Post your photography skills! (self-gloss)

Dcg- how do you like the 70-200 f/4? I am debating if I should shell out the extra money (when I have it) for the f/4, f/2.8 or f/2.8IS. The images from the 2.8IS are incredibly sharp I mean beyond a doubt amazingly sharp. But I don't know if I could shell out $2k+ on a lens.

Couple of pics from my vacation. These were taken with the X100 for those who're interested. Ciick on the pic for the larger image.



dcg said:

A friend of mine would like to put together a look book with her sister modeling some vintage dresses, and has asked me to photograph it. I don't really have any experience with this type of photography. Any suggestions for resources online where I could read up on modeling photography specifically?

My gear:
Canon 20D
EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
Speedlite 580EX II

Click to expand...

Kas said:

Strobist.com is great to be honest. Maybe a group on flickr?

Click to expand...

Thanks, I'll take a look...

Krp480 said:

Dcg- how do you like the 70-200 f/4? I am debating if I should shell out the extra money (when I have it) for the f/4, f/2.8 or f/2.8IS. The images from the 2.8IS are incredibly sharp I mean beyond a doubt amazingly sharp. But I don't know if I could shell out $2k+ on a lens.

Click to expand...

It's excellent. Maybe the mk II version of the 2.8IS is *slightly* sharper when looking at test shots, but that's really splitting the thinnest of hairs - either is sharper than that vast majority of zoom lenses. I've seen people say they prefer the f4 due to the smaller size and reduced weight vs. the 2.8 - whether they're just trying to rationalize saving the money, I don't know. Haven't used the 2.8 myself, but for my money I'd rather put the difference towards another lens. Pretty steep price to pay for a single stop, unless you absolutely need it.

edit - just checked B&H; the price difference appears to be $1100+. For that amount of money, one could buy the 100mm f2.8L IS macro lens, or the 135mm f2L, or the EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS, or get most of the way to a 400mm f5.6L/300mm f4L IS/24-70f2.8L, or get the 85mm f1.8 + the 15-85mm f3.5-5.6 IS....you get the idea.



dcg said:

It's excellent. Maybe the mk II version of the 2.8IS is *slightly* sharper when looking at test shots, but that's really splitting the thinnest of hairs - either is sharper than that vast majority of zoom lenses. I've seen people say they prefer the f4 due to the smaller size and reduced weight vs. the 2.8 - whether they're just trying to rationalize saving the money, I don't know. Haven't used the 2.8 myself, but for my money I'd rather put the difference towards another lens. Pretty steep price to pay for a single stop, unless you absolutely need it.

edit - just checked B&H; the price difference appears to be $1100+. For that amount of money, one could buy the 100mm f2.8L IS macro lens, or the 135mm f2L, or the EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS, or get most of the way to a 400mm f5.6L/300mm f4L IS/24-70f2.8L, or get the 85mm f1.8 + the 15-85mm f3.5-5.6 IS....you get the idea.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the answer! Well I gotta admit between the 2.8 AND f4, I would probably choose the 2.8. I know I would eventually be upgrading at some point in time to the 2.8 if I get the 4. I don't feel like spending the extra $1k for just IS. Although I know that if I do get the 70-200 it will be for either low-light indoor situations or for fast paced sports and the extra couple of stops would really help so I could use a faster shutter speed. I first should be saving up for the lens though ! But I think it would be easier to know which lens I will be getting once I have the money saved up.

Luckily I have narrowed it down to the 24 1.4 or the 70-200 (still deciding which one I should get though), but that doesn't mean what I want won't change anytime soon!

^To clarify, my comparison was based on the f4 IS (~$1280) vs. f2.8 IS (~$2380). There are, of course, non-IS versions of both. If you're planning to eventually upgrade to the 2.8, may as well save yourself the hassle and save up for it the first time.



dcg said:

^To clarify, my comparison was based on the f4 IS (~$1280) vs. f2.8 IS (~$2380). There are, of course, non-IS versions of both. If you're planning to eventually upgrade to the 2.8, may as well save yourself the hassle and save up for it the first time.

Click to expand...

Important to keep not only price but also weight in mind. I wouldn't want to carry the f/2.8 IS around the whole day at 1500g for the lens alone.

All this talk about Canon IS lenses is giving me a headache. LOL. This IMO is another example of the equipment trap. I have been shooting for decades without IS with no problems. You use a tripod and remote trigger and it's all good in low light. While we are on the subject of IS another thing to think about is equipment failure. You not only have a complicated lens group with auto focus motors now you're adding a whole new group of complicated electronics into the mix. At 1k additional cost no thanks.

truth I don't think I will ever own a IS or VR lens..don't they operate with a gyro or something? It's like taking all the technique out and replacing it with something manmade..which will break as said.

I have only one lens with IS and I honestly think it can get quite handy sometimes. I like that lens for example for the snapshots when we have a BBQ in the late afternoons in summer.

Was a bit around the city but didn't get anything really interesting. On the way back stumbled over someone less fortunate.

Nice Colours.

I have a question that needs some quick answering if you don't mind. I'm doing the editorials for a suicide article and I took this picture but I'm trying to burn the piss out of the background to darken it but around the thumb and left lower side of the arm it looks like it needs some smoothing over (kind of notchy looking) any tips or suggestions to do this? I've also tried masking but my mouse isn't the greatest so getting a smooth curves line by hand isn't much of an option.



dcg said:

^To clarify, my comparison was based on the f4 IS (~$1280) vs. f2.8 IS (~$2380). There are, of course, non-IS versions of both. If you're planning to eventually upgrade to the 2.8, may as well save yourself the hassle and save up for it the first time.

Click to expand...

Ah, well I would just get the 70-200 2.8L non-is then. I would rather have the extra speed of the lens. I mean there is a couple stops we're talking about. I would get the IS of the 2.8 but honestly it is pointless because the couple of times I will REALLY need it won't even come close to outweighing the times I won't need it. If I were to use it also I would really be using it for sports, otherwise I like to use wider angle lenses anything that is 50 or less.

As for the IS debate on whether or not it breaks, I think every lens is bound to fail one time or another. Unless you are getting like a full manual zeiss, most lenses have AF and a lot have IS as well. I mean personally it is a nice feature and even though I would keep my lens on IS all the time, you won't really need it unless you are hand-held @ 200mm and at a slower shutter speed. I have been using my 50L and yes it is a light absorber, but even when I use speeds like 1/100th of a second I don't need IS. Shots turn out fine, then again if you are at 200mm they will be shakier... w/e I mean if someone needs the IS let them buy the IS.

Anyways...


here are todays shots (will probably be getting a ton more), helps that I can shoot in school now at all times !

Im not saying someone shouldn't buy it. I'd rather have a nice tripod which could act as my IS/VR for all my lenses though I used to own one and I could shake the lens and feel the thing moving in there..I've worked on equipment like this for helicopters and it's very sensitive. I'm not the most sensitive person to my equipment sometimes.

Tripod is nice and all but it's a weighty addition o the stuff you already cary and you can't use it everywhere.

I love my tripod but I have to say there is a place for the tripod AND the IS.