poesprogeny
2nd of November 2001 (Fri), 09:21
I just came across this site and it looks great with the information and all of the great pictures that everyone has posted. I was hoping someone can help me with a question. I've just been into photography for a year, but I am about a week from stepping up to a higher level camera and lense combination. I've read as much as person can read in the last four months about this, but still a little confused.
In looking at Canon's L series lenses, I have been trying to determine which style is going to be best for me, and if the price difference is worth the performance difference. For instance, I know that everyone wants the fast lenses like the 2.0's and the 2.8's. But, I guess my question is why? I know you get more light from them, but what shots am I missing if I get an F4 lens (at a lower price) than an F2 lens? I don't know if I'm making a lot of sense here or not. But, if I am going to be doing a lot of landscape photography where I am wanting more (if not the most) depth of field, am I losing anything by going to an F4 lens instead of an F2? For that matter, for this type of photography, am I losing anything by going to an F5+? (Still within the L series of lenses)
Conversely, what kind of shots are going to require the 2.0 lens where the aperture is thrown wide open? Is that going to be the telephoto shots on wildlife where shallow DOF is the rule?
Again, I know these are beginner questions, and that's because I'm a beginner. The camera that I have now is a Minolta with interchangeable lenses, but allows for no manual controls at all. Everything is automated. So, in stepping up to a better system and lens, I just want to make sure I'm getting what I need and not missing out on something that I may not know that I do need.
Any help or advice would be immensely appreciated. Thanks for reading.
In looking at Canon's L series lenses, I have been trying to determine which style is going to be best for me, and if the price difference is worth the performance difference. For instance, I know that everyone wants the fast lenses like the 2.0's and the 2.8's. But, I guess my question is why? I know you get more light from them, but what shots am I missing if I get an F4 lens (at a lower price) than an F2 lens? I don't know if I'm making a lot of sense here or not. But, if I am going to be doing a lot of landscape photography where I am wanting more (if not the most) depth of field, am I losing anything by going to an F4 lens instead of an F2? For that matter, for this type of photography, am I losing anything by going to an F5+? (Still within the L series of lenses)
Conversely, what kind of shots are going to require the 2.0 lens where the aperture is thrown wide open? Is that going to be the telephoto shots on wildlife where shallow DOF is the rule?
Again, I know these are beginner questions, and that's because I'm a beginner. The camera that I have now is a Minolta with interchangeable lenses, but allows for no manual controls at all. Everything is automated. So, in stepping up to a better system and lens, I just want to make sure I'm getting what I need and not missing out on something that I may not know that I do need.
Any help or advice would be immensely appreciated. Thanks for reading.