I just bought a 300D for my first digital SLR. I an a vet to the Canon film line-up with FTbN's, T90's and numerous lenses. But, this thing makes me think again. I bought the basic kit with lens because I don't have any EF lenses. This leads me to my questions about lenses.
I am considering an 80-200/f4 L for my next lens. I understand the 1.6 multiplier and that is kinda cool, but what about light gathering? If I understand it correctly the light gathered is across the entire image and metered upon some part of it depending on metering modes. So, the smaller imager should behave the same with lenses disigned for film? I ask this because I will spend some time in manual or shutter priority modes. Also, how does a macro lens behave on a digital SLR, do I just have a smaller 1:1 image at 100mm x 1.6 focal length? Does that also give me a longer shortest focal point? I am using a Canon 200/f4 Macro and an Canon 100/f4 Macro on a T90 currently and would consider a macro lens for the digital in the near future, based on this what is a recommended macro lens? I have no experience with EF lenses and EOS bodies. Also, would the 80-200/f4 L be a good choice for this camera that will get me a mid-tele lens at max zoom? Or should I consider the 300/f4 L? Also are the IS zooms good and worth looking at? A lot of my photos are horitculture based, I raise and breed daylilies and shoot a few gardens for folks and submit some images for publication. 90% of my working photos are avaliable light and about half of my family stuff is with flash, what would be the ideal midrange flash for this body? I normally use 277T's one at a time or in pairs with my T90.
I will quit now, before I bore everyone to tears or laughter.
Thanks Matt
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
[ QUOTE ]
I understand the 1.6 multiplier and that is kinda cool, but what about light gathering?
[/ QUOTE ]
Assuming we are not talking about a very close subject distance, and ignoring lens transmission of less than 100%, as in any situation, only the f/number of the lens dictates its "light-gathering" properties (not a precise technical characterization, but it will serve to address your inquiry). The format size doesn't affect this.
[ QUOTE ]
Also, how does a macro lens behave on a digital SLR, do I just have a smaller 1:1 image at 100mm x 1.6 focal length?
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't think about focal length of 1.6 x focal length. Yes, for any given macro lens, at its closest focus, its magnifcation will not vary with sensor size. Thus on a smaller sensor, the size of the field (the size of the object that can fill the frame) will be smaller on a 300D than on a full-frame 35 mm camera.
[ QUOTE ]
Does that also give me a longer shortest focal point?
[/ QUOTE ]
No, the closest focus distance for any given lens does not vary with format size.
[ QUOTE ]
I am using a Canon 200/f4 Macro and an Canon 100/f4 Macro on a T90 currently and would consider a macro lens for the digital in the near future, based on this what is a recommended macro lens?
[/ QUOTE ]
The Canon EF 100 mm f/2.8 macro lens is well thought of in the 300D world. I wish I had one!
[ QUOTE ]
Also are the IS zooms good and worth looking at?
[/ QUOTE ]
Image stabilization can be a very valuable feature, the more so the longer the focal length (and by that I mean the 35 mm equivalent focal length, since that is what basically determines the sensitivity to camera shake).
[ QUOTE ]
. . .what would be the ideal midrange flash for this body?
[/ QUOTE ]
To have dedicated flash operation with the 300D, you will need a Canon Speedlite -EX series flash or equivalent.
The 420EX, 550EX, and 580EX are widely used. There is also a fully compatible Sigma unit, the 500 DG Super. There is also a Metz unit that is well thought of.
The 550EX has far more features (and a bit more soup) than the 420EX. The 580EX is quite new. Several of its advantages over the 550EX do not come to bear with the 300D.
Both the 550EX ands 580EX are fairly expensive. Many people feel you get a better bang for the buck with the Sigma. It also offers some metering modes the Canon flashes do not. Some people feel that tehy are more serviceable modes than the very ingenious, but sometimes quirky, Evaluative Through-The-Lens (E-TTL) metering used with the Canon flash unts working on a 300D.
Well, we look forward to hearing from you. Good luck with your nice new camera.
Best regards,
Doug
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Matt: Since there aren't many of us who actually know what an FTbN is, much less owned/used one, I thought I'd give your questions some time. (I still have my FT and my first F1, and my wife's FX - I could only marry a Canon woman!)
One thought first, which will help all of your questions. When I taught photojournalism classes at under-grad level, I always started them off with the "Limit your angle of view" concept. (I know I stole it from someone - its not unique!) That is to say, dont think of a camera lens as doing anything other than changing the angle of view that strikes the focal plane (film plane or sensor). No "Magnification" in other words. So now lets look at your questions in that 'light'.
"I am considering an 80-200/f4 L for my next lens. I understand the 1.6 multiplier and that is kinda cool, but what about light gathering? If I understand it correctly the light gathered is across the entire image and metered upon some part of it depending on metering modes. So, the smaller imager should behave the same with lenses disigned for film?"
Correct, except that if you are used to full frame, realize that standing in the same place with a 50mm acting like a 70mm (the 1.6) means the metering is taking in only what you see in the finder, ie, less than you are used to standing with a 50mm in the same position. The light is 'gathered', or more accuratly the image projected onto the focal plane, by the lens, which of course has nothing to do whether the camera is film or digital, making the lens behave as it was designed for film.
You will get good arguments and marketing hype that a lens must be different on a digital camera. Some of this is quite true, if you think about it, as the sensor is getting only x% of the image the lens is designed to project onto the focal plane. For me, a sports shooter, this is great, as I get to use the sweet spot (the center) of the telephotos. Wide anglers have a very different opinion.
"I ask this because I will spend some time in manual or shutter priority modes."
So do I; old habits die hard. Just remember to expose for highlights, or as we say now be sure the histogram is well to the right.
"Also, how does a macro lens behave on a digital SLR, do I just have a smaller 1:1 image at 100mm x 1.6 focal length?"
Correct again. Imagine putting a cardboard with a window cut-out in front of your eyes....'limiting the angle of view'....so you have a "limited" 1:1 image.
"Does that also give me a longer shortest focal point? I am using a Canon 200/f4 Macro and an Canon 100/f4 Macro on a T90 currently and would consider a macro lens for the digital in the near future, based on this what is a recommended macro lens?"
OK. This is where the limiting angle of view thing comes into its own. A 200mm lens on a digital body with a smaller than full frame sensor acts exactly like it would if the sensor were full frame just less area is used. So, the depth of field, bokeh, minimum/short focus points should all stay the same (as it would be in the lessened area). (If it were truly 'magnified' or it were 'smaller' then the DOF, etc. would all shift accordingly, which of course they do not.) So as to what lens you want, you need to think of how often you end up with too large an image in either lens. Cause in the new world, the glass is going to buy you apparent "extra" closeness because of the limited angle of view...making a new lens matched not to your current habits but more like current and back several feet. I hope that made sense.
"I have no experience with EF lenses and EOS bodies."
Dude, are YOU in for a happy surprise!
"Also, would the 80-200/f4 L be a good choice for this camera that will get me a mid-tele lens at max zoom? Or should I consider the 300/f4 L?"
Horses for courses. I don't know what you like to shoot, but if you are doing gardens plus closeups of flowers, I would think the 80-200 has value. Depends on your budget too.
"Also are the IS zooms good and worth looking at?"
Matt, this is the question that really motivated me to answer. I remember when the idea of a professional zoom lens was about equal to a great 1968 Japanese car, ie, not! That is over. The L zoom can hold its own next to primes. I do not know the 80-200 (use the 70-200 2.8L), but given its an f4 and not the 2.8, it should be more than satisfactory. Those rules have all changed.
"A lot of my photos are horitculture based, I raise and breed daylilies and shoot a few gardens for folks and submit some images for publication. 90% of my working photos are avaliable light and about half of my family stuff is with flash, what would be the ideal midrange flash for this body? I normally use 277T's one at a time or in pairs with my T90."
You will get really diverse opinions on this one! I use the 550EX on camera alot outside as fill, and the results are great. Others swear at this combo. Hopefully you will get more guidance on this.
You are really going to be surprised at the new world!
have fun
dave
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
I have only shot a handfull of photos with this body so far and the histogram still does not mean much to me, so could you elaborate on this statement?
""I ask this because I will spend some time in manual or shutter priority modes."
So do I; old habits die hard. Just remember to expose for highlights, or as we say now be sure the histogram is well to the right. "
I have been shooting a G2 for years and like it, but really wanted interchangeable lenses. I may have to sell some of my prized FD lenses to make some of this happen, but I hope not. Any interest in a very clean 400/4.5 or 35-105/3.5 out there? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Matt
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Linear Mode
