Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 134
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    bay area, ca
    Posts
    4
    Whats the difference between the Canon 70-200 f4 and the Canon EF 135mm f/2.8? I am interseted in getting a telephoto lens for indoor wedding shots & outdoor street photography. if none of these are appropriate for both kinds of uses, what do you recommend that is affordable <$500?

    Thanks!
    Last edited by xlsdiva; 08-27-2005 at 06:16 PM.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,807
    Quote Originally Posted by xlsdiva
    Whats the difference between the Canon 70-200 f4 and the Canon EF 135mm f/2.8? I am interseted in getting a telephoto lens for indoor wedding shots & outdoor street photography. if none of these are appropriate for both kinds of uses, what do you recommend that is affordable <$500?

    Thanks!
    main difference is that the 70-200 is not bright enough at f4 for available light shooting and i believe the 135 f2.8 has a soft focuse feature. 135mm might also be a bit limiting for either application. not 100% sure but the 135mm should give you better image since it's a prime. are you only looking for teles?
    canon 17-40 L, 70-200 f2.8 L, 400 f5.6 L, 50 f1.4 & f1.8, 1.4x TC, sigma 15 f2.8 fisheye, flash 500 DG Super, kenko extension tubes

    note to self: don't participate in sad, silly threads unless you're looking for sad, silly responses.

    "anti-BS filter" (from andy): http://dcresource.com/forums/showpos...94&postcount=4

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    bay area, ca
    Posts
    4
    i was looking for a telephoto lens.. i didnt realize that the 135 was a fixed lens, i apologize for my lack of knowledge..

    I think i will be settling on the tamron 28-75 in the meantime until i can afford a 70-200 or somehting as good.

    thanks for your help.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    101

    What about Pentax ist*???

    Do the Canon's & the Nikon's work with Pentax ist*?
    Any disadvantage in crossbranding?

    What would be high quality affordable primes for ist*?

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,175
    The Pentax only accepts Pentax lenses (obviously) and select 3rd party lenses from Sigma, Tamron, etc. I say select because you have to make sure the Pentax version of the said lenses are available.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,175
    Update: It's a fairly minor update, but I've adjusted the prices to better reflect street prices on the market, and I've added a lens or two to the list. My next update will be fairly significant, so keep your eye on this guide.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    18
    Thanks Rex, keep up the good work. This thread has made my transition to dSLR cameras a lot easier than I thought it was going to be.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,175
    As promised, I have made some major visual changes to the guide. All I can is... take a look.

    I hope you enjoy it. I will be updating the lens recommendation section a bit more in the near future.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    647
    Looking great, Rex! A couple of comments...

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex914
    The cheapest lenses are the ones that are easiest to make. The easiest lenses to make are always those that are close to the 50mm mark, the viewpoint of normal human eyesight. The farther the focal length deviates from 50mm (percentage-wise), the more costly it will be. It is much trickier to design say… a 10mm or a 500mm lens than a 35mm or an 85mm lens.
    Might want to tweak this a bit to reflect the effects of sensor size; I think it's better to clarify the whole "crop factor" debate as soon as possible. Could say something like: a "normal" view is achieved when the focal length of the lens is equivalent to the diagonal dimension of the sensor, which was about 50mm for film SLRs. Current consumer digital SLRs have smaller sensors, so the "normal" focal length would be closer to 30mm.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex914
    You will also need a bigger aperture when you want to blur the background in a shot. When you use a larger aperture, the depth of field becomes shallow because the camera has less time to “assimilate” the whole image, placing only closer things (to the focus point) in focus, leaving the rest out of focus, or blurred.
    That's a rather confusing explanation; it could lead someone to believe slower shutter speeds would give the camera more 'time to assimilate' and thus increase dof, which is hardly the case. e.g. assuming a static subject, at the same aperture if you open the shutter twice as long but compensate by putting on a 1-stop ND filter, the image will be identical.

    Also, you could add the Tamron SP90 AF f/2.8 to the list of macro lenses; it's pretty popular, and high-quality.

    Other than that, everything looks wonderful; very handy resource for SLR beginners.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,175
    Thanks! I've made the changes and have added the Tamron in.

    Would anybody be interested in seeing an ultra-wide zoom section?
    Last edited by Rex914; 11-09-2005 at 07:34 PM.

Posting Permissions

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