What are the items on your to-buy list?

[John Foote]

A fat lady in a karate outfit?

Ninja assassin... Hmmmm. That might work. What's the going rate for a proper butt-whuppin these days? If I keep her booked for a couple of months, I might be able to afford all this stuff. Does she bring her own food? john

 

[Lee Rothman]

AFAIAC I am all set on lenses, but I must admit, after my experience last week spending an afternoon with a 1D, I am warming up to the idea that if and only if the so called D60 (or whatever the replacement is going to be) is any less of a camera than the 1D, I may pop for one come June when I am all paid up on these lenses I just got. I hope by then Delta can offer me a good deal. ;-)

 

[Lee Rothman]

I'm gonna start calling you "Prime Time Dave". LOL....sure, if one has the option/luxury of moving about as they setup their shot, indeed there is truly NO contest between a prime and a zoom. However in the average situations the zoom is still a VERY valuable tool indeed. No doubt with my new collection I'll still shoot about 80% zoom and 20% primes. But heck, you just can never tell, I am known to change my mind from time to time. LOL ;-)

 

[Karl Guttag]

I'm in a wait and see for what happens around PMA an make my "play" accordingly.

A lot depends on the new Body(s), their focus systems and the scaling factors.

I like the sound of the 24-105F2.8L which seems likely. This would be a very nice work horse lens, particularly if the new body has a 1.4X or so cropping factor.

I was leaning toward the 16-35F2.8L (to replace a Sigma 17-35F2.8-F4), but I have shelved this plan at least for now. I think my Sigma is "good enough," particularly if the new body is "desirable" and has about a 1.4X scale factor and the strongly rumored 24-105F2.8 exists.

I will probably get a 100-400F4.5-5.5IS-L for a general purpose long lens. I have a 70-200F2.8L and extenders, but would like the 4X range without swapping, plus it is a bit sharper than using extenders. This will be even more needed if the new body is 1.4x as I don't particularly like using a 2X extender on the 70-200F2.8L.

I have 50F1.4 and 85F1.8 primes. I might get either the 100F2 or 135F2 depending on the new body.

Karl

Just curious - can you guys share your plans with me about the
lens/camera/flash/accessories on you next-to-buy list? Over the
past few months I have been able to set up a small Canon system
including the D30 and a few lenses. I'm very happy with the current
setup but afraid I'm missing something that is useful (yet
affordable).

My wife is going to buy me a birthday present and she let me choose
it within the predefined budget. I now have the following lens
combo:

primes: 20/2.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.2, 100/2.8 macro, 135/2, 300/4 IS
zooms: 16-35/2.8, 28-70/2.8, 70-200/4,

I'm thinking of selling the 20/2.8 as I seldom use it after
acquired the 16-35/2.8, and buy either the 35/1.4L or 24/1.4 L.
What is your advice?

BTW, I shoot everything interesting to me.

Thanks

Louis

--Karl

 

[Andrew Cawte]

I've recently acquired the following setup:

D30, battery grip, 50/1.4, 28-135IS, 100-300L, timer remote control, 420EX, and lots of storage and batteries.

Top of my to-buy list is definitely a trip to somewhere reasonably photogenic! I'm spending far too much time staring at all this equipment while the rain pours down outside. It's a terrible waste.

You have a very nice selection of lenses, so if you want to spend more on kit, I'd advise investing in a couple of extra batteries and a 1GB Microdrive or two. That would allow you just to leave the D30 switched on all the time, with no auto power-off to catch you out and make you miss shots while you wait for it to wake up - and when the opportunity presents itself you can fire off as many shots as you like without having to ration CF space.

If you've already got those, the timer remote would be my next suggestion - even if only because it lets you do simple things like set a 10 second self timer followed by taking more than just one picture. If you're taking group photos, the chances of everyone smiling at the same time rapidly goes down with size of group, but if you can take 5 shots instead of one then you have some hope of Grandad smiling at the same time as Auntie

The one lens I drool over is the 100-400L IS, although the 100-300L is doing a surprisingly good job as a substitute until I can justify the expense. I'd probably get a 1.4x TC around the same time, along with a stronger tripod.

Andy.

Just curious - can you guys share your plans with me about the
lens/camera/flash/accessories on you next-to-buy list? [snip]

 

[jcwphoto]

My list is small, too.

Aiming for a Angle Finder.

In the process of building my own hotlight kit. So maybe a variable voltage controller?

Not much else.

Oh maybe a D60.

j

Could such a state of mind be possible? Nahhhh... Not in this
sport. Still, my wish list is pretty modest.
A hextone inkset and CIS.
A tripod mount for my 100 macro.
One more 420EX, and a couple of stands/brollys.
Something white and fat with a thin green stripe around it.
That's all. john

--jason: http://www.jcwphoto.net

 

[DavidP #28649]

How about buying Betty dinner?

AFAIAC I am all set on lenses, but I must admit, after my
experience last week spending an afternoon with a 1D, I am warming
up to the idea that if and only if the so called D60 (or whatever
the replacement is going to be) is any less of a camera than the
1D, I may pop for one come June when I am all paid up on these
lenses I just got. I hope by then Delta can offer me a good deal.
;-)

--The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net

 

[Walt60320]

Maybe I should just buy every lens Canon makes and pull a small trailer behind my car with all the lenses in it. Then when I want to take a photo I can evaluate the situation and then pick from my inventory of lenses in the trailer. However this may become time consuming and many good shots would be missed while searching in the trailer for a lens and then making the change. Or I could just keep 3 or 4 good lenses that would cover just about anything I would want to shoot. One positive side effect from this plan is that my camera equipment would fit in a camera bag, removing the need for a small trailer.

Walt

Just curious - can you guys share your plans with me about the
lens/camera/flash/accessories on you next-to-buy list? Over the
past few months I have been able to set up a small Canon system
including the D30 and a few lenses. I'm very happy with the current
setup but afraid I'm missing something that is useful (yet
affordable).

My wife is going to buy me a birthday present and she let me choose
it within the predefined budget. I now have the following lens
combo:

primes: 20/2.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.2, 100/2.8 macro, 135/2, 300/4 IS
zooms: 16-35/2.8, 28-70/2.8, 70-200/4,

I'm thinking of selling the 20/2.8 as I seldom use it after
acquired the 16-35/2.8, and buy either the 35/1.4L or 24/1.4 L.
What is your advice?

BTW, I shoot everything interesting to me.

Thanks

Louis

 

[Lee Rothman]

You can bet if I ever made it to New York or she made it to Salt Lake I'd get her dinner for sure.

How about buying Betty dinner?

Y

 

[Lee Rothman]

As far as that rumored 24-105L is concerned I have already decided that if it isn't IS I am taking a pass. My copy of 28-70 2.8L is just too damn sharp to part with. I would more likely slap on my 70-200IS if I needed longer. No big deal for me and surely NOT a reason to add to my "to buy" list.

 

[DavidP #28649]

Don't forget the 1200/5.6 -- it's special order - - and I understand it's between $50,000 and $100,000 US.

Hmmm, I wonder if you can get it cheaper "grey market" ?

Maybe I should just buy every lens Canon makes and pull a small
trailer behind my car with all the lenses in it. Then when I want
to take a photo I can evaluate the situation and then pick from my

inventory of lenses in the trailer. --The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net

 

[DavidP #28649]

It's more likely that the 200-400/4 DO IS will be sharp than it will be affordable.

I'll bet it's $7,500 US.

long zoom (hoping the rumoured 200-400 DO will be affordable and
sharp). Otherwise I'll probably get the 100-400.

--The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net

 

[Lee Rothman]

Your joke is terribly close to my reality there Walt. I have ALL my gear in their own pouches inside of a Lightware 1623 Case. Now that I basically have ALL I will need for now it weighs in around 50lbs give or take...mostly give! My wife is on my case to get wheels for it, but I keep telling her I'm going to be working out in the hotels on the road. Anyway I will likely get a Tamrac Super Pro 614 bag (their largest) to have a bag easier to work out of but still hold most of what I have in a more accessable manner.

 

[Walt60320]

Thanks David. I almost forgot that one. The only problem now is I'll probably have to get a larger trailer.

Walt

Hmmm, I wonder if you can get it cheaper "grey market" ?

Maybe I should just buy every lens Canon makes and pull a small
trailer behind my car with all the lenses in it. Then when I want
to take a photo I can evaluate the situation and then pick from my
inventory of lenses in the trailer.

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net

 

[Walt60320]

Ha ha ha. Funny you should comment Lee. I almost mentioned you in my post as a possible trailer owner.

Actually for some people this lens collecting can get out of control but hey, what the heck. It keeps us out of trouble (mostly), doesn't leave us with enough money left over to put into any really bad vices and some people are actually making money. So I say buy what you can, get outside with the stuff and take pictures.

Don't ya just love it!!

Walt

Your joke is terribly close to my reality there Walt. I have ALL my
gear in their own pouches inside of a Lightware 1623 Case. Now that
I basically have ALL I will need for now it weighs in around 50lbs
give or take...mostly give! My wife is on my case to get wheels for
it, but I keep telling her I'm going to be working out in the
hotels on the road. Anyway I will likely get a Tamrac Super Pro
614 bag (their largest) to have a bag easier to work out of but
still hold most of what I have in a more accessable manner.

 

[Thomas Gardner]

I continue to be amazed that with a D30 I can see the difference
that primes make in my photos. Just yesterday I compared 13X19
enlargements of images shot with my beloved Canon 70-200 f4L zoom
(That I have demonstrated is slightly sharper that the 2.8 IS
version) at 85mm, with identical shots taken with a Canon 85 1.8,
and the prime’s images were crisper… So it should come
as no surprise that I’d recommend sticking with primes.

I'm a zoom kinda guy but after familarizing myself with MTF tests, graphs and charts.... I'm convienced that one needs both zooms and primes in their lens kit. Currently I'm running four zooms in my kit:

Sigma 24-135mm
Canon 28-70 f/2.8l
Canon 70-200 f/4.0l
Canon 75-300 F/4.0-5.6 IS

I was going to add the much vaunted Canon 70-200 and the 100-400mm to my zoom lens kit and then discovered MTF charts and graphs. Well after learning to understand what the charts were trying to tell me, I converted from the zoom school of it's the only way to an honoree of both camps. I have a primary loyalty to sharpness and the propensity to use the proper lens to get the image recorded.

So on my wish list that I'm currently starting to fill, I've added six primes and a zoom of "Must Have" lenses and decided that I don't need the 70-200mm f/2.8 or the 100-400mm IS zooms:-0

Zooms:

Sigma 15-30mm

Primes:

Sigma 14mm f/2.8
Canon 85mm f/1.8/f/1.2
Canon 135mm f/2.0L
Canon 200mm f/2.8L
Canon 300mm f/4.0L
Canon 400mm f/5.6L

Not sure which 85mm to get if either. Why? Because the performance characteristics are not up to my liking so I might go with a third party Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro whose charts I'm much happier with as the lens for this situation/need.

To me, the purpose of primes is to shore up the weaknesses of the zooms I have aquired, much like bracing in a well designed bridge. The sum of the parts makes up the whole is the idea.

Right now, I'm deciding between many possible choices that are somewhat affordable, based upon the monies I have left. The following choices are the combo/individual packages I feel I can afford.

1. Sigma 14mm and the Canon 135mm.

2. Sigma 14 and the Sigma 15-30mm

3. Sigma 15-30 and the Canon 135mm

4. Canon 200mm and the Canon 135mm

5. Either the Canon 300mm or the Canon 400mm

I might add the EX 1.4X II to the mix of I wants but the EX 2.0X II is definitely out as I consider it a bad choice unless you're a desperate pup.

I made a linear chart/graph that listed all the lenses I had, their ranges, adjusted for 1.6X EOS D30 multiplier to see where I was at lens wise. I filled the weak points in with primes that shore up, bridge bracing style, the linear chart for the lengths of each of the lenses.

I'm leaning towards choices 1, 3 or 4 which seem to fit the current type of image capturing that I'll be doing with these lenses as 5 can wait for the start of Major Minor League for my teen son. Number 2 is too restrictive on one end of the mm chart. Let's see 1 will fill in the left and right end of the first third of the linear lens graph. Number 3 will fill in both the left and the middle nicely. Lens group 4 will help fill in the rightside of the lens chart nicely, also.

Suggestions as to what direction I should take?

Thanks
Thomas

 

[Lee Rothman]

Funny you would mention the 24mm 1.4L. I recently got one as a backup for the times where the 16-35 2.8L won't cut it. Indeed it is considerably crisper (no big surprise but saying a lot as the 16-35L isn't chopped liver either) For difficult situations I consider both a MUST but in your particular case the 16-35L should suffice alone....

 

[Dave Werner]

Hi Thomas,

Wow, nice choices, But I can’t tell you what you need… I can however tell you something that I’ve experienced that might help:

I’ve had a long love hate relationship with zooms that started in 1968 when I bought a used Voigtlander Zoomar Reflectar (I’m not making this up!) It was the first commercial zoom lens when it first came out and was an Exacta mount 35-70 2.8 (!) lens that was ENORMOUS (roughly the size of one of those gargantuan 82mm filter mount Sigmas…). It had 3 rods on the side to hold it together! I used it on an Alpa 6C camera with an Exacta to Alpa adapter. So I did have an open mind about zooms, even back in the days when most good cameras were European made!

I’ve owned zooms by Schneider (heavy and beautifully made but not very sharp), Angenieux (gorgeous but not very sharp), Acura (but I keep it quiet), Nikon (One good two bad), Kiron (a surprisingly good Nikon mount lens) and Canon (the nifty 70-200 f4L). I’ve been fascinated by most of them and in love with a few…

But, I’ve been going over my old 35mm slides and negatives and I’ve made a fascinating discovery. None (not one!) of my several hundred memorable (worth scanning and working on) photos, was shot with a zoom!

Most seem to have been shot with “normals” (50mm Summicron, 50mm micro Nikkor, and 50 1.8Alpa Macro Switar) and wide angles (35mm 2.8 Summaron, 35 f2 , 24 2.8 Nikkor and a 15mm Zeiss Hologon). The few memorable telephoto images (90mm Elmar, 100 f2 Alpa Kinoptic, and 85, 105, 180, and 500 Nikkors) again, ALL WERE SHOT WITH PRIMES!

(I’ve got to watch this, if I keep typing long paragraphs and capitalizing words your going to think I’m Lee Rothman…)

There were some nice zoom shots too, but nothing that I would want to put up on the wall now or sell on my future print sales website. (I’ve sold a surprising number of prints in two local frame stores and have sold a couple of dozen framed prints in answers to unsolicited requests for shots from my Pbase photos.) Don’t laugh, I’ve got both my Epson printers and all the paper and Ink that I’ve ever used paid for!

So… what’s going on? I think that there are two main reasons:

First, and by far most important, is that with a prime you have to think more. You have to walk around, look at the subject from different angles and make the “frame” work. You climb, you bend, sometimes you crawl, but you capture the subject. In doing so, not only do you make the “frame” (the window dimensions imposed by the fixed lens on the subject) work, you get to SEE the subject from more angles and you find things that a point and shoot “zoomer” never sees.

Second, (yes, second) the technical advantages of prime lenses. Primes are faster and let you shoot things that a zoom would miss. (Yes, Image Stabilization does alter the equation a bit, but a perfectly exposed image shot with a rock stable IS zoom, of a subject with ANY movement, is a blurred image!) Primes are sharper to begin with and since they are also faster, they let you use faster shutter speeds and freeze motion, yours and the subject’s (that’s the other side of sharpness). And lastly, but perhaps most important, but often overlooked of the technical advantages is flare control. Primes are less flare prone than zooms because they have fewer elements. More potentially great photos are lost to flare than any other reason.

One of the regulars on this forum just told me of a climb to an overlook on a mountain with a 100-400 5.6L He came down tired, but convinced that he had some real keepers. On the computer that night they all turned out to be washed out! (I won’t name him but he’s pretty talkative so you may here his side of it yet…) Yes, he should have checked for flare in the LCD images at the site of the “shoot”. (But after climbing up a mountain you aren’t quite as sharp as you are sitting on the “Easy Boy” recliner in the living room seeing if the zoom will cover from the edge of the wall to the window.) If he had used a 300 f4L (non IS) he would have probably had a few keepers and would have less back pain to show for it!

OK there’s the rant…

Oh back to your question! (I hope you’ve gotten this far?)

None of the above. Try a Sigma 14mm 2.8s if it’s not evenly sharp, return it and get another one (repeat until you get a good one). They seem to be running two bad to one good. They buy a 400 5.6 L before Canon discontinues it and replaces it with an IS version with 6 more elements to flare and doubles the price.

Whew…
--Dave Werner

 

[Doug Walker]

I will likely get a Tamrac Super Pro
614 bag (their largest) to have a bag easier to work out of but
still hold most of what I have in a more accessable manner.

I was in your situation about 2 months ago and bought the 614. I got tired of carrying multiple bags for all my gear. I like to have everything in one bag and not have to leave anything behind. I usually work out my Suburban and transfer certain items from the 614 to a smaller bag if I'm going on an extended walk or hike. It's a BIG bag but it does hold everything including my Sony laptop. It also has tripod straps for your new Gitzo. It's amazing how much that bag can hold. There doesn't seem to be a bottom to it LOL. One caveat, it doesn't technically qualify as carry on but the 613 does. May not affect you anyway if you mainly travel by car (as I think you posted that fact).

 

[Forbidden Fruit]

I was glad to see you managed to sort through your massive equipment inventory and take 4 pictures this week. !

Salt Lake must be a pretty photogenic place for the next two weeks.. Wish I was there with my one lens - I would be taking hundreds of pictures

Your joke is terribly close to my reality there Walt. I have ALL my
gear in their own pouches inside of a Lightware 1623 Case. Now that
I basically have ALL I will need for now it weighs in around 50lbs
give or take...mostly give! My wife is on my case to get wheels for
it, but I keep telling her I'm going to be working out in the
hotels on the road. Anyway I will likely get a Tamrac Super Pro
614 bag (their largest) to have a bag easier to work out of but
still hold most of what I have in a more accessable manner.