I ordered a 10D today

I bit the bullet and decided to buy a Canon 10D camera. Now comes the question of which lenses to buy. I'm thinking of possibly using the Canon 28-135 mm as my first lens. My most immediate use will be a stage production this weekend where flash is not allowed.

I'd appreciate it if any of you who have used Canon lenses before can advise me if I should choose a different on instead, or if this one has specific problems I should look out for.

Victor Engel said:

I bit the bullet and decided to buy a Canon 10D camera. Now comes
the question of which lenses to buy. I'm thinking of possibly using
the Canon 28-135 mm as my first lens. My most immediate use will be
a stage production this weekend where flash is not allowed.

Click to expand...

This sets off a "low light, will need faster lens" alarm in my head.
-harry

depending on how much light there is, that lens may or may not be fast enough.

Depending on where you are sitting, you can always go for a $80 50mm 1.8 to tie you over this weekend's shoot.

Victor Engel said:

I bit the bullet and decided to buy a Canon 10D camera. Now comes
the question of which lenses to buy. I'm thinking of possibly using
the Canon 28-135 mm as my first lens. My most immediate use will be
a stage production this weekend where flash is not allowed.

I'd appreciate it if any of you who have used Canon lenses before
can advise me if I should choose a different on instead, or if this
one has specific problems I should look out for.

Click to expand...

--
-Stan
http://forums.stanc.net
http://www.stanc.net

hm said:

hm said:

I bit the bullet and decided to buy a Canon 10D camera. Now comes
the question of which lenses to buy. I'm thinking of possibly using
the Canon 28-135 mm as my first lens. My most immediate use will be
a stage production this weekend where flash is not allowed.

Click to expand...

This sets off a "low light, will need faster lens" alarm in my head.
-harry

Click to expand...

OK. I've received two alarms for low light conditions. Any decent zoom lenses out there that are fast enough for your liking? The 50mm 1.8 is also on my list, but I'd like to get in close and get some wide angles as well. And I really don't think I'll have the time to be swapping lenses.

I've been shooting with a rented S2 Pro at 1600 ISO about two stops underexposed (the harsh lighting makes the camera tend to overexpose even with spot metering) with good results. Aperture was similar to the lens I cited in my first post.

I use this lens for 90% of my shooting and love it. It is sharp as a tack and the IS is very useful.

Victor Engel said:

I bit the bullet and decided to buy a Canon 10D camera. Now comes
the question of which lenses to buy. I'm thinking of possibly using
the Canon 28-135 mm as my first lens. My most immediate use will be
a stage production this weekend where flash is not allowed.

I'd appreciate it if any of you who have used Canon lenses before
can advise me if I should choose a different on instead, or if this
one has specific problems I should look out for.

Click to expand...

--
--
http://www.pbase.com/mroda

The 70-200 2.8 L IS USM is an excellent lens for the low light and you'll have great range.

Teski

Victor Engel said:

hm said:

Victor Engel said:

I bit the bullet and decided to buy a Canon 10D camera. Now comes
the question of which lenses to buy. I'm thinking of possibly using
the Canon 28-135 mm as my first lens. My most immediate use will be
a stage production this weekend where flash is not allowed.

Click to expand...

This sets off a "low light, will need faster lens" alarm in my head.
-harry

Click to expand...

OK. I've received two alarms for low light conditions. Any decent
zoom lenses out there that are fast enough for your liking? The
50mm 1.8 is also on my list, but I'd like to get in close and get
some wide angles as well. And I really don't think I'll have the
time to be swapping lenses.

I've been shooting with a rented S2 Pro at 1600 ISO about two stops
underexposed (the harsh lighting makes the camera tend to
overexpose even with spot metering) with good results. Aperture was
similar to the lens I cited in my first post.

Click to expand...

Victor Engel said:

OK. I've received two alarms for low light conditions. Any decent
zoom lenses out there that are fast enough for your liking? The
50mm 1.8 is also on my list, but I'd like to get in close and get
some wide angles as well. And I really don't think I'll have the
time to be swapping lenses.

Click to expand...

You might want to try out the 16-35L f/2.8. Fast zoom, VERY expensive. Maybe you can rent one in your area for the weekend. This would tide you over while you make a more informed choice....

Teski said:

The 70-200 2.8 L IS USM is an excellent lens for the low light and
you'll have great range.

Click to expand...

That would be an interesting switch from what I've been using. I say this because in order to get it to work, I'd have to sit further back in the audience, thus getting a different perspective. I'll think this one over. Thanks.

"I ordered a 10D today" tells anyone glancing over the postings NOTHING about why you are posting your message and many will pass without reading it.

billtoo

Victor Engel said:

I bit the bullet and decided to buy a Canon 10D camera. Now comes
the question of which lenses to buy. I'm thinking of possibly using
the Canon 28-135 mm as my first lens. My most immediate use will be
a stage production this weekend where flash is not allowed.

I'd appreciate it if any of you who have used Canon lenses before
can advise me if I should choose a different on instead, or if this
one has specific problems I should look out for.

Click to expand...

--
billtoo
http://www.pbase.com/billtoo

There's the 24-70 2.8 L USM. My main point was that you need to get some speed in your lens, and I personally would want a zoom since you can't really move around too much while the play is going on (I assume).

Teski

Victor Engel said:

Teski said:

The 70-200 2.8 L IS USM is an excellent lens for the low light and
you'll have great range.

Click to expand...

That would be an interesting switch from what I've been using. I
say this because in order to get it to work, I'd have to sit
further back in the audience, thus getting a different perspective.
I'll think this one over. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Teski said:

There's the 24-70 2.8 L USM. My main point was that you need to
get some speed in your lens, and I personally would want a zoom
since you can't really move around too much while the play is going
on (I assume).

Click to expand...

Some motion blur, of course, can create interesting and sometimes desireable effects. This is not actually my primary concern, since I know I can get acceptable images at f 3.5. Faster would be nice, but I can live with this speed. Canon literature notwithstanding (IS gives you 2 extra stops), the main source of blur for my subjects is THEIR motion, not mine. No amount of IS will fix this. So, IS is nice, but I don't see that it buys me anything at this point.

Regarding moving around, I should have taken the opportunity to take pictures during rehearsal. I'd have been able to move around at leisure, etc. I did do this the last time with great results. Some scenes demand a close-in perspective which simply cannot be achieved using a long lens. So, yes, you're right. I don't have the luxury of moving around this time.

Teski said:

Victor Engel said:

Teski said:

The 70-200 2.8 L IS USM is an excellent lens for the low light and
you'll have great range.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

This sounds like an expensive lens. So far I haven't priced any lenses. I guess after I narrow down the choice to a few, maybe the final decision will be made by the price tag.

Yesterday I tried out the camera and lens for the first time. The IS is great, but sometimes there is a vibration as the lens tries to reseat itself or something.

Now I have a question about a specific kind of situation and how you would set the camera to get a good exposure. I'll explain by way of illustration. The first picture shows a subject that would have been a great candidate for spot metering. Instead, I used area metering with a -1 stop bias.



Full image is at http://the-light.com/Photography/Canon/IMG_0206.JPG

I consider this to be close to ideal exposure. This picture was shot at ISO 1600 at full telephoto (135 mm). Exposure time was 1/8 second. Since I was using IS, I did not use a tripod. OK, spot metering probably would have been better for that shot, but how about this next one? I give two shots, each with a different exposure bias. The exposure I would have preferred would have been between the two:





Full images are at



; and



; .

Lens was zoomed to 85mm. The first image was exposed with -1 stop bias, the second with -2 stops bias. This time the ISO used was 3200.

I generally used ISO values of either 800 or 3200, depending on the situation. The design of the camera makes it very simple to switch on the fly.

On the negative side, the battery wore down very quickly. I had to switch batteries during intermission. I usually had preview turned off. OTOH, I didn't charge up the battery before my first use.

Finally, a sample taken at 800 ISO with 0 bias:



Full image at http://the-light.com/Photography/Canon/IMG_0221.JPG

I'll be experimenting with spot metering today. I haven't done it so far, because I'm not used to moving the spot around yet. Frequently, the item I want metered is not in the middle of the frame. Here's a good example. How would you meter this picture?



http://the-light.com/Photography/Canon/IMG_0418.JPG

This one had a bias of -1 stop.