I got my Canon 200L F2.8
and I think it's a keeper.
I've had my D reb for about 8 months now, and was getting pretty good
results with it. With this lens, I feel like I have to go back a few steps
to try to use this properly.
You always hear, "you need a fast lens." Well, I have one now. So I set it at
F2.8 and snap a bunch of pics. Almost all were blurry. A 200mm lens, at F2.8,
at around 10 feet will give you a DOF of .08 feet. (about an inch)
Well, I'm not used to this, and it explains the blurry pics. So as I said, I need to
go back a few steps, and realize the DOF before just clicking away.
But even when you screw up, sometimes it works out.
One more thing. This lens is so sharp, I could hardly tell the difference when
applying USM in photoshop.
The weather is going to be nice for once this weekend so I'll be putting it
through the test sites (my usual haunts) but I'm sure it will do great.
1/100s f/2.8 at 200.0mm iso400
1/250s f/5.6 at 200.0mm iso400
One more thing, it uses the teleconverters well.
Quantaray 2x ($80)
I call this the poor mans 400mm F5.6
Hand held. It did take a bit of work in PS to get it like this.
1/400s f/4.0 at 200.0mm iso200
One last thanks to Andy for helping me in the purchase of this lens. He helped
reassure the seller that I was OK even though I don't have many posts
at the Fred Miranda Site.
dave.
I've had my D reb for about 8 months now, and was getting pretty good
results with it. With this lens, I feel like I have to go back a few steps
to try to use this properly.
You always hear, "you need a fast lens." Well, I have one now. So I set it at
F2.8 and snap a bunch of pics. Almost all were blurry. A 200mm lens, at F2.8,
at around 10 feet will give you a DOF of .08 feet. (about an inch)
Well, I'm not used to this, and it explains the blurry pics. So as I said, I need to
go back a few steps, and realize the DOF before just clicking away.
But even when you screw up, sometimes it works out.
One more thing. This lens is so sharp, I could hardly tell the difference when
applying USM in photoshop.
The weather is going to be nice for once this weekend so I'll be putting it
through the test sites (my usual haunts) but I'm sure it will do great.
1/100s f/2.8 at 200.0mm iso400
1/250s f/5.6 at 200.0mm iso400
One more thing, it uses the teleconverters well.
Quantaray 2x ($80)
I call this the poor mans 400mm F5.6
Hand held. It did take a bit of work in PS to get it like this.
1/400s f/4.0 at 200.0mm iso200
One last thanks to Andy for helping me in the purchase of this lens. He helped
reassure the seller that I was OK even though I don't have many posts
at the Fred Miranda Site.
dave.
dave.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
0
Comments
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Rob
Dave, looks like you got yourself a great glass, and you're not afraid to use it:-)
Cheers!
That is the same thing I did. I had a 70-200L F4 and a 75-300is that were
always on the long end of the zoom. I sold both of those lenses with the
thought of buying a Canon 400 F5.6. (I had this thought right after seeing
the moon pic that Gus made)
After a short time, I figured that with the 200L and a 1.4 and 2 time extender,
I had some pretty good glass at 3 (or 4 if you use both stacked) focal lenghts.
I think this is going to work out well for me.
dave.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
I think I'll have a bit of a learning curve, but I think this will be a fun lens for me.
dave.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
dave.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
Rob
Though the moon pic here did turn out pretty well after some PS, but it can't hold
a candle to a real 400mm lens. Check out the pic Gus took.
Just wanted to add this to help/confuse you more.:D
dave.
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=11758&highlight=moon
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.