Constant Aperture zooms or primes?
Jul 3, 2013 07:54:24 #
I have the Sigma 10-20 f/3 for my Pentax K5. It does a great job when I need a super wide angle. But, I try to keep my need for prime and zoom lenses in perspective, so I use the 40mm limited, or 50mm f/1.4, when a wide angle zoom is not needed (for portraits or still life). If you want a little of both worlds, look at the Pentax 16-45mm. I've used this lens with remarkable results, perhaps producing some of my best images.
Jul 3, 2013 08:20:21 #
PhotoGator
Loc: Florida
JayDog11 wrote:
I have the Sigma 10-20 f/3 for my Pentax K5. It does a great job when I need a super wide angle. But, I try to keep my need for prime and zoom lenses in perspective, so I use the 40mm limited, or 50mm f/1.4, when a wide angle zoom is not needed (for portraits or still life). If you want a little of both worlds, look at the Pentax 16-45mm. I've used this lens with remarkable results, perhaps producing some of my best images.
He already has a 17-50mm f/2.8 why in the world would anyone want to add a 16-45mm f/(you know)?
Jul 3, 2013 08:20:50 #
Jul 3, 2013 08:29:17 #
PhotoGator
Loc: Florida
davidintexas wrote:
Primes are lighter and easier to travel with.
Con: Fixed Focal Length
Jul 3, 2013 09:04:26 #
I've had good luck with a monopod, as very few places would deny an older person the use of their "walking stick" that just happens to have a mini-ball head on top...
Jul 3, 2013 09:06:07 #
ole sarg
Loc: south florida
You really have what you need. On the other hand if you simply want to buy another lens then do so.
Jul 3, 2013 09:29:42 #
Here - http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rokinon-16mm-F2-0-Ultra-Wide-Angle-Lens-for-Canon-APS-C-New-Lens-/290940178961?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item43bd62d211#ht_2786wt_1079 - is what you should take a look at - 16mm F2 ! They make this in Pentax mount also,I believe.....
Jul 3, 2013 10:11:25 #
what would you guys have done in the days when f3.5 and and 50 asa was as it got?
Jul 3, 2013 10:14:08 #
PhotoGator wrote:
Con: Fixed Focal Length
For a great majority of wide angle stuff , not really, unless you are confined to a wheelchair or you are exceptionally lazy. You just zoom with your feet. Simply a few steps forward or back accomplishes what a wide angle zoom lens can do. With a lighter, more compact prime lens attatched, using your feet to adjust composition becomes all the more easy. For a sight-seeing trip, the only wide angle lens I'd want with me is one with fixed focal length. Now with telephoto lenses - that's different; a zoom lens makes sense.
Jul 3, 2013 11:16:05 #
George II
Loc: Fayetteville, Georgia
Monopods are allowed if you use it wisely I think most people here know why tripods are frowned upon..
"The G"
"The G"
Jul 3, 2013 13:34:28 #
George II wrote:
Monopods are allowed if you use it wisely I think most people here know why tripods are frowned upon..
"The G"
"The G"
"The G", have you actually used a monopod and been allowed to do so, at say St. Paul's, Westminster, Notre Dame, or even the Louvre?
These places not only have very strict rules on photography, but they have docents on every corner. Those are the realities of having thousands of tourist daily.
I don't think Richard was asking how to cheat. But rather that he owns a nice f2.8 zoom and whether it was fast enough, or would he have to use a faster prime, given the low-light conditions he is sure to encounter.
I think Richard will do what he thinks is best, and we all hope for him that its adequet to get his photos.
Keep the advice realistic, helpful, and hopefully tempered with actual personal experience. SS
Jul 3, 2013 14:03:51 #
Thanks everybody for all the comments.
PhotoGator: The 70-200 f2.8 is a little high cost for me. That's what I spent on airfare to Italy and I would rather take my wife than another lens at that price! Maybe for my next trip (Paris countryside?).
I have actually used Pews to set the camera on; also, holding the camera at arms length steadies it to a degree. I find holding my elbows to my chest is OK if I have set up the pic first. Still uncomfortable as I have a touch of 'age' in my hands(;-)
So, with all the help I have received on this site, I may save my $$ this trip and see how the 17-50 F2.8 works out. I also have a Pana LX-3 as backup so I seem to be set!
Thanks again everyone.
PhotoGator: The 70-200 f2.8 is a little high cost for me. That's what I spent on airfare to Italy and I would rather take my wife than another lens at that price! Maybe for my next trip (Paris countryside?).
I have actually used Pews to set the camera on; also, holding the camera at arms length steadies it to a degree. I find holding my elbows to my chest is OK if I have set up the pic first. Still uncomfortable as I have a touch of 'age' in my hands(;-)
So, with all the help I have received on this site, I may save my $$ this trip and see how the 17-50 F2.8 works out. I also have a Pana LX-3 as backup so I seem to be set!
Thanks again everyone.
Jul 3, 2013 14:09:02 #
Jul 3, 2013 14:26:55 #
RichardE wrote:
I would rather take my wife than another lens at that price! Maybe for my next trip (Paris countryside?).
I would rather take my wife than another lens at that price! Maybe for my next trip (Paris countryside?).
Richard , you are a wiser man than most of us.
I suggest, before you go, to make up a bolt with a string as long as you are tall, and tie a washer on the end. You step on the washer with the bolt screwed into the camera, and when it's up to your eye and the string is taut, the camera is very steady. It fits in your pocket, ready for use.
Have a great trip. SS
Jul 3, 2013 15:13:01 #
What a great idea, SharpShooter! I must to re-learn to think 'outside the box'!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.