Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: 2018 - What Was Used

  1. #1
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    4,149

    2018 - What Was Used

    So, typically during the winter I look at what gear I used in the past year to help assess potential changes to my kit. This year, it is more out of curiosity as I feel pretty set with my gear.

    For cameras, below is based on photos I kept. If you look at shuttercount, I had 21,844 shutter actuations in 2018 on my 5DIV (not available for the others). Doing some quick math, I averaged a picture every 24 minutes in 2018. Including the M3 and G7XII, I kept 8,518 pictures and videos.

    As for the breakdown of what I kept:
    Cameras 2018 2017 2016
    5DIV 91% 8.3%
    5DIII sold 72.8% 96.4%
    M3 3.4% 8.1% 3.6%
    G7XII 5.6% 10.8% NA

    I bought the G7XII in February 2017 and the 5DIV in November 2017. Overall, I used my smaller cameras a bit less this year. In thinking about it, I would say I did less casual shooting with most of my shots coming from events or travel.

    The only change I could see here depends on Canon. I like the size/weight on the M3 and the IQ is pretty reasonable. But I would like faster AF (the M3 is good for relatively static subjects, not so much in keeping up with movement). I've been tempted by the M5/M6/M50. But I decided awhile ago to skip a generation, so I might be tempted by whatever new M series is released in 2019. Or not. This is not pressing.

    As for my primary body, I do not see making any changes any time soon. The 5DIV is great and very much suits my needs and habits. I shoot landscapes and wildlife and really enjoy both (I view it as nature photography). My most important images are probably family related and the 5DIV excels there. I've made large prints and like the way they look. Just a great all around camera.

    What could happen late this year is I've decided that I would like a second body. It isn't really needed this year as my vacations will be landscape oriented. But that is likely to change in 2020 where I am hoping to get a wildlife based trip in. There is a chance a new M might be so good it will fill that role, but I suspect I will want a second FF body so I can quickly move from a supertele to a wider angle shot. But, that will not be a factor until late this year at the earliest.

    The following is a breakdown of lenses used for the "kept" images on my 5DIV:
    Lens 2018 2017 2016
    14 mm (R or A) 0% 1% 0%
    EF 16-35 f/4 IS 7% 10% 7%
    EF 24-70 II 31% 36% 38%
    Sigma 50A 7% 4% 2%
    EF 70-200 II 9% 11% 9%
    EF 70-300 L 5% 8% 8%
    EF 100 L macro 0.4% 3% 1%
    EF 100-400 II 25%
    Sigma 150-600S 3% 27% 31%
    EF 500 f/4 II 11%
    MPE 65 1%
    TSE 24 II 0.1%

    Yet again, my 24-70 II was on my camera more than any other lens. Great lens, very versatile. I do not see that changing. Technically, it's percentage did tick down a bit, but I attribute that to all the evaluation of supertele's I did and the fact that I am trying to be more critical in my editing process.

    This was the year of the supertelephoto. I tested several and ultimately added the EF 500 f/4 II. This was an inheritance. No regrets, great lens. Then essentially sold the 5DIII and Sigma 1.4TC to pay for the 100-400 II. I had always had in the back of my mind that as soon as I had a camera that could AF at f/8 at more than the center point, I would pick up the 100-400 II. A lot of testing and it does look like I will be selling my 150-600S this year. When looking at actual focal lengths (not the reported 600 mm an 560 mm), the Sigma is ~8% "longer" but it is heavier and larger. There is still something I really love about how the Sigma paints an image. Great lens. But the 100-400 II does seem to be a close enough match, and the 500 II is on another level. I should also note, wildlife pics with me tend to skew "high". For whatever reason, I have a harder time deleting them and tend to take a lot. Landscape images, I have an easier time picking a favorite or two and deleting everything else.

    I also picked up the MPE 65. I borrowed John's (Neuro's) for a few shots, and was just amazed at what it could do. Then awhile later there was a 15% off refurbished lens sale and impulses being impulses it is now part of my kit.

    While I did not use it much, I did finally used the TSE 24 II and, as expected, liked it. It is staying in the kit. The Rokinon 14 mm was not used nor was I ever tempted to use it. Same with the 40 mm pancake (not even listed). But, unless I decide to pick up a replacement, which isn't likely, I'll just keep the Rokinon just in case. The 40 mm pancake is staying in my kit as well as I can see using it as a lens cap with benefits in the future.

    The lens I would love to add, the Sigma 135 f/1.8. While I want to shoot more portraits, I really do not have subjects and when I do, the 50A, 100L, and 70-200 II have it covered. So, I might get it, depending on how much I get for the Sigma 150-600S, but probably not. Then, if I was ever to get more into nightscapes, I could see something other than the Rokinon 14 f/2.8 (its a good lens, but faster are now available), but I do not see that happening.

    So, like I said, I do not see my kit changing much in 2019. I have a few "wants" but no real "needs." I likely will be parting with the 150-600S, but the money is just as likely to go into my account until I develop a real "need."

    A quick thanks to John (Neuro) for letting me borrow the EF 600 f/4 II and MPE 65.

    My M lenses used:

    Lens 2018 2017 2016
    EF-m 11-22 6% 16% NA
    EF-m 18-35 69% 49% 55%
    EF-m 22 8% 0% 45%
    EF-m 28 6% 2% NA
    EF-m 55-200 11% 15% NA

    In 2017, I used the 70-300L on the M3 18% of the time, was actually a very nice combo.

    I do not see any changes to the M kit. I know Canon released the EFm32 f/1.4. My usage of the M system would need to increase before I invest more. Part of that is just having more trips where I want a "system" but not my 5DIV. That could happen. Or, if Canon does release a new generation of M bodies that blow me away.

    So, that is it for 2018. Usually this post for me launches me off in a direction that I research for awhile to pass time over the winter. Not this year. I am feeling pretty set.

    Guess I'll have to take pictures of winter scenes or something... ;-)
    Last edited by Kayaker72; 01-22-2019 at 02:54 AM.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Dave Throgmartin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Posts
    999
    Very thorough, good detail!

    Dave

  3. #3
    Administrator Sean Setters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Savannah, GA
    Posts
    3,341
    I've had the Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM and EF 40mm f/2.8 STM nearly since they were introduced, and I haven't used them terribly much. The EF-S 24mm STM turned out to be great for infrared shots, so it basically stayed mounted to my IR-converted camera (but I don't shoot IR too often). However, the EF 40mm STM was so close to my 35 and 50mm primes, but without the extra wide aperture, that I rarely mounted it (reduced size/weight are almost never a priority for me).

    However, that was before I picked up a DJI Ronin-S this past Christmas. Both of the pancake lenses have been living on my 7D Mark II as they work very well for video. I like especially like using the 7D II + EF 40mm f/2.8 STM with the Ronin-S as the stabilization is even more impressive with the longer focal length, compressed view.


  4. #4
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    4,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Throgmartin View Post
    Very thorough, good detail!

    Dave
    Thanks Dave! I like doing this. Really, it is a tool to make me think what was used and why. What holes do I have or should I stop spending money on photography and do something else with it

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Setters View Post
    I've had the Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM and EF 40mm f/2.8 STM nearly since they were introduced, and I haven't used them terribly much. The EF-S 24mm STM turned out to be great for infrared shots, so it basically stayed mounted to my IR-converted camera (but I don't shoot IR too often). However, the EF 40mm STM was so close to my 35 and 50mm primes, but without the extra wide aperture, that I rarely mounted it (reduced size/weight are almost never a priority for me).

    However, that was before I picked up a DJI Ronin-S this past Christmas. Both of the pancake lenses have been living on my 7D Mark II as they work very well for video. I like especially like using the 7D II + EF 40mm f/2.8 STM with the Ronin-S as the stabilization is even more impressive with the longer focal length, compressed view.

    Great video Sean! It had me smiling throughout.

    The 40 mm pancake I have is odd. I literally forget I own it for long stretches of times. But, when I have gone out to use it, it is a very nice lens. Glad you have found a use for yours.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Dave Throgmartin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Posts
    999
    This is an interesting topic. It's easy to get tunnel vision and lose track of what you've been doing. I find for myself that the photo subjects tend to change as time goes on also.

    I tend to get really behind with post processing which makes studies like these difficult. I have some things from 2016 to still go through yet!

    Brant,

    Can you comment on your use of non-supertele primes on full frame? It looks like the only one that gets any substantial use is the 50 Art. Do you find the 24-70 and 70-200s cover most of the jobs when you'd want a faster aperture?

    Dave

  6. #6
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    4,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Throgmartin View Post
    Brant,

    Can you comment on your use of non-supertele primes on full frame? It looks like the only one that gets any substantial use is the 50 Art. Do you find the 24-70 and 70-200s cover most of the jobs when you'd want a faster aperture?

    Dave
    I can...but right now I am headed to the airport. I'll try to later tonight.

  7. #7
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    4,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Throgmartin View Post
    Brant,

    Can you comment on your use of non-supertele primes on full frame? It looks like the only one that gets any substantial use is the 50 Art. Do you find the 24-70 and 70-200s cover most of the jobs when you'd want a faster aperture?

    Dave
    The short answer is yes, most of the time, as long as I have a good flash and a modern FF sensor (5DIV) where I am comfortable at higher ISO.

    For the longer answer, let me break down the times when I want a faster aperture: 1) Family functions, usually indoor in regular sized rooms and pretty poor lighting; 2) staged events such as official photo shoots, and 3) nightscapes. Next, fast apertures primarily give you extra light and an effect (a more shallow depth of field= better separation, stronger and often better bokeh).

    For family functions, I usually shoot f/2.8-f/5.6 (usually f/3.2), 1/125-1/200, and ISO 2000 with a directional flash mounted on the camera (I tend to bounce in the direction of a window, otherwise ceiling). The higher ISO takes the pressure off the flash and I find that ISO 2000 tends to give a very well balanced image with pleasant shadows. I have found is that the two stops from f/2.8 to f/1.4 simply is not enough "extra" light to shoot without a flash and that the dof gets so shallow that I often miss moments or the images doesn't tell the story of the scene because only a few eyelashes are actually in focus (unwrapping gifts only means so much if the gift is all blurry). Also, here the flexibility of the zoom is really appreciated as the scene is usually shifting quickly.

    For staged events, I am usually shooting the 50 Art at f/1.4 to f/2.0 when I want a very powerful effect, then 70-200 f/2.8 II and the 100 L Macro if I want to be close (babies, etc). For example, I recently did some family member senior pictures. Almost all the favorites were from the 50 Art. Here the extra "effect" from the faster aperture was apparent. But, I could take a lot of pictures, and it was controlled. But, what has interested me in reading/watching, and in very controlled settings (ie studios), portrait photographers are usually not using fast apertures. They are f/5.6 to f/11 and are using subject/background distances to create the effect. So, fast glass is great, but not as necessary as you might think (some might take offense to this opinion).

    For nightscapes, again, here I can easily justify a faster prime over the f/2.8 lenses. I can get good nightscapes at f/2.8, but here an extra stop or two of light saves you from running your exposure so long that you get star trails. Also, sensor noise at 1/125-1/200 of a second really isn't much for scenario 1....but it can be an issue for a 10-30 second exposure. So, cranking ISO is less of an option, granted, I still do it. But, I do not have a fast prime for nightscapes as I do not often get a chance for good nightscapes. If I ever did, you can bet a wide fast prime would end up in my bag.

    I am sure others have different experiences or maybe different philosophies, but that is where I ended up. I do keep in the back of my mind something Rick (HDNitehawk) has written on the subject, something to the extent that his families favorite pics were often taken on the 24-70 II, but HIS favorites were often when he slowed down to use a faster prime.

    So, I find having the 50A a great compromise. I do occasionally throw it on during family events. There is absolutely a significant difference in the feel of the pictures from the faster aperture vs my f/2.8 zooms and that is much appreciated for staged shots.

    But, if I had to only have two lenses, it would be my two f/2.8 zooms, the 24-70 II and 70-200 f/2.8 II. Thankfully, I do not have to only have two lenses.

    I hope that helps. Let me know if you have any other questions or if you want me to expand on something else.

    Brant

  8. #8
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    4,149
    Hey Dave...just read your thread on portfolio. Great that you are doing that. If the "effect" is what you are after....tough to beat fast glass. I wish that wasn't true, but there is definitely less isolation with f/2.8 glass. I do find it to be enough, in most cases, but in others, you just need more.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •