Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
betty boop

Camera & Photo Chat

Recommended Posts

It'd be worse on mine... yeah 24 is a bit bad if you put on a UV filter... Try the B+W ultraslim (think that's the name).. The downside of that is it needs a different lens cap... :wacko: Just cannot win....

~

Have a Kenko Pro1 UV permanently mounted already. Bought on the basis that I could double up when mounting the same brand / series CPL. Not the case in reality when wider than about 30mm...

~

You can't go wrong with a collection of F4s.... ala travel pack...

For me, I want 17-40F4 IS (i.e. rumoured mkII), 24-105F4IS, 70-200F4IS. 1.4x, 2x teleconvertors..

Then at home use a 70-200F2.8, 100F2.8 macro...

:wub: :wub:

Love the 24-105 as a single lens traveller. But drool over the F2.8 trio: 16-35, 24-70 & 70-200. Oh, and the macro. Better make it the quartet.

Wondering if the 17-40 IS will be worth it for me. Most of my wide landscapes will be either low light tripod, or daytime handheld. Not sure I need the IS? But then again, if it's available... :blush:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
~

Wondering if the 17-40 IS will be worth it for me. Most of my wide landscapes will be either low light tripod, or daytime handheld. Not sure I need the IS? ~

was what was wondering as well, and is why discounted the 16-35 f2.8 as landscapes and wide shots always f8 or smaller. and not sure with IS as well,

~

But then again, if it's available... :blush:

didnt need that mentioend :D . having owned the 17-55 f2.8 IS as a lens had a lot going for it. sometimes still ask myself if should have ever sold it ! but at the time it was either that or the 24-105L couldnt have both. especially since was no room for it in a FF future. a space a 17-40 IS could well fill .... :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have a Kenko Pro1 UV permanently mounted already. Bought on the basis that I could double up when mounting the same brand / series CPL. Not the case in reality when wider than about 30mm...

That's what I have.. :D And removing it will help, but it still is a problem at 24mm.. worse for a CPL.. the B+W slim ones really seem to work... For me at least... The corners still fade off, but not as bad as the Kenko UV and CPLs.

5D3 supposedly will come with 24-105Mk2... I don't mind all the flaws TBH, the colours to me seems excellent (that and I'm so lazy to change lens)... 24-105, battery grip, the whole thing is so balanced... :wub: :wub:

Love the 24-105 as a single lens traveller. But drool over the F2.8 trio: 16-35, 24-70 & 70-200. Oh, and the macro. Better make it the quartet.

They are extremely heavy though.. Maybe they'd work ok for you, i'm a weak guy, and am not strong enough :blush:.. :P

Wondering if the 17-40 IS will be worth it for me. Most of my wide landscapes will be either low light tripod, or daytime handheld. Not sure I need the IS? But then again, if it's available... :blush:

The IS is a rumour I think... But yeah, if available, subject to approval...... :ninja: Not sure why i keep want to buy stuffs :lol:

Any of you guys tried tilt shift lens? e.g. lens baby?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
~

Any of you guys tried tilt shift lens? e.g. lens baby?

That's it, I'm outta here. You guys cost me a bomb.

(I didn't even want to go there with TS lenses. I saw one in the flesh when buying the 85mm f1.2. Drool. I'd love one for cityscapes...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Don't use a CPL on a wide-angle lens!

The difference in the angle of incidence of the light means that there will be a difference in the polarising across the shot. You will notice this as, say, darker sky in one corner of the shot. I know CPL's sound good, and they are for longer lenses, but should be avoided for the shorter lenses used in landscape stuff.

BTW MM, and this is just to "help" you, did you know that the 100mm macro is a pretty decent portrait lens as well? :winky:

And the 100-400mm L is also a great lens! I don't use mine all that often as I mainly do landscape stuff, but when I do use the 100-400 it always gives great shots.

Like I said, I'm just trying to help! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't use a CPL on a wide-angle lens!

The difference in the angle of incidence of the light means that there will be a difference in the polarising across the shot. You will notice this as, say, darker sky in one corner of the shot. I know CPL's sound good, and they are for longer lenses, but should be avoided for the shorter lenses used in landscape stuff.

I like my CPLs... :P longer side of the lens the CPL works great for me, the skies are Nikon like saturated blue.. and don't bloom. Totally unnatural, but personal preference I guess.. just have to rotate it to make it look "right".. The 24-105 gives great colours... The contrast of the pictures I took in Esperance (deep south :P) is amazing ... :wub: Wish I have the time, money to go back down again...

Yet to try graduated filters though.. Maybe some day..

And the 100-400mm L is also a great lens! I don't use mine all that often as I mainly do landscape stuff, but when I do use the 100-400 it always gives great shots.

+1...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a look at this image.

I took it with my 15-85mm set at 15mm. Notice the darker sky in the top right! :o

(Please excuse the colours as I've converted from RAW with just the standard values - couldn't be bothered adjusting for lighting & etc.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have a look at this image.

I took it with my 15-85mm set at 15mm. Notice the darker sky in the top right! :o

(Please excuse the colours as I've converted from RAW with just the standard values - couldn't be bothered adjusting for lighting & etc.)

Is that on a plane? Yeah, I get that sometimes, most times I can twist it to make it parallel I think..

Something like this, or this, or this... Sorta give some illusion of depth to the sky... The last pic is with my old CPL, and the corners falls off quite rapidly.. But I use that to sorta "frame"

I actually like to use a CPL for night time city shots too.. No vignetting ghosts :P... My virtual machine is dead again and I can't find examples (that or I have lost power, or somebody has broken into my house again).. But with a CPL I can have a longer exposure and filter out the glows of certain light sources, or fog...

It's like a magic pill... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Not on a plane - from ground level.

And the three shots you link too all have CPL-induced artefacts. It's like vignetting at just one corner. Or, depending on the orientation of the filter, in the middle of the shot - I have some of those.

Ever since I tracked down the cause of this problem I've never again used my CPL's again for landscape work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not on a plane - from ground level.

What's that white thingy to the right?

And the three shots you link too all have CPL-induced artefacts. It's like vignetting at just one corner. Or, depending on the orientation of the filter, in the middle of the shot - I have some of those.

Yeah. RHS typically bluer than LHS. I'd try to shoot some scapes without a CPL and see how it goes... Been meaning to try those conkin filters.... Just never got the chance ...

Ever since I tracked down the cause of this problem I've never again used my CPL's again for landscape work.

What CPL you have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's that white thingy to the right?

Salt!!

What CPL you have?

All my filters are B+W.

They may be expensive but I refuse to put something with the quality of a "Coke bottle bottom" in front of my lenses. Why spend $1000's on a lens and then put a $5 piece of windows glass in front of it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting re circular polarising filter and vignetting not something have noticed to be honest, but then on a crop camera maybe less noticeable ?

will look out for sure. I still have a 77mm hoya filter, but yeah with no landscape lens in the locker anymore so not something to check out or a while :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


No, it's fully noticeable on the 7D. You may have just been lucky. ;)

no probably a case of just not noticed ! :blush:

but now that you've mentioned it hehe

I'll try it on the 24-105 but not sure if its something that shows on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no probably a case of just not noticed ! :blush:

but now that you've mentioned it hehe

I'll try it on the 24-105 but not sure if its something that shows on that.

It will down towards the 24mm length, unlikely to see it at the 105mm end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the CPL tips gb.

To be honest, I always forget to twist the thing and find the sweet spot, so I might be better off without anyway.

It still sounds like all your advice leads to spending more money. Not really worried about the 100mm macro as a portrait lens as long as I've got the 85mm beast (although, I could probably change over the lens to the macro, take half a dozen shots and change the lens back in the time before the 85mm would have even focussed on the first).

But I'm starting to see more and more opportunities for the zoom out here in the bush. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...