dm you drop in "gloomy theatre" a few times in your comments, there ought to be a few 70-200 2.8 2nd hand since the mkII. I reckon keep all your present family and get that. It's not just fstop you seem to need but plenty of flength headroom as well.
The 70-200IS MK I is showing up at KEH in the $1400-1800 range (and for that kind of money - which I currently dodn't have anyway - I'd be happier buying from an institution which offers a warrantee rather than privately with no recourse). It's EXPENSIVE, even now the MK II is out there. Course, the MKII is a $2500 lens........... :yikes
Has anyone played with the Sigma f1.4 for an EOS mount?
My 24-70 F2.8 L rarely gets used on a crop body - it is so big and heavy I just do not favor that combination, it seems unbalanced fore and aft, but the lens is very sharp. But so is my favorite, 24-105 f4 L IS. The 24-70 L is probably maxed out for sharpness at f5.6 to f8. But very good wide open...
I find it hard to imagine that you have difficulty with AF with a 7D and stage lighting. Is it really that dark on the players when you are photographing them? The 7D using the three AF point algorithm really works superbly for me, and compares very favorably to my 1DMK4, which probably has the best AF Canon makes.
I am not trying to question you here, Diva, it may be just that dark when you are working and I am not aware of it.
The 70-200IS MK I is showing up at KEH in the $1400-1800 range (and for that kind of money - which I currently dodn't have anyway - I'd be happier buying from an institution which offers a warrantee rather than privately with no recourse). It's EXPENSIVE, even now the MK II is out there. Course, the MKII is a $2500 lens........... :yikes
I take your point, and there is also the bulk and weight to factor in. And with no IS at least a monopod in the theatre would be critical. But even so, I'd be putting a 70-200 f2.8 above a current 24-70 on my list. The difference in flength would be stunningly framed close-in shots. I'm thinking from the results end, not only from the specs+price end. There's no substitute for the thrill of a lens that gives you exactly what you wanted and more! You'd also save the blood (IQ) you spill by having to drastically crop for an approximation of a longer flength. If you did go the extra with a used 70-200 f2.8 with warranty, and it wasn't suitable for whatever reason, you could resell almost without losing a buck. If you haven't had the longer length experience yet I'd say it was well overdue!D
I don't have problems with accuracy of AF - the 7d is magical on that score - but it really is that dark sometimes. My regular concert gig usually only has 2 lights, one either side of the stage. I often shoot the shows my daughter is in, which means school auditoriums with poor lighting. Even in shows with sophisticated, professional lighting, there's a lot of high contrast "effect" lighting these days, which means many dark patches.
If I tell you that my "usual" settings when using my 135L are f2.2-3.2 @ iso1600-2000 to eke out a 1/160 or 1/200 shutter speed (I'm not one of life's great steady handholders, so that's as low as I like to go), that gives you some idea.... This is why I'll often use the 50 1.4 and crop down, too, because I can go with a lower shutter speed and thus drop the ISO back a bit. EVentually, I'll need a FF camera so I have enough extra ISO for this not to be any kind of an issue, but at the moment, I'm still striking a balance.
If you haven't had the longer length experience yet I'd say it was well overdue!D
Neil
I had the 200L 2.8 for a while - byoootiful lens, but I sold it to get the 135 and definitely feel that's a more useable focal length for me. I'd actually consider getting another copy of the 200 at some point if I want more reach - it's really a lovely piece of lightweight, high quality gear.
Has anyone played with the Sigma f1.4 for an EOS mount?
I have nothing but good things to say about both the 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 from Sigma. I've only tested the 85 1.4 on Nikon, not Canon, but have shot a few weddings with the 5D mk2 and the 35 L, Sigma 50, and Canon 85 L...
And again, nothing but good things to say about the Sigmas. Sharp, built to last, (maybe not the paint finish, but at least the mechanics and optics) ...and WAY affordable compared to the L's...
I have nothing but good things to say about both the 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 from Sigma. I've only tested the 85 1.4 on Nikon, not Canon, but have shot a few weddings with the 5D mk2 and the 35 L, Sigma 50, and Canon 85 L...
And again, nothing but good things to say about the Sigmas. Sharp, built to last, (maybe not the paint finish, but at least the mechanics and optics) ...and WAY affordable compared to the L's...
=Matt=
Matt, I've got the 35L (with a 40D) and I love it, it's brilliant, but... I keep it hidden away, because I've become so untrusting of its focal length. I would often use it for people shots, but then I think I'm going to have some distortion mar the shot, when I don't want distortion, that is. I guess I really must force myself to take a chance with it more often.
If I keep it at closest at least double the MFD from S, say ~ 1m (when I don't want distortion), have I pretty much guaranteed there won't be any distortion on the 1.6 crop?
How about a 24-7- f2.8 Sigma...no OS but at 899 from BH it is a good deal.....I love mine...there are several on EBAY Also.......for less monsy than B&H....Good Luck
... If I keep it at closest at least double the MFD from S, say ~ 1m (when I don't want distortion), have I pretty much guaranteed there won't be any distortion on the 1.6 crop?
Neil
A 35mm lens used with a crop 1.5x/1.6x, APS-C sized sensor is a normal/standard Field-Of-View (FOV), similar to the FOV of a 50mm lens on a FF-135 format camera.
The perspective will be very nice for a full length or 3/4 length image, or a group image. For many people, myself included, I prefer something longer for a head shot or head-and-shoulders.
There are a few glamor/fashion photographers who prefer using an extremely long focal length for head shots, around 500mm or so. It all depends upon your personal preference, and that of your subject(s).
How about a 24-7- f2.8 Sigma...no OS but at 899 from BH it is a good deal.....I love mine...there are several on EBAY Also.......for less monsy than B&H....Good Luck
I checked that lens out online a few months back, Art - saw an awful lot of reviews that, in addition to the usual focus-needed-calibrating-at-Sigma-Central issues, complained the AF wasn't really that fast and it hunts a bit in the dark, which leads me back to the same problems as I would have with the Tamron 28-75 (which, if I'm honest, would be my first choice as a 3rd-party lens, simply because I've been so happy with the 17-50). If this L doesn't work out as I hope, I may check into the Sigma again, so thanks for the reminder
Neil, I"ve found that even at 50mm on a crop sensor I have to be careful if I'm close - remember those from-above shots I did of Mini-D last month that were just that leeeeetle bit too close with a 50mm? For close portraits, I do like something between 50-75 if I have the room (hence the purchase of this lens!!).
Ziggy & dm, thank you both for your helpful input! I do have longer options, and recently I have been using the 24-105 for portrait-type stuff, with f-length always about 70mm and more, and have had good results - this lens is very sharp with great resolving power, and the 40D is able to let its qualities come through.
The 35mmL at f1.4 is so much faster, and that is so much fun! I will just have to get out and develop technique with it. Good thing is that because of that very same edgy f-length that I am nervous of it offers some creative possibilities. What I don't want is "creative possibilities" appearing when I don't order them!wink:D
Matthew SavilleRegistered Users, Retired ModPosts: 3,352Major grins
edited March 13, 2011
It is definitely all about composition and distance. I shoot portraits at 17mm and wider sometimes, on crop and even full-frame. You just have to keep people's appendages away from the edge of the frame, and you have to keep your distance.
Off the top of my head, here's a shot on the 35 1.4 L and a 5D mk1:
Nice examples Matt, thanks very much! I am encouraged by them, there's nothing extreme in them (except perhaps the S's right hand on the couch - but you were pushing your luck with that, I reckon), and in fact the FOV is very attractive.
Comments
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
My 24-70 F2.8 L rarely gets used on a crop body - it is so big and heavy I just do not favor that combination, it seems unbalanced fore and aft, but the lens is very sharp. But so is my favorite, 24-105 f4 L IS. The 24-70 L is probably maxed out for sharpness at f5.6 to f8. But very good wide open...
I find it hard to imagine that you have difficulty with AF with a 7D and stage lighting. Is it really that dark on the players when you are photographing them? The 7D using the three AF point algorithm really works superbly for me, and compares very favorably to my 1DMK4, which probably has the best AF Canon makes.
I am not trying to question you here, Diva, it may be just that dark when you are working and I am not aware of it.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
I take your point, and there is also the bulk and weight to factor in. And with no IS at least a monopod in the theatre would be critical. But even so, I'd be putting a 70-200 f2.8 above a current 24-70 on my list. The difference in flength would be stunningly framed close-in shots. I'm thinking from the results end, not only from the specs+price end. There's no substitute for the thrill of a lens that gives you exactly what you wanted and more! You'd also save the blood (IQ) you spill by having to drastically crop for an approximation of a longer flength. If you did go the extra with a used 70-200 f2.8 with warranty, and it wasn't suitable for whatever reason, you could resell almost without losing a buck. If you haven't had the longer length experience yet I'd say it was well overdue!
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
I don't have problems with accuracy of AF - the 7d is magical on that score - but it really is that dark sometimes. My regular concert gig usually only has 2 lights, one either side of the stage. I often shoot the shows my daughter is in, which means school auditoriums with poor lighting. Even in shows with sophisticated, professional lighting, there's a lot of high contrast "effect" lighting these days, which means many dark patches.
If I tell you that my "usual" settings when using my 135L are f2.2-3.2 @ iso1600-2000 to eke out a 1/160 or 1/200 shutter speed (I'm not one of life's great steady handholders, so that's as low as I like to go), that gives you some idea.... This is why I'll often use the 50 1.4 and crop down, too, because I can go with a lower shutter speed and thus drop the ISO back a bit. EVentually, I'll need a FF camera so I have enough extra ISO for this not to be any kind of an issue, but at the moment, I'm still striking a balance.
Concert
ISO 2000 - 1/160 - f2.2 - 135L
iso 2500 - 1/160 - f2.2 135L
Kids' show
ISO 1600 - 1/125 - f2.0 - 50mm
I had the 200L 2.8 for a while - byoootiful lens, but I sold it to get the 135 and definitely feel that's a more useable focal length for me. I'd actually consider getting another copy of the 200 at some point if I want more reach - it's really a lovely piece of lightweight, high quality gear.
And again, nothing but good things to say about the Sigmas. Sharp, built to last, (maybe not the paint finish, but at least the mechanics and optics) ...and WAY affordable compared to the L's...
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Matt, I've got the 35L (with a 40D) and I love it, it's brilliant, but... I keep it hidden away, because I've become so untrusting of its focal length. I would often use it for people shots, but then I think I'm going to have some distortion mar the shot, when I don't want distortion, that is. I guess I really must force myself to take a chance with it more often.
If I keep it at closest at least double the MFD from S, say ~ 1m (when I don't want distortion), have I pretty much guaranteed there won't be any distortion on the 1.6 crop?
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
A 35mm lens used with a crop 1.5x/1.6x, APS-C sized sensor is a normal/standard Field-Of-View (FOV), similar to the FOV of a 50mm lens on a FF-135 format camera.
The perspective will be very nice for a full length or 3/4 length image, or a group image. For many people, myself included, I prefer something longer for a head shot or head-and-shoulders.
There are a few glamor/fashion photographers who prefer using an extremely long focal length for head shots, around 500mm or so. It all depends upon your personal preference, and that of your subject(s).
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I checked that lens out online a few months back, Art - saw an awful lot of reviews that, in addition to the usual focus-needed-calibrating-at-Sigma-Central issues, complained the AF wasn't really that fast and it hunts a bit in the dark, which leads me back to the same problems as I would have with the Tamron 28-75 (which, if I'm honest, would be my first choice as a 3rd-party lens, simply because I've been so happy with the 17-50). If this L doesn't work out as I hope, I may check into the Sigma again, so thanks for the reminder
Neil, I"ve found that even at 50mm on a crop sensor I have to be careful if I'm close - remember those from-above shots I did of Mini-D last month that were just that leeeeetle bit too close with a 50mm? For close portraits, I do like something between 50-75 if I have the room (hence the purchase of this lens!!).
The 35mmL at f1.4 is so much faster, and that is so much fun! I will just have to get out and develop technique with it. Good thing is that because of that very same edgy f-length that I am nervous of it offers some creative possibilities. What I don't want is "creative possibilities" appearing when I don't order them!
Thanks again, guys!
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
Off the top of my head, here's a shot on the 35 1.4 L and a 5D mk1:
...And here's a shot on a crop sensor at 17mm:
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix