PDA

View Full Version : Camera talk


DarkSky
02-06-2011, 03:03 PM
I just caught some chit-chat in the chatbox:

<table width="97%" align="left" border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1"><tbody><tr valign="top"><td style="white-space: nowrap; font-size: 11px;" width="1%">http://www.ontariostorms.com/images/statusicon/post_old.gif (http://www.ontariostorms.com/misc.php?ccbloc=35088) [06-02, 04:18] davefootball123 (http://www.ontariostorms.com/member.php?u=86) </td> <td style="font-size: 11px;"> i have the 18-55 which is nice and sharp and im gonna get a 70-300 4.5-5.6vr and a 50 1.8 </td> </tr> <tr valign="top"> <td style="white-space: nowrap; font-size: 11px;" width="1%"> http://www.ontariostorms.com/images/statusicon/post_old.gif (http://www.ontariostorms.com/misc.php?ccbloc=35089) [06-02, 04:18] davefootball123 (http://www.ontariostorms.com/member.php?u=86) </td> <td style="font-size: 11px;"> with my d90 </td> </tr> <tr valign="top"> <td style="white-space: nowrap; font-size: 11px;" width="1%"> http://www.ontariostorms.com/images/statusicon/post_old.gif (http://www.ontariostorms.com/misc.php?ccbloc=35090) [06-02, 04:21] obwan (http://www.ontariostorms.com/member.php?u=350) </td> <td style="font-size: 11px;"> yeah the 50 gives the sharpest pics, the 18-135 gets used the most </td> </tr> <tr valign="top"> <td style="white-space: nowrap; font-size: 11px;" width="1%"> http://www.ontariostorms.com/images/statusicon/post_old.gif (http://www.ontariostorms.com/misc.php?ccbloc=35091) [06-02, 04:28] obwan (http://www.ontariostorms.com/member.php?u=350) </td> <td style="font-size: 11px;"> i purchased the 70-300 because i was going to the yukon on vacation in a rush and strapped for money(300) I would have rather bought a 200-400 but not the $7000 one </td> </tr> <tr valign="top"> <td style="white-space: nowrap; font-size: 11px;" width="1%"> http://www.ontariostorms.com/images/statusicon/post_old.gif (http://www.ontariostorms.com/misc.php?ccbloc=35092) [06-02, 04:30] obwan (http://www.ontariostorms.com/member.php?u=350) </td> <td style="font-size: 11px;"> nice pics with your cam, was the night shot done in auto mode or have you been trying manual??? </td> </tr> <tr valign="top"> <td style="white-space: nowrap; font-size: 11px;" width="1%"> http://www.ontariostorms.com/images/statusicon/post_new.gif (http://www.ontariostorms.com/misc.php?ccbloc=35094) [06-02, 17:37] davefootball123 (http://www.ontariostorms.com/member.php?u=86)
</td> <td style="font-size: 11px;">obwan i only use manual or apprature unless i need a fast shutter speed without setting my apprature. </td> </tr> <tr valign="top"> <td style="white-space: nowrap; font-size: 11px;" width="1%"> http://www.ontariostorms.com/images/statusicon/post_new.gif (http://www.ontariostorms.com/misc.php?ccbloc=35095) [06-02, 17:37] davefootball123 (http://www.ontariostorms.com/member.php?u=86) </td> <td style="font-size: 11px;"> that night shot was iso 3200 i beleive </td></tr></tbody></table>









I've got the 70-300 4.5-5.6 and it's "ok". Pretty good daytime shots using a tripod. But without IS (image stabilization) anything beyond 150mm and you're going to have less crisp images. I had the 70-300mm on my old Canon Digital Rebel.

When I bought my Canon T2i I got the 55-250mm zoom. MUCH more versatile lens as it goes wide enough to get regular shots without having to switch lenses back to the stock 18-55. And after you use IS you'll never get a lens without it :) Definitely worth the extra cash for IS on a lens.

Although, on more expensive lenses, IS alone can add a lot to the price. eg:

http://www.henrys.ca/59117-CANON-EF-70-200MM-F2-8L-IS-II-USM-LENS.aspx with IS, and

http://www.henrys.ca/305-CANON-EF-70-200MM-2-8-L-AF-USM.aspx without IS.

The 75-300mm is $250 without IS, $800 with. :(

But the CANON EF 70-200MM F2.8L IS II USM LENS (http://www.henrys.ca/59117-CANON-EF-70-200MM-F2-8L-IS-II-USM-LENS.aspx) will be my next lens. Once I find a stash of money somewhere :)

davefootball123
02-06-2011, 03:22 PM
I will be picking up a 70-300vr nikon for $500 and a 50 1.8 for $150 and a 10-24 probably about $800 for my D90. I may pick up the 50 1.8 this week. I have an 18-55vr which i prefer over the 18-105 because it is sharper. Suprisingly the 18-55 is a very sharp lens. I am still learning my D90 and i am getting better but i still need practice. I bought the camera for weather photography but i have found that i enjoy photographing many other things like landscapes wildlife and waterfalls. High iso preformance is good. What it the high iso preformance like on ur T2i Dark Sky?

obwan
02-06-2011, 03:22 PM
the nikon (vr) is vibration reduction. The same thing as the canon IS. IF you have a program like Photoshop you can basically do the same thing with sharpen images.

davefootball123
02-06-2011, 03:25 PM
If you dont have VR in a telephoto lense and ur using a shutter speed slower thatn 1/the focal length your going to have some troubles with hand holding. VR i have found to give me about 3-4 stops extra hand holdability. I can shoot 1sec at 24mm with my 18-55 and its sharp

DarkSky
02-06-2011, 04:38 PM
High iso preformance is good. What it the high iso preformance like on ur T2i Dark Sky?

Not sure as I never use it. Although for shooting indoor hockey I'll go as high as 1600, but I try and keep the ISO as low as possible while maintaining a non-blurred subject. But you can Google ISO test + camera model and see comparisons. Most high ISOs are just digitally smoothed images which I can do in an editor later.

DarkSky
02-06-2011, 04:40 PM
If you dont have VR in a telephoto lense and ur using a shutter speed slower thatn 1/the focal length your going to have some troubles with hand holding. VR i have found to give me about 3-4 stops extra hand holdability. I can shoot 1sec at 24mm with my 18-55 and its sharp

Yep. VR/IS is a great thing. But always check to see if it's digital reduction or optical (optical 'anything' is better). With optical stabilization you can hear the little motor going inside the lens to stay focused, when the shutter release button is half pressed.

davefootball123
02-06-2011, 09:39 PM
Of course its optical. I hear a little hiss inside my lens kinda like water running.

DarkSky
02-06-2011, 11:11 PM
Of course its optical. I hear a little hiss inside my lens kinda like water running.

My HD620 camcorder's I.S. is digital I believe. 'Still works very well though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7jBjEc5_VY