Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2013 · Re-buying my Canon Gear any suggestions
  
 
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · Re-buying my Canon Gear any suggestions


willm02118 wrote:
... I know the lens is expensive but it can replace two or three other lens if you are not a pro.


I think you can delete the "if you are not a pro". part of the last sentence.



Feb 22, 2013 at 12:17 PM
willm02118
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · Re-buying my Canon Gear any suggestions


I figure the "pro" would come down on me for suggesting a superzoom lens over a L prime like the 35L, 50L, etc. But not everyone has that kind of budget to spend for the primes unless they make money from photography. Life is about compromise. All of my primes are non-L. I rather have three non-L prime than one L prime.


Feb 22, 2013 at 03:14 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · Re-buying my Canon Gear any suggestions


No worries. Of course, I interpret "replace" to mean while performing any particular activity, not that you wouldn't have more lenses back at the ranch.


Feb 22, 2013 at 03:40 PM
ComicDom1
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · Re-buying my Canon Gear any suggestions


Thanks Will,

I think I mentioned in another post that I had owned a 200mm 1.8 Non IS and 300mm 2.8 Non IS at the time I owned both the Original 1D back in 2001-2002 and later on the 1DMKII. I was looking for something to fill that gap. I was shooting primes on the short end but I think I can live with the 24-105mm F4 IS since its such a marvelous lens. On the shorter end the 85 1.8 is a must have for me. Along with those lenses the 70-200mm 2.8 IS II is a no brainer.

At this point the only the only tele-converter I would consider is the 1.4

With the added noise control of the sensor in the 1D4, considering lenses like the 35-350 (a classic) and the 100-400 is very realistic.

In regard to those lenses a friend of mine who is a photographer raised these questions:

If both the 35-350 and 100-400 are push pull lenses, won't they be sucking some dust inside them? '

Also won't they be blowing that dust around sound as you push pull them to zoom?

How does that affect the cleaning of your sensor? Will you have to clean it more often if you use the push pull lenses instead of an internal focusing lens like the 28-300 IS?

Jason



Feb 22, 2013 at 05:21 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · Re-buying my Canon Gear any suggestions


I think the "dust trombone" syndrome is way overblown. I see no relationship between requirements to clean the sensor and whether I'm using my 70-200/2.8L IS II or 100-400L IS. If there was a significant difference, I would probably notice, as I often use one or the other for prolonged periods of time, say two to three weeks. My 100-400L has no more dust inside than my internal focus lenses, of approximately equal age.

OTOH, there is a correlation between the frequency of changing lenses and the requirement to clean your sensor. That's one reason that the 28-300L IS is so handy in environmentally hostile situations.



Feb 22, 2013 at 05:41 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Cicopo
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · Re-buying my Canon Gear any suggestions


The 28-300 L is ALSO a push / pull lens. I haven't encountered any problems with the 35-350, 100-400 (used for 4 summers shooting radio control events together) or the 28-300 which was used along with the 100-400 for last season. Oddly enough I really don't like push / pull but I'm finally getting very comfortable with it.


Feb 22, 2013 at 06:14 PM
Gunzorro
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · Re-buying my Canon Gear any suggestions


jcolwell wrote:
I think the "dust trombone" syndrome is way overblown. I see no relationship between requirements to clean the sensor and whether I'm using my 70-200/2.8L IS II or 100-400L IS. If there was a significant difference, I would probably notice, as I often use one or the other for prolonged periods of time, say two to three weeks. My 100-400L has no more dust inside than my internal focus lenses, of approximately equal age.

OTOH, there is a correlation between the frequency of changing lenses and the requirement to clean your sensor. That's one reason that the 28-300L IS is so
...Show more

+1

Totally agree!

I prefer not to change lenses any time I can avoid it. Like Jim, I'll carry and extra body/lens (not usually 3, crazy man! ) to have the exact lens I need/want at the ready. Learned this early, leaning out of small helicopters trying to change lenses!



Feb 22, 2013 at 07:02 PM
Gunzorro
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #8 · Re-buying my Canon Gear any suggestions


willm02118 wrote:
I figure the "pro" would come down on me for suggesting a superzoom lens over a L prime like the 35L, 50L, etc. But not everyone has that kind of budget to spend for the primes unless they make money from photography. Life is about compromise. All of my primes are non-L. I rather have three non-L prime than one L prime.


No, a real pro will always consider the benefits of weight and simplicity, vs. too many pieces of unused gear to keep track of and haul around all day. Many a time I've rued the fact of bringing and extra body, lenses, and large camera bag full of other goodies, as opposed to the one full frame body + super zoom I actually used all day and into the night. I've learned a bit since then! If I know the parameters of the activity, I prefer the freedom of one body/lens around my neck and anything else deposited somewhere else. I tend to wedge into odd nooks and crannies for support and also unusual vantage points, and bulky extra gear can actually be a danger for a klutz like me.

A good example was one of my favorite-ever assignments: two days to cover the Space Shuttle move along the streets of L.A. The first night was handled by the 16-35L II zoom, plus 50/1.2L, from pre-sunset to about 11:00 PM. This was very localized at a 405 freeway overpass, covering about three blocks of distance, back and forth and milling around. The next day was a multi-mile trudge in hot weather (yes, with back-up body and "light" camera bag), following the Shuttle from its overnight spot at the Forum, with descent on Crenshaw Blvd. I ended my day with Debbie Allen dancers (and other speakers, etc.) performing at the Baldwin Center mall -- perfect lens for that, wide open in bright shade. That day was covered completely by the 28-300L, using its full range of focal lengths, and really no others were needed, for some of the best coverage I've ever produced. That wouldn't have been the lens for a night shoot, but as a f/5.6 to f/8 daytime lens, amazing results!

Just for comparison: an equivalent selection that would improve speed and performance to a noticeable degree would be the original 24-70/2.8L, 70-200/2.8L IS and 1.4X II converter weighing 2640 grams, or 5.8 lb., compared to the 28-300/3.5-5.6L IS at 1670 g, or 3.7 lb. That's a considerable difference in weight, and expense.



Feb 22, 2013 at 07:34 PM
ComicDom1
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · Re-buying my Canon Gear any suggestions


After taking everyone's thoughts and comments into consideration, as well as doing some additional reading, I came to the conclusion that the best thing for me to do right now is pickup the 1.4 Canon Extender III to go along with my 70-200 2.8 IS lens. If I am not happy with that I will consider the 100-400L mm. From what has been said here and what I understand although being slower, it would be the next best choice at least for me.

Jason



Feb 25, 2013 at 10:36 PM
firstgear99
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · Re-buying my Canon Gear any suggestions


ComicDom1 wrote:
A couple of years back, I sold off my Canon gear and changed camps. I realized my mistake and I am now having to re-buy my Canon Gear. I am open to suggestions of what others think I might add.

I have already purchased:

1D Mark IV for main camera with extra battery
1D Mark II for backup (very lightly used)with 3 batteries
Received 28-105 3.5-4.5 Usm Lens with Mark II (This lens will most likely be sold)
EF 40mm 2.8 lens purchased as first lens in kit

Planned purchases very soon:

24-105mm F4 L IS
70-200mm 2.8 IS II
85mm 1.8
Speedlight 600EX-RT or Metz flash

Considering the 28-300mm IS
...Show more
I have the 28-300 L that I used for my walk around lens for the longest time with my 5DII. After I got the 24-105L and hung it on my 1Dx, that had become my walk around lens. I liked the 28-300 because it gave me the best of everything when I traveled. Only down side, between the weight of the lens and the 1Dx body it can be a load. I found that my arm got used to it.....lol

Remember with the 28-300 you always have the right lens length with you.....



Feb 25, 2013 at 11:06 PM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password