[The1]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

Thanks Mark, I found it. Surprisingly, I'm above 50 points already. I just don't feel like spending the money on the Platinum level... the Gold level is more feasible.



Thanks. Sounds like the 24-70 and 24-105 debate.

pretty much, i've seen comparison charts showing the corner quality and blah blah blah on both lenses at blah blah length and with a TC and blah blah going on, there's not much point comparing from what i've heard... Sounds like the TC will make the corners of the 300 suffer more, but still might be the slightest hint sharper in the dead center, but the article said it was pretty inconclusive and not much point debating it. And again, that was just 1 lens out of a million produced, so who knows if it was flawed.

[The1]

Originally Posted by TL

speaking of raw images,
I shot this raw image at around 4:30pm with my Nikon D7000 with my 35mm f/1.8 handheld:
1/15sec
f/8
ISO 800
Does your raw pics look this grainy?



TIM_3049 by GQjai, on Flickr

I get that on occasion with my 7D at any ISO, but i think it's more down to shutter speed and handholding, a slight shake can turn something into looking like it's noise (so i'm told) sometimes. can you try and use the same settings but with a tripod to see if you can replicate it?

[The1]

Originally Posted by adrean8j

That is the exact reason I just went ahead and got a "vacation" memory card (PNY SDHC 32gb Class 10) and just shoot in RAW +L all the time (unless I am shooting some action type shots).

I did that for a while, but got tired of sifting through crap, maybe it's time to start doing it again. or if someone asks for something ASAP i just turn it to RAW plus JPEG, then if i forget, i'll still at least get raw images.

Live and learn right...

[Chewy734]

FYI: DxO Optics Pro 7 just got released two days ago... for those who are interested.

[The1]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

FYI: DxO Optics Pro 7 just got released two days ago... for those who are interested.

may check that out once i can get if for significantly cheaper prices

[rodi]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

eh?

Originally Posted by rodi

two are pending.
plus my fashion short film that i'm filming this weekend.

http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showp...8&postcount=68

[kamek]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Canon CPS - I may join this myself just for the cleaning service.

http://www.cps.usa.canon.com/

Originally Posted by Chewy734

Thanks Mark, I found it. Surprisingly, I'm above 50 points already. I just don't feel like spending the money on the Platinum level... the Gold level is more feasible.

CPS is a great service. If you're gold or above, take advantage of their equipment loans service and try out a few bodies or lenses: http://www.cps.usa.canon.com/loans/loans.shtml

Did anyone take advantage of the Canon "flash sale" yesterday? B&H offered it though their Facebook page. I picked up a 70-200 f/2.8 IS at $400 off retail.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Chewy734

FYI: DxO Optics Pro 7 just got released two days ago... for those who are interested.

I'll update mine as soon as I get home from the Caribbean...

[vachss]

Originally Posted by kamek

Did anyone take advantage of the Canon "flash sale" yesterday? B&H offered it though their Facebook page. I picked up a 70-200 f/2.8 IS at $400 off retail.

Adorama still has it for $1974 (but won't for long) if you're thinking about it:
http://www.adorama.com/CA702002ISU.html?emailprice=t

I may regret it, but I'm not not snapping one up. Though I'm sure the 70-200II is a great lens it just doesn't fit into my work flow. The shots I might want a 70-200 for just always seem better served by my 135L or 300/4.

[The1]

Originally Posted by vachss

Adorama still has it for $1974 (but won't for long) if you're thinking about it:
http://www.adorama.com/CA702002ISU.html?emailprice=t

I may regret it, but I'm not not snapping one up. Though I'm sure the 70-200II is a great lens it just doesn't fit into my work flow. The shots I might want a 70-200 for just always seem better served by my 135L or 300/4.

depends on your use of the 135L the 70-200 2.8II is a bucket load sharper.

I like the 135L a lot, but I only seem to use it when i'm planning to do a photoshoot with someone (which is rare)

But because I have 2 cameras, one of the 2 will always have the 70-200 2.8II on it, while I go back and forth between my 16-35L and my 24-70L depending what i'm doing for the most part.

[vachss]

Originally Posted by The1

depends on your use of the 135L the 70-200 2.8II is a bucket load sharper.

If you mean in low light because of the lack of IS I agree. If you mean just straight MTF and image quality, good as the 70-200 is can you really say that it's "a bucket load sharper" than the 135L? The 135 is one of the sharpest lenses I own.

When I use the 135 it's almost always at f/2 to throw out the background for portraits (and sometimes at f/2 for night/stars scapes. While I'd hesitate to give that up, if I really thought the 70-200II was much sharper I might reconsider. The other factor is that I guess I'm not much of a zoom guy. Over the years I've had and sold a 100-400, 70-200 (non-IS), a 24-70 and 17-40 (along with a bunch of lower end zooms). The only zoom I still have is the 16-35II - and even its continued presence is kid of questionable beside my 24/1.4II and Samyang 14/2.8.

[rodi]

Originally Posted by vachss

If you mean in low light because of the lack of IS I agree. If you mean just straight MTF and image quality, good as the 70-200 is can you really say that it's "a bucket load sharper" than the 135L? The 135 is one of the sharpest lenses I own.

this.

[Chewy734]

The 70-200mm f/2.8L II was on sale refurbished for $1530 + tax earlier in the week.

[Kgolf31]

Ashu and others,

Looking at a 55-200mm Lens, they are f/4-5.6

Would this be fast and sharp enough for motorsports? Still going to be using it other other shots, but it would mainly be for that.

As well, should I get VR or would I be fine without it? The difference is about a $80 difference

[kamek]

Originally Posted by vachss

Adorama still has it for $1974 (but won't for long) if you're thinking about it:
http://www.adorama.com/CA702002ISU.html?emailprice=t

I may regret it, but I'm not not snapping one up. Though I'm sure the 70-200II is a great lens it just doesn't fit into my work flow. The shots I might want a 70-200 for just always seem better served by my 135L or 300/4.

It was a toss up between the 135L and 70-200 2.8 for me. I decided on the 70-200 because it gives me more of a focal range to hold me off until I can upgrade to all L primes, and the discount topped it off.

I love this lens when I rent it, and now I own it!

[Chewy734]

Originally Posted by Kgolf31

Ashu and others,

Looking at a 55-200mm Lens, they are f/4-5.6

Would this be fast and sharp enough for motorsports? Still going to be using it other other shots, but it would mainly be for that.

As well, should I get VR or would I be fine without it? The difference is about a $80 difference

Kyle, it's fast enough if you shoot during the day with enough light outside. If you're shooting at dusk, dawn, or at night, then probably not.

I assume the VR works as well as the IS does for Canon. If so, I highly recommend getting it since it'll be tough to hold it still at 200mm without a tripod.

[Kgolf31]

Ok, that makes sense. Looks like I'll just save up for VR.

[Kgolf31]

Take a Picture, It'll Last Longer by M0nk3yy31, on Flickr

[Chewy734]

One thing I noticed while in Belize was that most travelers and tourists were using Nikons... both point-and-shoots and dSLRs. In fact, out of all the cameras I saw there while walking around and such, I didn't see a single Canon dSLR... I was really shocked.

[M_Six]

We had a lecture at school last week that was professionally taped and they brought their photog for some stills. He had a 5D and 1D. Both classics. I couldn't figure why someone would go for those two instead of one or the other and a 7D.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by M_Six

We had a lecture at school last week that was professionally taped and they brought their photog for some stills. He had a 5D and 1D. Both classics. I couldn't figure why someone would go for those two instead of one or the other and a 7D.

If he's a pro, then he likely bought 'em new and plans to use them until they fall apart...

[gcochard]

Originally Posted by Kgolf31

Ok, that makes sense. Looks like I'll just save up for VR.

Where are you looking to find those prices? I just got my 55-200 VR for 150 at amazon: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...kenrockwellcom