Who wants to live forever?

[DonSchap]

Anyone waiting for a lens, that's who.

Yes, I FINALLY got my hands on the long awaited addition to my TAMRON collection. And, yes, it was WORTH the wait. Well, to be honest ... no lens is worth the wait and the reason is ... you cannot use it unless it is on your camera body!

So ... here's the box ... (I drove over and picked it up, so it isn't crushed, this time)
40179

and here's the glass, within, and right there, where it belongs!
40190

The only problem is ... now the camera body has to go and get repaired ... :mad:
TAMRON 70-200mm f/2.8 @ 135mm f/2.8 (unfiltered) . . . . . . . . . . . . . CZ 135mm f/1.8 @ 135mm f/2.8 (unfiltered)
40185 40186


Guess you'll have the fun, being one of the first shooting real stuff through it, Sean

[sparkie1263]

Nice can't wait to see it in action.
Frank
PS I sent you a PM about a lens.

[Visual Reality]

I really wanted to like this lens, but the AF leaves a LOT to be desired.

Hope you have better luck with it than your A700.

[DonSchap]

My A700 has been great! Yes, had a moving control failure, but that one control gets the most use than ANY other part, even the shutter release. I do not have lightweight fingers, either, as several members will attest, so I may push it harder than most.

So, while they could probably improve its endurance ... I'm still very pleased with what I have been able to turn out with the camera, so far. Way out in front of the Canon EOS 20D, I had.


As far as the lens goes, it fills its niche. It is, easily, $1000 less than the SONY equivalent and that certainly makes it affordable (if that is a word you can really use these days). For that $1000 I feel I saved myself, I could buy another A700 to go with it. :rolleyes: If you want "rocket-focus", then you buy the SONY 70-200 G SSM ... and it will deliver it. Just pony up the extra $1000, too. :)

[sparkie1263]

What do you think Don?
Frank

PS Somebody just sent there A100 out to Sony and they got it back pretty quick. Hope you have the same luck.

[DonSchap]

Well, it is a quick diagnose, I hope. Minimal troubleshooting.

I am just waiting for the "return box" to ship it off in.

Movin' on, though ... I think I'll take the "new guy" for a stroll, tomorrow.

40191

[seanhoxx]

You know I'm born to lose, and gambling's for fools. But thats the way I like it! I don't wanna live forever! and don't forget the joker! The only card I need is the ace of spades!
"Ace of spades" by Motorhead
I don't want to liove forever but seems like I have been waiting forever LOL A few more days won't kill me, and speaking of the joker is it Tamron or Sony!

[DonSchap]

Ah, displeasure will be replaced by bliss, once you get your hands on your desire.

Again, there are forces at work that seem to manipulate the market in ways we can only fathom (because, no one is talking). I often wonder, if I had to do it all over, again, which direction would I travel?

Would I think that a $3000 Full Frame DSLR should have ... say, Movie Mode? Would I have become so dependent on "Live View" ... that I couldn't take an image without it? Nah, I think I would still be pretty happy using my SLR for exactly what I ORIGINALLY bought it for. Just taking great images ... with standard photography rules in place. Not worried about "upgrading" it to the throughly overcrammed technological crap that most things are becoming.

I have one of those "Tilt" cellphones, with the slide out hidden keyboard. For the past three days, I've been in the AT&T store, just trying to get it to work right without having to remove the battery every time I want to use it, because it has to HARD reset. What good is that, I cannot even get a reliable phone call, any more, because I don't know if it is working or not? But hey, it's got games, internet, texting and god knows what else?

That, to me, speaks volumes to where this is all going. Our equipment is so complex, it cannot even do the BASIC function it was designed for.

"RELIABITY? Why that is job # 37 on the list. Sorry, Man!" :(

[S_p_i_d_e_r]

That, to me, speaks volumes to where this is all going. Our equipment is so complex, it cannot even do the BASIC function it was designed for.

You should have bought a Nokia 1110i, 1200 or 1650 :)

Not every product on the market is a gadget full of useful (or not) features... And by the way - it's us, customers, who is responsible for such products. Demand creates supply.

[DonSchap]

I agree ... the inexperienced kids with their parents money really mess things up.

You know what they say: "Be careful what you wish for ..." :rolleyes:

[dr4gon]

Ah, displeasure will be replaced by bliss, once you get your hands on your desire.

Again, there are forces at work that seem to manipulate the market in ways we can only fathom (because, no one is talking). I often wonder, if I had to do it all over, again, which direction would I travel?

Would I think that a $3000 Full Frame DSLR should have ... say, Movie Mode? Would I have become so dependent on "Live View" ... that I couldn't take an image without it? Nah, I think I would still be pretty happy using my SLR for exactly what I ORIGINALLY bought it for. Just taking great images ... with standard photography rules in place. Not worried about "upgrading" it to the throughly overcrammed technological crap that most things are becoming.

I have one of those "Tilt" cellphones, with the slide out hidden keyboard. For the past three days, I've been in the AT&T store, just trying to get it to work right without having to remove the battery every time I want to use it, because it has to HARD reset. What good is that, I cannot even get a reliable phone call, any more, because I don't know if it is working or not? But hey, it's got games, internet, texting and god knows what else?

That, to me, speaks volumes to where this is all going. Our equipment is so complex, it cannot even do the BASIC function it was designed for.

"RELIABITY? Why that is job # 37 on the list. Sorry, Man!" :(

Sounds like you just got a bad new phone and should probably get it exchanged. Sorry to hear your troubles though. Every product does have its lemons.

[DonSchap]

Every test shot has been so impressive, with this new 70-200. Sharp, controlled. I have to recommend it as one of the best IQs that I've seen. Ranks right up their with the top drawer glass.

I admit, it's not "rocket-focus", but it gets there and delivers the goods. I'll be interested in seeing the results Sean gets from his, when it arrives, that's for sure. Hopefully, in time for his Thursday follies! LOL ;)

[seanhoxx]

I hope to shoot it up on Thursday with the new lens, but it may be pretty ugly, playing the number one team in the leauge, at there field, there senior night, oh and by the way in last 3 years we havent even scored a SINGLE goal against them! And then maybe a few shots at Friday night football, come on bring on the darkness!!

[DonSchap]

Well, in a continuing analysis, the I put the TAMRON up against images I took with my EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM ... and it is too close to call. These are just fabulous. Fortunately, the TAMRON is ~$1000 less! Once you have that focus, it's the nuts!

[Visual Reality]

It's supposed to be right up there with the top lenses in optical quality, just like the 17-50. The slow / noisy / constantly missing AF that is reported on the net is what stops me :(

I dont have big problems with my 17-50, so I wonder what is wrong with the 70-200? I thought they'd be using the same motor. Maybe focus is just that much trickier at longer focal lengths.

[S_p_i_d_e_r]

Maybe focus is just that much trickier at longer focal lengths.

More glass to move :)

[DonSchap]

It is a little tricky, some times. Depends on the modeling illumination, I have experienced.

I will work with it ... but still ... that seems a relatively small issue, when you can rapidly manually focus this lens right where you want it in the DMF mode. At f/2.8 and thirty yards, DOF almost takes care of the rest. I suppose it is just working with your equipment.

Believe me when I tell you, I have worked with a lot less, so I guess I'm not as sensitive to all this. The IQ is where I was basically concerned ... and this baby has it.

[seanhoxx]

With any luck at all the lens will show up this afternoon, won't have much time to play with it before trying to use it at soccer. Any quick tips on camera adjustments or settings for decreasing light stadium lighting and moving action? and as we are home the gorls will be in all white. Also got my super multi coated Hoya uv filter on the way.

[DonSchap]

With that lens sheild, your chance for flair will be minimal, so the MC filter will not be crucial at all. This lens is already coated quite nicely.

I believe if you set the ISO-1600 ... you be good to go with a good choice of shutter speeds at f/2.8 aperture.. Let us know! :D

[Visual Reality]

Who sets their ISO anymore? Auto ISO is your friend ;)

[DonSchap]

You obviously do not have a SONY α100, 'VR'.

If you did, you would know that when the Camera is set to "AUTO" ISO and the Mode dial is in the "M" (Manual Mode) position, ISO is automatically FIXED @ 100. That's not so good, is it ... under the lights?

You really need to know the equipment being used BETTER before you make these kind of setting suggestions (or at least have read the accompanying manual). They are NOT "Universal!"

Hey, thanks for trying, though. When are you buying your Alpha?

[Visual Reality]

Short answer...never. Especially not with broken features...

[jekostas]

You obviously do not have a SONY α100, 'VR'.

If you did, you would know that when the Camera is set to "AUTO" ISO and the Mode dial is in the "M" (Manual Mode) position, ISO is automatically FIXED @ 100. That's not so good, is it ... under the lights?

You really need to know the equipment being used BETTER before you make these kind of setting suggestions (or at least have read the accompanying manual). They are NOT "Universal!"

Hey, thanks for trying, though. When are you buying your Alpha?

Wow, this is an incredibly stupid way of going about things on Sony's part.

[DonSchap]

I don't build 'em ... just advise how to make use of 'em. Thanks for that helpful insight, though ;)

[DonSchap]

Sean ... did the lens show up? (He's probably having so much fun with it, he forgot to write!) LOL :D :eek:

[seanhoxx]

No lens yet!! ARGHHHHHH it is so close to me I can feel it!! So it was the good old Tamron 70-300 last night. Girls did well all things considered, held to 0 - 0 tie in first half, then we got hammered 5 - 0 in the second, still a great first half.
And with the glass I have I have been setting ISO to auto because the the light changes so fast as it starts getting dark, lots of shots showing ISO1600 under the lights. Is there a way to set autoISO so that it goes down to 100? on A700 the base for auto is 200 correct?

[dr4gon]

Even on the A900, base is 200 I believe also. I can see where that would be frustrating! But at night, I doubt 100 ISO would have any use?

[seanhoxx]

True no use for 100 at night but another feature that would be nice to be able to choose would be the min / max for autoISO that included the 100 setting. with so many things to think about and remember I find myself shooting on a bright sunny day at 200 not a big deal but.....

[seanhoxx]

It is in my hands, ran home over lunch and there it was waiting for me. Didn't even wait to take it in, opened it up on the back patio LOL. I will be posting "whats in the box" later as my hard drive is gewtting some repair work done to. Might come into the office and post this weekend if I can't stand it LOL Off to high school football to take on the darkness tonight, unless it rains

[DonSchap]

Okay ... so I took the TAMRON 70-200 on the A100 to the botanical gardens ... and popped a few.

150mm f/4.5 (100% crop)
40384

from this original (natural light)
40385


Then this HDR Rose group with this:

Base exposure 150mm f/5.6 1/125 sec ISO-100 Natural light
40387

HDR rendering
40388

[sparkie1263]

The lens is looking good. Nice series of images.
Frank

[dr4gon]

Great macro shots with that lens!

[DonSchap]

@ Frank: Thanks!

@ 'dr4gon': They are not macro shots. The first one is a crop of the second at 100%.

It is a heck of a lens, though. Wait until you see what's coming ... on a zoom. I need to edit it a bit ... because of timing and composition ... but, I think you all will enjoy it.

[DonSchap]

Okay ... so I am sitting on the bank of the lake, at the Botonical Gardens ... getting some shots ... looking across at this photographer working with a wedding party. I'm thinkin' "shades of CDI", here.

All of the sudden, there's like this complete loss of gravity (only way I can 'splain it), right in the middle of the group.


40398
EXIF: A100 w/ TAMRON 70-200mm f/2.8 @ 200mm - f/2.8 - 1/320 sec - ISO-160 - Natural lighting ... unnatural gravity.


Luckily, I had my 70-200mm f/2.8 strapped on, so I snapped the shot. Hey, does that make me a wedding photog, now, or somethin'? :rolleyes: :D :p

[sparkie1263]

The third lady from the right really got some air. Was it the ladies basketball team? If not sign her up.LOL Only you would get a shot of twenty people jumping. Make that you and the other guy with the camera.LOL I am going to call you Donny on the spot.LOL
Frank

[dr4gon]

lol, she's WAY up there! Was this at 200mm? Looks like they had a good time.

[DonSchap]

Yeah ... I'm posting EXIF ... take a look.

[dr4gon]

gotta get me an a100 now.... I want the natural gravity effect! :D

thank you.

[seanhoxx]

It came in and I unpacked and heading to high school football, learning on the fly maybe not the best way to get a feel for this bad boy!!
140mm F2.8 1/320 sec. ISO 1600 Spot meter S mode

[sparkie1263]

Where is the Ball????????? LOL That is what Dr4gon told me about my image. LOL Nice shot.
Frank

[seanhoxx]

Am I missing something simple? How can I add the data to the bottom of the pic???
135mm F2.8 1/250sec ISO1600 Spot meter S mode EV. +0.7 SSS on
150mm - all info. same as in above data.

[sparkie1263]

You need firefox. They have a EXIF data tool that you just right click on the image and it lists all the EXIF data and you can copy and past it in you post.
Frank

[seanhoxx]

same data as posted above, can yopu tell I am not on my own computer?

[seanhoxx]

Astro turf seems to have somewhat of a reflective property?

[dr4gon]

Some great shots there! I like the color on their jerseys, really stands out!

[sparkie1263]

I see some motion blur. I went and checked your EXIF and even at f/2.8 and ISO 1600 you can't get the speed up. That's tough lightning. Maybe Don can give us some pointers.
Frank

[dr4gon]

Oh, wow, didn't realize these were from the new lens :D.

I think the only that would help alleviate motion blur at the current settings would be to pan with the players as best as you can, but of course, not everyone is moving in the same direction so only one object will stand out.

[DonSchap]

How's it workin' for you? Speed's up ... lighting looks good. Probably should be at 1/500 if you do not pan. It's only a third of an f/stop from where you are in these.

Practice some daylight stuff, shooting moving cars and such. See if you can get the panning motion down. Also, with speeds of this sort (anything over 1/250th), shut off SSS.

[seanhoxx]

SSS OFF? would M mode be better then S mode? I tried to stay at 250 - 320 and 2.8 I really thought there would be less blur? Played around with some +o.3 and +o.7 EV I was standing about 4 feet off the sideline and about half way between the goal line and the back end zone. As we were "away" I didn't feel as comfortable as I normaly would walking up and down the sidelines and endzones. any more advice? will be at soccer Monday night.

[DonSchap]

M-mode stops the exposure from changing your settings, in this case, both ISO and Aperture in S-mode.

I usually am in M-mode during night shots. I do not want the camera making any decisions when I'm shooting. The lighting is normally FIXED across the field for uniformity. I tried to explain this in one of these posts. Probably that non-SONY DSLR one where the OP was asking about CZ 135mm f/1.8 lens. I suggest you guys get used to shooting this way ... you will have ultimate control over your shots.

Shoot an AUTO shot in the very beginning and note all the camera's settings. The camera will struggle to resolve the image based on its idea of "the perfect shot", but it does not consider motion or the fact you want bokeh, too.

Concerning SSS: It really does nothing for you at 1/250th sec. or more, except maybe add feedback. You know your settings ... so why bother? This has been a point of contention, since my Canon days. It's your choice ... but, I shut it off. It looks suspect to me, especially since it appears like there is "camera-shake" in one of these shots. :confused:

So, why not eliminate the issue altogether?

Do some test shots at your next night shoot ... BEFORE you get involved with real action. Shoot the team's practice shots.

Some basic setup ideas:

Mode: M
Aperture: f/2.8
Speed: 1/500 sec
ISO: 1000 or 1600
DRO: off
SSS: off
Lens shield: On
Contrast: +1
Sharpness: +3
No EV adjustments (All +EV adjustments do is force the camera to perform slower)
No circular polarizer

[dr4gon]

M-mode stops the exposure from changing your settings, in this case, both ISO and Aperture in S-mode.

I usually am in M-mode during night shots. I do not want the camera making any decisions when I'm shooting. The lighting is normally FIXED across the field for uniformity. I tried to explain this in one of these posts. Probably that non-SONY DSLR one where the OP was asking about CZ 135mm f/1.8 lens.

SSS does nothing for you at 1/250th sec. or more, except maybe add feedback. You know your settings ... so why bother? This has been a point of contention, since my Canon days. It's your choice ... but, I shut it off. It looks suspect to me, especially since it appears like there is "camera-shake" in one of these shots. :confused:

So, why not eliminate the issue altogether?

Do some test shots at your next night shoot ... BEFORE you get involved with real action. Shoot the team's practice shots.

Some basic setup ideas:

Aperture: f/2.8
Speed: 1/500 sec
ISO: 1000 or 1600
DRO: off
SSS: off
Lens shield: On
Contrast: +1
Sharpness: +3
No EV adjustments (All +EV adjustments do is force the camera to perform slower)
No circular polarizer

Great pointers, I will try that next time I'm out .... er with a 70-200/2.8!! But I'm sure I can take something from this and apply it with the 70-300 turtle.

[DonSchap]

Yes, reduce speed, sailor! If this works at f/2.8 ... the when you are at f/4 (70-100mm) you could shoot 1/250th (turn SSS "on"!).

At the long end, (185-300mm) f/5.6 ... 1/125th! (Make darn sure SSS is "on") :(

[seanhoxx]

I will give it a shot LOL Yes there is blur from camera shake, need to get used to the lens and the weight of it WOW! and yes I know it is lighter than some other 2.8's but is the most weight I have handled so far! I literely unpacked the lens, examined it for damage, put it on the 700 checked the AF, worked the zoom while looking throught the view finder, fired off a couple of shots at the backyard then put it in the lens "baggie" and headed to the game!

[dr4gon]

I will give it a shot LOL Yes there is blur from camera shake, need to get used to the lens and the weight of it WOW! and yes I know it is lighter than some other 2.8's but is the most weight I have handled so far! I literely unpacked the lens, examined it for damage, put it on the 700 checked the AF, worked the zoom while looking throught the view finder, fired off a couple of shots at the backyard then put it in the lens "baggie" and headed to the game!

After the other day at the zoo, I was tired too from all the walking and camera holding. The weight can really take it's toll on your palms. :rolleyes: more practice we need!

[seanhoxx]

More practice, and more strength, I have thought about those hand strenght squeeze things, I have acouple laying around in desk drawers somewhere, or those firm rubber balls to squeeze. Maybe a good time to actualy listen to my DR. and cut back on those 10 -12 cups of coffee, and a couple of cokes I have each day!!! I don't notice tremors in my fingers or hands but I wonder.

[dr4gon]

More practice, and more strength, I have thought about those hand strenght squeeze things, I have acouple laying around in desk drawers somewhere, or those firm rubber balls to squeeze. Maybe a good time to actualy listen to my DR. and cut back on those 10 -12 cups of coffee, and a couple of cokes I have each day!!! I don't notice tremors in my fingers or hands but I wonder.

lol.... you could achieve SSS+ if you laid off all that caffeine!!

[seanhoxx]

a few shots of the band, no flash they are on the track out of the lights, cheer leaders were a pretty long shot.The low light ability seems pretty good even at the settings I used.

[DonSchap]

I find that practicing at 100-200mm @ 1/15 sec with SSS off ... really gets your attention. Just go ahead and switch back and forth, handheld, at the same subject. It's amazing. But, what is also equally amazing, is that you (yes, Grasshopper) can train yourself to shoot equally as well with SSS on or off.

[dr4gon]

I've done some practicing, but mostly at 90mm and 50mm at 1/10 or 1/8. I can easily do each when I'm calm with SSS on and can do ~200 or so too if I'm really calm and concentrate. With SSS off though I can barely do 90mm and 50mm at 1/10.

It's funny to read books and/or forums where they advise as a general rule sticking to the reciprocal of the focal length (50mm, no lower than 1/50 sec, that's EASY as pie!).

[seanhoxx]

I'm not sure I can even hold the 700 steady with the 50mm prime on it for 1/15 sec. let alone with the big guy. Practice practice

[DonSchap]

You know, Sean ... if you just correct for White Balance, you can get the image to really work for you a little more.

40442 40443

[seanhoxx]

See thats what happens when you fall into that AUTO mind set. Suggestions as to settings?

[dr4gon]

shoot AUTO (since you shoot RAW) and adjust afterwards

[DonSchap]

You know, I'm always amused when I put the 50mm f/1.4 on my camera. It automatically becomes what I used to see as a 75mm lens on my film cameras. Using the 28mm f/2.8 on the DSLR is a lot closer to what I used to see with the 50mm on the 35mm-film camera ... but, no where near the bokeh.

How are you two getting along using the 50mm PRIME? Do you seem to find it a little too long for indoors?

Just wondered.


Meanwhile, back to the 70-200mm f/2.8

[DonSchap]

I think I will do the Chicago Botanical Gardens, one last time, this season ... in the AM, just to grab those waterfall shots with the sun behind me. Those wedding parties had me a ... little jumpy, I guess.

I'm going with a four-lens pack out (10-20mm, 28-75mm, 70-200mm, & 200-500mm) and the tripod. Hey ... maybe I'll get lucky.

[seanhoxx]

Haven't done much of anything with the 50 yet, to busy on the soccer and football fields. Hope to get some use out of it soon, I really need to work with my lens to get the feel for them and how they work under different light and shooting situations. Practice practice eh.
So is this thread going to live for ever? Or is it about time to put it down?

[dr4gon]

At the same apertures, I think the Tamron edges out the Minolta 50/1.7. It's better at low lights though. :)

[seanhoxx]

Some basic setup ideas:

Aperture: f/2.8
Speed: 1/500 sec
ISO: 1000 or 1600
DRO: off
SSS: off
Lens shield: On
Contrast: +1
Sharpness: +3
No EV adjustments (All +EV adjustments do is force the camera to perform slower)
No circular polarizer
Don, and others I used these settings the other night, I flipped back and forth with WB between auto and 4000k much better images, I had to bump up ISO to 1600 pretty quick and as the night went on dropped speed from 500-400-320-250 as shots kept getting darker on me, some still pretty dark but the soccer field is NOT as well light as football field. I will post images soon for additional advice on setting adjustments.