Lenses

[ilzho]

Thanks everybody. I'll stick with Canon.

Will Canon upgrade the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM anytime soon?

I think I saw it was introduce in 2010 and it has come down a little in price since it's launch so it makes me think a new one will come out soon?

Not sure though.

[TTMartin]

---

@ilzho wrote:

Will Canon upgrade the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM anytime soon?

---

NO!

I was serious it is the BEST 70-200 IS lens sold. 

[Waddizzle]

---

@TTMartin wrote:

---

@ilzho wrote:

Will Canon upgrade the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM anytime soon?

---

NO!

I was serious it is the BEST 70-200 IS lens sold. 

---

Here is an example of just how good the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM can be.  Shot on a cold, overcast, winter day.

Here is a crop of the barrel of the Howitzer 105mm.  You can see the brush strokes.

[ebiggs1]

"Will Canon upgrade the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM anytime soon?"

Canon is the only one that can answer that question.  Since no company has yet equaled it in IQ and build, the Nikkor is close, I don't see Canon rushing out to upgrade.  Even if they do, it doesn't take away from the current lens. It will always be as good as it is today.

"I was serious it is the BEST 70-200 IS lens sold."

One place we can agree, huh, Mr. Martin!

[ebiggs1]

"You can see the brush strokes."

Hardly proof. Both the Sigma and Tamron can do that.  The worth of the ef 70-200mm f2.8L II is well beyond that.

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"You can see the brush strokes."

Hardly proof. Both the Sigma and Tamron can do that.  The worth of the ef 70-200mm f2.8L II is well beyond that.

---

Maybe.  But, I'm not so sure if they could capture that much detail and contrast on the same gray, overcast day, though.  The Siggy and Tammy need some light in order to really shine. 

All I know for sure is that 70-200 sure outperformed my 24-105 when it came to capturing color and contrast that day.  The 24-105 shots seemed dull by comparison.

[ilzho]

I guess I could start a new thread, but what is a favorite shutter speed for motion blur without a tripod?
I have tried 1/30 - 1/60th just panning on neighborhood cars, to get a feel for when I go back to track for the race horses.

I tend to like 1/50th. Clearly with a tripod, I could go lower, but what are some of your favorite comfortable shutter speeds for panning motion blur?

Thanks.

100mm, iso 200, f/14, 1/50 tv mode.

[TTMartin]

---

@ilzho wrote:

I guess I could start a new thread, but what is a favorite shutter speed for motion blur without a tripod?
I have tried 1/30 - 1/60th just panning on neighborhood cars, to get a feel for when I go back to track for the race horses.

I tend to like 1/50th. Clearly with a tripod, I could go lower, but what are some of your favorite comfortable shutter speeds for panning motion blur?

Thanks.

100mm, iso 200, f/14, 1/50 tv mode.

---

The shutter speed I use for race cars is influenced by focal length. So there really isn't one speed I use. 

Very nice panning at 1/50, good sharpness of the car.  Your aperture is a little small at f/14, and you would have better off with ISO 100 and f/8. Otherwise, just keep practicing. :-)

[ilzho]

Thanks for the advice, I need it.

I put it in Shutter priority mode, so it picked the aperature/iso for me. I put the AF point in the center dot only.

It was pretty bright outside, so I was expecting a lower ISO to be honest. 

Guess I should have put in manual mode.

[TTMartin]

---

@ilzho wrote:

Thanks for the advice, I need it.

I put it in Shutter priority mode, so it picked the aperature/iso for me. I put the AF point in the center dot only.

It was pretty bright outside, so I was expecting a lower ISO to be honest. 

Guess I should have put in manual mode.

---

Perhaps still Tv mode, just manual ISO of 100. 

I have no idea why it would bump the ISO to go to f/14, instead of f/7.1 or f/8