PDA

View Full Version : Now I'm an L-coholic!


drisley
18th of February 2004 (Wed), 11:29
Well I've been doing MUCH research on zoom lenses for the past couple of weeks, and after reading comments here, and seeing the pictures for myself, I decided to take the plunge and get a Canon 70-200mm F4L!

I just got a call from Fedex and it's arriving this afternoon. I will be passing out cigars to my friends while I wait...

Seriously, though, I think I'm going to have to sue this forum and the users for making me spend all this $$$. Since the american recording industry can do it, I will too!!! :D

Pekka, I want log-in info sent to me ASAP! :wink:

But even more seriously, I took the advice here too and ordered from the states (Im in Canada). B&H never had the lens in stock, so I orderred from Adorama. The total cost was $860 CDN , and that included Fedex Overnite shipping, and customs charges (GST)! Compare that to the cheapest price I found here... $969 CDN +taxes+ shipping. So, I save about $200 CDN.

I'm going to rue the day when all digicams have full size sensors. I love the fact that I now will have a 1.6x multi factor giving me a 320mm lens!

Avarond
18th of February 2004 (Wed), 11:44
Congratulations, Im hoping to have one of those a few days after my tax refund arrives (Friday I hope, otherwise its a week from Friday, groan). I agonized over this decision for many weeks between the sigma 2.8 and the canon f/4. Hopefully I didnt make the wrong decision. Let us know how you like it!

elm54
18th of February 2004 (Wed), 11:49
I'm going to rue the day when all digicams have full size sensors. I love the fact that I now will have a 1.6x multi factor giving me a 320mm lens!
If only that were so......... But I guess full frame sensors will show us the softer edges of our lenses. :? At least that's the way I understand it. But I'm always open to a better understanding. It seems that this 1.6 multiplyer compares the resulting image taken through a certain focal point lens with a DSLR to one taken with a 35mm SLR. Not bringing anything closer but capturing a less of the image than what would be captured on the 35mm image.
Again I am an amature, if this is wrong I'm sure that someone will say it better than I .
:oops:
Eric

CoolToolGuy
18th of February 2004 (Wed), 11:58
I'm going to rue the day when all digicams have full size sensors. I love the fact that I now will have a 1.6x multi factor giving me a 320mm lens!
It seems that this 1.6 multiplyer compares the resulting image taken through a certain focal point lens with a DSLR to one taken with a 35mm SLR. Not bringing anything closer but capturing a less of the image than what would be captured on the 35mm image.
Again I am an amature, if this is wrong I'm sure that someone will say it better than I .
:oops:
Eric

Eric,
You are spot on with one tiny, technical clarification. The lens has a certain focal length, the focal point is something different.
[Now the CoolToolGuy steps aside, into the shadows, as the potential for yet another firestorm related to the 'multiplyer' increases...] :P

Have Fun
Rick 8)

drisley
18th of February 2004 (Wed), 12:03
I think you are partyly right.
Yes, rather than magnify the image, I believe it "crops" the image.
However, the result, I believe, on a 200mm lens with a 1.6x "cropping" factor would be equivalent to a 320mm zoom.

I think it's sort of like cropping an image by 1.6x in photoshop, then enlarging it back to the original size by 1.6x. However, you wouldnt get the loss of detail. ?

elm54
18th of February 2004 (Wed), 12:24
[quote="elm54"][quote=drisley]
Eric,
You are spot on with one tiny, technical clarification. The lens has a certain focal length, the focal point is something different.
[Now the CoolToolGuy steps aside, into the shadows, as the potential for yet another firestorm related to the 'multiplyer' increases...] :P

Have Fun
Rick 8)
Yeah ... what he said :lol:
Thanks I meant focal length my technical articulation suffers from lack o clarity {child of the sixties} 8)
Eric

defordphoto
18th of February 2004 (Wed), 12:47
Once an L. Always an L. You can never go back now.

Congrats.

CoolToolGuy
18th of February 2004 (Wed), 12:55
Yeah ... what he said :lol:
Thanks I meant focal length my technical articulation suffers from lack o clarity {child of the sixties} 8)
Eric

I'm not criticizing you, its just when you get to certain topics on this forum, some folks will even question your punctuation, much less your choice of words or spelling. It's a very cool forum, just a few quirks (like every other forum on this, or any other topic).

Have Fun
Rick 8)

elm54
18th of February 2004 (Wed), 14:20
I really meant thanks :!:

drisley
18th of February 2004 (Wed), 14:41
It's here! It's here! It's ....

IanD
18th of February 2004 (Wed), 14:51
It's here! It's here! It's ....
Enjoy :!: