shooters - thoughts?

[will pattison]

squid, crash, chili...others, what body and glass are you using? how much does it contribute to sharpness?

for example, i use the 20d and mostly my sigma 70-200 f/2.8. this is, by all accounts, pro quality glass, but does sharpness suffer from lack of i.s.? other reasons? i have also been told the 20d can't focus as fast as the mark 2. what effect does that have?

yes...i am already starting to justify spending MORE...

:whoa:

wp.

 

[Okiewan]

The Mark II focus is much faster, more focus points, faster burst... no doubt you'll get more in-focus shots, not sure if the best of each one is any sharper than the other? But more keepers for sure. Of course the file sizes are also larger if that's important.

Is the $7K dif in price worth it to YOU? I'd damn sure love to have one, then again I'd like to have a Z06 too....

If you get one... can I touch it?

 

[Chili]

Most guys I know that have the IS lenses have the IS turned off or at the very least one plane of the IS turned off for moto. I shot with my 20D's and the Sigma and loved the results, when it died an untimely death right before I left for Millville I replaced it with the Canon 70-200 non IS, personally I still don't think there is any difference in my results with either lens. In fact my original plan was when I got the replacement Sigma from the warranty department I would offer both the Canon and Sigma for sale at the same time and just keep whichever did not sell the quickest. I've since changed my mind for two reasons, I plan on getting a mkII soon so I'm hoping that the noticeably faster focus on the Pro bodies that Squid and Crash swear I will see is true and the main reason right now is it's started to bug me that the zoom rings between my Canon 24-70 and the Sigma 70-200 would rotate in opposite directions, small reason I know but an annoyance when you grab the second body and the first shot you quickly go to zoom in and instead zoom all the way out.

On that note anyone want a New in the Box Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX DG?, if so send me a pm or e-mail would even consider a trade involving it one of my 20D's and some cash for a mkII :laugh:

 

[Chili]

Is the $7K dif in price worth it to YOU?

7K? a new 1DmkIIN is $3400 and is also the same 8.2 MP as the 20D. Many used mkII non N models going for between 2-2.5k right now with folks wanting to upgrade to the mkIII

 

[Okiewan]

Sorry, missed the "n" in his post. No idea what the III goes for, only know that a new II was nearly 8K.

I'll leave you photo types to discuss among yourselves :cool:

 

[Chili]

Sorry, missed the "n" in his post. No idea what the III goes for, only know that a new II was nearly 8K.

I'll leave you photo types to discuss among yourselves :cool:

Okie you are confusing the 1DmkIIN or it's predecessor the 1DmkII for the 1DsMkII which retails at 8k. A new mkIII retails around $4400 I believe.

 

[Squid31]

I'm using a 1D and a 1DMKII. If I had to pick my favorite between the two, I would pick the 1D hands down. Some people think I'm nuts, but that's just my opinion. I have a 70-200 IS, and I bought this instead of the Sigma because I knew I would just want the Canon eventually so I figured I would just get what I really wanted right away. I also have a 300 f/4 IS, and it is a really good lens for the money. It's not the greatest indoors, but works really well outside. As for IS, I don't use it when shooting MX.

As for sharpness, I still have 2 or 3 shots in my portfolio taken with my Digital Rebel and 70-300 lens. Although I get more keepers with the "pro" gear than I did with the rebel, I wouldn't say the good ones from the pro gear are any better than the good ones form the non pro gear.

So to make a long story short, you can get great images with both pro and non pro gear, but you will get a higher keeper rate with the better gear.

These 3 photos were shot in Atlanta 04. My first SX with a camera. Exif intact

 

[Chili]

According to the exif data all three of those were shot with the Nifty Fifty at 1.8, not bad for a sub $100 lens!

 

[Squid31]

Yep, I bought it just for that trip. I didn't even have a flash yet, so the 75-300 didn't work out so good. I had a flash for the Pontiac race that year and was then able to use the 75-300, but the 50mm was mounted most of the time.

 

[crash32]

I used the 20d and the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 until just around the end of the year.
I have since purchased a 1DMKII and the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS. I think that on the 20d there is not much diffence in the speed from one lens to the other. But I did notice the Canon lens is faster on the 1DMKII.
I found the 20d and Sigma was good but since the upgrade my keeper rate has gone way up.
You should be able to find a good used 1DMKII for a decent price unless you would like a good used 20D.
Then I will sell you the 20D I have.

:)