still better than my telephoto lol
still better than my telephoto lol
Excited for my new gear. Currently I have:
- Rebel XTi
- AE-1 with FD 28, 50, and 80-210
- 18-55
- 70-200 f/4 IS L
On the way:
- 5D Mk1
- 24-70 f/2.8 L
- 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS (will sell soon)
- Flash, 430 EX II
Can't wait!
Maybe this would be too long of an answer for the long lists, but maybe it'd be interesting to get a history (or snippet of history) for how a particular lineup evolved. I mean, most lens fiends I know don't just go out and buy everything at once. Like most addictions, it starts with justa taste....
yes i totally agree with you colin
Originally Posted by Colin
I started with the 40D kit with 28-135. I bought the 50 1.4 for low light stuff and it was relatively cheap. I found that 50 wasn't wide enough on the crop so I talked myself into the 24 1.4L after reading a raving review on B&H. I now had an "L" and that's when it started.
My next lens was the 70-200 4.0L. So I sold the 28-135. Next, I bought 15mm Fisheye when I dropped my 24L. I needed a wide while the 24 was being repaired.
I really didn't like the 70-200 with out IS or the 2.8 and the focal range wasn't long enough for what I was using it for so I bought the 100-400.
Next I bought a 5Dmk2 kit with the intentions of selling the 24-105. After trying it out, I realized I couldn't live with out this lens (I could if I had the 24-70 but...). So I sold the 70-200 since I had the range covered with 100-400 and the 24-105 and with IS.
I've been pretty good since then, mainly because I still have to pay off the 5Dmk2 and the 100-400. I'm torn for my next lens, I think I'll get either the 85 1.2L or the 16-35 2.8L (70-200 2.8 IS is on the table too actually). We'll see what happens when Canon comes around with the rebates again.
Here's my lineup:
- 40D w/Kirk L-Bracket
- Elan 7 w/Kirk L-Bracket
- 17-40mm f/4
- Speedlite 580EX II w/Spherical Diffuser (Gary Fong)
- Heavy Duty Gitzo Tripod and Ballhead (Max 17.5lb support) w/Kirk 2.5" Quick Release Adapter
- Lowepro Computrekker AW
As you can see, not too many lenses right now but lots of accessories! Funny thing, within the last year I've gone through (in order of purchase): 28-135mm IS f/3.5-5.6, Sigma 20mm f/1.8, 70-300 IS f/4-5.6, 50mm f/1.8, 24-70mm f/2.8, 85mm f/1.8, and 70-210mm f/4. Mostly I was interested in trying different lenses, so I picked them up used, tried them, and then re-sold them (on average breaking even). From this group, I was most impressed with the 85mm but I didn't use it enough to justify keeping it (at this time).
Haha wow. No laughing at me?
Cameras:
Canon 20D
Canon AV-1 (mom's old highschool graduation present)
Lenses:
Canon EF-S 18-55mm 3.5-5.6
Canon FD 50mm f/1.8
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 with lens hood (as soon as the UPS man comes)
Saving for:
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM (need a new job this summer haha)
I have a UV and a CPL filter for the kit lens as well as a UV for the EF 50mm.
My first camera was a kind that took that miniature film, and had those disposable flashes about the size of a candy bar. That worked okay, and was fun.
I then got a Polaroid, which I've still got, but don't have any film for. I thought that was neat because I could see my pictures immediately, and I didn't have to buy new flashes every 8 shots.
Then my grandmother gave me her 'Ricoh', or whatever it was. It used real 35mm film, and had an external flash. Completely manual, though it had a light meter built in. I didn't know what the aperture did, but I understood exposure time, and I knew that if I sent the aperture to a lower number, the light meter read higher. I never really understood aperture while I had that camera (I'm hoping I find it someday in my pile of junk, as a keepsake), and as the battery died, the light meter stopped working, so I just guessed based on what I recall working in similar situations. I actually got some (3 exactly) good B&W pictures of my oldest daughter, which I keep as precious tothis day,with this method of ignorance.
I got a Kodak 1 MP camera, refurbished, for my Birthday, I think around 1998/1999 or so. The quality was pretty lousy, but it was fun, and got me back into taking pictures. I still have it, with additional lenses for telephoto and wide angles. It now needs tape kept tight over the battery compartment to work...
I later heard a guy from Keeble and Schuket (spelling) talk nice about the Canon S-50 point and shoot, bought one for the family, and one for my mother. I later got exclusive use of this camera. My mom still uses hers, and just wishes it would take a picture faster. Some of my favorite pictures were taken with this camera. Quality was definitely an improvement over the Kodak, by far. With this camera, I discovered how to use manual mode, a tripod,and the combination of white balance, aperture, shutter speed, and ISO, to get what I want. It became my camera when the former wife sprung for a 20D and a Mamiya 425 AFD (is that model right?). Unfortunately, while taking pictures at the beach, the S-50 proved that no matter how much you shove the tripod into the sand, waves will knock it over. I rescued the pictures via the Lexar compact flash card, but the salt water killed the camera instantly.
My parents bought me an XT, and after much research, understanding nothing about lenses, I settled on the 28-135, and luckedout. I bought it because it was reasonably priced, seemed to have a good zoom range and set of features.
I bought a 28-200 as a back up when I sent my 28-135 into service for dust, because the zoom range seemed nice, but I found that the reach wasn't that much farther, I noticed a lot more chromatic abberation and barrel distortion on the wide end, it didn't have full time manual focus available, no image stabilization, and the autofocus was loud. I gave it to my sister.
After seeing how wide my spouse's 17-85mm went, which I liked for landscapes, I knew I needed a wide option, but I didn't want to ditch the 28-135, so after much agony, I got the 16-35mm f/2.8L. First 'L' lens. I just loved touching it.
I bought a 35mm film Rebel Ti, didn't do a whole lot with it, but I did get to see the 16-35 mounted on a full frame.... that was a seed planted.
I bought a 70-300mm f/X.X-5.6IS and a and a 60mm Macro for my spouse, who claimed that she needed them to take really good pictures for her portfolio. I got to try them out. I then had a lust for telephoto and macro.
Saw a Canon ad about the 50mm 'compact' macro being affordable, and got one as a splurge. I then realized that I needed the 'Life Size' converter to make ita true macro. Feeling a little duped, I got that. If I was more educated, I would have gotten the 100mm f/2.8 macro, but... we learn...
The telephoto I put off...
But I had the 'L' bug. As much as I liked the 28-135, I went for a 24-105 f/4 IS L. I was at K&S in Palo alto, and was torn between the 24-70 and the 24-105. It'd be nice to have both, but I'm very happy overall with the 24-105 for my needs, as an all purpose lens.
After this, through a wikipedia search, i ran across Bryan's website, and actually starting buying stuff with a better understanding of what I was actually purchasing.
I agonized for months before getting the 70-200 f/2.8 IS, to finally bite the bullet on getting a telephoto. I eventually wanted more reach, and got the 1.4x teleconverter. I love this lens. It is just so much fun.
For practical purposes, at this point, i was pretty complete. However, the XT, mounted on the 70-200, just seemed so ridiculous. I got a kick out of how small the thing was, but I looked at that 20D, and felt it, and it just felt so good.
Hello 30D.
Read about the 5D, started thinking about the advantages of a full frame sensor..... bought a his and her pair...
28-135 got retired with the XT as a spare, now on loan, still on active duty with a friend.
My compact macro with life size converter, while it worked okay, started to seem a bit out of place. I got a his/her pair of sigma 150mm macro lenses. I couldn't pin down anything actually wrong with them, but I missed the 'L' feel. If I was at all practical, i would have settled down and got the 100mm Macro lenses, but in came the 180mm f/3.5L's...I picked up the 2x teleconverter at the same time, just for magnification. It's come in handy at times...I don't regret it, but I do feel a little sheepish. I still love the one that stayed with me.
But, having tried the 2X converter with the 70-200, i was disappointed with autofocus, contrast, sharpness, and CA. However, I had discovered the reach...
I tortured myself between the 300 f/4 IS and the 400 f/5.6.... and finally decided that if I really needed the reach, and the 70-200 with a 1.4 converter wasn't enough, I could just use a tripod if there wasn't enough light.
After lookiing at length on the primes, I jumped on the 50 f/1.2 and the 85 f/1.2. While the 85 has been very impressive, and pretty useful, the focal range and shorter possible focusing distanceof the 50mm has made it more useful for just dragging around with me. They were followed shortly with a 35 f/1.4, which I really, reallyl enjoy...
On an impulse, I picked up a refurbished 100-400, after discussions on this forum, and have been getting to know it. I like it, and it's really useful, but it doesn't have the giggle factor i get with the 70-200, though it's a different animal, and it does what it does pretty well. I look forward to more time wiith it.
I wish I had more time to print!
Geez, if I knew I was going to ramble that much, I wouldn't have started. Sorry.
I really could have used the 35 1.4L today. 50 was to narrow and 24mm was too wide and I would have loved something faster than 4.0.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote