Ask me your photography questions!

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
I got my Nikon 80-200mm F/2.8 for $400 used; fast zooms are out there, especially with a lot of people trading them in for VR/IS lenses.

That's not bad at all

But different people have different definitions of fast. f/2.8 is certainly quite good for a zoom, especially something in the 200mm range. For zoom lenses in the normal range, like from 20mm to 80mm, f/2.8 just seems too slow for me, coming from f/1.8 and f/1.4 primes.

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: jpeyton
I got my Nikon 80-200mm F/2.8 for $400 used; fast zooms are out there, especially with a lot of people trading them in for VR/IS lenses.

That's not bad at all

But different people have different definitions of fast. f/2.8 is certainly quite good for a zoom, especially something in the 200mm range. For zoom lenses in the normal range, like from 20mm to 80mm, f/2.8 just seems too slow for me, coming from f/1.8 and f/1.4 primes.

Um, quite good? It's the fastest a zoom is made for either Canon or Nikon systems. Olympus offers an f/2 zoom but due to the differences in format, it is effectively slower.

A lens is considered fast when it's fast compared to lenses of a similar type. This definition doesn't change.

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: jpeyton
I got my Nikon 80-200mm F/2.8 for $400 used; fast zooms are out there, especially with a lot of people trading them in for VR/IS lenses.

That's not bad at all

But different people have different definitions of fast. f/2.8 is certainly quite good for a zoom, especially something in the 200mm range. For zoom lenses in the normal range, like from 20mm to 80mm, f/2.8 just seems too slow for me, coming from f/1.8 and f/1.4 primes.

Um, quite good? It's the fastest a zoom is made for either Canon or Nikon systems. Olympus offers an f/2 zoom but due to the differences in format, it is effectively slower.

A lens is considered fast when it's fast compared to lenses of a similar type. This definition doesn't change.

I think he means it's more cost effective for him on his current primes. It's hard to bet a 90 buck 1.8. My 28-75 which covers 50mm, but three times the price. And yes...it needs to be compared with fast walk around zooms. But he stated that he doesn't mind footwork. He preferes sneakers over zooms.

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: jpeyton
I got my Nikon 80-200mm F/2.8 for $400 used; fast zooms are out there, especially with a lot of people trading them in for VR/IS lenses.

That's not bad at all

But different people have different definitions of fast. f/2.8 is certainly quite good for a zoom, especially something in the 200mm range. For zoom lenses in the normal range, like from 20mm to 80mm, f/2.8 just seems too slow for me, coming from f/1.8 and f/1.4 primes.

Um, quite good? It's the fastest a zoom is made for either Canon or Nikon systems. Olympus offers an f/2 zoom but due to the differences in format, it is effectively slower.

A lens is considered fast when it's fast compared to lenses of a similar type. This definition doesn't change.

I think he means it's more cost effective for him on his current primes. It's hard to bet a 90 buck 1.8. My 28-75 which covers 50mm, but three times the price. And yes...it needs to be compared with fast walk around zooms. But he stated that he doesn't mind footwork. He preferes sneakers over zooms.

I understand. I'm just saying that the Canon 400 f/2.8, for instance, is regarded by the whole world as a fast lens-- and that's an f/2.8 prime.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: foghorn67
He preferes sneakers over zooms.

Sneakers are great for moving forward and back; up and down, that's another story.

 

[ultimatebob]

Hmm... I didn't really mean to hijack Fuzzy's help thread. Sorry about that.

I have a 50mm 1.8 for my Rebel XT, though, and I've found that it's not very useful when trying to take pictures of "moving targets" like children or pets. I guess that my sneaker zoom technique needs some work.

 

[Fritzo]

When photographing our lovemaking sessions, we get a lot of motion blur. Also ass pimples seem to show up really well. Can you suggest a lens that will soften butt acne but still allow for lots of movement?

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: ultimatebob
Hmm... I didn't really mean to hijack Fuzzy's help thread. Sorry about that.

I have a 50mm 1.8 for my Rebel XT, though, and I've found that it's not very useful when trying to take pictures of "moving targets" like children or pets. I guess that my sneaker zoom technique needs some work.

Not only does that lens not have USM, but it uses an old-style stepper motor. So even if the speed of AF isn't too slow for the situation, you may miss focus wide open if you get stuck between two of the steps. That's why I don't really consider the 50mm f/1.8 a fast lens unless you manually focus wide open. Sometimes, you get what you pay for.

 

[timswim78]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
OMG what have I done

Other camera people feel free to help da' bunny

I have a Canon EOS Rebel 2000 (film) with 2 lenses. One lens is the standard Canon 28-55 (or something like that). The other lens is a Tamron 70-300 tele-macro.

If I buy a Digital Rebel XT, will I be able to use these lenses with it?


THANKS!

 

[yllus]

Okay, here are some Rebel XT specific questions.

1. What light metering mode do you typically use? I'm thinking partial metering is going to be the best for the most part, since evaluative and center-weighted averaging will both dull the pictures if there's a significant contrast between the light on the subject and what surrounds it.

2. How often are you completely in manual mode, as opposed to shutter/aperture priority?

 

[ultimatebob]

Originally posted by: timswim78

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
OMG what have I done

Other camera people feel free to help da' bunny

I have a Canon EOS Rebel 2000 (film) with 2 lenses. One lens is the standard Canon 28-55 (or something like that). The other lens is a Tamron 70-300 tele-macro.

If I buy a Digital Rebel XT, will I be able to use these lenses with it?


THANKS!

Yep! Those are both EF lenses, which work with the Rebel XT. Just keep in mind that those lenses will be magnified by a factor of 1.6X because of the smaller sensor on the Rebel XT. That's good for your telephoto lens, but not so good for the wide angle on your 28-55.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: 6000SUX

Originally posted by: ultimatebob
Hmm... I didn't really mean to hijack Fuzzy's help thread. Sorry about that.

I have a 50mm 1.8 for my Rebel XT, though, and I've found that it's not very useful when trying to take pictures of "moving targets" like children or pets. I guess that my sneaker zoom technique needs some work.

Not only does that lens not have USM, but it uses an old-style stepper motor. So even if the speed of AF isn't too slow for the situation, you may miss focus wide open if you get stuck between two of the steps. That's why I don't really consider the 50mm f/1.8 a fast lens unless you manually focus wide open. Sometimes, you get what you pay for.

Yup yup, moving targets are rough for the 50mm f/1.8 because of its slow focusing motor. The Rebel XT's autofocus isn't exactly the top of its class either. For moving objects I think a zoom may be best, lest you run around everywhere trying to frame things.

When I mentioned zooming with my feet, I meant with static objects like scenery. Obviously this doesn't work that great for things like moving animals.

 

[DurocShark]

What is the amount of chromatic aberration in the main lens of a Yashica-Mat EM?

 

[DurocShark]

Originally posted by: Fritzo
When photographing our lovemaking sessions, we get a lot of motion blur. Also ass pimples seem to show up really well. Can you suggest a lens that will soften butt acne but still allow for lots of movement?

Most manufacturers sell what's called a "soft focus" lens. Great for blemish removal in the camera instead of after processing.

As for motion blur, shens.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: yllus
Okay, here are some Rebel XT specific questions.

1. What light metering mode do you typically use? I'm thinking partial metering is going to be the best for the most part, since evaluative and center-weighted averaging will both dull the pictures if there's a significant contrast between the light on the subject and what surrounds it.

2. How often are you completely in manual mode, as opposed to shutter/aperture priority?

1. I just use the regular evaluative metering. To tell you the truth, I'm not quite sure what the pros vs. cons of the different metering modes are. Could someone chime in on this?

2. I hardly ever shoot in full manual unless I'm using an external flash, or when I'm taking a picture of the moon. All other times I'm in aperture priority but I make constant use of the exposure compensation bar.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: DurocShark
What is the amount of chromatic aberration in the main lens of a Yashica-Mat EM?

I dunno

I never got into medium format.

 

[ultimatebob]

Originally posted by: DurocShark

Originally posted by: Fritzo
When photographing our lovemaking sessions, we get a lot of motion blur. Also ass pimples seem to show up really well. Can you suggest a lens that will soften butt acne but still allow for lots of movement?

Most manufacturers sell what's called a "soft focus" lens. Great for blemish removal in the camera instead of after processing.

As for motion blur, shens.

Yeah, that sounded like more of a post-processing problem than a lens problem. Unfortunately, we're going to need some sample photos before we can give any specific advice.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: ultimatebob

Originally posted by: timswim78

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
OMG what have I done

Other camera people feel free to help da' bunny

I have a Canon EOS Rebel 2000 (film) with 2 lenses. One lens is the standard Canon 28-55 (or something like that). The other lens is a Tamron 70-300 tele-macro.

If I buy a Digital Rebel XT, will I be able to use these lenses with it?

THANKS!

Yep! Those are both EF lenses, which work with the Rebel XT. Just keep in mind that those lenses will be magnified by a factor of 1.6X because of the smaller sensor on the Rebel XT. That's good for your telephoto lens, but not so good for the wide angle on your 28-55.

Correct!

In addition, and this has absolutely nothing to do with your question ( ) you'll notice a HUGE difference between the viewfinder size and brightness in your Rebel 2000 if you move to the XT... the XT's is just a pain to look through

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: ultimatebob

Originally posted by: DurocShark

Originally posted by: Fritzo
When photographing our lovemaking sessions, we get a lot of motion blur. Also ass pimples seem to show up really well. Can you suggest a lens that will soften butt acne but still allow for lots of movement?

Most manufacturers sell what's called a "soft focus" lens. Great for blemish removal in the camera instead of after processing.

As for motion blur, shens.

Yeah, that sounded like more of a post-processing problem than a lens problem. Unfortunately, we're going to need some sample photos before we can give any specific advice.

From our very own episodic: http://pixelessence.net/content/view/14/35/

 

[virtuamike]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: yllus
Okay, here are some Rebel XT specific questions.

1. What light metering mode do you typically use? I'm thinking partial metering is going to be the best for the most part, since evaluative and center-weighted averaging will both dull the pictures if there's a significant contrast between the light on the subject and what surrounds it.

2. How often are you completely in manual mode, as opposed to shutter/aperture priority?

1. I just use the regular evaluative metering. To tell you the truth, I'm not quite sure what the pros vs. cons of the different metering modes are. Could someone chime in on this?

2. I hardly ever shoot in full manual unless I'm using an external flash, or when I'm taking a picture of the moon. All other times I'm in aperture priority but I make constant use of the exposure compensation bar.

Metering modes depend on your subject. For landscapes and the like where exposure of the entire scene is your goal, then go with evaluative. If you do portrait or macro work where exposure of your subject matters more than exposure of your background, then go with center weighted and lock your exposure on your subject prior to composing and focusing. And if you're a zone nut, then obviously go with spot metering.

Me, I'm manual mode almost all the time. Sometimes I'll use aperture priority for event coverage, but it's rare.

 

[virtuamike]

Originally posted by: ultimatebob
Why don't you have a wide-angle to zoom "all purpose" lens like a 17-85 in your collection? Doesn't changing lenses all the time get annoying?

It only gets annoying if you change lenses all the time (which for me is mainly event coverage). If I can afford to take the time to choose my lenses (often the case), then I go with my primes.

 

[virtuamike]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

Originally posted by: ultimatebob
Why don't you have a wide-angle to zoom "all purpose" lens like a 17-85 in your collection? Doesn't changing lenses all the time get annoying?

By now, I can change lenses with my eyes closed due to all the practice I get.

The reasons why I don't have a lens such as this is:

1. I'm poor.
2. Primes are a lot brighter (larger aperture, lower f-number) than zooms, which means I can use them handheld in lower light conditions that zooms.
3. Pleasant depth of field at larger apertures.

I personally don't feel like I'm limited by primes. I'm perfectly happy zooming in with my feet and I enjoy the light weight of primes, as well as their sharpness.

I will eventually get a zoom like the above, but having used primes for so long, I actually feel no hurry to do so.

Prime users FTW!
I exclusively use my 16mm F/2.8 fisheye, 35mm F/2, 50mm F/1.4, and 135mm F/2.5
If I want supercloseup, I bring my 300mm F/4
Quality over quantity!

Nikon 17-55. Quality and quantity can coexist

It's the only zoom I have. 35/1.4 AIS, 50/1.4 AF, 55/3.5 AIS macro, 85/1.4 AF, 105/1.8 AIS, and 180/2.8 AF. Anything else I need, I rent.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

bump omg

 

[DurocShark]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny

I use a Canon Rebel XT with a Sigma 30mm f/1.4, Canon 50mm f/1.8 mkII, Tamron 180mm, Sigma 50-500mm, and Sigma 10-20mm

That's in your sig. Let me recommend a much better lens (though a shorter zoom range) than the 50-500. The Sigma (also sold by Ritz rebadged as a Quantaray) 70-300 DL runs around $100. And it's an outstanding lens. Even sharper than the APO version that costs $250-300. Very slightly more chromatic aberration, but unnoticable except for extremely high contrast images. Like taking a photo of stadium lights. It worked perfectly for the surfing photography I used to do, including sunrise stuff. Back when I used a Minolta 7xi and 500si. (I'm all manual focus now, though.)

EDIT: Clarified "better".

 

[ElFenix]

how is the sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6?

would it be a good pair to a tamron 28-75 f/2.8?