Printable View
Yes, I could see the logic. However some overlap is good. And remember for sports you need a fast shutter speed which means a fast lens. The 100-400 is not a fast lens so you'll need to push ISO hard instead and that's not good. I would go the 70-200 and if you really find you need the bigger lens you can trade it, but I'd be willing to bet you'll never part with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Col.Coleman
I can always fit a 2x adapter ring on a 70-200 as well.
CC
Yes, if that fits, it would be a pretty good solution. The 100-400 is so big and heavy you won't often want to carry it anywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Col.Coleman
OK, In the 70-200 I there is not much diff $ wise between the 4L IS and the 2.8L non IS. Given it will mostly be used on a tripod, do you reckon the 2.8 is the go rather than the 4L IS.
Or have I just answered my own question.
CC
I'd get the f/4 IS. It's smaller and lighter, and the IS gives you some extra stops although it won't help with fast shutter speeds. However a 70-200 at 2.8 gives a very small DoF which you may want to avoid. So f/4 IS is my recommendation. I have one of these myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Col.Coleman
The 4L will only handle a 1.4x extension tube where the 2.8 will handle both the 1.4x and the 2x albeit with the loss of a couple of stops, but the ability to catch the live action should be better though I think. With Dof, with kids sport the blurred or soft focus background, you only get the shot of your kid and no others so less hassles with paranoid parents.
Have you seen that article I referred to in the link? Just wondering what you thought.
I still have 2 weeks until my friends hit HK so I still have time to get this one off purchase right.
CC
Now my list looks like this.
Out of Digital Rev, with my friends buying Duty Free in HK.
Canon EOS40D bundled with camera bag, gift pack and
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM $2950.41
Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM $ 755.00
Canon 17-40mm f/4L USM $ 802.00
Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS USM $1169.00
Canon 1.4x Teleconverter $ 422.00
Total $6098
Now to start haggling:D:D:D
CC
Personally, I thing you are getting a whole lot of Glass that you will end up not mounting on the camera once the novelty wears off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Col.Coleman
You also have overlapped your focal ranges many a time, and that does tell me that some lenses will be living in the kit bag with no use after you settle in on a favourite lens or two....So in effect money wasted.
In my opinion, I think, that if you do have a sizable disposable budget at hand, perhaps evaluate the following path.
Camera 40D + Battery Grip (extra power plus extra set of controls for Portraits)
Wide applications :16-35 f/2.8 L
General Purpouse: 24-70 f2.8 L
Mid to Tele: 70-200 f2.8 L
Three lenses, all fast, IS is over rated, practical focal range covered, get on with the joy of taking pictures, and not lugging a bag of glass anywhere you go.......
Also, keep in mind that in about two years when the 40D becomes obsolete and antiquated ;) Full Frame sensors should fall into norm/affordability the lenses will still keep on "giving" and you will not have to sell off your EF-S plastic lenses.......:D
From what I've seen, the hassles come about from simply taking a DSLR to an event, let alone having a big lens pointed vaguely in the direction of their concern. I'd be very surprised if they were satisfied with explanations of depth of field and bokeh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Col.Coleman
There was an article on the SMH website a while back... right here, infact:
The Sydney Morning Herald Blogs: Photographers
Oh, and another one that came up in Google:
The Sydney Morning Herald Blogs: Who's Your Daddy
... Not that the 4L would be any different.
I don't quite understand the need to cover all focal lengths, but maybe that's because I've only come across "lazy" type photographers who zoom instead of position themselves and correctly compose. You've got your own inbuilt zoom functionality called legs :)
In your list, I reckon the 17-40 (though I'd go for the 16-35mm f/2.8L) and 70-200 would be your workhorses. Add a fast 50mm prime (with which your leg zoom becomes quite effective) and a 2x teleconvertor., and you'd have a great kit.
But, you'll find your own style regardless of what you get :)
The only lens that is EFS is the 10-22mm. all the rest are EF Luxury lenses. The reason I included that lens is the optics are reported as decent and with the 1.6x of the 40D, the 16 or 17 isn't as wide as I would like. Have been playing with my mates Leica and a 7-14 lens., so the 10 ends up at around 16. The 17-40 I plan to be the only lens I take on hikes and a converter. 24-105 will be on the frame 90% of the time for around home and portrait shots and the like. The sole reason for the 70-200 is for sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by ciapek
The zoom with your feet idea is fine, but sometimes sidelines on fields, fast moving vehicles you do not want to get run over by, and cliff faces do not always allow this.
I only plan to use 1 lens at any given time, NOT lug them around.
I value your input and will investigate this further. I just can't afford a 1D. Even this is a stretch to try and get a complete system.
CC