Deciding between two very differend lenses

[karusel]

I own the 100-400L IS USM, and quite love it, with the only problem - I don't get much use of it, so far I've shot an airshow, some close-ups of various subjects far away, far too many sharpness test shots (results WERE slightly disappointing), I've also shot some helicopters flying over our house, but I found these to be of absolutely no value at all.

A forum member of some local forums has switched his lens with the above for a while, a week, month, I dunnno :D The lens being 50 1.0L.

After few initial test shots I've decided that at 1.0 it is truly unsharp, but hey, is there a sharper 50mm lens at 1.0 out there? Yeah, you get the point, I did anyway.

So I went to shoot this thing (this saturday), organized yearly by a radio station, basically a contest, how should I put it, battle of the bands? :) Anywho, I've shot the entire competition with 10D and the afforementioned Lense, at apertures mostly at 1.0, some closed down to as far as 2.0. The lens is evidently old and mingles cry out for a MKII, it clearly is not meant for fast action, since it has some serious focusing speed problems, and the manual electronic focus sucks bore's tits, but I've become to love it (lense, not the funky focus), after seeing some shots, although I must say I still have them all (except one, see below) in CRW form.

Now this guy I switched lens with is willing to sell the 50mm OR compensate with my 100-400. Now, since I'm not really mr. Gates, I was thinking I'd take a long chew on the teflon enforced bullet and sacrifice the 100-400. Also, he wants 2000 EUR for it. Come to think of it, I am a big fan of natural light (even if it's pink neon) photography, I would like to shoot concerts and events like that, getting a all-area-access-pass is not too difficult for me, and nobody would kick my a$$ as long as I stay out of the camera view.

Now the thing is, I know this guy bought the lens for half the amount he's asking, although the glass had some fungus which he had removed at Canon service. It somehow bothers me that besides loosing the 100-400 I'd also have to pay moderately big bucks to get the 50mm...

http://freeweb.siol.net/avenger/CRW_4365_.jpg
This girl enchanted me in about 1/45 second. About two hours later she left and I had a big smile on my face and her phone number. 3 day rule?

EXIF will tell you it was shot at ISO 800, f/1, 1/45s therefore quite impossible to shoot flashless with any other lens except with 85 1.2L, but at ISO 1600.

So what do you think I should do, seriously.

[Curos]

IMO, this sounds rediculous. A 100-400 AND 2000 EUR??? Thats insane! But i suppose if its worth enough to you..or something... I'd say sell the 100-400 and buy the 50 somewhere else (if you can find it)

[karusel]

No, 2000 EUR minus the 100-400, I reckon I could set the 100-400 price at about 1300-1400 EUR, so 700-600 price difference for me to pay at exchange.

[pcasciola]

The whole thing sounds crazy to me. You could sell the 100-400 and get a 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8 and maybe a 70-200 f/4L for the same amount of money. That combined with you Tamron would make an excellent setup. I just threw the 85mm in there to round out the cost to what a used 100-400 is worth, which you may have no need for.

Just my 2 cents.

[tim]

The three day rule is stupid. If you like someone, call them. Just my $0.02. I've no opinion on the lens though ;)

[scott stokes]

karusel I think that I know where one of these are for sale,it was in a little shop that i went into on a trip.I took some veary good photo,s inside a churh down the street from his shop.I almost got it but I need a good long lens first.I will see if I can find the number for you. he was asking $500,but told me he would take $425.

[steven]

A fair exchange would be a fair deal.
The 100-400 lens plus is too much.
Just my opinion.

[defordphoto]

Take back your 100-400 and re-think this all. The 50 1.0 is NOT a sharp lens. It is a dog and that's why he's getting rid of it and why Canon doesn't make it anymore. The $70 50 f/1.8 is many times sharper than the 1.0.

Get your awesome 100-400 back now. You can always resell it and get something like a 70-200L or something like that. Maybe you'd enjoy the 17-40L...

[Tom W]

To heck with the lens - go for the girl! :)

Honestly, I don't have any personal experience with the 50/1.0 but from what I hear, it doesn't share much (if any) advantage over the 50/1.4. In fact, it isn't real well liked, except perhaps as an investment (which might be what your friend considers it).

If the 100-400 really isn't finding use in your bag, take a little time to find out what you do want to shoot. Then go for it. It's good glass, so it will hold nearly all of its value if you decide to sell it.

BTW, you'll find that the beautiful woman that enchanted you in 1/45 second will probably enchant you even more if you had the 85/1.8. :)

[karusel]

I too suspect the guy is selling the lense because of softness, since this is basically the first thing he said at exchange...

Tim, I'll call her today. :D

Pcasciola, can't say it doesn't sound reasonable... but 1.4 is one full stop slower... uhm. Maybe. 70-200 f4 is too slow, 2.8 would be it, maybe Sigma.

Scott stokes, if you find it and he still has the lens and will send it to Europe, I'll love you forever. 8)

RFM, I see what you're saying, but tell me, if you're already shooting at the edge of abilities of 50 1.0, how could you do the job with 50 1.4 or even 1.8?

[DocFrankenstein]

Karusel... Do you notice the HORRIBLE purple fringing near the purse and the clip-on little man???? :shock: :shock: :shock: Anybody?

You must've come off pretty desperate, if he wants to trade a fungus lens for a new 100-400... he should be the one paying you the money.

Show him the middle finger and walk away with your 100-400...

Now, the girl. :twisted: How about you give me her # and I'll ask when she'd like to be called? :) :wink:

How about giving us more info? How did you get the number? what's she doing? Where are you planning to invite her? How much do you want it? :D :lol: :lol: 8)

[karusel]

:D Well, this shot is from after-party and despite the fact that there were many famous people, pretty young girls, dancers, musicians and all, she stood out and my alarms went off. I managed to capture some shots and then made a circle around this really long table and, well, she was already gone.

I have to tell you at this point that I have been on my feet pretty much the whole day, ate very little, drank around 6 coffees + some occasional quick gulps of water, my back was killing me, my legs hurt and I didn't really feel my feet any more. But I had to find her and THEN sit down.

I circled around surely for 15 minutes at least, being stopped by friends, making some by-the-way shots.

Then I found her hidden in a corner, quickly went to grab some wine, sat down next to her and just started talking. And I thought, well if she turns out to be a bitch or just not interested or both, I'll have a good time anyway, I'll drink this glass of wine there and light up a cigarette, sit back and relax. I wasn't even thinking of asking for anything, until she said she had to go, as a matter of a fact I'm pretty sure I'm the only reason she stayed there for so long. :mrgreen:

Life is good. 8)

[Molydood]

Karusel, can't you push your ISO up? I have found that the 300d with 1600 is acceptable if exposed correctly, and even if not, then noise ninja or equivelent will sort it afterwards.
Also, flash can look good if used correctly (bounced etc)
Martin

[ron chappel]

Ok-the important stuff first.CALL THE GIRL :D

Now the lenses...
I can see your point-kinda.If you are shooting at iso 3200 1/45 sec wide open and juuust getting shots then the 50/1 would seem abit tempting

If on the other hand you AREN'T making the most of the ISO capabilities or haven't tried at f1.4 then do so before wasting money on that lens
Maybe try f1.4 and see how many shots come out?You only need a few keeper shots,not all of them
After all the 50/1.4 is a stunningly good lens if you can cope with that one stop loss

[Andy_T]

Hell, for that money + lens you'll maybe get the 200/1.8 :shock:

I don't know the lens, but I read posts here in this forum of other members who bought that lens in good condition for less than the money ... without giving up the 100-400.

Best regards,
Andy

PS ... you could also get the 50/1.4 and a 20D that will give you the same shot because of the lower noise at high ISO settings...

[Pekka]

If you want a good low light lens, get 85/1.2L. It is sharp at 1.2, too.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I Echo Pekkas suggestion.

The 85mm is VERY Sharp at 1.2 and remains sharp all the way through. Perosnally I'd rather have the extra 35mm focal lenght as well.. especially for event photogrphy where I may not get close enoufh to get much from a 50mm.

50mm 1.0 is a magnificent optic.. but I agree with the others.. the price asked is FAR too high.

[karusel]

You're right, Pekka, I was thinking of getting the 1.2 before... and maybe I will. I've decided I won't keep this 50mm after all and I won't buy some other unless Scott would provide me the phone number.. 8)

Now for the truly important matters, I called Her and was stuck on the phone for a good hour of pleasant conversation, I'll meet with in this week. I've got a good feeling about this one. Goodbye Jenna Jameson & co. :mrgreen:

[tim]

lol@Jenna, and well done :D

That 85mm 1.2 costs $1400 :shock: