Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 04 Sep 2013 (Wednesday) 21:19
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Spend my money

 
lukeH
Mostly Lurking
17 posts
Joined Aug 2010
     
Sep 04, 2013 21:19 |  #1

Well I have a bit of a conundrum. I am happy with my mid and wide(have 16-35 and 24-105) but I want to improve my telephoto to do 2 things. I want to be able to take pictures of my kids in their sports more effectively(cross country, wrestling, and football) and I want to get into bird photography. I have 3500 I am planning on spending with a little flexibility. I am currently running a 5Dc and a 60D. I was thinking about 2 possible solutions; go with the new sigma 120-300 or I can get a good deal on the 1DS mark III and get a 100-400. What do you think and do you have any other possible solutions I may not have thought of. Wrestling I have had good luck with my 24-105 because they have a spot light on them when they are wrestling but football and cross country I have not been happy with 80% of my shots.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TJays
Goldmember
Avatar
1,310 posts
Likes: 118
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Los Angeles USA
     
Sep 04, 2013 21:31 |  #2

70-200 2.8 L, I just spent a lot of your money, but you will thank me


Regards
Terri Jean

5D4 Gripped-EOS 1DX Markll -600mm/4.0 II L-35-350mm/3.5 L-70-200/2.8 L-24-70mm/2.8 L-85mm/1.2 II L-50mm/1.2 L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
flashpoint99
Senior Member
411 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Dec 2012
     
Sep 04, 2013 22:09 |  #3

TJays wrote in post #16268888 (external link)
70-200 2.8 L, I just spent a lot of your money, but you will thank me

What he said!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SeattleSpeedster
Goldmember
Avatar
3,182 posts
Gallery: 552 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 6528
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
     
Sep 04, 2013 22:17 |  #4

I would go 1Ds2 and 70-200


Fuji GFX50s and A7R II | Zeiss 85mm f1.4 Otus and 28mm f1.4 Otus | Fuji GF23mm and 32-64mm | Canon 200mm f1.8 | Zeiss 100-300mm | Zeiss and Canon 16-35mm f4 | Zeiss 135mm f2 | Voigtlander 10mm f5.6 | Zeiss and Sony 50mm f1.4 | DJI Mavic Pro 2 and Inspire 2 X5S drones | https://mikereidphotog​raphy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NeonStar
Senior Member
253 posts
Joined Apr 2012
     
Sep 04, 2013 22:20 |  #5
bannedPermanent ban

Go something longer than 200




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
flashpoint99
Senior Member
411 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Dec 2012
     
Sep 04, 2013 22:31 |  #6

If you are getting nice results with the 105 in a gym for wrestling the 200 will knock your socks off. Take the same 200 add a 1.4 or 2x converter to it and youll get the reach you want for cross country and football.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lukeH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
17 posts
Joined Aug 2010
     
Sep 05, 2013 05:29 |  #7

The biggest concern I have with 200 is that I wont have any of the reach for bird photography. I have never been impressed with a 2x converter. Thanks for the suggestions.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lukeH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
17 posts
Joined Aug 2010
     
Sep 05, 2013 05:36 |  #8

I might have to use alot of flexibility and get the 100-400 also. I just wont let the wife know.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ctwatkins
Senior Member
Avatar
529 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Bluegrass State
     
Sep 05, 2013 06:05 |  #9

I'd be tempted to dump the 5DC and upgrade to the 5D3, as well as add the 70-200 2.8L non-IS. The copy I had was ALMOST as sharp at my 70-200 2.8L ISII. If you're shooting sports and birds, IMO, you need something with a better AF system than you currently have. AND, I'd also consider the 400 5.6L over the 100-400; basically the same price, or a little less, and a lot sharper. You'd most likely only be using the 100-400 at the long end for shooting birds, so you wouldn't be losing much.


Gear: 5D MKIII * 6D * 35L (1.4) * 135L (2.0) * 24 - 70L (2.8II) * 70 - 200L (2.8ISII) * 200L (2.0IS) * 580 EX * Induro CT213 * PCB AB B800 (X3) * Pocketwizard Plus

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mickeyb105
Goldmember
Avatar
2,537 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Sep 05, 2013 07:19 |  #10

If you are going to be shooting football under the lights, you will really want a 2.8 aperture lens to freeze the action. And maybe I just shoot in the worst gyms on earth, but ideally I prefer to shoot at 2.0 for wrestling.

Are you going to be on the sidelines for football or up in the stands?

My solution: buy used copies of the 135L (~$800), 200 2.8 L (~$550) and the 300 F4 L (~$550). Use the 135 for wrestling and enjoy the benefits of the ultra-fast AF and low-light prowess. The a 200L for football--especially on a monopod--will get you pro performance on your 60D. You can use the 135 on your FF body for sideline candids and closer-in action. The 300 F4 you can use for CC, birding, and football for awhile in the first half of football games.

Take your leftover funds and trade up either your 5Dc for a 6D or yor 60D for a 7D--or both, if you are so inclined. The 6D would be good for wrestling and on your 2nd body at football games. The 7D would be an incremental improvement for football but an even bigger one for birding.

You won't be able to get everything you want your of just zooms, IMO, but you can get there using primes. But you have to be committed to it and be ok with the trade off of flexibility with zooms.


Sony A99ii, RX-100ii, Sonnar T* 135mm f1.8 ZA, Planar T* 50mm F1.4 ZA, 24mm f/2 SSM Distagon T*, Minolta HS 200 2.8 APO, Minolta 2xTC APO, HVL-F43M
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lukeH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
17 posts
Joined Aug 2010
     
Sep 05, 2013 13:54 as a reply to  @ ctwatkins's post |  #11

I'd be tempted to dump the 5DC and upgrade to the 5D3, as well as add the 70-200 2.8L non-IS. The copy I had was ALMOST as sharp at my 70-200 2.8L ISII. If you're shooting sports and birds, IMO, you need something with a better AF system than you currently have. AND, I'd also consider the 400 5.6L over the 100-400; basically the same price, or a little less, and a lot sharper. You'd most likely only be using the 100-400 at the long end for shooting birds, so you wouldn't be losing much.

That is probably going to be my next step but I am probably going with a 1DX(that will have to wait till next year though). The 400 5.6L has been a serious consideration as well. I actually dont use the 5Dc all that much anymore. The 60D is my primary camera for the stuff I use unless it is landscape.

If you are going to be shooting football under the lights, you will really want a 2.8 aperture lens to freeze the action. And maybe I just shoot in the worst gyms on earth, but ideally I prefer to shoot at 2.0 for wrestling.

Are you going to be on the sidelines for football or up in the stands?

My solution: buy used copies of the 135L (~$800), 200 2.8 L (~$550) and the 300 F4 L (~$550). Use the 135 for wrestling and enjoy the benefits of the ultra-fast AF and low-light prowess. The a 200L for football--especially on a monopod--will get you pro performance on your 60D. You can use the 135 on your FF body for sideline candids and closer-in action. The 300 F4 you can use for CC, birding, and football for awhile in the first half of football games.

Take your leftover funds and trade up either your 5Dc for a 6D or yor 60D for a 7D--or both, if you are so inclined. The 6D would be good for wrestling and on your 2nd body at football games. The 7D would be an incremental improvement for football but an even bigger one for birding.

You won't be able to get everything you want your of just zooms, IMO, but you can get there using primes. But you have to be committed to it and be ok with the trade off of flexibility with zooms.

The football will be during the day, my sons are both younger. Football I have not been able to really freeze action consistently so I know my current options are poor. I can get really close to the action so a 70-200, 200, or even the 135 will work especially with the 60D. I have a few primes as well and have no issues using primes. I just have no long ones yet. The biggest concern I have is that catching action at the right time will require more preplanning but that will also make me a better photographer.
I do plan to upgrade the camera but I hate to do middling upgrades. I like to do large ones that will last me years instead of wishing I had made the big move. I would have alot more and be able to do all my upgrades but I just bought a trip to Rome and Paris for the wife and me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mickeyb105
Goldmember
Avatar
2,537 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Sep 05, 2013 23:52 |  #12

I've never been to Paris but did an eight-day honeymoon in Rome in 2010. It was beyond words, for me anyways. Your 16-35 L will serve you very well there with all that wonderful architecture.

If you get a chance, pop into any of the cathedrals scattered throughout the city. You never know what you will find--an entoombed Pope, a Bernini sculpture, or even a small gallery of Michelangelo's early work! As amazing as The Vatican and the various museums are, the 10 cathedrals we popped into were collectively outstanding.

I brought a borrowed Nikon D40 and kit lenses with me to shoot with and barely knew what I was doing--for a few nice shots in spite of it ! And a few with my lowly Blackberry as well;)


Sony A99ii, RX-100ii, Sonnar T* 135mm f1.8 ZA, Planar T* 50mm F1.4 ZA, 24mm f/2 SSM Distagon T*, Minolta HS 200 2.8 APO, Minolta 2xTC APO, HVL-F43M
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lukeH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
17 posts
Joined Aug 2010
     
Sep 06, 2013 13:12 |  #13

mickeyb105 wrote in post #16272070 (external link)
I've never been to Paris but did an eight-day honeymoon in Rome in 2010. It was beyond words, for me anyways. Your 16-35 L will serve you very well there with all that wonderful architecture.

If you get a chance, pop into any of the cathedrals scattered throughout the city. You never know what you will find--an entoombed Pope, a Bernini sculpture, or even a small gallery of Michelangelo's early work! As amazing as The Vatican and the various museums are, the 10 cathedrals we popped into were collectively outstanding.

I brought a borrowed Nikon D40 and kit lenses with me to shoot with and barely knew what I was doing--for a few nice shots in spite of it ! And a few with my lowly Blackberry as well;)

This will be my 4th trip to Rome(lived in Europe for years) and I am trying to find all the small cathedrals I have missed over the years. I would recommend anyone that has a chance to go to Paris. Even if it is only for a couple days. I typically find a condo that is for rent(there are all kinds of sites online for them) which can get you some amazing rates. I stayed in one that was in the Latin district across the river from the Louvre probably a half mile max walk from my door to the entrance of the Louvre. I paid something like 100 euro per night for it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mickeyb105
Goldmember
Avatar
2,537 posts
Gallery: 397 photos
Likes: 1596
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Vero Beach, FL
     
Sep 06, 2013 14:29 |  #14

lukeH wrote in post #16273598 (external link)
This will be my 4th trip to Rome(lived in Europe for years) and I am trying to find all the small cathedrals I have missed over the years. I would recommend anyone that has a chance to go to Paris. Even if it is only for a couple days. I typically find a condo that is for rent(there are all kinds of sites online for them) which can get you some amazing rates. I stayed in one that was in the Latin district across the river from the Louvre probably a half mile max walk from my door to the entrance of the Louvre. I paid something like 100 euro per night for it.

Well played!

I'll see if I can dig up the old pics I have of the mini-museum located in a Cathedral just a short walk (less than 1K?) south by southeast from Castel Sant'Angelo. One of Michelangelo's early sculptures is in there, along with some real impressive artifacts/treasures of the church. It was only accessible via appointment, and we were lucky enough that a French couple had done just that--being at the right place at the right time works!

I'm thinking perhaps there's a good chance you've been to this one if you've gone looking in the area's cathedrals, though. Do other cathedrals surrounding Vatican City also have museums like this?


Sony A99ii, RX-100ii, Sonnar T* 135mm f1.8 ZA, Planar T* 50mm F1.4 ZA, 24mm f/2 SSM Distagon T*, Minolta HS 200 2.8 APO, Minolta 2xTC APO, HVL-F43M
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lukeH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
17 posts
Joined Aug 2010
     
Sep 06, 2013 14:53 |  #15

mickeyb105 wrote in post #16273828 (external link)
Well played!

I'll see if I can dig up the old pics I have of the mini-museum located in a Cathedral just a short walk (less than 1K?) south by southeast from Castel Sant'Angelo. One of Michelangelo's early sculptures is in there, along with some real impressive artifacts/treasures of the church. It was only accessible via appointment, and we were lucky enough that a French couple had done just that--being at the right place at the right time works!

I'm thinking perhaps there's a good chance you've been to this one if you've gone looking in the area's cathedrals, though. Do other cathedrals surrounding Vatican City also have museums like this?

Pretty much every cathedral has a small museum or display of their important artifacts. It is fun to go through. Rome feels so ancient and the funnest thing to do is just walk. I ran into so many things that were straight surprises. Paris on the other hand is very much destination oriented. It is beautiful but even when I walked I rarely ran into anything truly unexpected. Paris is a great place to just sit back and relax. Especially if you have been there before and done the major sights.
Some of the street artists are truly amazing. I have about 15 watercolors around my house from this guy that sold them for 20-50 pounds. I hope to find him again.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,752 views & 0 likes for this thread
Spend my money
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is quadrentau
1336 guests, 253 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.