Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 32
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Somerset, England
    Posts
    718

    Final gear list check

    I thought I'd post it here in the Canon forum, since I'll hopefully soon be joining you. This is my current list of gear - and unless any of you can point any major flaws in my plan, it will be my final one. All told it sums up to 1,470.66 - Which I don't think is too bad for what it is.

    Canon 40D
    Battery grip + Second battery pack
    Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro (My preferred type of photography)
    Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 (Nicely priced all rounder, that seems to have good reviews)
    Sandisk Extreme IV 4 gigabyte (No point going halfway on the memory card really, it's only ab extra 15 over the extreme III)
    And a cheap remote control, which may or may not work. But at 10 it really makes no odds.

    Other equipment, including the lighting setup, has been postponed to make the initial purchase less financially catastrophic.
    Gear List:
    Canon 40D + Sigma 18-50mm + Canon 55-250mm

    My Gallery

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,275
    I would reccomend a Sigma 18 50 f2.8 EX DC Macro over the 17 70, have used both.
    Better build, sharper,easier to handhold & not too bad as a 50 mm macro
    flickr
    dcrp shooter's on flickr

    7D,Bge7,Canon 70 200 F4L IS,Canon 17 40 f4L,Canon 100 2.8 Macro,Canon 400 5.6L,580 EX II,Tamron1.4XTC SP AF

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amherst, MA
    Posts
    3,249
    1. You'll love the 40D.

    2. I had the 17-70 and I really liked it. My major complaint was that it was slow to focus in poor lighting. When I got it the 18-50 f/2.8 macro that Drama suggests wasn't available and from all that I have heard this may be the better choice.

    3. The 100mm macro is a great lens. I have the 60mm macro, which is an awesome alternative to the 100mm, unless you plan to shoot bugs (due to the shorter working distance), but for what I shoot with macro (flowers, etc) its perfect. The 60mm is also a nice portrait lens.

    4. I have a cheap $5 remote that I got off Ebay, which works fine, but the 40D has a 2 second timer, so I use that more often than the remote.

    5. Do you have tripod?

    6. One of the most important things that I purchased, rather late in the game, was a monitor callibration system - highly recommended. I use Spyder II.
    Michael B.
    Canon 5D2, 550D, Sony NEX 5N, Sigma 15mm fish, 24L mkI, 35L, 40mm f/2.8, 50 1.8 II, Sigma 50 1.4, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro, 60mm macro, 100mm f/2, 70-200 f/4, 200 f/2.8 mk I, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, 430EX. Growing list of MF lenses!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,275
    I use a 60 mm Canon macro for bugs too, when you want to go 1:1, a closer minmum focussing distance is a big help
    After factoring in the crop factor the 60 provides a 96mm POV
    flickr
    dcrp shooter's on flickr

    7D,Bge7,Canon 70 200 F4L IS,Canon 17 40 f4L,Canon 100 2.8 Macro,Canon 400 5.6L,580 EX II,Tamron1.4XTC SP AF

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Somerset, England
    Posts
    718
    Drama - I was considering the other seriously, and eventually came to choose the 17-70. However if you beleive the 18-50 to be a better choice, I may reconsider - It was a close call, so I went for the range.

    Also, how does the sharpness of the 60mm compare to the 100mm? I'm sure I could adapt to either range - Was just thinking that being able to be a tad further away from the subject could be advantageous? Having said that it's almost useless for portraits I suppose...Urgh so many confusing choices.

    Michael - I'd use the remote, I've really missed having one for my '50 at times, even with the timer. I have two tripods, a very sturdy older one, and a less stable but more convenient lighter one. So I choose depending on my intended use.

    Also, the calibration system is the next object on my list, and infact I was considering that before the camera. I'll likely go for either Spyder2/3 depending on my budget at the time. Also on the list is a RAID drive for secure file storage.
    Gear List:
    Canon 40D + Sigma 18-50mm + Canon 55-250mm

    My Gallery

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Formerly South Wales. Now South Carolina.
    Posts
    7,147
    Why the 100 Macro instead of a set of Kenko extension tubes on your 17-70? It works out cheaper and you get the same effect and you can make any and all lenses macro. As far as I can tell there's no advantage in a specific macro lens.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Brisbane, CA
    Posts
    3,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradox View Post
    Also, how does the sharpness of the 60mm compare to the 100mm? I'm sure I could adapt to either range - Was just thinking that being able to be a tad further away from the subject could be advantageous? Having said that it's almost useless for portraits I suppose...Urgh so many confusing choices.
    Why is it useless for portraits?
    Lukas

    Camera: Anonymous
    I could tell you but I wouldn't want you to get all pissy if it's the wrong brand

    Flickr

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Somerset, England
    Posts
    718
    Rhys - Because the IQ of the canon lens will beat the Sigma's, and from what I've heard of extension tubes, less light reaches the sensor using them, requiring a longer shutter speed or higher ISO etc. Do correct me if I'm wrong though...

    Also, TheWengler - With an equivalent focal length of what, 150mm, I'd have to be a fair way off the subject to get a portrait shot would I not?
    Gear List:
    Canon 40D + Sigma 18-50mm + Canon 55-250mm

    My Gallery

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Formerly South Wales. Now South Carolina.
    Posts
    7,147
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradox View Post
    Rhys - Because the IQ of the canon lens will beat the Sigma's, and from what I've heard of extension tubes, less light reaches the sensor using them, requiring a longer shutter speed or higher ISO etc. Do correct me if I'm wrong though...

    Also, TheWengler - With an equivalent focal length of what, 150mm, I'd have to be a fair way off the subject to get a portrait shot would I not?
    If you use something like the Canon 50 f1.8 then by the time you've lost a stop from using tubes then you have a very nice 50mm macro lens of about f2.8 which has cost a shed load less than the Canon macro lens. The only thing a macro lens has going for it is that it can also be used for other things. Tubes will fit every lens.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Brisbane, CA
    Posts
    3,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradox View Post
    Rhys - Because the IQ of the canon lens will beat the Sigma's, and from what I've heard of extension tubes, less light reaches the sensor using them, requiring a longer shutter speed or higher ISO etc. Do correct me if I'm wrong though...

    Also, TheWengler - With an equivalent focal length of what, 150mm, I'd have to be a fair way off the subject to get a portrait shot would I not?
    Generally you want something with an equivalent focal length in the portrait range, 75-135mm, just to avoid the big noses. However, I don't think there's really a limit to how long the lens can be, so 160mm should be fine. Of course if the lens is too long for you it can be inconvenient. The longer macro would work fine though, especially if you wanted some up close portraits.

    Also, don't dedicated macro lenses have something to help it focus more accurately up close?
    Lukas

    Camera: Anonymous
    I could tell you but I wouldn't want you to get all pissy if it's the wrong brand

    Flickr

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •