TheWAND Posted August 5, 2011 Author Share Posted August 5, 2011 Also, is anyone interested in buying a 400mm 2.8L lens? It is over 10 years old, but image quality is amazing. Only gripe I have with this lens over the current lens and the new version Canon is putting out is the weight. I've used the new IS version, and even though the lightness is great, IS is negligible even at the long focal range, which could never justify the price for the newer lenses. Anyways, the lens has been sitting in a case for a while seeing far too little use so if anyone is interested PM me or post here for pictures of the lens and a price. The lens has focus range limiters as well as manual focus "gears" which allows you to fine tune your manual focus adjustments in three levels. Auto focus is incredibly fast, even in low light. Comes with lens hood, rear lens cap and Canon 600mm trunk case. For price reference, this is what canon is putting out later this year as a replacement to the current version (which used to cost this much as well). Canon 400mm f/2.8L IS II Take that price and subtract a thousand, that's what the 400mm I'm selling used to cost. Of course I won't ask anything near that. Link to comment
hamiltonra25 Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Also, is anyone interested in buying a 400mm 2.8L lens? It is over 10 years old, but image quality is amazing. Only gripe I have with this lens over the current lens and the new version Canon is putting out is the weight. I've used the new IS version, and even though the lightness is great, IS is negligible even at the long focal range, which could never justify the price for the newer lenses. Anyways, the lens has been sitting in a case for a while seeing far too little use so if anyone is interested PM me or post here for pictures of the lens and a price. The lens has focus range limiters as well as manual focus "gears" which allows you to fine tune your manual focus adjustments in three levels. Auto focus is incredibly fast, even in low light. Comes with lens hood, rear lens cap and Canon 600mm trunk case. For price reference, this is what canon is putting out later this year as a replacement to the current version (which used to cost this much as well). Canon 400mm f/2.8L IS II Take that price and subtract a thousand, that's what the 400mm I'm selling used to cost. Of course I won't ask anything near that. Idk much about photography. Is that a professional grade lens? Never in my life would have guessed they could cost 12k Link to comment
TheWAND Posted August 6, 2011 Author Share Posted August 6, 2011 Idk much about photography. Is that a professional grade lens? Never in my life would have guessed they could cost 12k Yes. Mainly used for birding and sporting events, such as football games. I've gone hiking with it, and the weight isn't too bad in a decent photographer's backpack. Link to comment
Nylaspop Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 Lol a bit later I watched a YouTube on the macro L vs non L.... Getting the L now. Sold on waterproof and sharper image quality once picture gets cropped. I still prefer the 28-70mm 2.8L. Even tho I'll have the 500 1.4 for general use. I already have a 55-250 to cover that range, n my quality preference will be on close range focal length hahaha i seen you over at potn and that was an awesome video of the chinese guy with the odd british accent! Link to comment
TheWAND Posted August 7, 2011 Author Share Posted August 7, 2011 Haven't had much time for processing everything yet, but here's one. Constructing Traffic Raised red luminance to get brake lights to stand out, and straightened in photoshop RAW. Also custom WB in PS RAW and added very slight vignette using layers. Vignette can only be seen in upper portion of the photo. Figured I'd post this since this page in my photo thread hasn't seen a picture yet. Most of my time has been processing photos from family events lately. Link to comment
TheWAND Posted August 7, 2011 Author Share Posted August 7, 2011 Here's what I have coming from a recent family event, posting because nobody's face will be shown in this one. I'm still experimenting with off-camera flashes and hopefully I'll be able to upgrade my ST-E2 with radiopoppers soon and maybe add a 580 exii to my arsenal. Using the off camera flashes gives the photos a lot more depth than a flash would give if it was mounted on the camera hotshoe, and I love the creative effects you can create, like this one. In this photo, flash is way up high to the left pointed down set to ETTL setting with -2/3 power on the flash zoomed to 35mm with camera on manual set to 1/500 sec exposure and 2.8 aperture. Only post processing here is increased black point to completely black out faces. Partygoer's Anonymous Link to comment
SouthFlorida_Tron Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 wannnnddddyyyy... got my L!!!! got a brick (24-70 2.8L) and a 50mm 1.4 from a friend, both for 1500 :P :P Link to comment
Kazooie Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Partygoer's Anonymous I see his chin, now I know who he is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment
TheWAND Posted October 10, 2011 Author Share Posted October 10, 2011 Something to pass the time. From the 4th of July in SoCal. Obviously the 1D body I favor is not for pixel peeping but colors and contrast are spot on, not to mention the AF is spectacular. I'll add this from a wedding shoot in Palm Springs. Quite a quirky little venue. Link to comment
TheWAND Posted January 23, 2012 Author Share Posted January 23, 2012 That time of the year again... This is a 3 shot HDR from a little hike I went on today. Longest exposure was 2 seconds and the shortest was 1 second. I had to put on the 1.2 ND filter for this one. Also, after having purchased and testing the Sigma 85 1.4 for a week, I've decided to return it and order a 100mm L IS instead. The Sigma was great, especially after a bit of AF micro adjustment, but didn't cut it for me after using a friend's 85 1.2 for so long. Eventually I will have to upgrade, but until then, the 100 should suffice. Link to comment
TheWAND Posted February 3, 2012 Author Share Posted February 3, 2012 The 100mm 2.8 L came in yesterday and I've been shooting a bit with it. Here's a couple taken of my cousin's tank. 1/60 sec. f/8.0 ISO 1600 1/320 sec. f/2.8 ISO 800 Link to comment
SouthFlorida_Tron Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Splendid.....where have u been... Plz be sure to observe the POTM selections and I hope mine catches your attention regarding the theme! Link to comment
TheWAND Posted February 3, 2012 Author Share Posted February 3, 2012 Splendid.....where have u been... Plz be sure to observe the POTM selections and I hope mine catches your attention regarding the theme! Maybe. Yours is the best of the many water reflections so far... Link to comment
urbaneks Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Was that a canon lens? Link to comment
SouthFlorida_Tron Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 L = prestige = only Canon !!! Rawrrrr! Link to comment
urbaneks Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Any idea how this compares to the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS Macro Lens? I''m in the market for a macro lens for my canon. Link to comment
SouthFlorida_Tron Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Maybe. Yours is the best of the many water reflections so far... Heh thx bro.... Was a meaningless shot at the time, and now it turned out it has a purpose lol....apparently however..... Macro show of corals are considered abstract, so there's too many noobs involved at this point in the voting aspect regarding "oh that looks pretty, has my vote" without ackknowldging what the point is... If that makes sense lol Link to comment
SouthFlorida_Tron Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Any idea how this compares to the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS Macro Lens? I''m in the market for a macro lens for my canon. Mmm, well. With macro, it doesn't get better than the 100mm L with IS. I have the regular 100mm macro f2.8. Slight difference in sharpness towards the edges. Sigma's I've heard the 150mm macro wins, not sure about the 105. Link to comment
TheWAND Posted February 3, 2012 Author Share Posted February 3, 2012 Any idea how this compares to the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS Macro Lens? I''m in the market for a macro lens for my canon. Between the Sigma 105 and the Canon 100 L, I'd go with the Canon. If you want a lens that will double as a medium telephoto go with the Sigma 150mm 2.8. It's got OS as well as weathersealing. If you want the 100mm lens though and don't have a Canon body that is 7D or higher, then go with the Canon. Sigma needs major microadjustment 90% of the time for autofocus. I chose the Canon 100L over the Sigma 150 because I needed this to double as a short tele for portraits until I could put down money on the 50mm 1.2L or the 85mm 1.2L. I also only chose this lens because the 9 blade rounded aperture looks much nicer stopped down compared to the 8 blade aperture of the older 100mm canon has. Link to comment
sanchez Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Hey, just out of curiosity.. where around SoCal do you shoot? I'm from SoCal too Link to comment
05XRunner Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Any idea how this compares to the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS Macro Lens? I''m in the market for a macro lens for my canon. you will be EXTREMELY hard pressed to tell the difference between just about all of the macro lenses. They are ALL sharp, all very accurate focus and NONE will disappoint. If you took the same pic from every lens I really doubt anyone could tell the difference what is what. So Canon, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina..they are all excellent I see we have a spouter of sigma AF calibration. Do you have FIRST hand experience or are you just spitting out what others have said on the web? I have had alot of lenses and a bunch of Sigma lenses and the ONLY one I have ever needed to be calibrated was the 50 1.4EX The 2 Sigma 150 macro, Sigma 70-200 2.8 DG EX, 50-500 DG EX, 10-20 DG EX, 17-35 EX DG and 3 Sigma 50 1.4 EX the only ones that gave me issue was 2 of the 50's that needed calibrated..all the other ones were dead on. PLENTY of my Canon L's I have had needed microadjstment as well..but then again thats why the tool is there to give it slight adjustment if needed. Link to comment
TheWAND Posted February 3, 2012 Author Share Posted February 3, 2012 I had the Sigma 85 1.4 shortly before I returned it as well as having used a friend's 50 1.4 with had back focusing as well. They are great lenses if you get a good copy, but I'll stick with the Canon for now. The point is it doesn't matter if you or I have microadjustment in our DSLR bodies, because many people on this board do not have it, which will make the AF useless unless it's spot on in the lens you have. Also, what he says is right about the macros all being similar for the most part. Macros wouldn't be labeled macro lenses unless they were extremely sharp. I just chose the one that fit my needs the best. Plus the Canon was less than the Sigma by $80 which I could never justify buying a Sigma over a Canon for more than the Canon. I shoot mainly in the Orange area, sometimes down by the beach. Weekend engagement shoot is going to be at Salton Sea though, so that's a while away. Link to comment
SouthFlorida_Tron Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 Priceless photo hahahha... love it. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.