 Laurie Watts |
Which lens to use with Canon 20 D I have a Canon 20 D it came with the 18-55 lens, but I also purchased the 70-200 2.8 L lens and have been using that beauty for photographing motocross. My dilemma is this, there is a particular jump that captures excellent subject matter, however, since I have track access I find I am too close to photograph my subjects with the 70-200 lens. What lens should I consider using. Thanks
|
|
|
|
||
|
robert G. Fately |
Well, Laurie, now you know why the pros usually have multiple cameras around their necks - for just such occassions as this. Your big zoom is wonderfully fast, which means you can take shots at f2.8 with minimal depth of field to make the subject/rider really "pop" out from the background in the shot. But if 70MM is just too long for the position your are describing, then you obviously need to go wider. Of course, changeing lenses on a DSLR in the middle of a motocross track may not be a good idea, what with the dust and all. If you want to use your 18-55 one time, just to get a sense of what focal length is useful at that distance, then you could consider getting a faster lens (even a prime) in the appropriate focal length. I would not recommend you getting one of those wide-to-tele zooms (like the 28-200 types); they are not nearly as sharp as your 70-200 and they are slower, to boot.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Laurie Watts |
Thanks for the info Bob. Yeah the Big zoom is a great lens and I am spoiled with it, and yes the 70mm is a bit too long, a few more feet and it would be perfect, but the few more feet I need are unfortunately located off a steep drop off. : ) I was thinking about a prime, but was also looking at the Canon 28-70 2.8L series lens. I like the 50mm prime that canon has, either 1.4 or 1.8. But I think I'll try your suggestion of using the supplied 18-55 to see what focal length would be best. Thanks for your help.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Andrew Laverghetta |
A friend of mine has the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L and he's got some great photos with it in respects to the range it covers. I bought the Sigma version since it isn't nearly as expensive. That's aorund $400 compared to $1100. Though, I can notice the difference when looking through the lens and in some of my photos compared to my 200mm f/2.8L, I'm sure the extra is worth it if you can afford it. It seems like you can with you 70-200. It will have a wide end around 38mm effectively. If you want to get wider with the same quality, you'd probably need to go with the 16-35mm for the same wide aperture. But then you wouldn't have the long end. It's even more expensive than the 24-70 L. Hope this helps! -Andrew
|
|
|
|
||
|
David Earls |
Laurie, Have you tried using an extension tube? Kenko makes a set of them for Canon digital mounts. They have the necessary diaphragms to permit TTL metering and auto-focus.
|
|
|
|
||
|
robert G. Fately |
To David's point, Lauri - extension tubes are designed to allow the lens mounted on them to focus much closer - for macro type work. When you mount a tube, the lens can no longer focus beyond a few feet. Since this also does not address the entire "change the lens in the field and get dust" poblem, there's no real reason to go this route for this purpose.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||