|
Is the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L any good or are you better off getting a fixed length lens? I kayak fish and can get pretty close to a lot of birds/animals and it seems like having a range of zooms to chose from would be kind of nice.
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 15:50 |
|
|
fknlo posted:Is the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L any good or are you better off getting a fixed length lens? I kayak fish and can get pretty close to a lot of birds/animals and it seems like having a range of zooms to chose from would be kind of nice. From a pure "whats the biggest telephoto I can get for not a stupid amount of money" standpoint, the 400 5.6 is cheaper and performs a bit better, but you lose that versatility of zoom range. Other than that, the 100-400 is well regarded and popular. Some don't care for the push/pull mechanism, and it's also a bit dated, but the IQ and AF are solid enough.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 22:15
|
|
|
fknlo posted:Is the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L any good or are you better off getting a fixed length lens? I kayak fish and can get pretty close to a lot of birds/animals and it seems like having a range of zooms to chose from would be kind of nice. Slight IQ benefit to the prime, offset entirely by it's lack of IS, which the Zoom has.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 22:48
|
|
|
I absolutely love my 100-400L except for when I'm hiking a couple hours back. At that point I really wish I had the 400L prime instead. It is a lot lighter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 22:53
|
|
|
100-400L kicks rear end.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 22:57
|
|
|
I loved my 100-400 until I got to try a 500mm f4. Now it's like a marriage where we have to stay together for the kids.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 23:03
|
|
|
rcman50166 posted:I can't afford anything larger than that 400. But I've tried a Nikon 600mm f/2.8 and some sort of 1000-2000mm lens that I can't seem to find the name for but here's a picture of my buddy using it. Not if you continue to be friends and buy a erephus fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Dec 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
OH GOD I BOUGHT IT WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME  . It was sitting there, right on ebay. It was mocking me. "Newly Listed!", it said. "Free Shipping," it said. Opening it sealed the deal. "This item is getting 8 views per hour". I knew it wouldn't last long. BUY. $950. What have I done? I'm going to have to sell my 40D and the 2X extender to begin to afford it. I am now the owner of a Canon 400mm f5.6L telephoto.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2013 04:24
|
|
|
rcman50166 posted:OH GOD I BOUGHT IT WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME Well, thanks for ensuring the 400/5.6L Mk II IS will be released next week. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2013 18:49
|
|
|
knowing Canon, that thing would be $3000-$4000 anyways.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2013 18:57
|
|
|
rcman50166 posted:knowing Canon, that thing would be $3000-$4000 anyways. Announced 2013, released 2016. (And start saving for the 500/4, once the supertele bug's got you there's no going back. )
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
Seeing how the 24-105mm/4 from Sigma is apparently making GBS threads all over Canon's, and expecting the same for the rumored 24-70mm/2(.8), I'd wait for anything longer from them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
How is it "making GBS threads" over the 24-105L? I can see that its indeed better at the wide end but slightly worse at the long end. Also, I can't find the Sigma for less than $850 while the Canon can be had for less than $700 at times. It may be better but its nowhere near the levels of ownage that the 35mm ART is over the 35mmL. Sure, people moving into full frame with no FF lenses and therefore have to get one can spring for the Sigma but if you've already got a 24-105L don't bother lifting a finger.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2013 21:52
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Seeing how the 24-105mm/4 from Sigma is apparently making GBS threads all over Canon's, and expecting the same for the rumored 24-70mm/2(.8), I'd wait for anything longer from them. With an 82mm thread, it automatically loses for me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2013 22:56
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:How is it "making GBS threads" over the 24-105L? I can see that its indeed better at the wide end but slightly worse at the long end. Also, I can't find the Sigma for less than $850 while the Canon can be had for less than $700 at times. It may be better but its nowhere near the levels of ownage that the 35mm ART is over the 35mmL. Sure, people moving into full frame with no FF lenses and therefore have to get one can spring for the Sigma but if you've already got a 24-105L don't bother lifting a finger. The Sig 24-105 isn't that awesome of a deal for Canonhavers for all the reasons you listed. It is pretty awesome if you are Nikon or Sony user, though. In other Sigma news, it looks like they might be releasing a 135 f/2 Art sometime next year and announcing a line of fast, long Sport telephotos - 300 & 400 f/2.8 and 500 & 600 f/4 are expected. Should be very exciting!
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 06:27
|
|
|
A 24 or 28 art would be nice too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 13:59
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:In other Sigma news, it looks like they might be releasing a 135 f/2 Art sometime next year and announcing a line of fast, long Sport telephotos - 300 & 400 f/2.8 and 500 & 600 f/4 are expected. Should be very exciting!
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 14:18
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:How is it "making GBS threads" over the 24-105L? I can see that its indeed better at the wide end but slightly worse at the long end. Also, I can't find the Sigma for less than $850 while the Canon can be had for less than $700 at times. It may be better but its nowhere near the levels of ownage that the 35mm ART is over the 35mmL. Sure, people moving into full frame with no FF lenses and therefore have to get one can spring for the Sigma but if you've already got a 24-105L don't bother lifting a finger. Good job comparing new prices for the sigma with used prices for the canon. Nothing like throwing apples at oranges, nope.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 19:29
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Good job comparing new prices for the sigma with used prices for the canon. Nothing like throwing apples at oranges, nope.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 19:33
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Good job comparing new prices for the sigma with used prices for the canon. Nothing like throwing apples at oranges, nope. Canon 24-105 new, from Buydig 2 weeks ago for $694. Never mind when they popped up as official Canon refurbs for even less.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:The Sig 24-105 isn't that awesome of a deal for Canonhavers for all the reasons you listed. It is pretty awesome if you are Nikon or Sony user, though. In other Sigma news, it looks like they might be releasing a 135 f/2 Art sometime next year and announcing a line of fast, long Sport telephotos - 300 & 400 f/2.8 and 500 & 600 f/4 are expected. Should be very exciting! I'm overjoyed with my 35 1.4 Art. It's stupidly sharp wide open, focuses really well, and looks awesome on full frame. Plus it was like $500 less than the Canon 35 1.4.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 02:59
|
|
|
dakana posted:I'm overjoyed with my 35 1.4 Art. It's stupidly sharp wide open, focuses really well, and looks awesome on full frame. Plus it was like $500 less than the Canon 35 1.4. Plus the Canon 35mm 1.4 L II that's probably coming next year will be stupidly expensive, though match its image quality.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 05:33
|
|
|
My sigma 35 is so good I rarely take it off. Wide open Av mode with Auto ISO is like easy mode for awesome photographs of kids around the house.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 09:02
|
|
|
I have a canon 35mm 1.4 L. Is the sigma really that much better? What are the pros and cons of the sigma?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 10:43
|
|
|
somnambulist posted:I have a canon 35mm 1.4 L. Is the sigma really that much better? What are the pros and cons of the sigma? The Sigma is better than the 35L in that it's sharper, has less fringing, cheaper, and Sigma has an adapter that lets you fix any potential focus issues yourself (meaning you can safely purchase a used/refurb without worries). I think I paid like $650 for my refurb. I still haven't sold my 35L, but I also haven't used it in forever. Definitely going to enjoy a slight upgrade with $300~ in my pocket though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 15:20
|
|
|
I went through the previous pages and only saw a brief discussion on this. I'm thinking of buying a new lens and I was checking the 28mm lineup of Canon. Is there a reason to pick up the 2.8 version over the 1.8 aside the age of the design? Also, I saw the Sigma 18-35mm mentioned. I was planning on selling my 85mm to help buy a new lens, but is it worth it to sell my (well-worn) 17-40mm? I think I could get roughly 600 euros for the two. (I have a 7D which I've had for about four years, but I don't think I'm going to sell that soon anyways so the prospect of switching to fullframe isn't a problem)
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 16:17
|
|
|
Fragrag posted:I went through the previous pages and only saw a brief discussion on this. I'm thinking of buying a new lens and I was checking the 28mm lineup of Canon. Is there a reason to pick up the 2.8 version over the 1.8 aside the age of the design? The 28mm 1.8 does not seem like a good lens as per this review: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28mm-f-1.8-USM-Lens-Review.aspx I've heard good things about the new wide IS primes though, but they are fairly expensive. Edit: If you are considering the Canon 28mm 1.8, I would highly recommend looking at the Sigma 30mm 1.4. I haven't personally owned it, but from what I've seen and read, it is generally a well-performing lens for the price. theloafingone fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Dec 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 16:53
|
|
|
theloafingone posted:The 28mm 1.8 does not seem like a good lens as per this review: I've been using this lens as my go to for a decade on my 10D (and now my new 70D) - It's actually pretty nice - it's not ULTRAMEGASHARP wide open, but most SLR lenses not made in the past few years are not. (Take my 50 1.4 with it's built in soft focus effect @ 1.4 as an example  ) I have heard that sigma is excellent though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 17:20
|
|
|
What 'Class' of SD card should I get for my Canon SL1? Is Class 10 enough for the occasional burst shoot, and amateur video?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 22:52
|
|
|
Canon 1.4 arrived and took some test shots with my 6D. It's beautiful.Jolarix posted:What 'Class' of SD card should I get for my Canon SL1? Is Class 10 enough for the occasional burst shoot, and amateur video? Class 10 will do 1080p on DSLRs so I'd assume so. They're all pretty cheap now, so no reason not to get a decent brand too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 23:09
|
|
|
Yep, should do fine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 23:09
|
|
|
SanDisk has the best warranty by far, so buy their stuff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 23:10
|
|
|
I had a scan disk card break apart on me, I e-mailed them, telling them what happened and they replaced it with no hassle. I didn't even have to prove I owned the thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 23:31
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:Canon 1.4 arrived and took some test shots with my 6D. It's beautiful. canon 1.4? That's a pretty vague way to describe a lens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 23:45
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:canon 1.4? That's a pretty vague way to describe a lens. Sorry, Canon 50mm f1.4. Didn't know there was another 1.4 lens by Canon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 23:48
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:Sorry, Canon 50mm f1.4. Didn't know there was another 1.4 lens by Canon. There are, but they aren't really worth talking about. maybe the 24mm is? I dunno
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 23:50
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:There are, but they aren't really worth talking about. I was curious so I looked it up. Apparently the only other EOS 1.4 lenses are the 24L and 35L.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2013 00:10
|
|
|
Rumor time! Supposedly a new high-end camera coming 2014, with that high resolution sensor that was rumored about months earlierm, and an hybrid viewfinder, altho rumor says it's for video only (which would be loving stupid, give me focus peaking). Supposedly called the EOS-A1. http://www.canonwatch.com/canon-rumor/ If that's true and I had to guess, it'll probably be priced close to 1D-X.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
High megapixel count would be loving retarded for a video-only camera.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 20:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 15:50 |
|
|
No, the EVF in the hybrid viewfinder would be video only.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 20:05
|
|