thinking of picking up a teleconverter.

I own a 70-200vr2 and if i get the TC-17E, would i need to bring a monopod or tripod everywhere to have decently sharp images? Would steady hands be good enough?

TIA

Anyone know how bad is the stiff zoom ring issue on the Nikon 24-70mm? I have been reading alot about this issue which has held me back from buying the 24-70.

hey guys since x-mas is coming around and i'm not really getting any gifts :okay: i decided to treat myself to a new lens. Currently just using the stock 18-55mm that came with my XSi. Decided to either get a 50mm 1.4 or something that will allow me to capture FAR objects , so somewhere up to the 200mm range. What do you guys suggest ? I'm still a n00b at photography, but im getting the hang of it :badpokerface:

the thing is i want the 1.4 because i normally take pics of close objects/people, but at the same time if i had a 200mm it would allow my imagination to run a bit more freely.

TIA!

why do you need the 1.4? not even considering the 1.8? 1.8 is already pretty good not to mention very sharp. probably the best bang for the bucks lens there is out there at $100 off clist.

im a nikon guy so i wouldnt really know about the canon 1.4's. however ilvtofu has the sigma 1.4 and says its surprisingly better than the canon version. (has more blur because the lens is bigger)
are you shooting people outdoors? if you shoot wide open at like 1.4 it will overexpose like crazy. im just guessing you will shoot wide open since you want the 1.4.

as for myself i at one point had a 1.4g which is 4 times more expensive than the nikon 1.8. loved it. build quality is much better and the lens had a really nice feel. sort of like a canon L lens i guess.... i had a super sharp one and bokeh was creamier than the 1.8. loved that lens. but i ended up selling it for a tamron 17-50 fixed f/2.8. was it worth 4x more? if i was made out of money i would say yes. sadly im just a teen and a 50mm wasnt really convenient to walk around with :( give the 1.8 a shot? i mean its only a bill whereas the 1.4 will be 4x more.

sold and upgraded a lot if not all of my lenses but i still have my 1.8 nifty fifty

hey uno thanks for the response! i didnt mean it had to be specifically the 1.4 , something around there would be fine though. You are right though i think the 1.4 would be too much exposure as most shots prob will be done outside. Will defnitely look into the 1.8! :)

For some perspective if you're planning on shooting indoors:

I shot some basketball with a 50D + 70-200 2.8 IS II.

St. Pats, so an older gym in Vancouver. Worst case to get a high enough shutter speed to freeze action (~1/400), I shot at 2.8 with ISO2000+ (ISO3200 was max needed). It got worse as the sun set, as the windows in the gym influence the ambient light quite a bit.

If you're in a newer gym there should be more light, so you can get away from ISO2000. Otherwise, expect those kinds of settings.

If you really need one at a budget, the Sigma equivalent I hear is commendable alternative.


[EDIT] Oops, quoted a post from 2006. I guess this is valid information still :)

Ya dude the 50mm 1.8 is like 129.00 at futureshop and everything else is hella expensive... Best bet would be to check CL for used lenses.

You can get a tad more bokeh with the 1.4.

For example, this bokeh is at 1.4

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-V.../DSC_0846e.jpg

Being able to shoot low light ability is nice too.

so i think ima swing by FS or BEST BUY and get the 50mm 1.8 , it said it was 139.99 before tax, i DONT WANNA WAIT TIL BOXING DAY :lawl:

Dammm, Canon 50MM 1.8 is 89.99 at BestBuy this boxing day, im probably gonna go see if i can grab one.

Anyone heard of deals for the Nikon 35 1.8? I know the sigma 30 1.4 is $499 now at some places.
Posted via RS Mobile

Where can you get the 30mm 1.4 for $499?

londondrugs i think

anyone have any pictures taken with a 17-55 f/2.8 is lens? on a canon 60d?

i was gonna get the 17-40 f/4L but my friend told me to consider the 17-55 f/2.8

I've said it once and i'll say it again, i love the 17-40 F4L on full-frame, but its good on a cropper. I'd go for the 17-55mm 2.8 if you don't plan on going full frame anytime soon. It's a great lens and you will love it (I've never used it before, but heard alot of good things)

My $0.02

The new Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 OS is a biiiig competitor to the Canon 17-55mm F2.8 IS. It's quite comparable in sharpness and quite a bit cheaper as well. I think the Canon focus is faster and more silent, but make sure you consider the Sigma. I got one a few months ago and I'm super happy with it!

looking for a budget 50mm f1.8 (even f1.4 if its possible) lens for my new nex5. looking at paying max around $150 or lower. any suggestions?

how did you test it when you went to get the sigma?

i just took a risk and bought it from amazon.com. I was in the states - and I figured if it really didn't work I could just return it. Amazon has a good return policy. I read some reviews online and Sigma doesn't have as big a quality control problem like they did 5 years ago. (especially with older lenses like the 30mm F1.4 - my buddy bought 4 copies before he found a sharp one)

that's the one i was interested in =(

I've been debating between 3 lenses to buy. Would you guys recommend the Nikon 35mm 1.8, Tamron17-50mm 2.8, or the Tokina 35mm 2.8. I was looking for a sharper street photo lens in mind. Thanks for the help.
Posted via RS Mobile

Nikon. Its cheap, lightweight, smaller and faster than the others.

As a street lens for DX format, it can't be beat.

Ya - my buddy bought them off Amazon.co.uk. Good thing they have a good return policy - they either front focused or back focused. He finally bought one when he was in Japan - and he was able to test a few at a store there.

If you want to buy it used - just make sure you thoroughly test it first. At least in Canada - if you buy it from a proper retailer - you get the extended warranty - and Sigma will keep on fixing it for you... just a hassle, that's all.

I recently bought my 30 1.4 from LD before Christmas. What I did to test it was just a quick focus test. Line 5 batteries in a diagonal, tripod and try focusing on specific batteries using AF (center point). Worked great for me. I did this test at home.

Before paying, I did a quick check shooting text at different apertures. 1.4 is soft, but by my standards it's more than acceptable. I say it's soft because I compared it to my Canon 70-200 2.8 mk2 and even my Sigma 18-50 wide open (2.8 mind you). After sharpening, it's more than fine.

This was the first and only copy tested. My friend did the same at another LD and had the same results. I don't think they suffer much from Sigma's bad rep with qc anymore. It's more likely that people are unhappy with performance at 1.4 because they're so hyped up as being super-sharp at that aperture. They're simply not.

Given the performance, price, and especially that 10 year warranty, it's hard to say no if you can find a good deal locally (new of course).

I think there are ways to check the date code through the serial (correct me if i'm wrong). If you happen upon a retailer that has a lot of older stock, I'd steer clear, but newer (from the past few years) ones should be fine.