PDA

View Full Version : Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM


Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

TheHoff
3rd of February 2008 (Sun), 15:53
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2177/2239464405_faa401191f_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexfirmani/2239464405/)

TitusvilleSurfer
3rd of February 2008 (Sun), 16:21
^That is one of those shots you dream of finding. And even when it is right in front of you, may not notice. VERY well done! :) I don't think that guy is homeless...it sure looks like a nice jacket, but still!

LightRules
3rd of February 2008 (Sun), 16:23
SWEET shot from a SWEET lens.

Iceman!

http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k143/P1X4R_2006/Bowen/Green%20Goblin/Iceman/IMG_0890.jpg

TheHoff
3rd of February 2008 (Sun), 16:35
^That is one of those shots you dream of finding. And even when it is right in front of you, may not notice. VERY well done! :) I don't think that guy is homeless...it sure looks like a nice jacket, but still!

Thank you!

I sat across the street from him on the ground for a good 5 minutes before shooting. I got maybe 25 frames before he noticed me and left. I don't like to be intrusive but the setup was too good to pass. This was something that probably would not have been possible with any of the other 200mm Canon glass -- the 2.8 prime's size and color are perfect for street candids.

And regarding his situation, you're right, he may or may not be technically homeless. There are a lot of 'in betweeners' here that live in weekly motel rentals or get by on welfare check to welfare check without actually living on the street. There are also a lot of jacket donation services this time of year which may explain the coat. Regardless, he looked like one of our city's typically forgotten.

arild8515
4th of February 2008 (Mon), 17:13
Hey guys, first post ever here on these forums. After much debate, whether to throw too much money at the 70-200 f2.8, I went for the 200 f2.8 (mk2), used, in pristine condition.

Keep in mind, this is one of the first photos I“ve ever taken with this glass (and I was freezing my ass off!), so it might not look as good as it should“ve. I haven“t cropped it either, but figured the landing spot for the snowboarder could be in there anyways.

F2.8, ISO800. 1/1000 shutter speed, Canon 20D, untouched by photoshop, other than the JPG conversion.

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x278/arildharboe/bsboard200mm2.jpg


By the way, I“m a snowboarder, student and hobby photographer. The only other lenses I own besides this one, is the good old 28-105 3.5-4.5 and the pretty much horrible 75-300 4-5.6 mk2 USM. I plan to get a 17-55 when I get richer!

canoncad
5th of February 2008 (Tue), 11:21
I used to use the lens without any complain. It was nice lens. :lol::lol::lol::lol:

P1X4R
7th of February 2008 (Thu), 13:04
http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k143/P1X4R_2006/Predator%20Mask/IMG_0908.jpg
http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k143/P1X4R_2006/Predator%20Mask/IMG_0909.jpg
http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k143/P1X4R_2006/Predator%20Mask/IMG_0911.jpg

TheHoff
7th of February 2008 (Thu), 13:08
I was going to ask what the hell is that and why do you have it... then I noticed where you work.

P1X4R
7th of February 2008 (Thu), 13:16
I was going to ask what the hell is that and why do you have it... then I noticed where you work.


it's a Predator mask. why do i have it? because it's way cool. :)

http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k143/P1X4R_2006/Predator%20Mask/IMG_2752.jpg

tom s
15th of February 2008 (Fri), 10:09
Nice pics, P1X4R.

Perry Ge
18th of February 2008 (Mon), 18:39
This lens is amazing in so many ways, its AF is epic, it's soo soo sharp, and takes the 1.4x T-Con effortlessly.

For this shot, I was down at the harbour with my 17-40L mounted to my 5D, and there was this glorious sunset. Sadly there wasn't anything interesting in the foreground and the wide angle made the sun small in the frame. But then...200L to the rescue!!! :lol:

Straight out of camera - I really like how this lens renders colours. And look ma, no flare!

John_TX
18th of February 2008 (Mon), 19:34
Very nice indeed. I'm into landscapes and from what I've seen, the 200 f/2.8L seems to be just the ticket to bring out features & isolating them from the background. Plus for the price, if you work at the end of 200mm a lot, it seems like a bargain when compared to the 70-200 f/2.8L IS, especially if your willing to give up a little flexibility with the zoom.

I'm just moving over to a Canon setup and I think the 17-40L & 200 f/2.8L + 1.4x TC (Kenko or Canon, can't decide) are going to be my first lenses.
Still debating on the body thought...40D/450D/400D. Way too many choices!

Hopefully though, in a year or two, I'll be able to pick up a full frame as well, and dedicate the cropper to longer reach work.

Perry Ge
18th of February 2008 (Mon), 19:38
I'm just moving over to a Canon setup and I think the 17-40L & 200 f/2.8L + 1.4x TC (Kenko or Canon, can't decide) are going to be my first lenses.
Still debating on the body thought...40D/450D/400D. Way too many choices!

That's my exact landscape setup. Get the Kenko TC, it's cheaper, IQ is the same, and fits MORE lenses than the Canon. The Canon is better built and pricier, that's it.

As for the body...........5D 5D 5D 5D 5D 5D :D.

A rock solid tripod is a must, and good set of GND filters is a very, very valuable asset to have. I also like having a hot shoe spirit level and compass on me at all times, and don't forget the flashlight!

John_TX
18th of February 2008 (Mon), 19:54
I'd really like to pick up a 5D right now.

I ALMOST did over the holidays as Amazon had the 5D + 24-105L kit for $2600 shipped! USA Warranty & everything, straight from Amazon, not a 3rd party seller.
I'm still kinda kicking myself for not doing it, but that just wasn't an option at the time.
Given the current 5D prices of almost $2100, I would have been able to get the $1059 24-105L for a cool $500!
That's what is keeping me from picking up the 24-105L at this time, as that's definitely a lens I need! Hopefully they'll keep the same kit savings & bundle this lens with the new FF's that will soon (hopefully) be coming out (5D Mk II/3D/7D).

Maybe I should just pick up a cheap $495 XTi which could keep me occupied until later in the year or early 2009. After all, even a 300D would be a huge upgrade from what I've got now.
I'm almost certain we'll hear something about the 5D replacement before the end of 2008.

Excellent tips on the tripod & filters as well. I picked up a carbon fiber Feisol CT-3442 & 488RC2 around October last year and have really enjoyed using it. I'm glad I saved a couple hundred by not going with a Gitzo.

gardengirl13
19th of February 2008 (Tue), 07:27
I've said it before, I sometimes think of getting the 70-200 zoom but there is just no way I can give up my 200L! I love it to death! Wonderful bokeh, nice and light, black, super fast AF with a 1.4TC (I use kenko). I just love it! I was thinking of do close up work with it too. I don't want the macros because I don't really shoot macro work, just close ups, so I'm thinking of getting the ext tubes again and just using the 200. I have some great shots taken with the tubes and this lens. It also takes the 2x TC. It's not great, but it's usable for web stuff or small prints. My avatar was taken with the 2x TC I borrowed with this lens. Not a great shot and it's super small, but it's fun to toy around with.

John_TX
19th of February 2008 (Tue), 09:01
I'm not sure if you've used the 18-55 kit lens (non-IS), but with regards to image quality, would you say the 200L + 2x TC is on par with, better, or worse than the image quality of the kit lens?

Just trying to get a feel for what you give up. I've heard that the 200L 2.8 is one of the sharpest lenses Canon makes, so obviously, anything that softens it up a little would be very noticeable, but what I'm interested in is, how does this slightly reduced IQ compared to other lenses. Sorry that's a mouth full! :lol:

TheHoff
19th of February 2008 (Tue), 09:59
I see very little sharpness degradation with the 200 + 1.4x combo. The worst thing that happens to IQ is an increase in chromatic aberration but the sliders in LR / PS make quick work of a little fringing... and of course this is only visible on the pixel level, not on the overall image. It makes a very nice combo with the TC -- sharp and quick focusing.

gardengirl13
19th of February 2008 (Tue), 10:34
I've never used the kit lens (well my neighbor lent me her rebel years ago and I may have tried it, but I'm not 100% sure,) as the Hoff said with the 1.4 you won't notice any difference at all, not in IQ or AF speed. You do get a bit more in purple fringing, but as he said, it's not much (and it's much less then the 85 1.8 I tired without any TCs on it!)

With the 2x it's noticably slower AF, it's harder to focus on fast birds, but things like flowers it works fine. It seems to darken the image a bit. It seems to have a bit more grain and not be as smooth with the bokeh, but that could be part to having it 5.6 instead of 2.8.

I don't have any photos with me, I'll have to look around. But on nice bright sunny days in good light it works well. I'd say a bit better then the cheap kit lens, but I've never printing much more then 4x6 with it while I tried it. I'm curious to try it again, but I also am thinking of the 400 prime too!

Lester Wareham
19th of February 2008 (Tue), 12:37
I'm not sure if you've used the 18-55 kit lens (non-IS), but with regards to image quality, would you say the 200L + 2x TC is on par with, better, or worse than the image quality of the kit lens?

Just trying to get a feel for what you give up. I've heard that the 200L 2.8 is one of the sharpest lenses Canon makes, so obviously, anything that softens it up a little would be very noticeable, but what I'm interested in is, how does this slightly reduced IQ compared to other lenses. Sorry that's a mouth full! :lol:

Hmm, on my lenses the 200+2X has much lower CA than the kit lens @18mm for a factor of 2-3X.

Sharpness is about the same from one stop down (f8 ) on the 200+2X although not so good wide open at f5.6 comparing again to the kit lens @18mm.

But my kit lens was a very sharp one by all accounts and by far its best focal length was 18mm. For comparison the center sharpness of the kit lens @18mm was about that of the 17-40 f4L @ 17mm, not so good away from the centre and with higher CA.

The important things about TCs are:

a) is it sharper than cropping and up-sizing
b) is the AF usable, can it be effectively MF

b) is dependent on photographer and subject, however for a) using the TC was 10-15% sharper (in 50% MTF terms) than using a 1.4X and up-sizing.

This equates subjectively to a slightly soft A3 print using a 1.4X and up sizing and a sharp A3 using the 2X. Of course other's millage may vary.

Bill Pham
24th of February 2008 (Sun), 11:22
just a few taken with this lens using 30D and handheld while in a boat fishing.

Bill

Lester Wareham
24th of February 2008 (Sun), 11:39
just a few taken with this lens using 30D and handheld while in a boat fishing.

Bill

Great shots Bill. You can't believe how rare it is to even see from a distance a bird of prey in the UK, you are very lucky to be where you are.

Bill Pham
24th of February 2008 (Sun), 13:23
thank you Lester for the kind comment.

Bill

MannP
8th of March 2008 (Sat), 01:02
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v648/mannanddulchtwo/Bells%20and%20whistles/IMG_2263.jpg

MannP
8th of March 2008 (Sat), 01:06
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v648/mannanddulchtwo/Bells%20and%20whistles/IMG_2262.jpg

Rafromak
8th of March 2008 (Sat), 22:03
I just received this lens from B&H last weekend, and haven't had very much time to test it, except for a few photos of a moose I took Sunday, and for these photos. I am real happy about the sharpness and clarity of this lens. None of the photos below have been sharpened in any way. These are not good photos, but they at least give an indication of how good the lens it. I did not use a tripod, and was approximately 30 feet away from the very small squirrel. The second photo is a 66% crop.

This is a link to a couple of photos of Sunday's moose. Keep in mind that I did not used a tripod, and that i took the photos at sundown in the shade.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=463258&highlight=alaska+moose

Perry Ge
16th of March 2008 (Sun), 12:17
With 1.4x TC attached:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3068/2305529652_92aef4f243_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/perryge/2305529652/)

Dorman
16th of March 2008 (Sun), 13:14
Stunning lens all around - I considered this one for a long time but needed the versatility of a zoom in this range.

bob_r
26th of March 2008 (Wed), 08:04
This is a shot with the 200L and a Sigma 2x TC.
30D - 1/200s f/5.6 at 400.0mm iso250
http://www.pbase.com/image/94729537.jpg

and here's one of an American white pelican with just the 200L
30D - 1/1600s f/2.8 at 200.0mm iso100
http://www.pbase.com/bob_r/image/94706985.jpg

Rubberhead
26th of March 2008 (Wed), 10:17
I've set the comparison up for the 200mm f/2.8L vs. 200mm f/2.8L x 1.4TC both at f/4:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=245&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=1&LensComp=245&CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLI=0&API=2

The TC really hurts the IQ. You can dial-up the 2.0xTC and it gets even worse.

TheHoff
26th of March 2008 (Wed), 10:20
Nephew's baptism; ISO 800, 1/160 @ 2.8

http://i30.tinypic.com/2ihugs4.jpg

silvex
26th of March 2008 (Wed), 10:32
Nephew's baptism; ISO 800, 1/160 @ 2.8

http://i30.tinypic.com/2ihugs4.jpg

Stunning shot!

RPCrowe
26th of March 2008 (Wed), 10:47
Prime lenses are great. Normally, they are usually lighter in weight, often-sharper and normally have wider apertures than many zoom lenses. The only downside is that they do not zoom.

In the many-many years in which no self-respecting photographer would touch a still-camera zoom lens, many professional photographers using 35mm and just about all photojournalists used multiple bodies in order to increase the versatility of their prime lenses.

Even though, I have several zoom lenses, I am a great proponent of the multiple camera body system. I believe that using more than one camera is tantamount to being essential when using primes and is still very handy when using zooms.

Switching lenses is simple and efficient when you are carrying two or more bodies. While you do not quite have the versatility of a zoom lens; using two or more bodies does free you from being locked into one focal length without the bother of switching lenses.

When using Leica M-2 film cameras, my favorite combination for general shooting was the 35mm on one body and 90mm on another. That combo was great for up close people shooting such as at a wedding reception (I never used 35mm equipment for the ceremony or portrait shots but, did use 35mm for wedding candids).

If a person was to use a 200mm on one body and a 100mm on the other, he or she would be pretty well set up for many shots requiring tele capability.

I have a 30D and a 350D. Between them, they are probably worth somewhere around the price of a 40D. However, I would much rather shoot with these two bodies than to be restricted to only one body and one lens at a time. IMO, these two bodies, set up with two great lenses, are more capable than a single 40D would be; even with the availability of those two lenses. Sure, I'd like a pair of 40D cameras, or even a pair of 30D's, but my two cameras do a great job!

My standard set-up these days is the two bodies with 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses attached. I carry one body on a strap around my neck and the other body with a hand strap attached, ready to shoot in a holster case at my left side. With these two lenses, I have a great focal range with awesome image quality. I don't miss the gap between 55mm-70mm a bit!

ben_r_
26th of March 2008 (Wed), 11:06
With 1.4x TC attached:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3068/2305529652_92aef4f243_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/perryge/2305529652/)
Wow that is an awesome shot! Great job!

Mum2J&M
4th of April 2008 (Fri), 13:47
A little tough to follow the incredibly fabulous images above! But here's one I took this afternoon indoors after receiving this fine lens. Not much done in PP except a boost in contrast, slight lightening of shadows and a tiny bit of sharpening. (forgot to add - slight color correction)

http://Priors.smugmug.com/photos/274679405_NjEnU-M.jpg

D40
ISO: 800
shutter speed: 1/100
aperture: f/3.2
2/3 ev (just playing)
window light only

Mum2J&M
6th of April 2008 (Sun), 09:57
Nephew's baptism; ISO 800, 1/160 @ 2.8

http://i30.tinypic.com/2ihugs4.jpg

I love this. Was this hand-held?

TheHoff
6th of April 2008 (Sun), 10:59
Thanks! It was. I'm a monopod kinda guy but for this I used the church pew as a brace.

Rafromak
10th of April 2008 (Thu), 16:32
used a a set of Kenko tubes to get closer to the subject, which measures approximately 1/4" across the top. It's s small cone of tamarack tree (a relative, I guess), found in the interior of Alaska.

totalbeginner
15th of April 2008 (Tue), 15:07
One of my favourite lenses!

http://martinneep.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p909599710-4.jpg

http://martinneep.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p622389830-4.jpg

Mum2J&M
15th of April 2008 (Tue), 18:11
One of my favourite lenses!

http://martinneep.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p909599710-4.jpg

http://martinneep.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p622389830-4.jpg

Gorgeous pics! Wish I could've afforded to keep mine, but had to sell it in order to get the shorter focal lengths for now. Your shots look great - and sharp!

totalbeginner
16th of April 2008 (Wed), 09:55
If you've got a flash with a long enough reach it takes great portraits too! :)



http://martinneep.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p755691942-4.jpg

Savas K
16th of April 2008 (Wed), 16:59
Just got from spring break. Loved the 200 2.8. Size , colors, IQ . You can shoot low key.
Enjoyed the scenery.

I will need some 100% crops of specified areas in order to evaluate properly. (the spring break image)

John_TX
16th of April 2008 (Wed), 17:48
If you've got a flash with a long enough reach it takes great portraits too! :)


Very nice, I like the compression it gave to that group shot.

Question: Were the lines/stripes on their legs caused by the flash or some sort of reflection of the sunlight (e.g. off a car windshield)?

Bill Pham
16th of April 2008 (Wed), 18:49
one with the kenko 1.4 stack at f4. no flash natural light.

Bill

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t210/Billphotos_2007/Billphotos_2008/IMG_0102.jpg

totalbeginner
17th of April 2008 (Thu), 12:52
Were the lines/stripes on their legs caused by the flash or some sort of reflection of the sunlight

Well spotted! They're actually sat infront of a swimming pool. The lines are the flash reflecting off of the water. (something I didn't consider) :rolleyes:

John_TX
17th of April 2008 (Thu), 14:47
Well spotted! They're actually sat infront of a swimming pool. The lines are the flash reflecting off of the water. (something I didn't consider) :rolleyes:

At least you had the common sense to back up to the other side of the pool before taking the shot!

I can see it now "one sec, let me take a few more steps back so I can fit everyone into the frame...splash!" :mrgreen:

Definitely something I would have done!

totalbeginner
18th of April 2008 (Fri), 13:48
one sec, let me take a few more steps back so I can fit everyone into the frame...splash!"

Reading that made me cringe! My poor 5D!!! :eek:

Bill Pham
20th of April 2008 (Sun), 23:33
couples of shot from today. handheld and natural light. just resize for here.

Bill


http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t210/Billphotos_2007/Billphotos_2008/IMG_0064cloneouthand.jpg

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t210/Billphotos_2007/Billphotos_2008/IMG_0074Addyshooting.jpg

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t210/Billphotos_2007/Billphotos_2008/IMG_0070Addywith20gauge.jpg

Stickman
22nd of April 2008 (Tue), 22:40
Bill,

Very nice!

CanonXtiDude
27th of April 2008 (Sun), 02:28
Just picked up this lens. LOVE IT! its the 2.8L II USM

Jadis
28th of April 2008 (Mon), 17:41
Just got this lens too. I love it! What a value for ~$500! Here is a pic wide open at 2.8. Not your typical subject for a telephoto lens though:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=266900&stc=1&d=1209422411

TheHoff
9th of May 2008 (Fri), 18:18
Bump for one of my favorite lenses...

http://i31.tinypic.com/33jtt2e.jpg

Bill Pham
9th of May 2008 (Fri), 20:36
i'll add some more for this. since it's one of my favorite also.

Bill

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t210/Billphotos_2007/Billphotos_2008/_MG_0342redtailhawkcrop.jpg


http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t210/Billphotos_2007/Billphotos_2008/_MG_0343retailhawkcrop.jpg

EOSBoy
19th of May 2008 (Mon), 21:48
Just got this lens too. I love it! What a value for ~$500! Here is a pic wide open at 2.8. Not your typical subject for a telephoto lens though:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=266900&stc=1&d=1209422411


That's some crazy DoF! I love how it looks nearly 3D.

Perry Ge
19th of May 2008 (Mon), 22:11
Just got this lens too. I love it! What a value for ~$500! Here is a pic wide open at 2.8. Not your typical subject for a telephoto lens though:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=266900&stc=1&d=1209422411

I love using this lens for shots like this, the compressed telephoto look + shallow DOF looks really nice, and the colours and contrast are superb. A good shot with lovely composition!

Rafromak
26th of May 2008 (Mon), 00:39
Alaska moose. A young and slender bull. Used the Rebel XT and EF 200mm f/2.8L USM. Please notice the mosquitos flying around the moose :)

roentarre
26th of May 2008 (Mon), 06:40
Wow, so many beautiful shots

p360
26th of May 2008 (Mon), 09:24
Wow, so many beautiful shots

Exactly..!! I feel like mine has been underused..!

CountryBoy
31st of May 2008 (Sat), 12:03
Anyone have any baseball shots using this lens ? Would love to see some of youth baseball images, without a tc.

JeffreyVB
2nd of June 2008 (Mon), 00:16
Anyone have any baseball shots using this lens ? Would love to see some of youth baseball images, without a tc.

I have some minor league pics with the TC if you are interested in those?

Boucher
2nd of June 2008 (Mon), 02:16
Jadis that shot is really awesome. well done.

I've been contemplating getting this lens for a fair while....

CountryBoy
2nd of June 2008 (Mon), 04:26
I have some minor league pics with the TC if you are interested in those?

That will do :D

nostalg1a
3rd of June 2008 (Tue), 23:19
Does anyone have a picture of this lens mounted on a 40D or an XTi? Thanks.

adrianzg
7th of June 2008 (Sat), 04:02
all wide open..

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3151/2556323380_b68f4eb64f_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3076/2556322720_ce75692f96_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3076/2555479847_e84566b34d_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3163/2555476739_832898a700_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2062/2555480867_450b053bc4_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3184/2555477553_dac647229f_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3163/2556306522_c8ab8e0f8a_b.jpg

tom s
8th of June 2008 (Sun), 14:08
Wonderful pictures, Adrian.

oaktree
8th of June 2008 (Sun), 17:06
I've had a 200/2.8 for 18 month and, up to now, rarely used it and was about ready to sell it. I have a 135/2.0 and a Kenko 1.4 TC so really don't "need" a 200mm lens.

However as summer finally arrived here in the NW, I've been using the 200/2.8 and find I really like it. It's fast, sharp, not too big or heavy, and already paid for :) ! So I'm keeping it. With the 1.4 TC, it becomes a good 280/4.0 lens.

versedmb
8th of June 2008 (Sun), 20:22
Alaska moose. A young and slender bull. Used the Rebel XT and EF 200mm f/2.8L USM. Please notice the mosquitos flying around the moose :)

Awesome.

bigsue19
9th of June 2008 (Mon), 04:50
Nice photos, Adrian...inspires me to get out there and use mine more often!

adrianzg
9th of June 2008 (Mon), 07:18
more photos from today..nt the best examples of the colours the lens can produce..but the sharpness, bokeh, subject isolation and working distance is just superb for street cinematic potraits.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3146/2563298939_70f105b443_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3012/2564122260_88f2bcf69f_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3274/2563297393_e8e359559a_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3139/2563295995_22f2cf2f27_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3123/2564120510_3acf263447_b.jpg

Nick_b
9th of June 2008 (Mon), 07:49
Adrian, those shots are fantastic! are you shooting on a full frame camera or a crop?

Double Negative
9th of June 2008 (Mon), 09:08
"Only $5k less than the f/2!" ;)

adrianzg
10th of June 2008 (Tue), 04:14
full frame. this lens on the 5d rawks!

Moorcroft
10th of June 2008 (Tue), 08:09
After reading all the raves about the 200mm f2.8 it helped firm up my mind to buy a secondhand example from Chas Eagles in Sunderland. I want it, particularly, for indoor use at bowls clubs in available light where the f/2.8 together with the smaller size and weight as compared to the 70-200mm f4.0 L (non IS) will be an advantage.

I'm just going out to give it a bit of use (outdors).

Nick_b
10th of June 2008 (Tue), 08:21
full frame. this lens on the 5d rawks!


That's what I thought! Amazing the subject isolation you are able to achieve with this combo!

Moorcroft
11th of June 2008 (Wed), 11:49
Just one of the first shots with the new acquired s/h 200mm straight from the camera but resized.

http://www.durhambowling.org.uk/images/IH_1000_edited-1.jpg

Nick_b
11th of June 2008 (Wed), 12:08
I'm hopefully going to be picking one up soon...

Moorcroft
11th of June 2008 (Wed), 15:02
Nick

It's a nice lens to use. I'm very pleased with mine which I bought yesterday secondhand. It's everything the other enthusiasts on this Thread have praised it for being.

It promises well for use indoors in the artificial light of the bowls clubs where I intend to use it in preference to the 70-200mm f/4.0L USM which is a bit slower, heavier and more obtrusive.

Nick_b
12th of June 2008 (Thu), 10:42
Well I picked it up yesterday. So far so good!

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k162/nickandaline/_MG_5354.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k162/nickandaline/_MG_5354-3.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k162/nickandaline/_MG_5440.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k162/nickandaline/_MG_5393.jpg

Double Negative
12th of June 2008 (Thu), 10:47
Nice, Nick! Love the bubbles shot! Congrats.

90c4
12th of June 2008 (Thu), 11:03
I've had a 200/2.8 for 18 month and, up to now, rarely used it and was about ready to sell it. I have a 135/2.0 and a Kenko 1.4 TC so really don't "need" a 200mm lens.

Have you done any direct comparisons between the 135+1.4X TC and the 200mm 2.8? I'm on the fence between these scenarios, leaning toward the 135mm due to flexibility.

holland_patrick
12th of June 2008 (Thu), 15:12
I just picked mine up...
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y136/holland_patrick/2008/OH5N6354.jpg

JeffreyVB
13th of June 2008 (Fri), 00:54
That will do :D


I'll try to get some up this weekend.

TheHoff
3rd of July 2008 (Thu), 02:20
Wedding season for the 200...

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3164/2628529672_5f22c34fe0_o.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/alexfirmani/2628529672/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3256/2627712523_fb25cae0f3_o.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/alexfirmani/2627712523/in/set-72157605918186926/)

form
3rd of July 2008 (Thu), 02:33
The 200 f/2.8L is one of the lenses I'm seriously considering for its sniping ability and bokeh. The bokeh is the thing I like most about the 70-200 f/2.8 IS, with IS being also very...good. I'll still take 200mm f/2.8 without IS for 1/3 the price of the zoom.

TheHoff
3rd of July 2008 (Thu), 02:42
The 200 f/2.8L is one of the lenses I'm seriously considering for its sniping ability and bokeh. The bokeh is the thing I like most about the 70-200 f/2.8 IS, with IS being also very...good. I'll still take 200mm f/2.8 without IS for 1/3 the price of the zoom.

One of the best lenses Canon makes for price vs. performance and probably in the top 3 for raw performance overall if you exclude the super-teles. You won't be sniping with a white 200 zoom and the bokeh on the prime is lovely. Also consider with the size and weight differential, the 200 prime is easier to handhold than the zoom so you probably gain a stop of holdability even without IS if you have good technique.

form
3rd of July 2008 (Thu), 02:45
There's no doubt if I could afford it I'd get one. I spent all my money on a 40D that I needed so I'd have two bodies for a wedding that cancelled on me for tomorrow.

Nordly
3rd of July 2008 (Thu), 02:53
Hoff, excellent work as usual. The subject seperation is unreal, beautiful stuff!

A few wide open at f/2.8, I love this lens on my 5D.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3105/2626432600_23984fe311.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3282/2625612553_99dc00ceea.jpg?v=0

TheHoff
3rd of July 2008 (Thu), 03:18
I see you're taking advantage of the warm light from the past few days. Beautiful work! *(and quite a model, too)

Nordly
3rd of July 2008 (Thu), 03:24
Yes, it's been lovely hasn't it. Up until the thunder & lightning this evening, anyway. Wish I got out to have a go with some shots though. Thanks for the compliments, and the girlfriend never fails as a model. I buy the bubble-tea, she models a little for me ;) She still needs a some warming up to the camera though, a bit shy.
Have any more with the 200 from the wedding? Would love to see!

TheHoff
3rd of July 2008 (Thu), 03:28
Hah, that was Canadian lightning? I wasn't sure. It was pretty tame (coming from a Florida boy). I thought someone was popping off a strobe in a nearby condo.

Please do check out my thread in the Weddings forum; I only shot the 200 during the middle of the short ceremony, though. I think I have something at least decent with the 1.4 TC on as well; I'll dig that up and post it in the morning. Cheers~~

Nick_b
4th of July 2008 (Fri), 22:53
So I've spent a little more time with my 200mm at the zoo a few weeks ago. Really great lens. I'm still getting know her but were getting along just fine!


http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k162/nickandaline/_MG_6111.jpg

With a little help from a nearby post I was able to use a little old fashioned IS. ;)

1/125 F2.8 ISO 3200

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k162/nickandaline/_MG_6405.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k162/nickandaline/_MG_6609.jpg

Dockland
7th of July 2008 (Mon), 06:44
Please keep em coming. I'm heading fot this baby this autumn.

bob_r
7th of July 2008 (Mon), 10:06
Please keep em coming. I'm heading fot this baby this autumn.

Since I love this lens and you twisted my arm :)

Here are shots of 2 of my grandsons taken at a local park:

http://www.pbase.com/bob_r/image/93716706.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/bob_r/image/93750353.jpg

a couple of shots of lotus blossums

http://www.pbase.com/bob_r/image/99331134.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/bob_r/image/99331133.jpg

and a coulpe of zoo shots (the 200 has become my "zoo lens")

http://www.pbase.com/bob_r/image/99293345.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/bob_r/image/99293349.jpg

Bob R

Boucher
7th of July 2008 (Mon), 10:09
4th shot is just awesome. Well done mate.

bob_r
7th of July 2008 (Mon), 11:56
4th shot is just awesome. Well done mate.

Thanks. I think the 200 may be the "bargain" of the "L" lenses.

Bob R

TheHoff
7th of July 2008 (Mon), 12:37
Thanks. I think the 200 may be the "bargain" of the "L" lenses.

Bob R

It is out of stock on Adorama and the grey market is out of stock at B&H so this lens may go out of availability for a while before they make some more. There is one FS on fredmiranda right now for $525, including the tripod mount.

Double Negative
7th of July 2008 (Mon), 12:38
^ The 200L is definitely a bargain amongst Ls. The 135L is no slouch either, especially considering what you're getting.

bob_r
7th of July 2008 (Mon), 12:55
^ The 200L is definitely a bargain amongst Ls. The 135L is no slouch either, especially considering what you're getting.

I agree completely. I sold my 70-200 f/2.8 and bought both of them. I haven't missed the 70-200 at all.

Bob R

tgr141291
7th of July 2008 (Mon), 12:57
Here are some of my shots using the 200mm f/2.8 L. I haven't used it recently as i brought it to take photos of the rugby and it is now close season. Previously I used the 55-200mm kit lens and the difference is atronomical.

I didn't realise how great the price difference between the US and the UK was. Mine cost me £519.99 ($1028.61) in April '08!

The photos taken below were taken in extremely poor light, (where the 2.8 apperture is very useful) and in extremely heavy rain.

A little noise at 100% crop due to ISO 400. The body is 400D

In a nut shell, this is the best lens i have ever used. The clarity of the image is amazing, BUY IT!

Note these images aren't nearly as good as the actual images due to having been resized and have image quality reduced.

If you want a full size copy, mail me at richardstg@yahoo.com

Enjoy.

tgr141291
7th of July 2008 (Mon), 12:58
More

TheHoff
7th of July 2008 (Mon), 13:01
hah, the stare down with the ducks is a good one

nostalg1a
8th of July 2008 (Tue), 00:10
Just a quick test shot.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3122/2640377283_3f06f3b175_b.jpg

Dockland
8th of July 2008 (Tue), 14:03
wow, thank You! :)

Bill Pham
8th of July 2008 (Tue), 14:41
heres a close up for you. with kenko 1/4 tele attach

Bill 1

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t210/Billphotos_2007/Billphotos_2008/birds%20photo%202008/drakemallard1.jpg

Stealthy Ninja
9th of July 2008 (Wed), 23:18
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=17565&stc=1&d=1164375073


For us amatures, we can't afford everything in your impressive kit. The 200mm 2.8L is a good choice.

Nice kit! But, what lens/camera did you take that photo with (if all your stuff is on the table)... ? MYSTERIOUS! ;p


BTW... you guys suck :p I decided to get the 70-200 F/4L IS... then I decided to get the 70-200 F/2.8L IS...

NOW I want the 200mm 2.8!


Most people seem to go with the 70-200 zooms in this range, for myself I teamed it with the excellent 100mm f2.8 macro. The 200/2.8 is one of the most overlooked lenses and also one of the best bang for the buck.


I have the 100mm 2.8 macro too (great lens). I am going to do the same thing as you. THANKS! :D

John_TX
9th of July 2008 (Wed), 23:37
I'm constantly amazed that the 1-stop jump from 200 f/2.8L to 200 IS f/2.0L is a whopping $5k.
It just blows my mind that one stop + IS costs about 10x the price of the 200 f/2.8L!
I think for an extra $5k, I'd rather pick up a 1Ds and then bump the ISO up a step, but that's just me!

Busto
10th of July 2008 (Thu), 10:10
Great thread! Here's my contribution. ISO 400, f/4, hand held.

http://i33.tinypic.com/20620bc.jpg

Nick_b
10th of July 2008 (Thu), 23:47
Nice shots everyone!

Still getting to know my new lens.

She's great wide open.

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k162/nickandaline/_MG_7069.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k162/nickandaline/_MG_7087.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k162/nickandaline/_MG_7106.jpg

Stealthy Ninja
11th of July 2008 (Fri), 01:02
Well, I did it. I went and got the 200mm 2.8.

Below (next two posts) are some examples of my first try with the lens. LOVE IT!

If you want to seen more, go to My Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/aidav/sets/72157606101626921/)

I took it to the streets of Hong Kong. Most of these shot are handheld so it gives you an idea of the handholdablity (new word, add it to your dictionaries) of this lens.

What I did was wait on corners (like a tourist - I even had shorts and a T-shirt on - I am not Chinese BTW) and point the camera at something touristy. When the subject I was trying to shoot came into the frame, I just snapped one off.

Most of the time it worked and the shots are very sharp. Quite a few times I managed to get peoples amused or curious looks (as they looked at me). I didn't need a monopod mostly (because it was outside and I could up the shutter to 1/200+ 400ISO - it was a cloudy day). Most of the shots I took are handheld.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3271/2658042712_20ffe0ebd3_o.png

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3266/2657207131_ce3be4d1f6_o.png

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3111/2657209453_525b38f9d2_o.png

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3280/2658037014_b01deb7c47_o.png

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3183/2657279257_1d8992c6fe_o.png

If you want to seen more, go to My Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/aidav/sets/72157606101626921/)

Stealthy Ninja
11th of July 2008 (Fri), 01:11
Some more. If you want to seen more, go to My Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/aidav/sets/72157606101626921/)

This one was taken out of a bus window.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2238/2657213353_0889a58f49_o.png

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3214/2657208053_f1e65b76e1_o.png

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3197/2658035144_2d5beab697_o.png

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3164/2658038450_177d175432_o.png


Hey! Stop looking at me! I'm TRYING to be STEALTHY!
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3164/2657212259_092566901a_o.png

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3155/2657210137_64098c6a24_o.png

If you want to seen more, go to My Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/aidav/sets/72157606101626921/)

Nordly
11th of July 2008 (Fri), 01:48
Stealthy Ninja, 3 & 4 are my favourites from what you've included here. Fantastic captures. Looks like you generally could've done with a little more light though, but it is a tremendous lens! Left you a few comments on Flickr!

Stealthy Ninja
11th of July 2008 (Fri), 02:00
Stealthy Ninja, 3 & 4 are my favourites from what you've included here. Fantastic captures. Looks like you generally could've done with a little more light though, but it is a tremendous lens! Left you a few comments on Flickr!

Yeah, a bit of sun would have helped. I could have boosted the speed to counter movement more and it would make the photos look a little nicer I think. Still in the city, you can't expect too much.

I am yet to properly edit these photos (they are actually screen caps off lightroom) I will boost the exposure a little and play with the curves. Just wanted to get some up. ;)

I like 1, 3 and 4 the best (#1 just makes me think).

Thanks for the comments.

Stealthy Ninja
12th of July 2008 (Sat), 11:25
I found something interesting while checking out my photos from this lens.

I was looking at this photo (attached below) and I noticed some white streaks in the photo (see 100% crop attached below).

At first I though it may be something on my sensor or something... then I realised they're raindrops. This lens is great. This image has had NO sharpening or editing BTW.

Stealthy Ninja
13th of July 2008 (Sun), 22:48
Sorry to hijack this thread a little, but I took this one today as I was walking to my bus.

Don't they say dogs and their owners look alike?

Taken across a 4 lane road.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3140/2666806414_2b70958565.jpg


LARGER SIZE HERE (http://www.flickr.com/photos/aidav/2666806414/sizes/o/)

Perry Ge
17th of July 2008 (Thu), 12:30
I really like those HK street shots. Now that the rain has stopped, I've gotta get out and hit up some of that.

Busto
17th of July 2008 (Thu), 17:59
http://i36.tinypic.com/zlc8ie.jpg

Stealthy Ninja
17th of July 2008 (Thu), 20:58
I really like those HK street shots. Now that the rain has stopped, I've gotta get out and hit up some of that.

Yeah, that bout of rain was annoying. Still pretty sunny today. :)

Lester Wareham
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 06:47
I have often mentioned the 200/2.8 works well with the teleconverters and the 200 + 2X makes a capable emergency wildlife lens for when you are not carrying anything longer. The AF is slow but the optical quality is very usable. Couple of recent examples:

EOS 20D EF 200mm f2.8L II + EF 2X II Handheld 1/1000 f5.6 (Wide open) ISO 400
http://www.ware.myzen.co.uk/GalleryPics/Photos/Birds/General/Finches/Bird%20%20Bird%20B%20012%20100708.jpg

100% crop
http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Crops/Bird--Bird-B-012-100708.jpg

EOS 20D EF 200mm f2.8L II + EF 2X II Handheld 1/1000 f6.3 ISO 400
http://www.ware.myzen.co.uk/GalleryPics/Photos/Birds/General/Finches/Bird%20%20Bird%20A%20017%20100708.jpg

100% crop
http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Crops/Bird--Bird-A-017-100708.jpg

And a last shot showing the bokeh is still smooth, something that can degrade with a TC.
http://www.ware.myzen.co.uk/GalleryPics/Photos/Birds/Sea%20and%20Shore%20Birds/Bird%20%20Bird%20E%20003%20100708.jpg

Stealthy Ninja
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 06:50
I have often mentioned the 200/2.8 works well with the teleconverters and the 200 + 2X makes a capable emergency wildlife lens for when you are not carrying anything longer. The AF is slow but the optical quality is very usable. Couple of recent examples:

EOS 20D EF 200mm f2.8L II + EF 2X II Handheld 1/1000 f5.6 (Wide open) ISO 400
http://www.ware.myzen.co.uk/GalleryPics/Photos/Birds/General/Finches/Bird%20%20Bird%20B%20012%20100708.jpg


Much better than I thought it would be. I assume they are tripod shots though.

TheHoff
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 07:28
I was just putting this in another thread, might as well paste it here... this is from the 200 + 1.4x; it is very, very usable wide open. Thanks for the crops from the 2x! I keep saying I'm going to get one...


http://i27.tinypic.com/8vqaki.jpg

I think that is close to 100% crop

http://i29.tinypic.com/20iiceu.jpg

Perry Ge
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 07:32
1 from today, that like theHoff, I posted in another thread too.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3123/2679041273_238b8d2d1b_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/perryge/2679041273/)

TheHoff
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 07:39
Welcome back, PG!

Perry Ge
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 07:41
Thanks man. I've been ridiculously busy lately, little time to shoot, and it's also been raining non-stop here in Hong Kong. But the rain has stopped and hopefully I'll get back in the rhythm of things!

TheHoff
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 07:48
Hey I hear that... we have 6 to 8 months of constant drizzle here. With only half the people on the street, street photography is half as interesting. I'm trying to fit in all the sunshine I can right now.

Perry Ge
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 07:50
Haha yeah, luckily today there was a nice light cloud cover giving that excellent massive softbox effect, and (to keep things relevant), the 200L is perfect for street photography. I shot a headshot of a girl about 5 feet in front of me, and I bet she thought I was shooting some bird behind her or something haha.

Stealthy Ninja
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 11:21
1 from today, that like theHoff, I posted in another thread too.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3123/2679041273_238b8d2d1b_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/perryge/2679041273/)

Nice timing.

Lester Wareham
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 11:34
Much better than I thought it would be. I assume they are tripod shots though.

No they are handheld, exposure settings are listed in the message.

The EF 2X is quite big for a TC, twice the length of the 1.4X but the combination is still relatively compact and light and so easy to handle; 194mm long and 1030g. That is less than the 300/4 IS or 400/5.6 on their own.

Of course because of the slow AF with a 2X it is probably best as a emergency or stop-gap solution for wildlife use.

I was just putting this in another thread, might as well paste it here... this is from the 200 + 1.4x; it is very, very usable wide open. Thanks for the crops from the 2x! I keep saying I'm going to get one...


Great shot. In practice I find the 200/2.8 does not really notice the 1.4X at all, of course you can see it in software SRF measurements but as a 100% crop you would be hard pressed to tell, at least in the centre.

Stealthy Ninja
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 11:59
Haha yeah, luckily today there was a nice light cloud cover giving that excellent massive softbox effect, and (to keep things relevant), the 200L is perfect for street photography. I shot a headshot of a girl about 5 feet in front of me, and I bet she thought I was shooting some bird behind her or something haha.

Do you find people stare at you but because they don't know you're pointing at them, it's like a real natural look?

Just point it at a taxi or bus (or tourist attraction). If they check your camera for some reason you can just complain to them that they got in your shot of a bus/taxi. ;)

This lens is so good for street stuff. Especially if you're a foreign guy like me. They all think I'm a tourist... some even smile at me. :D

Mr. Clean
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 12:03
nice captures!

Stealthy Ninja
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 12:21
No they are handheld, exposure settings are listed in the message.....

Well done. I think I'll be getting the 1.4 soon. ;)

Oh and since beggers are all the rage:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3074/2670144849_3837e062f3_o.png


In case you're wondering. She's (yes it's a she) happy because I just gave her some money.

Hey! My first paid model!

Apparently she is not crazy. She just acts that way to get more money or something. She regularly has tea in some teahouse somewhere, then goes out begging. Apparently her son can support her no problem.

Therefore I guess it is a form of street art. :shock:

Blackvault
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 13:01
I didn't know ownership of the items was a pre-requisite to discussing the merits of them, sorry. :rolleyes: ;)

However a 200/1.8 comes to visit every so often - I think it likes the company:

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=17565&stc=1&d=1164375073

I'm I sad because I can name every one of those lenses? :oops::confused: Nice collection mate. You are pro or semi?

Blackvault

Stealthy Ninja
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 21:26
I'm I sad because I can name every one of those lenses? :oops::confused: Nice collection mate. You are pro or semi?

Blackvault


That guy has more stock than some stores I know. :lol:

So many red rings, it's hypnotic:

http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/~akitaoka/gira5.gif

mackidbrendan
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 21:33
I didn't know ownership of the items was a pre-requisite to discussing the merits of them, sorry. :rolleyes: ;)

However a 200/1.8 comes to visit every so often - I think it likes the company:

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=17565&stc=1&d=1164375073

i will trade you:
My soul, yes my loving young, only 16.8 years of wear and tear, soul. For all your gear. u can keep one body and the TS lens:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Nick_b
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 21:55
i will trade you:
My soul, yes my loving young, only 16.8 years of wear and tear, soul. For all your gear. u can keep one body and the TS lens:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Leaving the TS lens!?!? you are really showing your lack of experience my friend. :lol:

Perry Ge
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 22:13
Do you find people stare at you but because they don't know you're pointing at them, it's like a real natural look?

Just point it at a taxi or bus (or tourist attraction). If they check your camera for some reason you can just complain to them that they got in your shot of a bus/taxi. ;)

This lens is so good for street stuff. Especially if you're a foreign guy like me. They all think I'm a tourist... some even smile at me. :D

I get very few stares, partly because of the distance this lens allows you to shoot at, and partly because the people you shoot don't know if you're shooting them or something behind them, so if I get the occasional look, it doesn't last long. The lens is great for those kinds of street candids. Much less conspicuous than a big white lens.

Stealthy Ninja
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 22:39
I get very few stares, partly because of the distance this lens allows you to shoot at, and partly because the people you shoot don't know if you're shooting them or something behind them, so if I get the occasional look, it doesn't last long. The lens is great for those kinds of street candids. Much less conspicuous than a big white lens.

Totally right. Normally people have a glance at you and you can snap off a shot if you're lucky. Sort of street portrait. I guess I get a little more stares than usual because I'm a 6'4" white guy with a beard holding a camera, whilst loitering on a street corner for 5-10 minutes.

Still the police leave me alone, even when I photograph them.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3221/2657278219_aabfb4ae8a_o.png

Stealthy Ninja
18th of July 2008 (Fri), 22:56
Well, here are 2 of my favourites from last nights ICE extravaganza*. I do NOT know these people.

MR. COOL:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3162/2681691774_a2a64b57c5.jpg

The guys getting a lesson here I think:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3140/2680873699_f00f49b5a7.jpg

*Not really an Ice extravaganza - just normal ICE.

mackidbrendan
19th of July 2008 (Sat), 15:21
Leaving the TS lens!?!? you are really showing your lack of experience my friend. :lol:

are they actually that awesome? i thought they were just like lensababies, and i have a lensababy so i thought i would let him keep it haha

Stealthy Ninja
20th of July 2008 (Sun), 05:47
are they actually that awesome? i thought they were just like lensababies, and i have a lensababy so i thought i would let him keep it haha

From what I know a lensbaby is like faking/tricking the TS effect. The TS lenses are very good for things like photographing building as you can get rid of falloff (is that the word?). You can control the tilt or something...

Lensbabies are just selective focus (which is something a TS lens can do too).

Rafromak
20th of July 2008 (Sun), 13:54
Not the usual duck, but that's all I have.

4rgentum
20th of July 2008 (Sun), 15:06
i love this lens.

Dmab
23rd of July 2008 (Wed), 10:56
It's my most used lens in the stable. Absolutely stunning quality. This lens is the reason I switched to Canon. Nikon's only available lens at this range and price point is their 180 2.8 which is motor driven. The USM on a prime is a godsend.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3115/2692087907_f29d26f5ae_o.jpg

Rafromak
28th of July 2008 (Mon), 00:20
50% crop to get the moose closer to the viewer.
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y51/Rayfromalaska/moose07-26-08b.jpg

fubarhouse
28th of July 2008 (Mon), 07:01
200 f.2.8 w/ 1.4X TC

I know we all dislike the whole silky effect of waterfalls, but to see this one as a long exposure I think would be very nice.

Busto
28th of July 2008 (Mon), 15:13
I know we all dislike the whole silky effect of waterfalls
We do? Speak for yourself. I love that effect.

Rafromak
28th of July 2008 (Mon), 21:27
We do? Speak for yourself. I love that effect.

I don't like the effect unless it is a very small amount of it. Much better is the natural way that water flows and looks.

Stealthy Ninja
28th of July 2008 (Mon), 21:41
I don't like the effect unless it is a very small amount of it. Much better is the natural way that water flows and looks.

I think if the scene is peaceful it's not too bad. If it's something like rapids, maybe a faster shutter to get the "action" of the water is better. It is a bit overdone these days, that's all.

Non-photographers think it looks cool. I taught my sister-in-law how to do it on her P&S she was really excited. ;)

Rafromak
31st of July 2008 (Thu), 00:14
200mm prime coupled to a Kenko 12mm 1.4x tube:

Lester Wareham
1st of August 2008 (Fri), 06:21
The 200/2.8 is great for flowers, good for background isolation:

http://www.ware.myzen.co.uk/GalleryPics/Photos/Flora/Flora%205/Flora%20Fritillary%20A%20006%20120408.jpg

http://www.ware.myzen.co.uk/GalleryPics/Photos/Flora/Flora%205/Flora%20Flower%20H%20001%20080508.jpg

nostalg1a
1st of August 2008 (Fri), 16:45
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3096/2695097316_1d34126999.jpg?v=0

leitch
1st of August 2008 (Fri), 16:49
nostalg1a, that's a sweet photo!

Out of interest, does anyone have a photo of the actual lens with lens hood mounted on a body?