The slippery slope of fast glass

G

GEH007

Suspended / Banned
Messages
279
Edit My Images
No
My nifty fifty arrived this morning.

My god, super fast and sharp, how on earth can they sell these for 60 or so quid. I have a 28-135, which is a lovely lens but the speed of the 50 is amazing, high apertures and still high shutter speeds in less then ideal conditions. What a bargain.

I was thinking of a 70-300 next, but now Im not so sure.

Oh dear, I fear the slippery slope of fast glass looming!!
 
Haha, welcome to my world :D

Get a 70-200 f2.8 mate, will make such a difference being able to shoot at f2.8 through the range!
 
Its an expensive addiction to get, and loads of fun - though the bank manager is not always as smiley :lol:
 
yeah my first as F4-5.6 and now there all 2.8's lol

really good but bloody expensive
 
*dreams of more L glass*

LOL, I love my 50mm F/1.4, it's superb.
My only other lens is the 70-200mm f/4 L USM which is really sharp, f/2.8 would've been nice but I think the wife would've divorced me.

17-40 f/4 L is gonna be my next lens.
 
I cant even afford L Glass :(
I will own some soon though, i keep promising myself that! :lol:
 
I forget that they make glass slower than f/2.8. I remember every time I look at my cc bill though :lol:
 
You just need the 35, 135 and 85L's to complete the set - then of course you'll realise the 50 f/1.8 has two bigger brothers ;)

Enjoy the ride!
 
yep all my glass is F/2.8 now,except my 50F/1.7 and my 17-70 siggy...which i'll only use for landscapes and nice bright days when i need the wide angle...do they do a 10-20 in F/2.8 :lol:

and yep,it's a very expensive and adictive hobby :naughty:
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Ken Rockwell
It's a miracle! I bought mine in November 2005 and love it. It's replaced an entire bag of lenses....... my 18-200mm VR is more than just a new lens. It's changed the way I live and make photos......the 18-200mm VR just became the world's best portrait lens........

Sorry off topic, i sometimes cannot believe the rubbish that comes out of this guys mouth!
 
russbates said:
Originally Posted by Uncle Ken Rockwell
It's a miracle! I bought mine in November 2005 and love it. It's replaced an entire bag of lenses....... my 18-200mm VR is more than just a new lens. It's changed the way I live and make photos......the 18-200mm VR just became the world's best portrait lens........

Sorry off topic, i sometimes cannot believe the rubbish that comes out of this guys mouth!
Click to expand...

Isn't that in Flash's signature? :thinking:
 
fabs said:
Isn't that in Flash's signature? :thinking:
Click to expand...

Yeah it is

I was refering to Ken Rockwells website, off topic i know

In reference to the original question, 2.8 all the way would be odd to use anything else now!
 
Have to laugh at some of this!

Next up, can anyone suggest a protector filter for the 50mm?

I've looked at Hoya but they are 30 quid, the lens is only worth double that!

Is there a cheaper option that doesnt turn your lens into a jam jar bottom?

If not, I may just add a small hood and not bother with the filter.
 
stan the man said:
gotta settle for the 42 i'm afraid marc....crimbo has put paid to the 58 :'(.
Click to expand...

Heard good things about the 42. :thumbs: I needed a backup flashgun and thought about getting the 42, but then decided to get the 58 because of the movement range of the head. So now the 56 is my backup. :D
 
I never realized the benefits of having an F2.8, until I got the Tamron 17-50 F2.8.

Now I would :love: a 70-200 F2.8 :bonk:
But the Sony version are over £1000 :'(
 
fabs said:
Heard good things about the 42. :thumbs: I needed a backup flashgun and thought about getting the 42, but then decided to get the 58 because of the movement range of the head. So now the 56 is my backup. :D
Click to expand...

yeah,heard good things about the 42,and the reviews are favourable.just sold my 36 to livewire,and it's only gonna cost me £30 to upgrade to the 42,so not too expensive methinks....i think the 42 will suit my needs enough at the moment anyway,so anything better may be wasted on me..
 
stan the man said:
yeah,heard good things about the 42,and the reviews are favourable.just sold my 36 to livewire,and it's only gonna cost me £30 to upgrade to the 42,so not too expensive methinks....i think the 42 will suit my needs enough at the moment anyway,so anything better may be wasted on me..
Click to expand...

So what will the 42 gve you that the 36 couldn't? Or is it just a power thing?

Sorry, appear to have hijacked the thread a bit. :$
 
pearce_jj said:
well the 70..200mm F4L is £350 from Kerson or £450 from Jessops....
Click to expand...

Already got a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 so couldnt go for an F4 now :lol:

And thanks for the info about the 11-16, you swine! :lol:
 
Sorry but I don't get this obsession with fast expensive glass,I was brought up in the days of film manual exposures and prime lenses,now the 50mm was usually between f 1.7 & f2,the wide angles f2.8 and the shot telephotos up to 135mm also f2.8.
But how often did we use these wide open very rarely is the answer and we did not have the options of switching ASA speeds either.
Now I agree that if money were no object I would have fast zooms for the occasions that I needed them but the thought of going out for the day with the weight of a 24-70 and 70-200 f2.8 does not sound fun,so please accept that fast glass is lovely but for most eventualities the likes of my beloved canon 24-85 f3.5/4.5 are fine because they are going to be used at around f8 anyhow
 
CaptainPenguin said:
Sorry but I don't get this obsession with fast expensive glass,I was brought up in the days of film manual exposures and prime lenses,now the 50mm was usually between f 1.7 & f2,the wide angles f2.8 and the shot telephotos up to 135mm also f2.8.
But how often did we use these wide open very rarely is the answer and we did not have the options of switching ASA speeds either.
Now I agree that if money were no object I would have fast zooms for the occasions that I needed them but the thought of going out for the day with the weight of a 24-70 and 70-200 f2.8 does not sound fun,so please accept that fast glass is lovely but for most eventualities the likes of my beloved canon 24-85 f3.5/4.5 are fine because they are going to be used at around f8 anyhow
Click to expand...


Yeah I know what you mean, at the end of the day a 2.8 lens stopped down to 6.3 won't be any faster than a 6.3 lens. I love my nifty but haven't used it wide open when IQ was important as it is soft at that end.
 
kalibre said:
Yeah I know what you mean, at the end of the day a 2.8 lens stopped down to 6.3 won't be any faster than a 6.3 lens. I love my nifty but haven't used it wide open when IQ was important as it is soft at that end.
Click to expand...

hi there mate, hows the D300 serving you? ;)

Got my 50mm f1.8 recently as well, very fast but at f1.8 I think the dof is too shallow for most the stuff I shoot but its a fantastic abstract photography lens as well as for portraits. I tend to stick to about f2.8 most of the time which is enough for me.
 
CaptainPenguin said:
[snip]so please accept that fast glass is lovely but for most eventualities the likes of my beloved canon 24-85 f3.5/4.5 are fine because they are going to be used at around f8 anyhow
Click to expand...

I just looked at one of my LR catalogs, it's got 15k images in it. 12k were f/4 or faster, 10k were f/2.8 or faster but then I do shoot a lot of available light so wide aperture and high ISO are the order of the day.
 
pxl8 said:
I just looked at one of my LR catalogs, it's got 15k images in it. 12k were f/4 or faster, 10k were f/2.8 or faster but then I do shoot a lot of available light so wide aperture and high ISO are the order of the day.
Click to expand...

Thats the same as me, i hardly ever use flash. I have just bought a 430ex but thats only because i want it for modeling and fill in to eliminate some shadows on other portrait work
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top