Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Disclaimer: I am a beginning photographer and know just enough to get myself into trouble
I currently have a Rebel XT with the following lenses... 50mm f/1.8, 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 and a 70-300mm telephoto f/3.5-5.6.
I would like to get a wideangle fast lens so that I can shoot night shots that have people walking in it etc. and preferably lower the ISO to 400.
Currently I've determined that at f/3.5 with my 18-55mm lens, I need about 1/50th sec exposure at 1600ISO to capture these types of shots (with a tripod of course). Close examination reveals some noise which is expected and perhaps I also need to increase the shutter speed a bit more since there is slight blurring but I can't with this lens since it's as fast as it goes.
I have been looking at a Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 and another model Sigma 24-60 f/2.8. MY QUESTION IS: if I increase the aperture to f/2.8 then how much is it going to make a difference?
Also can you recommend any lens 18-135mm f/2.8-f/5.6, is there such a lens even available? I can't seem to find it.
I'd recommend the Canon 24-70mm 2.8L I rented one this past weekend, incredible lens!! It's going to be my niext purchase for sure!
This shot was at ISO 100, 42mm f/10 @ 3.2sec
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/MathewAngry/20080316-DBBK3.gif (broken link)
This one was at ISO 100, 30mm F/2.8 @ 1/40sec (this was in daylight, so dont know if it helps you at all)
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/MathewAngry/20080316-DBBK2.gif (broken link)
This one was at ISO 100, 35mm f/3.5 @ .6 sec
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/MathewAngry/20080316-DBBK1.gif (broken link)
For sure this lens would work for you (IMO) at the higher ISO you'll be able to capture some great night shots.
Location: The Frenchie Farm, Where We Grow 'em Big!
2,080 posts, read 6,938,943 times
Reputation: 1084
My best professional opinion on sports photography, 70-200 L 2.8, 70-300 4.5 - 5.6 DO w/IS, or 70-200 L 2.8 IS. The 70-200 lenses tend to be pricey, but the picture quality for what you do will be night and day. You'll be able to bring down the ISO fr. 1600 to 800 or 640 (may be if you're lucky, 400), reduce the noise accustomed to digital cameras, and hopefully freeze the action that you want. Your F should be @ 2.8. My advice, get out of the program mode, switch to aperture priorty (AV Mode set @ 2.8), and let the camera will vary your shutter speed. Now, the 70-300 is cool. It has a Diffractive Optics (DO) and Image Stabilization (IS). What does that mean for you? The DO... imagine a ray of light passing trough a prism. You'll see the different color bands at the other end. The DO's job is to narrow the band of light and sharpen the color bands as the light passes through the lens elements to your cmos plate. Thus, sharper image. The IS in this configuration help steady the image you are trying to capture. Especially when you telephoto, you can see your image move slightly with your breathing or hand naturally shaking. The IS helps reduce all that dramatically!
Another function the IS helps out with is the reduction of a 1/2 F stop. You'll see a slight change in your readings when stitching between the two.
Sorry it's long winded.....but I hope this helps!!!!!
We were just learning in my photography class last night that there's a factor you have to multiply by your focal length of your lens to compensate for the fact that the sensor in the digital camera is not capturing the entire width of what you're seeing. Crop factor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So if you think you're buying a 17mm or 24mm wide angle lens, you need to remember to multiply by this factor to get a more accurate focal length. I think our teacher said Nikon is 1.6 and Canon is 1.5; I'm not sure, but you could look in your camera manual. So if you have a 17mm lens, and you have to multiply it by a factor of 1.6, you actually have only a 27mm lens.
I hope this is correct since I'm just learning, but someone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Location: The Frenchie Farm, Where We Grow 'em Big!
2,080 posts, read 6,938,943 times
Reputation: 1084
Sorry, you're looking for a wider angle.... the 17-55 F/2.8 w/IS! It may not have the range you're looking for, but it's a start! Don't forget your conversion rate for your XT. Remeber, it's 1.6x the focal length of 35mm size. So the 17-55 I mentioned will convert to 27-88. The lens configuration you mentioned, the 18-135, will be 29-216.
good luck!
Just remember that at 2.8 the depth of field is dramatically shorter than the 3.5 at the same focal legnth. I found that at 200mm it became too short for many of the portraits I was taking. I could not get an entire head in focus when filling the frame and had to reduce my focal legnth or my f-stop to regain my depth of field.
Wide angles will be much less affected by this, but you will still see a big difference.
I'd recommend the Canon 24-70mm 2.8L I rented one this past weekend, incredible lens!! It's going to be my niext purchase for sure!
Canon's 24-70L is an AMAZING lens but it is not cheap. Its currently at $1,140 at B&H Photo. However, it is definately worth the price and its "L" designation.
Canon's 24-70L is an AMAZING lens but it is not cheap. Its currently at $1,140 at B&H Photo. However, it is definately worth the price and its "L" designation.
I was really impressed. I did want to rent it before dropping the $1100 on it. Glad I did, like I stated before, its my next lens. I've heard in the rumor mills that canon is considering adding IS for the next model of the 24-70mm. With my luck they'll release that info the day mine arrives in the mail!!
Super wide angle, one you can also use for Northern Lights, cityscapes, and landscapes?
How about a Tokina 12-24mm f/4, Canon 10-20mm, or a Sigma 10-20mm? I have a Tokina, and it's an outstanding little lens, built like a tank. For faster lenses you would have to pay much more cash. The problem is a lens for fast action at night, since you have to look at apertures around f/2.8 or perhaps f/1.8. However, any of the lenses I mentioned, coupled to a flash other than the built-in one, you should be able to take great action photos at night. The Tokina and Sigma (above) are designed for ASP-C sensors like the XTi.
These lessons are for the Rebel XT, but it should match the XTi's features:
Digital Rebel XT Lessons (http://images.photoworkshop.com/rebelxtlessons/interface.html - broken link)
I forgot to mention that your Canon 50mm f/1.8, plus a set of Kenko tubes, makes it an outstanding macro lens.
And if you want to look at a set of photos taken with the Tokina lens, try this page. Once you get there, click on the link included on the first pot of the thread: Tekina 12-24 test - Canon Digital Photography Forums
Last edited by RayinAK; 03-20-2008 at 10:09 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
