--and the 300mm is pretty expen$ive! What is the advantage over the 200mm 2.8 than the 70-200 ? I would think that the 70-200 would be better, although the 200 would save me money.
In general, primes have better image quality than zooms. So the 200/2.8 would be cheaper, plus better image quality, than the 70-200/2.8 zoom. Plus less weight.
Here's an important question though... Would it be a little counterintuitive to have this brand new, nice camera with just an Okay lense?
Counterintuitive? Probably. The lens is usually more important than the camera body. Not always, but often. You will eventually get the whole package, it can be debated which step is the correct first step.
Even with an ok lens the 1-series will do things the 30D cannot.
In general, primes have better image quality than zooms. So the 200/2.8 would be cheaper, plus better image quality, than the 70-200/2.8 zoom. Plus less weight.
With all due respect you forgot a little thing called "IS".
70-200 has it, 200 prime does not.
3 f-stops difference is (IMHO) way more than justifies the difference in price and weight... You pretty much can't use 200 (or longer) prime at night/inside without monopod, or even tripod. Each greatly reduces your mobility. With IS you can shoot handheld all you want.
And as a nice side effect you'll develop some solid biceps:-)
With all due respect you forgot a little thing called "IS".
70-200 has it, 200 prime does not.
3 f-stops difference is (IMHO) way more than justifies the difference in price and weight... You pretty much can't use 200 (or longer) prime at night/inside without monopod, or even tripod. Each greatly reduces your mobility. With IS you can shoot handheld all you want.
And as a nice side effect you'll develop some solid biceps:-)
$1000 is a big difference Nik. Plus when shooting movement in low light you will need to have a fairly fast shutter speed to stop the action. In order to stop the action your shutter speed will also be high enough to eliminate camera shake. For a budget I'd say the 200 f/2.8 would be the way to go.
$1000 is a big difference Nik. Plus when shooting movement in low light you will need to have a fairly fast shutter speed to stop the action. In order to stop the action your shutter speed will also be high enough to eliminate camera shake. For a budget I'd say the 200 f/2.8 would be the way to go.
I agree, it's a budget question. I saved for quite some time for my 70-200. Yet I can say it has already paid for itself (in less than 6 months), since I got a few paid gigs which I would not be able to do with a tripod.
And versatility of the 70-200 zoom range...:ivar
But I guess it leads to an old flamewar between Zooms and Primes, so I better shut down..:-) :hide
That's a good way to lose a lens, carrying it like that on the monopod! Puts lot of stress on that small 1/4-20 bolt holding it on. I've heard horror stories when those things let go... :O
That's a good way to lose a lens, carrying it like that on the monopod! Puts lot of stress on that small 1/4-20 bolt holding it on. I've heard horror stories when those things let go... :O
I get shouted down when I say it, but I agree completely.
Don't forget to click the "tabs" at the top of the article to see additional information. They did a nice job explaining some of the inner workings of this camera.
It looks like the 14 bits are there more to improve tonal gradation than to increase dynamic range although there's a "highlight recovery mode" which you may think of as extending the range by 1-stop.
$1500USD for a Canon 1D MKIIN is probably a bit wishfull.
A good used Canon 1D is about that now, and a good used Canon 1D MKII is about $1800-$2600 or so.
The Canon 1D MKIIN is still available new for $3400-$3500, and $2500-$3000 used.
(Prices gleaned from B&H, KEH, Adorama and FM Buy & Sell today)
OK, fine, ruin my fantasy! Thanks! :cry
Yeah, probably around the $2k range give or take is more like reality, but it's still half of a new Mk III. I'm just looking at the 20D price history when the 30D hit--it dropped nearly 50% in about a month.
$1000 is a big difference Nik. Plus when shooting movement in low light you will need to have a fairly fast shutter speed to stop the action. In order to stop the action your shutter speed will also be high enough to eliminate camera shake. For a budget I'd say the 200 f/2.8 would be the way to go.
I actually used the cost/prime reason for getting the 200 f/2.8. Great bokeh, sharp and fast! A really great lens. And I returned it. I was using it in low light and had to boost the ISO to use it since there wasn't any IS. But the main reason had to do with the situations in which I shoot. I kept needing to backup to get a good composition. Somewhere in the 150-170 range. Yes, it is $1K more but I have never regretted my decision.
"Don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to. Oh well."
-Fleetwood Mac
I actually used the cost/prime reason for getting the 200 f/2.8. Great bokeh, sharp and fast! A really great lens. And I returned it. I was using it in low light and had to boost the ISO to use it since there wasn't any IS. But the main reason had to do with the situations in which I shoot. I kept needing to backup to get a good composition. Somewhere in the 150-170 range. Yes, it is $1K more but I have never regretted my decision.
Does anyone know if all canon lenses (or just some) are water/weather resistant? I heard that it was only the L series lenses,, but are there more that weather proof? I know that just about all of canon's cameras can withstand a little bit of rain, dust or snow.. but I'm talking weather-sealed so that I don't have to worry about it if I want to shoot a mud game in the pouring rain.
(obviously it's still necessary to take care of any equipment, but in event of a sudden storm...?)
This will be an improvement from my 20D... I'm afraid to take it out in the elements while I could be gettng great shots.
--
_:nod Nate____
Canon 1D Mark II N . Canon 20D . Canon Digital Rebel Xti .
Speedlite 430 EX .
Canon : 18-55 kit, 75-300 IS, 70-200 IS f/2.8 L .
So I've been thinking about this one. Are there any disadvantages of using ISO 50 (other than the obvious losing one stop of sensitivity)? I'm just wondering why this would be an extension of the ISO range rather than it being on by default.
At any rate, this has become my dream camera. I think the 1.3 crop factor would be perfect, I can't imagine why I would need more than 10 megapixels other than to be able to frame generously and then crop in post, 10 fps would allow me to show off like nobody's business (okay, maybe I don't need 10 fps, but the flutter sound would be super cool ), my next camera will have anti-dust, and I can even fathom possibly being able to afford / justify the $4000 esitmated cost to the house CFO (but $8000 or $9000 or maybe more for the 1ds mkII replacement is well over the line).
So if anyone would care to make a donation to the Mike Lane gets a 1D mkIII fund, I'd appreciate it.
Y'all don't want to hear me, you just want to dance.
Does anyone know if all canon lenses (or just some) are water/weather resistant? I heard that it was only the L series lenses,, but are there more that weather proof? I know that just about all of canon's cameras can withstand a little bit of rain, dust or snow.. but I'm talking weather-sealed so that I don't have to worry about it if I want to shoot a mud game in the pouring rain.
(obviously it's still necessary to take care of any equipment, but in event of a sudden storm...?)
This will be an improvement from my 20D... I'm afraid to take it out in the elements while I could be gettng great shots.
According to this list, "most" "L" lenses are weather sealed, not water proof. It is more of a water shed and o-ring system, not designed for immersion or continuous exposure.
So I've been thinking about this one. Are there any disadvantages of using ISO 50 (other than the obvious losing one stop of sensitivity)? I'm just wondering why this would be an extension of the ISO range rather than it being on by default.
At any rate, this has become my dream camera. I think the 1.3 crop factor would be perfect, I can't imagine why I would need more than 10 megapixels other than to be able to frame generously and then crop in post, 10 fps would allow me to show off like nobody's business (okay, maybe I don't need 10 fps, but the flutter sound would be super cool ), my next camera will have anti-dust, and I can even fathom possibly being able to afford / justify the $4000 esitmated cost to the house CFO (but $8000 or $9000 or maybe more for the 1ds mkII replacement is well over the line).
So if anyone would care to make a donation to the Mike Lane gets a 1D mkIII fund, I'd appreciate it.
Mike,
Canon cautions that dynamic range is reduced at ISO 50 on the 1D MKII and 1D MKIIN.
Some users, including other Canon 1D series owners, get unusual results and inconsistant results across different color channels.
Neutral density filters are probably more desirable to use.
ISO 50 does improve signal to noise ratios, so if the scene is not too much DR, ISO 50 will reduce sensitivity and allow a larger aperture or longer exposure.
That's a good way to lose a lens, carrying it like that on the monopod! Puts lot of stress on that small 1/4-20 bolt holding it on. I've heard horror stories when those things let go... :O
He didn't have to buy the lens - his employer bought the lens - he is just using it.
That said, I know of more than one owner ( not me either ) who has rued the day he decided to carry a big lens ower his shoulder on a tripod. Harry knows them also. Tripods have beeen known to fall off cliffs with the good stuff on them also. Be careful out there, boys.
Watch this video. One may mistaken it for a machine gun.
Anicca - the Theory of Impermanence: camera changes, photos stay (in Smugmug). About me - one of the the junior siblings in Dgrin family (DOB May 2006).
Watch this video. One may mistaken it for a machine gun.
Two things, 1, that is amazing! 2, some of the people commenting over there crack me up! Some of the comments about how useless the 10fps feature is make me just shake my head.
Some of the comments about how useless the 10fps feature is make me just shake my head.
Most pro sports shooters I know aren't asking for more frames per second. I gotta agree, 8.5 is pretty darn fast and I don't see the need myself for a faster frame rate. You don't get the shot you want by laying down the shutter and praying one of them is the shot you hoped you got.
10fps is pure bragging rights by Canon and little else.
Most pro sports shooters I know aren't asking for more frames per second. I gotta agree, 8.5 is pretty darn fast and I don't see the need myself for a faster frame rate. You don't get the shot you want by laying down the shutter and praying one of them is the shot you hoped you got.
10fps is pure bragging rights by Canon and little else.
Oh I agree completely. Some of the comments thoughw ere regarding the concept of shooting fast like that,not specifically the exact number of shots per sec. I gotta admit, even if the bump up to 10fps is just bragging rights, it's still sounds amazing to me when I hear that shutter going off like a machine gun!
The 10 frames-per-second shutter is not the only speed advantage in this machine. The exposure system and the auto-focus systems have been improved to keep up with the shutter, and that makes for a much more responsive camera overall.
Couple the above advances and add in a larger buffer and faster memory card write speeds, and you start to get a feel for why this camera is so significant.
Frankly, the 1D cameras are so fast, it exposes (pun intended) the poor autofocus of some of the lenses. Its like, "c'mon, focus already!" ... and then the camera is there for you "bam".
The effect is hard to describe, you really have to experience the difference.
(In the Nikon world, the D2H/D2Hs is a similar experience. Shooting alongside, with several of these high-speed cameras, is quite an event in itself. Bambambambambambambam ...)
10fps is pure bragging rights by Canon and little else.
As a bird photographer, that belongs to a club of about 75 bird photographers, I can tell you it makes a difference. Not huge...but a difference. The uptick to 10fps and the dual DigicIII setup also gives the bird photographer a jump from 22 RAW burst to 30 RAW burst. Birds in flight, birds landing and birds feeding are where this is a help. The action is so fast and unpredictable that you increase your chances of getting the perfect moment captured, because you simply can not see the action and decide what to shoot as quickly as you can see the action and shoot it until it stops. I am NOT saying people should hold down the shutter and pray. I AM saying that with this added speed comes the ability to more closely match the speed of your subject. You simply do not have time to setup and take the one perfect frame in these situations. One splash of water, position of the eye, position of the wing, etc. can make the difference between a good bird shot and a great bird shot.
The camera alone does not a photographer make of course, so please do not think I am advocating someone gets the camera to be a better photographer. Put that camera and a 500 f/4 in my hands I'll produce a picture as good or bad as what I am producing with my 30D today. For the high amateur or pro that is killing with a MarkIIN, I'll wager the MarkIII does give them an edge and some more room to push their craft.
Comments
Counterintuitive? Probably. The lens is usually more important than the camera body. Not always, but often. You will eventually get the whole package, it can be debated which step is the correct first step.
Even with an ok lens the 1-series will do things the 30D cannot.
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
With all due respect you forgot a little thing called "IS".
70-200 has it, 200 prime does not.
3 f-stops difference is (IMHO) way more than justifies the difference in price and weight... You pretty much can't use 200 (or longer) prime at night/inside without monopod, or even tripod. Each greatly reduces your mobility. With IS you can shoot handheld all you want.
And as a nice side effect you'll develop some solid biceps:-)
SmugMug Technical Account Manager
Travel = good. Woo, shooting!
nickwphoto
www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E1DMK3/E1DMK3A.HTM
The ultimate football setup is a 300/400 2.8 on one body and 70-200 2.8 on another body.
I agree, it's a budget question. I saved for quite some time for my 70-200. Yet I can say it has already paid for itself (in less than 6 months), since I got a few paid gigs which I would not be able to do with a tripod.
And versatility of the 70-200 zoom range...:ivar
But I guess it leads to an old flamewar between Zooms and Primes, so I better shut down..:-) :hide
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E1DMK3/E1DMK3A.HTM
Don't forget to click the "tabs" at the top of the article to see additional information. They did a nice job explaining some of the inner workings of this camera.
It looks like the 14 bits are there more to improve tonal gradation than to increase dynamic range although there's a "highlight recovery mode" which you may think of as extending the range by 1-stop.
Sample shots at ISO6400 look amazing....
Erich
OK, fine, ruin my fantasy! Thanks! :cry
Yeah, probably around the $2k range give or take is more like reality, but it's still half of a new Mk III. I'm just looking at the 20D price history when the 30D hit--it dropped nearly 50% in about a month.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
I actually used the cost/prime reason for getting the 200 f/2.8. Great bokeh, sharp and fast! A really great lens. And I returned it. I was using it in low light and had to boost the ISO to use it since there wasn't any IS. But the main reason had to do with the situations in which I shoot. I kept needing to backup to get a good composition. Somewhere in the 150-170 range. Yes, it is $1K more but I have never regretted my decision.
-Fleetwood Mac
Exactly my reasoning!
(obviously it's still necessary to take care of any equipment, but in event of a sudden storm...?)
This will be an improvement from my 20D... I'm afraid to take it out in the elements while I could be gettng great shots.
_:nod Nate____
Canon 1D Mark II N . Canon 20D . Canon Digital Rebel Xti .
Speedlite 430 EX .
Canon : 18-55 kit, 75-300 IS, 70-200 IS f/2.8 L .
At any rate, this has become my dream camera. I think the 1.3 crop factor would be perfect, I can't imagine why I would need more than 10 megapixels other than to be able to frame generously and then crop in post, 10 fps would allow me to show off like nobody's business (okay, maybe I don't need 10 fps, but the flutter sound would be super cool
So if anyone would care to make a donation to the Mike Lane gets a 1D mkIII fund, I'd appreciate it.
http://photos.mikelanestudios.com/
According to this list, "most" "L" lenses are weather sealed, not water proof. It is more of a water shed and o-ring system, not designed for immersion or continuous exposure.
http://www.lensplay.com/lenses/lens_weathersealed.html
Most notably, the 70-200mm, f4L is "not" weather sealed, but the later IS version of the lens is.
As far as I know, no other Canon lenses are weather sealed outside of the "L" line. I don't know about other manufacturers products.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Mike,
Canon cautions that dynamic range is reduced at ISO 50 on the 1D MKII and 1D MKIIN.
Some users, including other Canon 1D series owners, get unusual results and inconsistant results across different color channels.
http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=978
The following link shows the DRange at different ISOs
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/evaluation-1d2/
Neutral density filters are probably more desirable to use.
ISO 50 does improve signal to noise ratios, so if the scene is not too much DR, ISO 50 will reduce sensitivity and allow a larger aperture or longer exposure.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
That said, I know of more than one owner ( not me either ) who has rued the day he decided to carry a big lens ower his shoulder on a tripod. Harry knows them also. Tripods have beeen known to fall off cliffs with the good stuff on them also. Be careful out there, boys.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
I'm with you Andy, the bolt is stronger than the lens mount.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
I have a bad experience on my side. BTDT, trying to get rid of the t-shirt.
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
About me - one of the the junior siblings in Dgrin family (DOB May 2006).
Two things, 1, that is amazing! 2, some of the people commenting over there crack me up! Some of the comments about how useless the 10fps feature is make me just shake my head.
10fps is pure bragging rights by Canon and little else.
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
Oh I agree completely. Some of the comments thoughw ere regarding the concept of shooting fast like that,not specifically the exact number of shots per sec. I gotta admit, even if the bump up to 10fps is just bragging rights, it's still sounds amazing to me when I hear that shutter going off like a machine gun!
:wow
I SO want one. There's GOT to be a way to rob a bank without going to jail....
Gotta love the evil chuckle at the end, kind of like "heh, match THAT, guys"
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
Couple the above advances and add in a larger buffer and faster memory card write speeds, and you start to get a feel for why this camera is so significant.
Frankly, the 1D cameras are so fast, it exposes (pun intended) the poor autofocus of some of the lenses. Its like, "c'mon, focus already!" ... and then the camera is there for you "bam".
The effect is hard to describe, you really have to experience the difference.
(In the Nikon world, the D2H/D2Hs is a similar experience. Shooting alongside, with several of these high-speed cameras, is quite an event in itself.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
As a bird photographer, that belongs to a club of about 75 bird photographers, I can tell you it makes a difference. Not huge...but a difference. The uptick to 10fps and the dual DigicIII setup also gives the bird photographer a jump from 22 RAW burst to 30 RAW burst. Birds in flight, birds landing and birds feeding are where this is a help. The action is so fast and unpredictable that you increase your chances of getting the perfect moment captured, because you simply can not see the action and decide what to shoot as quickly as you can see the action and shoot it until it stops. I am NOT saying people should hold down the shutter and pray. I AM saying that with this added speed comes the ability to more closely match the speed of your subject. You simply do not have time to setup and take the one perfect frame in these situations. One splash of water, position of the eye, position of the wing, etc. can make the difference between a good bird shot and a great bird shot.
The camera alone does not a photographer make of course, so please do not think I am advocating someone gets the camera to be a better photographer. Put that camera and a 500 f/4 in my hands I'll produce a picture as good or bad as what I am producing with my 30D today. For the high amateur or pro that is killing with a MarkIIN, I'll wager the MarkIII does give them an edge and some more room to push their craft.
My photos
"The future is an illusion, but a damned handy one." - David Allen