Old 11-09-2010, 02:53 PM   #26
LSRC Railfan
Senior Member
 
LSRC Railfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 274
Default

Quote:
The suggestion of the 17-40 and 50/1.8 is kind of a silly suggestion.
Why is it silly? You don't NEED a mid-range lens for railroad photography, although it is helpful. A 17-40-50-telephoto covers all necessary focal lengths (if it's in the 60mm area, he could just shoot with the 50 and crop). I think it would work great until he's able to save up enough for a nice mid-range walk around.
LSRC Railfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2010, 04:38 PM   #27
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LSRC Railfan View Post
Why is it silly? You don't NEED a mid-range lens for railroad photography, although it is helpful. A 17-40-50-telephoto covers all necessary focal lengths (if it's in the 60mm area, he could just shoot with the 50 and crop). I think it would work great until he's able to save up enough for a nice mid-range walk around.
It's silly because another whole lens fills most of that range better, a 15-85 IS or 24-70L if you dont need any wider than 24. On a crop camera 24 isnt terribly wide, but it is on my 5D. It's my next planned purchase. I have used one and I would use it a lot more than my 17-40. I have a 17-85IS that I have never been terribly pleased with the IQ on, but it fit's the bill as far as useful focal length goes. Apparently the newer 15-85 IS is worlds better in the IQ realm. I wont buy one because I cant use it on the 5D. Suggesting a zoom plus a 50 prime I thought was kind of silly, especially the 50/1.8 which is not that great of a lens, fragile and slow focusing.
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2010, 05:12 AM   #28
John Ryan
Senior Member
 
John Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Posts: 497
Send a message via AIM to John Ryan
Default

Silly? Really?

From 2004 until 2007, I shot with a 17-40mm, 50mm, and 70-200mm. On my 1.6x crop-format cameras, this worked out to having a versatile 28-65mm lens, a fast lens for portraits, and a telephoto with excellent reach. Since the original poster is shooting with a crop-format camera, the same setup should work well for him. That Sigma lens is garbage; stay away from it. It wasn't until I got a 1.3x-multiplier format camera and then a full frame camera that a lens in the 24-70mm range became really useful.

Incidentally, my 50mm, which I would not call "fragile," has survived with me for almost eight years. It was on my camera when I slipped on ice and slammed the camera, under my full weight, into asphalt, leaving a minor scratch on the plastic barrel of the lens, and doing $1500 in damage to the camera. And even with the metal top plate, thumbwheel, and lcd covers torn off completely, the camera continued to shoot for the rest of the day, in snow and below-zero conditions at that.
John Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2010, 02:58 PM   #29
milwman
I shoot what I like
 
milwman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cedar Fall's, Iowa
Posts: 2,474
Send a message via Yahoo to milwman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Ryan View Post
Silly? Really?


Incidentally, my 50mm, which I would not call "fragile," has survived with me for almost eight years.
Thats good to hear, I looked on the net for an older one with a metal mount and am happy with it over a F1.4, Cheeper and the front lens element is back in the barrel that helps keep flare down with night shot's.
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2010, 03:52 PM   #30
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
especially the 50/1.8 which is not that great of a lens, fragile and slow focusing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Ryan View Post
Incidentally, my 50mm, which I would not call "fragile," has survived with me for almost eight years. It was on my camera when I slipped on ice and slammed the camera, under my full weight, into asphalt, leaving a minor scratch on the plastic barrel of the lens, and doing $1500 in damage to the camera. And even with the metal top plate, thumbwheel, and lcd covers torn off completely, the camera continued to shoot for the rest of the day, in snow and below-zero conditions at that.
Are you really talking about the 50 /1.8 and not the /1.4? If so, I am AMAZED. The /1.8 I have, the previous copy (fell apart under only modest circumstance, and I learned that the entire thing is basically held together with two spots of glue), and every other /1.8 I have seen are just hopeless. I treat mine with the utmost of care.

Quote:
Originally Posted by milwman View Post
Thats good to hear, I looked on the net for an older one with a metal mount and am happy with it over a F1.4, Cheeper and the front lens element is back in the barrel that helps keep flare down with night shot's.
I know that the v1 has a metal mount and the v2 plastic, but it was my impression that the rest of the lens has the same construction. In my experience the issue with the /1.8 is not the mount but the construction of the rest of the lens. But I haven't seen a v1, is it build differently or does it just have a metal mount?
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2010, 07:34 PM   #31
John Ryan
Senior Member
 
John Ryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Posts: 497
Send a message via AIM to John Ryan
Default

Yep, 50 f/1.8 with a plastic mount. It's the first Canon lens I bought (because it was all I could afford), and I've had no issues with it. I keep thinking about getting a 50 f/1.2, but do I really need that?
John Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2010, 07:59 PM   #32
milwman
I shoot what I like
 
milwman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cedar Fall's, Iowa
Posts: 2,474
Send a message via Yahoo to milwman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
In my experience the issue with the /1.8 is not the mount but the construction of the rest of the lens. But I haven't seen a v1, is it build differently or does it just have a metal mount?
V1 is made like the F1.4 or 85 F1.8, The V2 has the same glass, Otherwise its made to be low cost.
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.