Comments on: Firebush and fall bokeh http://www.richardsnotes.org/archives/2008/10/27/firebush-and-fall-bokeh/ notes, photos, and other collectible fragments Thu, 09 Feb 2012 11:26:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Richard http://www.richardsnotes.org/archives/2008/10/27/firebush-and-fall-bokeh/comment-page-1/#comment-177459 Richard Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:16:59 +0000 http://www.richardsnotes.org/archives/2008/10/27/firebush-and-fall-bokeh/#comment-177459 Edward: I had it for a year so I can shed light on it. It's heavy but people put up with that weight because they want the flexibility and speed. Most people who use it do not use it on a tripod, they rely on the IS to steady the lens. I think the 135L is a better choice for you though, that and maybe the 70-200mm f/4. Edward: I had it for a year so I can shed light on it. It’s heavy but people put up with that weight because they want the flexibility and speed.

Most people who use it do not use it on a tripod, they rely on the IS to steady the lens.

I think the 135L is a better choice for you though, that and maybe the 70-200mm f/4.

]]> By: edward http://www.richardsnotes.org/archives/2008/10/27/firebush-and-fall-bokeh/comment-page-1/#comment-177457 edward Thu, 30 Oct 2008 12:59:25 +0000 http://www.richardsnotes.org/archives/2008/10/27/firebush-and-fall-bokeh/#comment-177457 yes the problem with the f2.8 is that it is heavy (very heavy) and that is the problem I have with it. one cannot really be carrying that lens around and I think you might need a tripod with it? does anyone around have the f2.8 lends and could shead some light on the weight vs the speed? yes the problem with the f2.8 is that it is heavy (very heavy) and that is the problem I have with it. one cannot really be carrying that lens around and I think you might need a tripod with it?

does anyone around have the f2.8 lends and could shead some light on the weight vs the speed?

]]> By: Richard http://www.richardsnotes.org/archives/2008/10/27/firebush-and-fall-bokeh/comment-page-1/#comment-177422 Richard Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:19:39 +0000 http://www.richardsnotes.org/archives/2008/10/27/firebush-and-fall-bokeh/#comment-177422 Edward: Right but the f/2.8 can shoot in lower light and more easily create shots like this with it's big aperture. Each of those two lenses has its place, just depends on what you want to do. If you don't want to zoom, the 135mm L is a wonderful way to go. Edward: Right but the f/2.8 can shoot in lower light and more easily create shots like this with it’s big aperture.

Each of those two lenses has its place, just depends on what you want to do. If you don’t want to zoom, the 135mm L is a wonderful way to go.

]]> By: edward http://www.richardsnotes.org/archives/2008/10/27/firebush-and-fall-bokeh/comment-page-1/#comment-177420 edward Tue, 28 Oct 2008 11:56:18 +0000 http://www.richardsnotes.org/archives/2008/10/27/firebush-and-fall-bokeh/#comment-177420 beautifull picture, I have take a few leaf pictures and they did not come out as nice as yours. thanks for sharing. I looked into the 70/200 f2.8 and wow it is heavy. the f4 is a lot less heavy. e beautifull picture, I have take a few leaf pictures and they did not come out as nice as yours.

thanks for sharing. I looked into the 70/200 f2.8 and wow it is heavy. the f4 is a lot less heavy.

e

]]> By: Richard http://www.richardsnotes.org/archives/2008/10/27/firebush-and-fall-bokeh/comment-page-1/#comment-177419 Richard Tue, 28 Oct 2008 11:36:59 +0000 http://www.richardsnotes.org/archives/2008/10/27/firebush-and-fall-bokeh/#comment-177419 Gedas: No kidding. That's why I tried the 135 plus extender. But, the true test is to do the same shot with each setup and look closely. The 200mm f/2.8 L is one of the least expensive high end lenses made by Canon and it's a great lens. Very close to the 135 in IQ and not much heavier. 200mm is a very useful focal length and what I've found in looking at images on flickr is that most people who have and use the 70-200mm zoom use the 200mm end most of the time. If that's the case, why carry a zoom? That lens is a brick and costly. The prime is lighter and cheaper and maybe sharper. So, there you have it. Gedas: No kidding. That’s why I tried the 135 plus extender. But, the true test is to do the same shot with each setup and look closely.

The 200mm f/2.8 L is one of the least expensive high end lenses made by Canon and it’s a great lens. Very close to the 135 in IQ and not much heavier. 200mm is a very useful focal length and what I’ve found in looking at images on flickr is that most people who have and use the 70-200mm zoom use the 200mm end most of the time. If that’s the case, why carry a zoom? That lens is a brick and costly. The prime is lighter and cheaper and maybe sharper. So, there you have it.

]]> By: Gedas http://www.richardsnotes.org/archives/2008/10/27/firebush-and-fall-bokeh/comment-page-1/#comment-177417 Gedas Tue, 28 Oct 2008 10:46:00 +0000 http://www.richardsnotes.org/archives/2008/10/27/firebush-and-fall-bokeh/#comment-177417 huh, bokeh! I think if you buy one of 200mm lenses, then you need a truck to pick up all you gear ;] huh, bokeh! I think if you buy one of 200mm lenses, then you need a truck to pick up all you gear ;]

]]>