Photography related discussions

[BoredSysAdmin]

is it these lens ???
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/542292-REG/Canon_2297B002_Telephoto_EF_200mm_f_2L.html#specifications

$5300
HFS

For these money one get pretty decent whole Home Theater !! Or decent used car !

 

[mike c]

is it these lens ???
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/542292-REG/Canon_2297B002_Telephoto_EF_200mm_f_2L.html#specifications

$5300
HFS

For these money one get pretty decent whole Home Theater !! Or decent used car !

That it is. Here's to hoping its worth it

edit: i did consider a used car but ... it wouldn't make me happy at all

edit2: if it's got a case, it must be worth it

 

[mike c]

(my) L prime trinity

without the hats

top view

 

[Highlander]

Nice one Mike, and really nice case. Will you be buying the polarizing drop-in filter for it?

I had a look at the link provided by BoredSysAdmin and noticed that the Canon stops down as far as f/32 whereas the Nikon is limited to f/22. I'm a bit surprised in a way, because nobody in their right mind would dream of using this lens beyond f/11 to f/16 where diffraction really starts to kick in.

Now let's see some piccies taken with it rather than of it.

 

[mike c]

This isnt going to be stopped down further than 2.5, otherwise i would have bought the 70-200 2.8 zoom

 

[Highlander]

Mike,

This isnt going to be stopped down further than 2.5, otherwise i would have bought the 70-200 2.8 zoom.

I understand where you're coming from; obviously the (very costly) additional stop available from the 200mm f/2 produces extreme subject isolation (bokeh) which, equally obviously, is what the 200mm f/2 lives for. However, just because you can shoot at f/2 doesn't mean you should. Depth of field at f/2 will be inappropriately (though impressively) narrow for some subjects at minimum focus distance. In addition, even though images shot wide open will be excellent, peak performance of the lens is likely to be around f/4. Moreover, the 200mm f/2 beats the 70-200mm f/2.8 @ 200mm in areas other than within the range f/2 to f/2.8.

For example, the Nikon 200mm f/2 beats the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 @ 200mm in resolution at comparable apertures down to f/8 inclusive. Therefore, when shooting at 200mm it is better to use the 200mm f/2 than the 70-200mm f/2.8. The Nikon 200mm f/2 also suffers less image degredation at comparable apertures than the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 @ 200mm when combined with teleconverters.

There is no reason to doubt that these findings would be similar for the equivalent Canon lenses.

 

[DTS]

Awesome looking lens and sweet collection. That case makes it so worth it.

 

[jeffsg4mac]

Mike, I have lens envy

 

[mike c]

Mike,

I understand where you're coming from; obviously the (very costly) additional stop available from the 200mm f/2 produces extreme subject isolation (bokeh) which, equally obviously, is what the 200mm f/2 lives for. However, just because you can shoot at f/2 doesn't mean you should. Depth of field at f/2 will be inappropriately (though impressively) narrow for some subjects at minimum focus distance. In addition, even though images shot wide open will be excellent, peak performance of the lens is likely to be around f/4. Moreover, the 200mm f/2 beats the 70-200mm f/2.8 @ 200mm in areas other than within the range f/2 to f/2.8.

For example, the Nikon 200mm f/2 beats the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 @ 200mm in resolution at comparable apertures down to f/8 inclusive. Therefore, when shooting at 200mm it is better to use the 200mm f/2 than the 70-200mm f/2.8. The Nikon 200mm f/2 also suffers less image degredation at comparable apertures than the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 @ 200mm when combined with teleconverters.

There is no reason to doubt that these findings would be similar for the equivalent Canon lenses.

agreed that the prime should across the board be sharper than the zoom (though i think the mark II zoom of canon seems to give up little at 2.8)

but i will be using this mostly for low light, as it is (last night) i was f/2 1/60 2500 ISO (love the IS) but that was generally an improvement in my normal 1/100 f/2.8 3200 situations.

somebody on the canon forum actually posted a side by side pic with this one and the mark 2 zoom at 200mm both wide open. sure there's a little bokeh difference (i wouldn't notice unless they were side by side) i'll try to search for it later.

 

[Warpdrv]

Dam Mike.... wicked looking lens's and photos look fantastic as well

Is that a Subwoofer those pics are taken buddy....

 

[dkane360]

WOW thats a lens lol. Does it xray through clothing?

 

[mike c]

WOW thats a lens lol. Does it xray through clothing?

no, but the clothes drop down anyway

(but it's not really because of the lens, who are we kidding, photography ... audio video are nerdy hobbies)

only warpdrv actually get nice girls.

 

[Warpdrv]

Well after watching this thread for quite some time and the feeling of regret for all the horrible pics I posted throughout the years with my crappy camera's I finally took the leap and made a phone call today on my day off....

Looked online but nothing avail locally, but the guy on the phone said, I see 1, and its about 30 mins away.... Got the last one avail anywhere around....


Proud new owner of my first DSLR !!!! Nikon D7000 kit

I got alot to learn - doesn't have any SD cards so I have to pick some up, headed out to costco for some Sandisk SDHC twin 4gb for now, I'll prob shoot for larger ones when I find a good deal...

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Congrats Warpdrv ! and welcome to DSLR owners club

only warpdrv actually get nice girls.

And apparently according to mike say goodbye to nice girls - unless they are hired models

Re: SD cards - I got Transcend 16gb one, which at the time of purchase was almost as fast as speedy sandisks ultra while being half of the cost. Do a bit research on which models faster, yet offer sufficient capacity.

 

[Warpdrv]

Thanks buddy.....

Well I grabbed a pair of the 8gb Sandisk HDSD's I had a coupon for Costco, so that worked out just fine... That should hold me over for a while.
Battery is charging - so I'm sittin here in limbo for now... Apparently the batteries are a new format from what I have been reading - so no using old ones - FWIW

So anyone got some links to pointers to good photography and learning... ?

 

[mike c]

the D7000 is the best SLR in the price range now, congrats.

rule number 1 get a speedlight nikon speedlights have model numbers that start with SB

 

[Warpdrv]

Thanks Mike, I was playin with it a bit today, learning about using different ISO settings and shutter speeds.

So many things to learn about, but it was nice to experiment....

I also want to pick up some decent versatile lens's as well...
Something better for closeups, thoughts.... Primes

How about the 35mm f/2D ? Or 50 ?

 

[mike c]

Thanks Mike, I was playin with it a bit today, learning about using different ISO settings and shutter speeds.

So many things to learn about, but it was nice to experiment....

I also want to pick up some decent versatile lens's as well...
Something better for closeups, thoughts.... Primes

How about the 35mm f/2D ? Or 50 ?

what kit lens did you get? you should look at the focal length you use the most (or which you prefer) on your kit lens so you'd know which prime lens you should get.

also, closeups of your gear or people?

 

[Warpdrv]

People, objects like flowers or gear.... I guess what the most flexible would be. God knows eventually I would love to get one of those big @$$ zoom lens's like you got. Heck, just cruisin around the yard - I know I'll be on the hunt for a good longer distance unit.

I'll start keepin an eye on the focal lengths.

Lookin at a filter kit with remote, already got a tripod, nothin special but it'll work.

 

[Sheep]

I would grab the 35mm F1.8G over the F2D. It's really cheap, and performs well. What lens to you have right now?

SheepStar