.4x tc or is a zoom better . The thought of skiing with the 70-200 its HEAVY. The 24-105 seems so much lighter. Thanks

You're definitely thinking right on the wiggle room--nice to have a little reassurance. Bottom line is I would rarely go below 1/1000 sec. for shutter speed (or 1/750 at the very least). Whatever aperture allows you to remain at or above that should be fine. Also--if at all possible, try to refrain from using either extreme on the aperture (small or large) as your lens will lose sharpness at wide open or super shut.

No need to use the center focal point per se. Pick a focus zone according to your composition understanding that that is where your subject will be. I imagine you understand how to manually choose your focus zone--I probably use this feature more than any other feature on the camera--I'm always picking the zone.

Screw the 135 with the extender--you lose a stop on the aperture end, it will likely compromise clarity somewhat, and it will just be a little more clumsy overall. Yeah--the 70-200 is heavy, but it's so worth it. That lens is worth every penny I paid for it. If you can afford it, buy the 2.8 IS--super pricey, but you'll own that lens for the rest of your life--and it will produce unbelievably crisp images. Lastly--don't skimp on a UV filter (or polarizer, or any other filter for that matter). No sense spending mad cash on a lens and throwing a piece of shit filter right in front of it.

[comish]

Grizz,
Nice site dude. Some sweet shots on there.

Now back to the camera geek talk.








of which I'm actively reading so keep it going.

[snowsprite]

Are we getting closer to the camera that does it all yet?

I'm have a gripe w/ carrying anything big or bulky when I'm skiing or traveling.

I'd like to take movies and have nice zoom capabilities.

Right now I have a 2 yr old Casio Exilim, which the good thing about it is I don't feel guilty dropping it in the snow and small streams all the time!

Sprite

[couloirman]

i really like my EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM for my everyday walk around lens, and its relatively cheap at $500. it might be a little slow for some people out there but it packs some bang for the buck

[hhski]

Not pics grizzle and summit I guess Ill go out with the 70-200. I was thinking Soli after a storm no rush or panic for another run there plenty of time to shoot .

[midget]

28-80 2.8 Tamron isn't that bad, esp for the money....around $350-$400.
70-200 2.8L the lens you will probalby use the most shooting skiing, albeit over $1k. The 70-200 f4L is a cheap way to go and still get quality optics.

However, you cannot throw a 2X TC on a 70-200 L 4 and maintain autofocus.

Actually you can if you have and it works just great with a 1D, and I've heard the 30d's AF is significantly better then the crap they put on the 20d so probalby would work just great on a 30d too. That being said, I wouldn't put more than a 1.6 converter on.
I'd really go with a 3 lens combo but it just depends on what you want to spend. Just add a 17-40 or something in that range with a 28-70 and a 70-200.

[summit]

Actually you can if you have and it works just great with a 1D, and I've heard the 30d's AF is significantly better then the crap they put on the 20d so probalby would work just great on a 30d too. That being said, I wouldn't put more than a 1.6 converter on.
I'd really go with a 3 lens combo but it just depends on what you want to spend. Just add a 17-40 or something in that range with a 28-70 and a 70-200.

I used to use f/8 TC'd lenses on my EOS 3 no problem. The newer 1D series has basically the same AF/AE sensor suite as the 3 and the 1v.

I was referring specifically to the prosumer DSLRs that lose their precision cross sensor at 2.8 and their linear sensors at 5.6.

The 20D and 30D have identical AF/AE sensor suites. The 30D has some tweaked AF algorithms from what I have heard but I have yet to hear anyone rave about improvement. It still loses the ability to AF with lenses slower than f/5.6 and you lose the precision cross sensor after f/2.8. You lose your cross sensor entirely after f/4 iirc.

You get no AF on a 30D with a 2X on anything but an f/2.8 or faster.

[mtbakerskier]

At least 90 % of all of the ski images that you see in the various ski mags are all shot with the 70-200 F2.8 The other 8% are probally shot with a 17-35 F2.8 or simular range for the digis.

If your serious about your images, than dont waste your money with the "all in one" lenses, or lenses that have a variable maximum aperature.

Personally I wouldnt waste my cash on any lenses that are not at least F2.8 all the way threw. Trust me the only people that say you dont need a 2.8 lenses are people that have nevered used one.

My Recomendaations:

Canon 70-200 F2.8 L (dont get the IS version)
Sigma 70-200 F 2.8 EX (current verson only)
Canon 16-35 or 17-35L or its digi equivlent (well there realy isnt one yet)

BTW If I was you I would WAIT untill after PHOTOKINA to make any camera gear purchases this year!!!!!!

[truth]

I used to use f/8 TC'd lenses on my EOS 3 no problem. The newer 1D series has basically the same AF/AE sensor suite as the 3 and the 1v.

I was referring specifically to the prosumer DSLRs that lose their precision cross sensor at 2.8 and their linear sensors at 5.6.

The 20D and 30D have identical AF/AE sensor suites. The 30D has some tweaked AF algorithms from what I have heard but I have yet to hear anyone rave about improvement. It still loses the ability to AF with lenses slower than f/5.6 and you lose the precision cross sensor after f/2.8. You lose your cross sensor entirely after f/4 iirc.

You get no AF on a 30D with a 2X on anything but an f/2.8 or faster.

Summit, when and why would you buy a lens higher than an f/4? That makes no sense at all. What a waste of $.

Great glass will improve the pics of any body but even the most expensive body in the market can't improve the pics of shitty glass. I'd rather shoot a digital rebel with L glass than a new 1D with f/5.6 or variable ap lenses.

[midget]

I used to use f/8 TC'd lenses on my EOS 3 no problem. The newer 1D series has basically the same AF/AE sensor suite as the 3 and the 1v.

I was referring specifically to the prosumer DSLRs that lose their precision cross sensor at 2.8 and their linear sensors at 5.6.

The 20D and 30D have identical AF/AE sensor suites. The 30D has some tweaked AF algorithms from what I have heard but I have yet to hear anyone rave about improvement. It still loses the ability to AF with lenses slower than f/5.6 and you lose the precision cross sensor after f/2.8. You lose your cross sensor entirely after f/4 iirc.

You get no AF on a 30D with a 2X on anything but an f/2.8 or faster.

wow, i guess you have it all figured out.