Over the last week I have been helping a friend spend some serious (for her) money on a 'birding/wildlife' kit.
With the unfortunate passing of a close relative, came the fortunate inheriting of some money that was unexpected. So she decided to splash out on herself and get 'seriously' into her passion for shooting birds.
Now bird photography ain't my thing - largely because it's so darn hard! You have to have stealth, patience, and an almost uncanny understanding of your subject to get halfway decent images - none of which I possess. I've tried, and failed, to get any decent bird images, until finally I've come to the understanding that it just isn't me.
So when she (Nicki is her name and I don't think she'd mind me saying it) - so when Nicki asked me to advise her on a birding kit, I had some serious research to do.
From her own experiences with bird photography, she knew she was heading into 'super-telephoto' territory to help get her close enough to the 'action', while still maintaining good distance so as not to alarm her subjects. Trouble is, 'super telephoto' lenses are horrendously expensive - and her budget wasn't 'that' big.
Naturally, then, Nicki was considering a Tamron 200-500mm f4.5/6.3 (or something like that - I forget 'exactly'), pointed in this direction by a well-meaning sales person at a camera store she had called. These lenses (Sigma does one as well) by the 'third party' lens manufacturers, seem to offer the best of both worlds - a rather impressive zoom range, reasonably low price, and relatively light weight (from all that plastic).
Trouble is (and maybe it's just me) I've never really been impressed by any third-party lens I've ever used/owned, over an equivalent lens made by the camera manufacturers (i.e. Canon/Nikon/Olympus/Sony/Pentax etc). In Nicki's case it happened to be Canon, as she already owns a 450D with standard kit lens and 70-300mm f4.5/5.6 that she had been using for her bird photography previously (and highly successfully I might add).
My advice to her (he said, cutting to the chase), was to go for a Canon lens - and within her budget there was really only one choice that kept coming up time and again on internet reviews - the 400mm f5.6 L. Many call it the ideal 'bird in flight' lens, because it's the start of the super-telephoto range, is 'relatively' light and so can be hand-held in good lighting, is super fast to autofocus, and it's also super sharp - all the ingredients you want in a lens.
So that's what I advised her to get - and that's what she got. Together with a new Canon 50D for increased ISO use, faster and more reliable autofocusing, a more rugged chassis, and more megapixels (15+) so she can crop in more seriously on the final image. The 50D also gives her an extra x1.6 cropping factor on the lens as well, giving her an equivalent 640mm f5.6 lens! pretty cool.
Is she happy with her new kit. Well, by all accounts she is. I haven't seen her since she got it - I guess she's been too busy out taking photos. So yeah - I'd say she's on to a winner.
Sunday, 7 June 2009
Thursday, 2 April 2009
EF-S 18-55mm IS lens test
When I was looking at getting a lighter travel kit I 'ummed' and 'arred' for quite a while about the lenses I should go with. The body was relatively straight forward - the Canon Digital Rebel series fits the bill nicely (and I continue to be impressed by the XTi/400D). But given that I already had a 17-40mm f4'L' and a 24-105mm f4'L', why wouldn't I just stick with them?
As a general, walk-around lens, I didn't think the 17-40mm would give me 'quite' enough reach for everyday use. And as much as I love the 24-105mm on my 5D for wedding work, it's not a light lens, which kinda defeats the purpose of a 'lighter' travel kit. Anyway, to cut a long story short (although this is going to be a long story anyway), I read some very good things about the 18-55mm IS and the 55-250mm IS - both very light (and very cheap) image stabilized lenses that I thought would fit the 'travel' bill nicely.
Of course, now that I've got all four lenses, my curiosity has got the better of me. I do want a lighter travel kit, but I also don't want to sacrifice too much in the way of image quality. After all, why bother lugging any camera gear around with you if you're only going to be disappointed with the end results!
So, armed with the EF-S 18-55mm IS and the 17-40mm f4'L', I decided a lens shoot-out was in order. I was prepared to take the results as they came, and make my decision about which lens to use based on the cold hard facts. Would the 'kit' 18-55mm lens prove as good as many claimed, or would my $1000NZ more expensive 'L' lens kick sand in its puny little face?
First, let me give a quick rundown on how I performed this 'less-than-scientific' test. I didn't shoot lens charts, resolution charts, or colour charts to determine which lens was 'best'. Instead, I took them both outside and did what was important to me - I actually took some real photos with them. I found a subject that wasn't going anywhere in a hurry, wouldn't exhibit any shake from the wind etc, and set up my tripod. I switched the 400D to remote release and for all the images taken I used the RC-1 infrared shutter release so I wasn't physically touching the camera when the image was taken. I didn't use mirror lock up because a: I never do, and b: I think it's overkill. Above is the scene as taken for my first series of test. Both lenses were set to 18mm.
It may be difficult to tell much from a low-res image on a computer screen (click on the image for a larger view), but if you're thinking "gee, there's not much in it" then you'd be right! I've looked at all of them at 100% on my screen (obviously), so let me tell you what I can see (and you'll just have to take my word for it).
On the edges, the 17-40mm is sharper than the 18-55mm, and exhibits a touch more detail at both f4 and f8 - just. At f11 and beyond the 18-55mm sharpens up to be practically identical. There isn't a hugh difference to be honest, and the 18-55mm equips itself very well against its $1000+ more expensive 'L' cousin.
The identical conclusions can be drawn from the central part of the image with both lenses at 18mm. Again, the 17-40mm is sharper up to f11, and then both are identical. Saying the 17-40mm is sharper up to f11 makes it sound as if the 18-55mm is crap - but it's only 'just' sharper. And these results are unedited jpegs straight from the camera. Nothing has been applied in photoshop.
As a quick test, I did apply some sharpening to the 18-55mm files (150% with 0.5 radius) and then compared them with the unedited 17-40mm files. Basically identical. I gotta say - I'm impressed.
I then zoomed both lenses to 40mm and took another series at all apertures. For the sake of sounding like a cracked record, the results were the same. There's no doubt that the 17-40mm has a tiny edge over the 18-55mm at apertures below f11 - but it's a tiny edge indeed. Amazing for a lens that cost literally a fraction of the price!
Of course both lenses are not created equal. The 18-55mm IS is a plastic fantastic with lightweight materials and a plastic lens mount - no depth of field scale, and difficult manual focus. The focus motor, whilst reasonably snappy, is audible - the front lens rotates, and it only has 1 aspherical element in its lens construction (although to be fair it does a very good job of controlling aberration). What it does have over the 17-40mm f4'L', of course, is the IS function.
The 17-40mm, on the other hand, is a solid, well constructed lens with silky smooth manual focus, full-time-focus override, a non-rotating front element, weather sealing, 2UD and 3 Aspherical lens elements, a silent USM motor, with a metal lens mount and distance indicator window. To look, touch and use the two lens is like comparing apples with oranges - or chalk with cheese.
Of course this also goes a long way to the $1000NZ price difference between the two lenses. But is that enough? Because when we look at the actual images taken with both lenses, the $1000 difference become less obvious. You are certainly not getting a thousand dollar image difference between the two lenses. Fortunately, I think that's a good thing.
The EF-S 18-55mm f3.5/5.6 IS is an incredibly solid performer - image wise - for the price. It's an obviously mass-produced, low-end 'kit' lens that is all but thrown in with a new Canon digital SLR, it's lightweight, and won't stand up to a lot of abuse. BUT - the images you can get with it are on a par with images taken with the much much more expensive 'L' series Canon lenses. A quick sharpen and slight curves adjustment in photoshop and you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference.
That makes the 18-55mm IS amazing value for money in my book. Too many photographers are told that their kit lens is 'crap' and to get rid of it asap. If your kit lens happens to be the Canon EF-S 18-55mm 3.5/5.6 IS lens, then you might just want to hang on to it for a bit longer.
As a general, walk-around lens, I didn't think the 17-40mm would give me 'quite' enough reach for everyday use. And as much as I love the 24-105mm on my 5D for wedding work, it's not a light lens, which kinda defeats the purpose of a 'lighter' travel kit. Anyway, to cut a long story short (although this is going to be a long story anyway), I read some very good things about the 18-55mm IS and the 55-250mm IS - both very light (and very cheap) image stabilized lenses that I thought would fit the 'travel' bill nicely.
Of course, now that I've got all four lenses, my curiosity has got the better of me. I do want a lighter travel kit, but I also don't want to sacrifice too much in the way of image quality. After all, why bother lugging any camera gear around with you if you're only going to be disappointed with the end results!
So, armed with the EF-S 18-55mm IS and the 17-40mm f4'L', I decided a lens shoot-out was in order. I was prepared to take the results as they came, and make my decision about which lens to use based on the cold hard facts. Would the 'kit' 18-55mm lens prove as good as many claimed, or would my $1000NZ more expensive 'L' lens kick sand in its puny little face?
First, let me give a quick rundown on how I performed this 'less-than-scientific' test. I didn't shoot lens charts, resolution charts, or colour charts to determine which lens was 'best'. Instead, I took them both outside and did what was important to me - I actually took some real photos with them. I found a subject that wasn't going anywhere in a hurry, wouldn't exhibit any shake from the wind etc, and set up my tripod. I switched the 400D to remote release and for all the images taken I used the RC-1 infrared shutter release so I wasn't physically touching the camera when the image was taken. I didn't use mirror lock up because a: I never do, and b: I think it's overkill. Above is the scene as taken for my first series of test. Both lenses were set to 18mm.
It may be difficult to tell much from a low-res image on a computer screen (click on the image for a larger view), but if you're thinking "gee, there's not much in it" then you'd be right! I've looked at all of them at 100% on my screen (obviously), so let me tell you what I can see (and you'll just have to take my word for it).On the edges, the 17-40mm is sharper than the 18-55mm, and exhibits a touch more detail at both f4 and f8 - just. At f11 and beyond the 18-55mm sharpens up to be practically identical. There isn't a hugh difference to be honest, and the 18-55mm equips itself very well against its $1000+ more expensive 'L' cousin.
The identical conclusions can be drawn from the central part of the image with both lenses at 18mm. Again, the 17-40mm is sharper up to f11, and then both are identical. Saying the 17-40mm is sharper up to f11 makes it sound as if the 18-55mm is crap - but it's only 'just' sharper. And these results are unedited jpegs straight from the camera. Nothing has been applied in photoshop. As a quick test, I did apply some sharpening to the 18-55mm files (150% with 0.5 radius) and then compared them with the unedited 17-40mm files. Basically identical. I gotta say - I'm impressed.
I then zoomed both lenses to 40mm and took another series at all apertures. For the sake of sounding like a cracked record, the results were the same. There's no doubt that the 17-40mm has a tiny edge over the 18-55mm at apertures below f11 - but it's a tiny edge indeed. Amazing for a lens that cost literally a fraction of the price!
Of course both lenses are not created equal. The 18-55mm IS is a plastic fantastic with lightweight materials and a plastic lens mount - no depth of field scale, and difficult manual focus. The focus motor, whilst reasonably snappy, is audible - the front lens rotates, and it only has 1 aspherical element in its lens construction (although to be fair it does a very good job of controlling aberration). What it does have over the 17-40mm f4'L', of course, is the IS function. The 17-40mm, on the other hand, is a solid, well constructed lens with silky smooth manual focus, full-time-focus override, a non-rotating front element, weather sealing, 2UD and 3 Aspherical lens elements, a silent USM motor, with a metal lens mount and distance indicator window. To look, touch and use the two lens is like comparing apples with oranges - or chalk with cheese.
Of course this also goes a long way to the $1000NZ price difference between the two lenses. But is that enough? Because when we look at the actual images taken with both lenses, the $1000 difference become less obvious. You are certainly not getting a thousand dollar image difference between the two lenses. Fortunately, I think that's a good thing.
The EF-S 18-55mm f3.5/5.6 IS is an incredibly solid performer - image wise - for the price. It's an obviously mass-produced, low-end 'kit' lens that is all but thrown in with a new Canon digital SLR, it's lightweight, and won't stand up to a lot of abuse. BUT - the images you can get with it are on a par with images taken with the much much more expensive 'L' series Canon lenses. A quick sharpen and slight curves adjustment in photoshop and you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference.
That makes the 18-55mm IS amazing value for money in my book. Too many photographers are told that their kit lens is 'crap' and to get rid of it asap. If your kit lens happens to be the Canon EF-S 18-55mm 3.5/5.6 IS lens, then you might just want to hang on to it for a bit longer.
Monday, 30 March 2009
Gina & Kerry's Wedding
My run of bad weather continued with Gina & Kerry's Wedding, although to be fair we did manage to stay outside for most of the day (and it was a garden wedding after all).
I was very excited about shooting this wedding, as the venue was an old chapel with beautiful gardens that had been converted into a B&B. Gina and Kerry found it on the internet and asked if they could have their wedding service there. It was the first wedding to be held on the grounds for over 90 years!
The location offered dozens of cool and quirky locations. Gina fell in love with this door and also wanted to make sure that the window at top left was included in the shot. Thankfully my 17-40mm f4L on the full-frame 5D let me get everything in, as well as giving quite a dramatic wide-angle feel to the image.
We played around there for quite a while, as we were really spoilt for choice with cool locations around the garden. It also helped that Gina & Kerry (and the rest of the bridal party) were so relaxed and fun to shoot. We could have spent all afternoon there (well I could of anyway), but they also wanted some photos taken at the beach, and then at the stables by the racecourse where they had the reception. I hope I get a chance to shoot another wedding at Chapel Hill next season (weather permitting of course)!
Down at the beach we played with the dramatic colour contrast of Gina & Kerry against their (very cool) 'electric purple' wedding car. I used a wide-angle again to really accentuate the curves of the car extending out into the frame, and gave the final image a high contrast HDR (High Dynamic Range) type of treatment.
I've recently discovered 'actions' in photoshop, where you can get lots of different looks with the click of a button (if you download the appropriate photoshop 'action'). What a huge time-saver when putting an album together and there are some very cool actions out there (as well as some pretty naff ones). Of course you can create your own actions as well. It's pretty easy. Just google 'making photoshop actions' and I'm sure you'll find an explanation of how it's done.
Another dodgy day in terms of the weather, but another great day in terms of the couple (they were fantastic) and the images we got together. Thanks Gina & Kerry. I'll have your album proof to you soon - promise :-)
I was very excited about shooting this wedding, as the venue was an old chapel with beautiful gardens that had been converted into a B&B. Gina and Kerry found it on the internet and asked if they could have their wedding service there. It was the first wedding to be held on the grounds for over 90 years!
The location offered dozens of cool and quirky locations. Gina fell in love with this door and also wanted to make sure that the window at top left was included in the shot. Thankfully my 17-40mm f4L on the full-frame 5D let me get everything in, as well as giving quite a dramatic wide-angle feel to the image. We played around there for quite a while, as we were really spoilt for choice with cool locations around the garden. It also helped that Gina & Kerry (and the rest of the bridal party) were so relaxed and fun to shoot. We could have spent all afternoon there (well I could of anyway), but they also wanted some photos taken at the beach, and then at the stables by the racecourse where they had the reception. I hope I get a chance to shoot another wedding at Chapel Hill next season (weather permitting of course)!
Down at the beach we played with the dramatic colour contrast of Gina & Kerry against their (very cool) 'electric purple' wedding car. I used a wide-angle again to really accentuate the curves of the car extending out into the frame, and gave the final image a high contrast HDR (High Dynamic Range) type of treatment. I've recently discovered 'actions' in photoshop, where you can get lots of different looks with the click of a button (if you download the appropriate photoshop 'action'). What a huge time-saver when putting an album together and there are some very cool actions out there (as well as some pretty naff ones). Of course you can create your own actions as well. It's pretty easy. Just google 'making photoshop actions' and I'm sure you'll find an explanation of how it's done.
Another dodgy day in terms of the weather, but another great day in terms of the couple (they were fantastic) and the images we got together. Thanks Gina & Kerry. I'll have your album proof to you soon - promise :-)
Tuesday, 17 March 2009
First photos with Rebel XTi
Took the 'new' camera out last night to one of my favorite locations to 'test' it out. For an entry level camera it handles very nicely - especially at night - since the large lcd screen on the back does double duty as the information screen as well. There are also a few nice little touches, such as a count-down for the self-timer and the cut-out sensors when you bring your eye up to the viewfinder. Overall I was very impressed.The vertical grip creaks and groans a bit, especially given my usual 5D experience, but the battery power seems consistent and I don't think it's likely to break anytime soon. The fit with the camera seems ok, and it certainly handles better with it attached.
The lenses autofocus quickly and reasonably quietly, although I didn't really get a chance to push them to the limits given I was shooting landscapes. Sharpness appears to be acceptable from the results so far, but I will do more tests against my 17-40 f4L soon. That will be a real test.
So far so good. I enjoyed using the camera very much, and it has an excellent user interface. Kinda wish some of the features were on the 5D as well. I can tell I'm going to enjoy using it, and will hopefully use it a lot more soon. More thoughts and pictures when I do.
Monday, 16 March 2009
400D Arrived
Well it turned up today - my XTi, together with a vertical grip and 18-55mm kits lens. I've already changed it for the EF-S 18-55mm IS lens, but will keep the standard lens for possible re-sale.
First impressions are positive - it's a very clean unit - looks almost brand new. Other first impressions? It is very small and light - so I'm very glad I got the grip to go with it. Makes a huge difference to the way it handles (to me at least), and certainly remains light and responsive. Focus response with the EF-S lenses seems quick and precise and the large lcd display on the back makes changing camera settings very quick.
Have also found the 'perfect' bag for my new travel kit - a Lowepro EX 180. As you can see in the photo, it's big enough to hold the 400D with grip attached, plus the 18-55 standard lens, as well as the 55-250mm EF-S, a Canon 50mm f1.8, a 430EX Speedlite, plus cards, blower brush, manual and other small assorted accessories. Quite a bit really. With all that packed in, it's still a very light load.I plan on getting out tonight to take some landscapes with the whole kit, which will give me a better feel for the camera, and the load. Although I can already tell that there's no comparison between this and the whole 5D kit I carry around in a backpack. Their may be no weight comparison to be made, but I'm hoping there's an image comparison. It might not be full-frame, or a 5D, but from what I've read I'm looking forward to viewing some of the images made from the 10MP sensor of the Rebel XTi. Will post some soon. I might even get around to a camera/lens/ISo comparison between the two kits. That might be 'very' interesting.
Sunday, 15 March 2009
Denise & Ashley
Denise & Ashley were my first wedding couple for 2009 - married on January 17th at Holy Trinity Anglican Church here in Greymouth. Denise is a local girl, so came 'home' to get married, even though both of them are based overseas (they both work for an international airline).
The day wasn't the best weather-wise and unfortunately this was to be a reoccurring theme throughout this wedding season. It rained for most of the day, although it did manage to clear enough so that we could get outside with the wedding party and take some photos.
Even though the weather wasn't really on our side, it didn't dampen Denise and Ashley's spirits. They were (are) a lovely couple to work with, and made the day a relaxing, pleasurable and fun experience for all involved.
The wedding reception was out at Shantytown - a replica gold-rush township that showcases early New Zealand history. This is a perfect venue to get some great 'old world' type images for an album, and is also the best place to shoot if its raining because it has a lot of cover that still allows for interesting views. It is a very popular wedding destination here on the Coast, and rightfully so.Nicky (my assistant) and I had a heap of fun on this wedding and it was a great way to start 2009 - even if the weather had other ideas.
A few days after the wedding, Denise and Ahsley got in touch with me and asked if I would mind taking some more photos, this time at the beach. Denise had grown up at the Cobden Beach, and was disappointed that her wedding images didn't reflect that (since it was too wet to get out there on the day).
Of course I was up for it, and so after work we met down at the Beach and had a great evening shooting images that will 'round out' their album. It's the first time I have shot more photos a few days later, and although not taken on the 'same day' as the wedding, I think they still fit into the theme of their wedding day, and will make a great inclusion to their album. It is, after all, about producing something that the client is happy with and that brings back the memories of that time in their lives - be it one day, or several.So 'thanks' Denise and Ashley. Your wedding was amazing, I enjoyed every minute of it, and the album is going to be fantastic! What a great way to start my 2009 wedding season.
Thursday, 12 March 2009
Canon 400D arriving soon.
Another year gone, another month along - another camera on the horizon. Am I a camera junkie? Maybe...
Out goes the EOS 1D, and in comes the 400D. Yep, that's right - from the sublime to the ridiculous. I've sold my top-of-the-line 1D and decided to change it with a (you could argue) bottom-of-the-line consumer-grade Canon Rebel. Am I insane!?
Now before I answer that, I will hasten to add that their IS method to my madness. In fact there's several methods (reasons) to my madness - although that probably still makes it madness!?
I fell into something of a routine towards the end of the last wedding season - I used my 5D full-frame pretty much exclusively. Sure, I had the 1D with me, but I never really got it out of the bag. Fair enough, you say, it's your back-up camera after all - isn't it? Well yes, it is, but after lugging my camera bag around for a whole season, I've got to say it's an incredibly heavy back-up. And what's more, I don't find myself all that keen to lug it over my shoulder and go for an afternoon stroll with it either! I could see a pattern emerging, and in as much as it was my 'dream' camera, I could see that I just wasn't ever going to use it unless I 'made' myself use it.
At the end of my last wedding, having just lugged my backpack full of gear around for several hours and almost getting a hernia, I made a vow that during the off season I would 'down-size' and lighten my load. So the decision to sell the 1D was, in the end, relatively easy - if not still somewhat sad.
My decision to sell the 70-200mm f4'L' (gasp, shock, horror) was less easy, but still the right one based on this years shooting experience. For a 70-200mm it isn't particularly heavy, but it does take up quite a bit of space - and heavy is relative when you look at other options. So out it goes as well. But what to replace them with?
To cut a long story short - I've settled on the 400D (Rebel XTi for our American friends). In fact, the camera that I have purchased (on trademe) is from America, and so will have 'Rebel XTi' on the front and not the 400D label as seen above. I am getting it with the vertical grip (I'm not 'that' crazy), as well as the slightly upgraded 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 Image Stabilized kit lens. That should lighten the load plenty!
And from reviews I've read, the image you get from the 10MP Canon CMOS sensor in these is very clear and noise free(ish) up to its maximum ISO1600. Not to mention the same 9 point focus system found on the 40D.
And the 70-200mm f4'L'? Well I've 'replaced' that with an EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 Image Stabilized Canon lens which has also been getting very good reviews. I appreciate it won't be the same as the 70-200 - but I don't intend using it for weddings. I've got an 85mm f1.8 Canon prime lens that I've been using for my close-up wedding portraits with the 5D, and I absolutely LOVE it. So the 55-250mm EF-S will become my 'travel' option, paired with the 400D (XTi) and 18-55mm.
So now I will basically have two kits; my 'pro' wedding kit with the 5D and some 'L' and prime lenses, and my travel kit (backup) with the lighter EF-S lenses that will cover me from 28 to 400mm! All together my travel kit probably weighs less than the 1D body by itself! Now I'm actually looking forward to going out and taking my camera with me. My back, and my hernia, both thank me...
Out goes the EOS 1D, and in comes the 400D. Yep, that's right - from the sublime to the ridiculous. I've sold my top-of-the-line 1D and decided to change it with a (you could argue) bottom-of-the-line consumer-grade Canon Rebel. Am I insane!?
Now before I answer that, I will hasten to add that their IS method to my madness. In fact there's several methods (reasons) to my madness - although that probably still makes it madness!?I fell into something of a routine towards the end of the last wedding season - I used my 5D full-frame pretty much exclusively. Sure, I had the 1D with me, but I never really got it out of the bag. Fair enough, you say, it's your back-up camera after all - isn't it? Well yes, it is, but after lugging my camera bag around for a whole season, I've got to say it's an incredibly heavy back-up. And what's more, I don't find myself all that keen to lug it over my shoulder and go for an afternoon stroll with it either! I could see a pattern emerging, and in as much as it was my 'dream' camera, I could see that I just wasn't ever going to use it unless I 'made' myself use it.
At the end of my last wedding, having just lugged my backpack full of gear around for several hours and almost getting a hernia, I made a vow that during the off season I would 'down-size' and lighten my load. So the decision to sell the 1D was, in the end, relatively easy - if not still somewhat sad.
My decision to sell the 70-200mm f4'L' (gasp, shock, horror) was less easy, but still the right one based on this years shooting experience. For a 70-200mm it isn't particularly heavy, but it does take up quite a bit of space - and heavy is relative when you look at other options. So out it goes as well. But what to replace them with?
To cut a long story short - I've settled on the 400D (Rebel XTi for our American friends). In fact, the camera that I have purchased (on trademe) is from America, and so will have 'Rebel XTi' on the front and not the 400D label as seen above. I am getting it with the vertical grip (I'm not 'that' crazy), as well as the slightly upgraded 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 Image Stabilized kit lens. That should lighten the load plenty!And from reviews I've read, the image you get from the 10MP Canon CMOS sensor in these is very clear and noise free(ish) up to its maximum ISO1600. Not to mention the same 9 point focus system found on the 40D.
And the 70-200mm f4'L'? Well I've 'replaced' that with an EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 Image Stabilized Canon lens which has also been getting very good reviews. I appreciate it won't be the same as the 70-200 - but I don't intend using it for weddings. I've got an 85mm f1.8 Canon prime lens that I've been using for my close-up wedding portraits with the 5D, and I absolutely LOVE it. So the 55-250mm EF-S will become my 'travel' option, paired with the 400D (XTi) and 18-55mm. So now I will basically have two kits; my 'pro' wedding kit with the 5D and some 'L' and prime lenses, and my travel kit (backup) with the lighter EF-S lenses that will cover me from 28 to 400mm! All together my travel kit probably weighs less than the 1D body by itself! Now I'm actually looking forward to going out and taking my camera with me. My back, and my hernia, both thank me...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)