Author Topic: Thinkin about lenses (Read 4528 times)

Hutch · « **on:** January 28, 2006, 05:17:00 PM »

Asked my better half If I could throw down some green on a new lens, much to my suprise she said yes!!!

So, right now I'm using a Sigma 24-70mm f3.5-5.6
I would like to have something a little faster,like around f2.8., But , I'm also wantin something with a little more reach.

Should I pick up a faster 24/28-70 lens, or keep this one and get some thing a 70-200,or 75-300.Or Pick up this one that is 28-300 f3.5-5.6 w/ macro

Most of what I'm lookin at is Sigma I would love to have a canon L series, but that's some serious cash.

Oh yea I've only got about $300 to work with.

so many options not enough cash on hand.

Hutch

Weasel · « **Reply #1 on:** January 28, 2006, 05:20:00 PM »

What body are you putting it on and what is your main photographic interest?

Hutch · « **Reply #2 on:** January 28, 2006, 05:22:00 PM »

I've got a Canon Elan7. Interested in shooting whatever catches my Eye.I can't really say I have a favorite, but virtually all of it is outdoors.

Hutch

spanky · « **Reply #3 on:** January 28, 2006, 09:07:00 PM »

hutch
i've got an elan7e i use a sigma 28-300 great lens cheap too i switched 2 years ago to a digital rebel 300d the lenses fit on both also have a canon 70-300 is 55-80 canon 17-55 canon & recenly got a sigma 12-24 pricey at $650.00 but great for wide & close up shots sigma makes a good product i've collected these over a 5 or 6 year span 28-300 is the best for all around & wildlife 70-300 with the image stbilization sounded good at the tme but 70 on the digital multiplys 1.6 = 150 to high for the low end .

Weasel · « **Reply #4 on:** January 28, 2006, 10:10:00 PM »

I'm not usually an advocate of the wide angle to tele zooms, but Sigma does make some good optics and the 28-300 would probably be a good compromise given the price range you are looking for.

For best results with that lens, try not to shoot at the widest aperture.

Jerry

Hutch · « **Reply #5 on:** January 28, 2006, 10:19:00 PM »

yea I've noticed that a lens like that preforms best at the middle of the road apertures.

Example: cheaper lens wide focal range wide open aperture

I think that If I would have went with about f11-f16 this shot would at least seem sharper or at least not so soft.

Hutch

Weasel · « **Reply #6 on:** January 28, 2006, 10:36:00 PM »

Nothing you can do about the foreground leaves because of the distance between them and the elk. Other things affect image sharpness, too. Was this taken from a tripod?

Hutch · « **Reply #7 on:** January 28, 2006, 10:48:00 PM »

Yes, once again cheap lens, in a hurry,unsure of how to use the film I had. I really didn't have a very good understanding of what exposure was or how to be creativly correct at that time.

Hutch

Hutch · « **Reply #8 on:** January 28, 2006, 10:49:00 PM »

Also used a remote shutter release.

Hutch

Weasel · « **Reply #9 on:** January 28, 2006, 10:52:00 PM »

Tripod AND cable release, eh? Good!! I'm glad SOMEONE read my articles... :D

Hutch · « **Reply #10 on:** January 28, 2006, 10:53:00 PM »

I look forward to every article. No lie that is the first one I look for.

Hutch

Hutch · « **Reply #11 on:** January 28, 2006, 11:00:00 PM »

Hey Spanky, what do you think about the whole eye focus thing with the 7e?

Hutch

Weasel · « **Reply #12 on:** January 29, 2006, 10:50:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hutch:
I look forward to every article. No lie that is the first one I look for.

Hutch

Thanks, Hutch! I appreciate that!

Hutch · « **Reply #13 on:** January 31, 2006, 08:37:00 PM »

Well, I went a Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM.
Cheaper than the 28-300 Sigma I was looking at but I think a better purchase in the long run.

Now I can start to save up for an L series lens!!!

Hey Jerry!! What lenses do you use most often and for what purpose?

Hutch

Weasel · « **Reply #14 on:** January 31, 2006, 08:54:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hutch:
Hey Jerry!! What lenses do you use most often and for what purpose?

100-400L IS for wildlife/waterfowl. That's probably my most used lens, followed by the 17-40L and 12-24mm Tokina for landscapes. 28-135 IS to fill the gaps. I've used the 28-135 IS for just about everything. It's my "walk around" lens. Most of my Teton moose shots were with that lens. Non-wide angle scenery, people, etc.

IB · « **Reply #15 on:** January 31, 2006, 10:31:00 PM »

Jerry....Speaking of Teton Meese, How often do you get there?
Perhaps the next time your about you might enjoy a Dinner and Drink!
I am about 77 miles from Jackson, with GREAT Landscapes, WILDLIFE and People too.
We could do hunt year around and NO PERMITS REQUIRED! Plus a Great little camp to play out of.
We should DO LUNCH . :eek:

......vance

You are aware that in WY. WEASEL is WHEE-ZUL

Steve Kendrot · « **Reply #16 on:** January 31, 2006, 11:18:00 PM »

Gee...I've been coming to Tradgang for months and just now noticed the photography forum. I just bought a used Canon 10D with a 100-400L IS lens a couple months ago and have been trying to figure out the switch to digital. I guess I'll have to check in here more often. Jerry, I've looked at your website. You have some beautiful work. I'm getting inspired by several photographers I know and hope to hone the skill to where I can share with others without being embarrassed!

One piece of advise I see recurring is to get a good tripod. Any thoughts on how to get one without spending a fortune? Camera set me back a bit so spending a grand on a tripod is not appealing...

Killdeer · « **Reply #17 on:** February 01, 2006, 06:02:00 AM »

I have a Bogen, I forget the model number, I think it's a 3221. It is a good sturdy tripod without the secondary brace for the centerpost. I chose that on purpose to give me more flexibility in where and how I could set it up. The legs have several locking degrees of spread, and can be adjusted to any length with the locks on their three sections. It is steel, so it is somewhat heavy.

You can remove the centerpost and replace it upside down on the pod to get your camera down on the ground, should you desire, while still being held rigid and out of the muck.
I put a grip-action ball head on it for flexibility while photographing wildlife. The rig has served me well for ten years with no problems.

I have several quick-detach plates for the head, one on each camera body, spotting scope, and one on the frame of my chronograph. The tripod is quick to set up and take down. It lives in my truck, mostly!

I guess I am pretty happy with it...and it didn't cost a whole lot.

Killdeer

Weasel · « **Reply #18 on:** February 01, 2006, 03:10:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Iron Bull:
Jerry....Speaking of Teton Meese, How often do you get there?
Perhaps the next time your about you might enjoy a Dinner and Drink!
I am about 77 miles from Jackson, with GREAT Landscapes, WILDLIFE and People too.
We could do hunt year around and NO PERMITS REQUIRED! Plus a Great little camp to play out of.
We should DO LUNCH . :eek: ......vance

You are aware that in WY. WEASEL is WHEE-ZUL

I'd love to, Vance! Last year was my first year. I'm elk hunting this year, so will probably be back in'07.

Wheeze

Weasel · « **Reply #19 on:** February 01, 2006, 03:14:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Steve Kendrot:
Jerry, I've looked at your website. You have some beautiful work. I'm getting inspired by several photographers I know and hope to hone the skill to where I can share with others without being embarrassed!

One piece of advise I see recurring is to get a good tripod. Any thoughts on how to get one without spending a fortune?

Thanks Steve, for the compliment! They're always appreciated!

I also use the Bogen (Manfrotto) 3221. However, I went through about three Bogen ball heads before settling on a Kirk BH-3. The Bogen's always crept on me when I used the 100-400mm. Even the BH-3 creeps a little. Should have bought the larger BH-1.

News:

Author Topic: Thinkin about lenses (Read 4528 times)

Users currently browsing this topic: