Replies

1. 
   andyfew322 | Feb 21, 2008 08:10am | #1

   fantastic shots

    

   Ductape can fix EVERYTHING!!!

2. 
   calvin | Feb 21, 2008 02:39pm | #2

   Brisk wasn't it. 

   What lens did you use?

   View Image

   A Great Place for Information, Comraderie, and a Sucker Punch.

   Remodeling Contractor just outside the Glass City.

   http://www.quittintime.com/

    

   
1. 
   JulianTracy | Feb 21, 2008 03:39pm | #3

   Canon 20D with a 70-200 (at 200mm) with a 1.4x converter. Cropped in quite a bit.J

1. 
   calvin | Feb 21, 2008 04:37pm | #4

   I've been thinking the add on.  How much does it alter the Fstop?   What were your settings last nite for partial and full eclipse?

   thanks.A Great Place for Information, Comraderie, and a Sucker Punch.

   Remodeling Contractor just outside the Glass City.

   http://www.quittintime.com/

    

1. 
   JulianTracy | Feb 21, 2008 05:48pm | #5

   I think you lose a stop with the 1.4 and lose 2 stops with the 2x.They're expensive if you get the Canon ones - but I found a used 1.4 for $99 cause it had some dust in the elements. Turned out - the design is one where the element pops right out with a retainer ring, so it was easy to blow it out - good as new.They're matched for certain lenses though - can't use it on my 100mm macro for instance.I was at asa 100. The sliver one was at F8 at 1//13th, the other one was at F8 at 4 sec.Here's what it was framed like when it was taken - equivalant focal lenght of 448mm.
   (200mm x 1.4 = 280mm >>> x1.6 (reduced sensor size) = 448mm equivalant in 35mm)JT

3. 
   Scarecrow | Feb 21, 2008 06:18pm | #6

   nice, I've been contemplating the 70-200mm f4L for awhile I think since I'm going on a photo-road trip this summer to Glacier/Yellowstone/Tetons that I'll have to pick one up.

    

   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

   http://www.drawingwithlight.smugmug.com

1. 
   JulianTracy | Feb 21, 2008 06:33pm | #7

   It's as sharp as their $1900 2.8 version - and it can be found used for $400 or so a lot.Built like a tank - for the money, there's no better lens. Plus, it's lighter than the heavy weights.I saw one on CL around here for $350 recently - search the Detroit CL ads to see if it's still available - I could help get it for you if it was - let me know.I don't see me going to full frame anytime soon as I have the EFS lenses. Had the the crazy L lenses a while ago, but sold them off cause it didn't make sense tying that much into the camera bag if it wasn't making me money anymore (used to be a photog).Now have the
   10-22mm (absolutely necessary for doing room pics),
   17-85mm IS (sharper than my previous L 24-70mm)
   70-200mm F4
   100mm 2.8 macro (sharpest they make - good long portrait lens as well)I'd like to pick up a 50mm 1.4 for portraits, but every one I've tested is not that good wide open, so what's the point...JT

1. 
   Scarecrow | Feb 21, 2008 07:22pm | #8

   Yup, I have the 17-40mm f4L and it's my walk around lens.  I wouldn't waste money on the EF-S series.  But then again I do plan to move up to FF.  But even if I didn't there is a reason the L glass is so expensive.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

   http://www.drawingwithlight.smugmug.com

1. 
   JulianTracy | Feb 21, 2008 07:30pm | #9

   Well, I had the 17-40L and was never that impressed with it. And when I bought it, I tested 3 total lenses and bought the one that was the best of the 3.So when I picked up the 17-85is for a better walk around lens - I tested it against the 17-40 and my 24-70L (again, when bought - bought the best of 3 versions at the store)Against the 17-40, the 17-85 was as sharp, though not as sharp at the corners - there's that L quality creeping in.But against the 24-70L, the 17-85 was actually sharper at most focal lengths, or at least as sharp no question.Must be I got an extra good copy.The 10-22mm has been a superior lens as well - in fact, it almost seems as though it has less wackiness on my 20D as the 16-35mm L had when using it on a 1Ds.I certainly don't see the EFS's as a waste of money - the 10-22 has allowed me to take some pretty amazing before and after pics of jobs - couldn't have done them without it.But then, I got off the newest camera fast lane a few years ago. Picked up the 10D when first announced, than got the 20D when it came out - that was a huge jump in functionality. 30D, no reason, the 40d? has some nice stuff, but these days I buy tools.Pretty crazy, isn't it - you can buy Sandisk Ultra II 4GB cf cards at Costco for $27!Julian

1. 
   Scarecrow | Feb 21, 2008 07:44pm | #10

   Pretty crazy, isn't it - you can buy Sandisk Ultra II 4GB cf cards at Costco for $27!

   Ya I know I plan on taking a handful of these on my road trip instead of a laptop.  Since we will be going a great part of this trip in a tent. 

   I'll probably pick up the 70-200 sometime before then.  I was keeping my eye on a used one for $400 but it recently got snatched up.  but for a 100 more I can buy new online.  If I buy a new camera, I'm watching the 5d's closely!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

   http://www.drawingwithlight.smugmug.com