Welcome to the IHoP v.2

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

What happens when you don't make your block. Ouch.

 

[///M5 2,833]

 

Buy this:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sony-DT-16-50mm-f2-8-SSM-Lens-with-Hood-and-Caps-/281437011935?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item4186f3ffdf

**assumes that lens tests well I did ZERO research on it as I know nothing of the Sony branded lenses but from a configuration situation it is the choice on a crop frame.

That is a very good lens as well. I am going to give this a go because I can always return it for another. The extra range is to get the player that my daughter is doing the scrap book for.

 

If you need reach you have the 55-200.  I am only such a dick about right now since the 17-55 COMPLETELY evolutionized what my pictures look like.

[///M5 2,833]

Pretty sure Matt will tell you the same about the 24-70 on the FF...although the 70-200 I guess resides really often on his camera

[nem 2,019]

I completely understand. This is more for the wife to use in my absence.

At that price I may pick one up at some point.

[dem beats 1,223]

Pretty sure Matt will tell you the same about the 24-70 on the FF...although the 70-200 I guess resides really often on his camera

The 24-70 is always on when shooting randomly, especially indoors.

Because of Europe and the need for so much wider angle the ultra wide zoom got a lot of love. It NEVER left the wife's crop sensor as second camera unless I needed it.

[dem beats 1,223]

The 70-200 gets the absolute most time on my camera. Especially if you include how much I used it with the 2.0 extender. It is the fastest, sharpest, most predictable, fastest, with lowest distortion, and did I mention fastest? If always works and is the most flattering in every way. It's for people, wildlife, shooting my buddy racing his bike, everything. It's heavy but the best lens in my bag.

By fast I mean fast to focus.

The second most used is the 50mm 1.2. It's fucking magic. If I had the 85mm 1.2 I might use it more..... But the 50 is AWESOME. I use it at 1.2 and its a life saver in really low light. It gets shots that are amazing.

The ultra wide and the 24-70 tie for time spent on the camera, but the 24-70 is MUCH more important. It gets the people photos. The ones I can't stage. And why I purchased a camera in the first place.

[dem beats 1,223]

If I could only pick one it would be a nearly impossible decision between the 70-200 and the 24-70 but I would choose the 70-200 every day of the week.

And that is 100% because the 70-200 is a better lens in every way, and not because of the focal length. If there was a lens as good as the 70-200 in the 24-70 focal length it would probably swing in the other direction.

I can't make that call as the 70-200 is so far and away a better lens than anything else I have ever used it makes it impossible to know.

[lithium 358]

phone is getting slow. question is reformat or root

[nem 2,019]

Wow Matt!

[dem beats 1,223]

Wow Matt!

I don't know if that helps you out at all, but it's my observations in real life scenarios.

Weddings, bike races, funerals, and work events.

I just took my whole bag of equipment out to the local renn fest. I only used the 50mm 1.2 and the 70-200 2.8 IS II.

If I went again I might have messed around with some wide angle stuff, but the low light situations and the need capture things quickly in dynamic situations meant all the light needed from the 1.2 to get really high speed shots, or the 70-200 to get close on the action.

[nem 2,019]

Yes Matt you have your experience is of great help. For fun when I get back next week I may just pick up that lens Sean posted.

[///M5 2,833]

phone is getting slow. question is reformat or root

Both

[///M5 2,833]

If I could only pick one it would be a nearly impossible decision between the 70-200 and the 24-70 but I would choose the 70-200 every day of the week.

And that is 100% because the 70-200 is a better lens in every way, and not because of the focal length. If there was a lens as good as the 70-200 in the 24-70 focal length it would probably swing in the other direction.

I can't make that call as the 70-200 is so far and away a better lens than anything else I have ever used it makes it impossible to know.

You mostly shoot people and people doing things, I mostly shoot stuff or multiple people.  Thus my preference for the wide end and yours for the zoom.  I NEED the zoom though and should be getting it before Saturday since Aidan has only 2 soccer games left.

[///M5 2,833]

And the Tamron 18-270 is fucking useless so I'd rather shoot with the 17-55 and crop/digital zoom the shit out of the picture than use the Tammy.

[dem beats 1,223]

If I could only pick one it would be a nearly impossible decision between the 70-200 and the 24-70 but I would choose the 70-200 every day of the week.

And that is 100% because the 70-200 is a better lens in every way, and not because of the focal length. If there was a lens as good as the 70-200 in the 24-70 focal length it would probably swing in the other direction.

I can't make that call as the 70-200 is so far and away a better lens than anything else I have ever used it makes it impossible to know.

You mostly shoot people and people doing things, I mostly shoot stuff or multiple people. Thus my preference for the wide end and yours for the zoom. I NEED the zoom though and should be getting it before Saturday since Aidan has only 2 soccer games left.

Correct on all counts. I was hoping that message came through.

Most of my shooting has been with no set up time, and mission critical. As in won't happen again.

[dem beats 1,223]

I did use the 70-200 on my crop for a family picture once.... It's all I had that day.

Wow, it sucked.

I was 30+ feet back.

[dem beats 1,223]

If I traveled like Sean, I would probably pack the ultra wide and the 50mm 1.2.

The shallow DOF and wonderful light capturing ability makes the 1.2 so useful. While not ideal for portraits as far as flattering goes, it's so useful.

For headshots/torso shots, for a business type shot, I would pick the 70-200 if I have the room to back up. It's just a better lens and more predictable. Manages background lighting so much better.

[dem beats 1,223]

What I really need to learn is flash. I don't find myself in asituation where I want one often...... But when I do, not knowing how to set it up quickly really sucks.

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

[Tirefryr 1,742]

Between the computer talk, and camera talk, we need a new Ihop.

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

Between the computer talk, and camera talk, we need a new Ihop.

[dem beats 1,223]

That is a spaceship!

[dem beats 1,223]

Between the computer talk, and camera talk, we need a new Ihop.

You love cameras and computers. Both are needed for all the pornographic material you consume.

And how else would you send D pics?

[///M5 2,833]

What I really need to learn is flash. I don't find myself in asituation where I want one often...... But when I do, not knowing how to set it up quickly really sucks.

My pictures with flash SUCK compared to those without.  All the more reason I lean on fast glass.

 

Pretty sure you need 2 flashes to get it to work worth a shit.

[Tirefryr 1,742]

 

Between the computer talk, and camera talk, we need a new Ihop.

 

 

They fucked it up with the hybrid.