06-12-2015 08:01 AM
Won't be many more L's I don't think (maybe 50mm) ... "
EF 50mm f1.2 L II ? Really ? This is a seriously expensive lens. It is also very difficult to master. It is very heavy and it requires a front protecto filter.
Have no fear Obiwan, I won't get that lens for sure. That's why I said maybe, but not really. I was thinking of a Art Lens, but really did'nt want to say. I was hoping you caught my drift
"Unless I have a special need for one."
You can rent! I don't but many folks do. My niece, in the business now, rents all the time and it works for her
Yep, I'm aware of that and may just do that
I've learned my lesson long ago with those off brands, ..."
Appearently not! There ARE some very good "off brands" stuff out there. You just need to know which.
I know there are a few other lens in 3rd party brands that stand out, I'm not talking about them. I been listening to you Obiwan real close on gear you think good. I have my eye on the ones you told me about . I just did'nt want to name them, but yeah, I'm looking at the "comtemporary" in a 600mm Zoom. The Sport and Canon L's are just too big, costly, and heavy for me. I think you know the one I mean. I've been reluctant to name any 3rd party lens, even the good few. I listen to you well when you point out good gear. Like you, I think most are 2nd rate and not worth hard earned money . But the ones you've told me about are on my long range list for sure .
"I agree that many lens reviews are not reliable ..."
And at this point of your maturation, you are not able to tell which one is and which one isn't. How can that possibly help you? The reviewer might not have know how to properly focus. And then wrote a review that said it wasn't sharp. Sound familar? Think about it.
Obiwan you don't listen to what I say very good sometimes. Read my reply again, you missed my statement. I said I will read reviews but won't let any make my choice to purchase for me. I will judge each lens I buy from my own evaluations and real life tests. If any don't hold up to my satisfaction, I will return it for a refund. I have learned. In fact, I've never bought a lens just from reading a review. All I've recently bought were ones you agreed was good. EF 24-105mm L, EF 50mm f/1.4, and of coarse my 70-300mm L which you gave your nod on. The EF 28-135mm witch I returned, after I got the 24-105. I replaced my EF 75-300mm kit lens with the 70-300 L. I had gotton the nifty fifty f/1.8 before we met. I got the EF-S 18-200 mm for a all around, and it's filled it's purpose. I know you don't like it but I did'nt get it cause it set the photography world on fire Anyway I got it the day we met in the mail. I buy my lens from reputable dealers who have excellant return policys. I don't lose anything but time if a lens don't workout. I listen to you Obiwan, more than you think. If any gear is in question to me I will always ask your opinion .
Against my better judgement, I'm gonna chime in, uninvited, to second a point Ernie Biggs has been making for weeks: You are entirely too preoccupied with equipment. You're primarily a street photographer. It's what you enjoy doing and apparently what you're best at. One of the main things a street photographer has to learn is to travel light. Vivian Maier, one of the most prolific and admired street photographers ever, trudged around Chicago with nothing but her Rolleiflex TLR and a handbag full of film. Most photographs of Henri Cartier-Bresson, the founding father of street photography, show him wearing a beat-up old Leica with the 50mm pancake lens that was popular at the time. Their simple equipment let them blend into the crowd and put their subjects at ease. And they didn't arrive home every night with a screaming backache.
The plain truth is that you are already well equipped for your chosen role. You have a perfectly serviceable camera in your 60D, and your 24-105 lens is one of the best street photography lenses currently in production. And you now have a telephoto that's plenty long enough for covering the jazz performances that are a staple of your photography. So you don't need an Art lens or an f/1.2 or any of the other exotic items you seem to crave. Forget about a "long range list" and concentrate on getting better at what you're doing now. The future will take care of itself, and a year from now you may have a completely different take on what you need. Above all, spend your time taking pictures, not reading catalogues and reviews. Or arguing with Ernie about whether he misunderstands your goals.
06-12-2015 12:25 PM - edited 07-19-2015 04:21 PM
Hey Bob good to see you, been wondering where you were. Have no idea why you thought coming here was not a good idea. But in any event, I'm not home at the moment I'm at a favorite wi-fi spot. But I will cont. when I return home this eve. You've said some interesting things and most of them I have to say, I agree with you. As you know I respect yours and Biggs knowledge and opinions on Photography, as well as other chaps on this site. That probably won't change either way. Be back soon my friend.
Ok Bob I'm back. Before I address your concerns I will give you a little background info, to maybe help you understand my motives and actions. 1st off, I'm a Cancer surviver, had liver Cancer Surgery this past Feb at Mayo Clinic, and have other health issues I'm dealing with. When I was told I had Cancer late last year, and that surgery was highly recommended immeditately, I was devestated. Going through this process has impressed upon me my very own motatility. It's made my outlook on life so different than before, and really makes me appriciate the simple pleasures and joys in life I use to take for granted. It's also made me stop projecting too far in the future, and concentrate just on today. Now, I try to enjoy everyday as if it's my last day, but also I try to live as if I would live forever....because I just may
You hit the nail on the head when you said I like street photography and cultural/social events. It depicts life in all it's elements and I like to capture those moments. The ups and downs in life, the joy, as well as the downside. But I do also want to do landscaping, I just have'nt put as serious an effort in doing so yet, but I do intend to. But I do have my tools now for that, don't I !!!!. Nothing I've bought, I could'nt afford, nor has anything put me in any kind of financial bind. But I have no idea if that will change, if I start incuring huge medical bills in the future. Right now I'm seeing 3 different Docs and am conttinuing taking tests and going for treatments and checkups. But no matter what may happen to my finances in the future, I now have most of the gear I'll need to do what I love. I've mainly used my EF 24-105mm L, and EF 70-300mm L to get accustomed to using them. To understand how to use them, and the best shots for each to be used for. But for most of my street and event photography, as you say, I should traval light and I do. Most days I only take my Canon EF-S 18-200mm walkaround cause that's all I need. There's days I go out shooting just for fun and practice, not to take serious shots. I put the wear and tear of practice shots on my walkaround lens. For those days I want my best shots I take my 24-105mm L. But there's 2 things about that walkaround lens where I thought it fell short. It's longest range is only 200mm and it's a EF-S, that I could'nt use on FF. This week I got a replacement walkaround, a 18-300mm, so it also takes up the slack when I don't have my 70-300mm L.. And it's a lens I can use with a FF body when I decide to get one, if I get one. I'm still in the testing stage with it, but if it works out as good as I hope, it'll replace my 18-200mm. I intend to learn to use all my gear and learn Photography to the best of my ability. Some days that's better than others but I try not to complain and take it all in stride. Learning this stuff is hard enough, just itself at 68, so I try not to add to that grief.... stuff I don't feel really matters. I take life and my photography today 1 day at a time. I'll either reach my goals or I won't. But I can have great fun and enjoyment on this journey no matter the outcome, or whatever else I go through day to day. Long range goals are good, but not as good for me now, as living in today.
I will say no more about any gear I may acquire, nor expect anyone to try to teach me photography on this site. I only hope that someone will be kind enough to help me with any problems I may encounter day to day with photography. Or issues with my camera, lens or/and my pictures. I ask no more than anyone else here when they make a new post seeking help.
I still have the utmost respect for you, biggs, and all the great people here, trying to help. I also marvel at some of you guys knowledge and read your posts most days. My goals and process may not be what some think it should be. But all I can do at this point is do what I think best for me. Hope to talk again soon my friend, your help as been invaluable, and I know it can be again.
07-10-2015 04:42 PM - edited 07-19-2015 03:19 PM
I decided to do a little lens test to see which of the two lens between my Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 Prime, and my Canon EF 24-105mm L f/4 zoom, would create the better bokeh. I used my 24-105mmL at the long end....105mm, and both were set at aperture f/4, using AV. The 50mm is a prime so it's at ....50mm. Both set at ISO 100. All pics taken under tree shade. The results are interesting to me. This gives me a general idea the difference in lens. I will check my 50mm at aperture f/1.4 next.................Pic #1 24-105mmL BTW....None of the pics are altered in post Ed other than convert from RAW to JPEG.are useful for me.
07-17-2015 12:52 AM - edited 07-19-2015 04:27 PM
Picture # 1 EF 50mm f/1.4 USM.......50mm, ISO 400, aperture f/4 Picture # 2. EF 50mm f/1.4 USM.... .50mm, ISO 400, aperture f/1.4
Picture # 3. EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM ..... 105mm, ISO 400, aperture f/4 ................BTW....No pics were altered other than convert from RAW to JPEG.
07-19-2015 03:43 PM - edited 07-19-2015 10:56 PM
One of the things I notice is that the Bokeh is stronger with the 24-105mm L f/4 lens, than the 50mm f/1.4 Prime lens..... with both set to aperture f/4. The 50mm Prime lens Bokeh seems a tad stronger than the 24-105mm L f/4 lens, when the 50mm Prime lens is set at aperture f/1.4. But they look very close, in these pics I took. The results may be slightly different if things are more precisely setup. I can also see the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, handles lower light better than my EF 24-105mm L f/4 IS USM. I'm beginning to see why the EF 24-105mm L f/4 IS USM, is considered by many, a very good, versitile, general purpose lens. These shots are just casual setup pics I took. Just about what I can expect in everyday shooting. These results are about what I expected from all I've heard and read. But nothing helps me understand anything I learn in Photography, better..... than seeing it with my very own eyes in real world applications.