Posts for: oldtool2
Apr 22, 2015 11:21:42 #
burkphoto wrote:
The Tamron f/2.8 will focus faster than the Canon ... (show quote)
The OP says he shoots a D6, I am assuming he meant a 6D. This is a FF camera but not the best for focus points. If I remember it has few cross focus points. Not so sure there would be much of an advantage going to a f2.8 lens with this camera.
If the Canon 70-200 f2.8L was one the OP was asking about it would be my choice though. Own one and live it! He isn't though, he is asking about the f4L.
Jim D
Apr 22, 2015 10:35:58 #
MarkD wrote:
Tennis is often played indoors. The OP doesn't say whether he/she is shooting outdoors, indoors, or both.
I wasn't aware of that, I think of tennis as an outdoors only sport. In that case I would have to consider an f2.8 lens.
Jim D
Apr 22, 2015 10:28:10 #
northsidejoe wrote:
Hello Jim thank you for looking and taking the time to comment.
Did you live in PGH. at some time? The incline is the same old incline a huge tourist attraction here now. saying hello from Pittsburgh.
Did you live in PGH. at some time? The incline is the same old incline a huge tourist attraction here now. saying hello from Pittsburgh.
I lived in West Mifflin, about 2 miles up the hill from Kennywood Park, till I was 15 1/2. Then we moved to the other end of the state. It was a great area to grow up in.
Jim D
Apr 21, 2015 14:33:04 #
FramerMCB wrote:
The slight advantage the Sigma will hold is the fact that you can update it using the Sigma dock (I believe). The Canon 70-200mm f4 w/IS is an exceptionally sharp lens with excellent AF and IS application and is probably a little cheaper than the other two. But, if I were you, I would lean heavily towards one of the f2.8 offerings. Just my two cents. (I believe at f2.8, you'll get a lot more flexibility/use out of it.)
I have to ask how many tennis matches are played in bad lighting? I'm sorry but I can't agree with you on this one, to me F2 .8 lens is used mainly in bad lighting. I own a couple and that's what they are mainly used for. I own the Canon 70 200 mm F2 .8 lens and can't remember the last time I was outside and used F2 .8 on that lens. Most of the time it set it at f7.1 or F8.
Jim D
Apr 21, 2015 13:57:23 #
Here are 4 photos, two with the Sigma and 2 with the Tamron. All taken with the same settings and the same PP for comparison.
Jim D
Jim D
Apr 21, 2015 12:07:16 #
ebbote wrote:
Very good OT.
Thank you. I'm trying to decide if the Sigma TC is worth the extra $200 it cost. It's nice to have the actual millimeters reported but I don't see that much difference in the quality of the photos.
Any thoughts? Which TC do you think works better?
Jim D
Apr 21, 2015 11:40:39 #
The next group of five photos were taken with the Tamron 1.4 X and all were shot at 840 mm.
Jim D
Jim D
Apr 21, 2015 11:30:57 #
Using the Sigma 150-600mm sport version. I have a few different 1.4 X TC's so decided to play with a couple. I'm going to post for five shots taken with the Sigma and then core five shots taken with the Tamron. This is by no means a scientific test, just to show what can be done.
The first group of five or taken with the Sigma tc-1401 1.4X and all shot at 840 mm except the Cardinal, it was shown at 786 mm.
C&C is always welcome.
Jim D
The first group of five or taken with the Sigma tc-1401 1.4X and all shot at 840 mm except the Cardinal, it was shown at 786 mm.
C&C is always welcome.
Jim D
Apr 21, 2015 10:22:52 #
northsidejoe wrote:
I took a little walk yesterday to get some spring air on my self and get rid of the winter air and took a few shots thanks for looking saying hello from Pittsburgh.
Thanks for the shot of the incline! I haven't been on that in almost 50 years and boy did that shot bring back memories! It doesn't look like it's changed a bit.
Jim D
Apr 21, 2015 10:14:01 #
tommyf wrote:
I shoot with a Canon D6 and have the 24~105 F/4 lens. I also love shooting tennis and for this activity, I want a 70~200. If you were in my shoes, would you purchase the Canon F/4 or the Tamron F2.8? Money is not much different with the Tamron more expensive. Thanks in advance.....Tommy
tommy,
A Canon F4 is going to be a better quality lens because it is one of their L series lenses. Second, ask yourself how often you would be shooting at F2 .8. Shooting tennis I would think not very often if ever. You will probably be shooting at F82 F10 most of the time.
There's no doubt I would buy the Canon over a Tamron lens. It's a better quality lens and the F4 is known for being sharp.
Jim D
Apr 18, 2015 23:31:16 #
MT Shooter wrote:
It will fit in the Lowepro Trekker or Flipside series backpacks with a body attached (400AW or larger size). As for a side bag that will hold it with the body attached, I don't know of any that will handle that combo.
I have two holsters that it might fit in. Will check in the next day or two and let you know.
Jim D
Apr 17, 2015 09:25:28 #
Mr. K wrote:
Hello everyone. This is my first post on the hog. ... (show quote)
If I were you I would go for it. 24-105L is a very nice lens. It's a little bit wider and quite a bit longer than the Tamron lens and you're going to gain IS which I don't think the Tamron has. The canon is a better quality lens also so I don't see how you can go wrong. The 24-105 is a beautiful walk around lens. With the IS I don't think the one stop difference will matter much at all.
Jim D
Apr 12, 2015 08:53:07 #
SharpShooter wrote:
Man, you guys are out of control. You have no idea how to pick a wife!!
Mine never gets her nails done. She never gets her hair done, only gets my hand-me-down shoes and she makes twice as much money as I do too!!
I'll admit, one night I cuddled up to her and didn't realize till morning it was the neighbors DOG!!! Good thing the dog can't talk! :shock:
But she sure can COOK!!!!!! :lol: :lol:
SS
Mine never gets her nails done. She never gets her hair done, only gets my hand-me-down shoes and she makes twice as much money as I do too!!
I'll admit, one night I cuddled up to her and didn't realize till morning it was the neighbors DOG!!! Good thing the dog can't talk! :shock:
But she sure can COOK!!!!!! :lol: :lol:
SS
Your neighbors dog can cook? Mine doesn't but she sure can eat!
Jim D
Apr 11, 2015 08:57:39 #
Haydon wrote:
Hey Jim please don't use SS... I keep thinking of SharpShooter ;)
No no no, wrong SS. Then again, SharpShooter could be taking those shots, LOL!
Sorry but SS has stood for shutter speed as long as I can remember.
Jim D
Apr 11, 2015 08:36:41 #
boberic wrote:
If a camera shoots 10 frames per second, each shot each ,in effect, starts at 1/10 sec. shutter speed. How then will this effect shutter speeds the the various other settings. Wouldn't each setting be increased by that 1/10 increment. Just curious. I know that the 1/10 increment would have no real effect on the exposure, but in may at really slow shutter speeds.
Actually you are looking at things backwards. SS will take priority over fps.
Using your example a SS of 1/5 of a second would slow fps to 5 fps.
Jim D