Question on a new lense

[Curt]

Ok looks like i might be making the jump to digital,
looking at getting a Digital Rebel, anyone have any experience with one?
what kind of sugestions on an AFORDABLE 300 to 400 mm lense???

[Unregistered]

Re: Question on a new lense

I took a 10D (basically the same camera) to Reno last year. It was my first experience with a digital SLR. Did it work? Well, I now have a seven foot wide enlargement of a shot of Voodoo hanging in my living room.

The only issue with digital is scum on the CMOS. This is a real nuisance. Here's a link to a site on how to safely clean the sensor. Canon will tell you only an "authorized service center" can clean the sensor.

http://www.pbase.com/copperhill/ccd_cleaning

Buy the best quality Canon lens you can afford. Lenses make or break the camera. I bought an image stabilized 70-200 zoom and a 2x doubler. This is an expensive combo, but it gave me a lot of flexibility. Image stabilization is incredible. I didn't even use a tripod.

So now the question, is the advice of an anonymous ammature worthwhile? Check out some of my photos from last year and you decide.

http://www.ignomini.com/aviation/reno2003/reno2003.html

Cheers,
Ignomini

[T. Adams]

Re: Question on a new lense

I can't disagree with the above response because I have that exact lense combo and used it last year with film. I bought the 100-400L with IS this year though so I would not have to use the converter. Anytime you slap a 2X on a lense you will lose some quality. Although I must say I am very, very impressed with the sharpness of Ignomini's shots.

I have found mine not to be quite as sharp on the inflight photos, as can be seen in the Oshkosh photos I just posted. This may be due to the fact that on warbirds I don't usually go any faster than 1/250 on the shutter speed. I like a lot of prop blur.

As for a budget, there are Canon 75-300 consumer zooms. They are VERY soft at the long end compared to "L" glass. The lenses mentioned here are around $1,700 for the 70-200 f/2.8L IS, and $1,300 for the 100-400l IS. The 2X converter is around $300. Be aware that there are 2 versions of the 2X, the newer version 2XII is superior to the older, do not buy the older version.

One other thing, you'll never be able to carry a tripod around at Reno, I do however carry a monopod with me all the time. IS works great, but I have gone as low as 1/15, 1/30 sec for full prop blur on engine runups, the monopod really helps here for razor sharp photos.

[Kilo Hotel]

Re: Question on a new lense

So now the question, is the advice of an anonymous ammature worthwhile? Check out some of my photos from last year and you decide.

Judging by the stunning results you're getting, the answer is a resounding YES, Ignomini.

[HiredBitSlinger]

Re: Question on a new lense

One other thing, you'll never be able to carry a tripod around at Reno, I do however carry a monopod with me all the time. IS works great, but I have gone as low as 1/15, 1/30 sec for full prop blur on engine runups, the monopod really helps here for razor sharp photos.

I have just "bitten the bullet" and purchased the 100-400L IS. Look forward to using it this year. My question is: You say you use a monopod with the IS enabled. The book says that IS should be turned off when on a tripod, as it will not function properly. Now the question is, is this wrong, or is a monopod different?


Dan Plunkett

[T. Adams]

Re: Question on a new lense

I leave it on all the time. The 100-400 uses an older IS version, so it should really be set to IS setting #1. Since you still are moving somewhat even when holding a monopod the IS will work. The #2 setting is for panning.

The newer IS lenses work on tripods also. I know the 70-200 f/2.8L IS that I have is always in mode #2. If you hand hold it and take a picture of a stationary object it goes into mode #1 on its own, the split second that you start to pan it switches itself to mode #2. That is why I leave it in mode #2 all the time. The 100-400 may do the same, but I don't think so. Now that I think about it, in these headon shots of the Porsche 911, and the Corvette I was using a monopod and the 100-400 was in mode #2, so I may have goofed. The shutter speeds are very high though, so I probably did not even need the IS on these headon shots. The picture of the Corvette's ass is also on a monopod IS on mode #2. I did pan this shot a little however and the shutter speed was 1/250. With the exception on the first Audi R8 pic, and the last pic of all the winners, all the others were shot at 400mm maxed out with the 100-400. The 911, and Corvette, headon shots were with the 1.4X on the lense also. Effective focal length with the 1.6 crop factor of 896mm!!!

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/123671/0

So after reading all that the moral of the story is leave the IS on.

[HiredBitSlinger]

Re: Question on a new lense

Those shots are really great. Gives me something to "shoot for". I have not been a monopod user, but I am re thinking that position.

Thanks
Dan

[T. Adams]

Monopd

I use it quite a bit for taxi shots and engine runups for prop blur, but all flight shots are hand held. Same at the race track, unless it is headon, or a shot from behind, I hand hold everything.