Catpiano

Why do you want CPL and ND sin?  for key shift? or blue sky? or reduce reflection?

Well ...  I got tons of filters at home ..  but at the end of the day, other then UV(protection) rarely use other filters ..

Catpiano

On your 70-200? then no worry about Vignetting.

Catpiano

on my 17-40 +_+
嘉嘉 發表於 2011-5-13 22:50

Then no worry ..  no vignetting too.

Catpiano

ADDING Vignette and vignette from lens/filter is two thing ..

Should say Vignette and "DARK corner" is not the same. Some nice old german glasses have vignette, but not dark corner. (lost of light vs dark shadow)

There is nothing wrong with 17-40 on 50D, actually, it is still slightly nicer then the 17-55 (Bokeh/Colour/Sharpness) however, 17-55 is faster (F2.8 vs F4) better/longer range, and very effective IS, 17-55IS is reasonable close to "L" lens construction, but I guess Canon don't want to call a crop lens "L" (luxury)

I actually use my 18-55/15-85/18-135 etc more then 17-55 or 17-40 on crop bodies .. I guess just habbit.

Back to ND, 77mm filters are not cheap, so I understand you may not want to buy many of them, and nend up not using them much.

There is a kind of ND filter you can adjust the level, I don't have one, but worth to try, and won't add extra thickness as well. (I am old school, use 2x/4x/8x)

^_^

Catpiano

hehe, but full frame body is my next target
嘉嘉 發表於 2011-5-16 13:20

   Ka Ka,  If you are planning on FF, and you already have 17-40 .. then no need to get the 17-55 ... (F2.8 is not that important on wide zoom, if you want fast aperture for smooth bokeh, get a prime, such as 35 F2 .. (or 1.4 if you want to spend $1600)

I can't remember correctly, I think you had experience on film?  Then "IS" may not be that important if you have steady hands, I am used to 1/4 or 1/5 of a second, but of course, people are more picky on sharpness now .

IS is great for low light indoor "FIXED" object, as long as you are taking picture for moving object, (human/dogs/cats) you need faster shutter speed/flash to freeze the object anyway ...

Don't get me wrong, IS is still good to have, just you won't use it as much on wide angle, plus most Camera perform very well at ultra high iso such as iso 1600.

Size is one thing too, the 17-55 is not a small lens, much heavier then the 18-55/15-85 even the 18-200.

And you were looking at some filter to "reduce" light, so I guess extra 1 stop won't benifit you much.

(P.S. for someone want one carry on lens, on crop sensor body with great quality, 17-55IS is still the best. ^_^ )

Catpiano

but so far none of my lenses have IS and I don't see how I can't survive without it (but of cuz like u said it's nice to have)

that's interesting......now I wonder why the 17-55 is so expensive?
it's for crop bodies and good thing about it is the F2.8, then pretty much it......嘉嘉 發表於 2011-5-17 22:04

The Canon 17-55 IS isn't really expensive .. if you compare to the Nikon one.

In general speaking, Canon lens costs slightly more (here) but this case, the Nikon one is more (~ 10%) with NO IS (VR).

Main reason for extra cost is: MORE LIGHT. You pay a big premium for extra light, say 17-40L vs 16-35L, u get more range from 17-40, but the 16-35 is almost 3 times more expensive. Or the 50mm, 3 times more from 1.8 to 1.4, and another 3 times more from 1.4 to 1.2, and almost 10 times more for the 0.95 (Leica)

DON'T sell your 17-40 for Tamron, which the Tamron makes great lens, but the construction, durability is not the same (you sound like you will keep a lens for lens, not like most C hing, swap lens every few week/month) and also the colour/constrast/bokeh, again, not saying Tamron is no good, but different, imagine you are taking few hundred photos in one event, you don't want to see 2 or 3 different "style"

I take both Nikon/Canon system for some event, (Nikon's wide still much better) but kind of confuse sometime when their styles are so different, and I am so old school, I don't know much about photoshop...

Plus, if you sell the 17-40, how much can u get? may be $600? then if u need to spend $400 anyway .. not worth to, and you need to "adpot" a different style lens.

If you are looking for a Macro lens, then it is a different story if you want a third party lens (ie: tamron 90mm is a great lens)

^_^

Catpiano

lots of people complain about the yellowish tone from the sigma,
have you ever notice that? I see lo ...
Mr.JPG 發表於 2011-5-18 08:39

    I have a handfull of Sigma, yes, they are a bit more yellowish, so when I swap to a sigma lens, I will do some fine tune on WB.

To be fair, their newer lens are better, (especially Prime) not as yellowish as before, and depends what system you use, Sigma lens match nikon system a bit better then Canon. (warmer tone from Nikon)

Catpiano

Suen ba la.. those email are scam ...  

I got phone call all the time .. said I won $million la.. LOL

use your brain + common sense...  

Sadly, 400D is a good camera, but you are not going to get much ..  may be $200? I am going to keep my 400D .. just save it for my son!

I somehow still like 5D over 5DII, unless you are big freak for video ..  using the 5DII for more then 2.5 yr ..  I can tell how many video I took ...  mostly short video .. and end up never viewed again .. (Just me, again, it can take great video, you are are into it)

OR .. get a used 1DsII for about the same cost, still the best COLOUR and closest to film feel Canon DSLR IMO. (but it is heavy)

Catpiano

回復  Catpiano

Having the 1D III for a while, very impressed with the reaction time and accuracy.  ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-5-19 08:20

    Ha ? weird wor .. I am fine with it @ even iso 6400 wor ...

Not that I will use those ultra high iso ...  I guess depends on how to take the pic la..  if it is under, then boost it .. even low iso, will got high noise..

Catpiano

It seems Nikon stuff is more well design and made.  Although, it is slower to adopt to new technolog ...
Look4chrisng 發表於 2011-5-19 09:11

    To be honest, I hardly notice that much of a different/advantage, no matter D300/D700 to 5D/5DII/1D/1Ds series ..  noise is not what I concern, may be 1 out of 100 pic, need ultra high iso .. ( I am not a news reporter ) and many way to fix .. (software to REDUCE noise, or even ADD more )

However, I hardly stand the noise level on Sony DSLR .. it's FF 25MP sensor is awesome, and those old minolta lens are great and cheap ... but then .. iso 800 and up ..  lots of noise, and not smooth .. and the bigger problem is the flash system isn't as great and flexible.