[charlie]

Mike, what is the difference between an E-TTL flash and a TTL flash. Enquiring minds need to know.

[Poseidon]

LOL!

E-TTL is Canon's proprietary system, it actually fires a pre-flash to determine exposure, then sets the flash power accordingly. It works VERY well. When I use my 550EX, it actually fires twice for every picture I take, kills batteries FAST, but it does a very nice job of balancing ambient light with flash. If you are shopping for a good flash, look for a 420EX, they have been replaced by the 430EX but you can still find them. (around $150) The 430EX is an awesome flash, but the cost is over $200 I think. I am considering a 580, if I can talk the wife into it, I will sell you my hardly ever used 420....

[charlie]

Captain used camera parts here.
I will take you up on that, when and if that happens. Otherwise, I may some searching around for a 420.
Thanx for the explanation though. How does it help a macro shot, like Gene was saying in the new pics thread.

[zhenya]

How does it help a macro shot, like Gene was saying in the new pics thread.

Charlie,

You don;t necessarily need to use a flash when doing macro work but it helps if you can provide even lighting for the subject that you are shooting.
If you simply use a pop up flash it may cause more harsh shadows to appear in your picture( I hate that thing), but if you can set up a flash to the side with a off shoe cord or something, or maybe trigger a slave flash that is pointed on the subject from the top, the light will be even( I think) and helps tremendously with DOF which is extremely shallow in all of the macro lenses.
You will be able to see lots more details as oposed to shooting without flash.
A good flash for macro work is the ring flash designed specifically for macro, however, they are very costly.., I think it's around $600 or more.
something like this works really well but I personally can;t justify spending this much for a designated flash if I'm not making a living shooting macros...

PS. Here's a link to various macro flashes and ringlights.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...rch&Q=&ci=9597

[Poseidon]

Charlie, did you ever get a new flash?

[charlie]

No, I did not. I really haven't even thought about it much until Gene's post reminded me. Maybe it is time to remind Lorie that Christmas is right around the corner
I personally would rather have a larger zoom lens. I am gonna go back to Las Vegas for the Nascar race next year, and we have a really decent pit pass.
And not the one you linked me to last time Mike, I showed that to Lorie, and you are in trouble.

[Poseidon]

Originally Posted by charlie

And not the one you linked me to last time Mike, I showed that to Lorie, and you are in trouble.

Just think how it is for ME, I actually WANT that one! Stacey says NO WAY!!! Maybe I can find a used one, for a little less.

Anyway, here is another one.

That one is a little cheaper, and it is a zoom too! This one is a little closer to reality price wise I think. Then there is always the king but at 11.8 POUNDS you might get a little tired.

I may take a serious look at the Sigma myself, it has spectacular reviews. The 300 F4 is another highly regarded lens, and then of course the 600, is well a 600!!!

If you give me a budget figure, I'd be happy to find you the best value for your cash!

[charlie]

Mike, Mike , Mike, Mike, Mike!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I want to live to be 53
I was thinking about something less than $400, is that even doable?????????????? And I am just a little guy, 160 LBS. soaking wet

[Poseidon]

Lets See....If you can stretch the budget just a little.

This one is even closer to your budget.

Here is El Cheapo, but it does at least have the USM auto focus. USM is VERY important, especially if you are going to use it for those 200MPH plus cars....

If you can get Lorie to OK that 70-200 f4, it really is the best of the bunch!

[charlie]

0345B002 Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Autofocus Telephoto Zoom Lens - USA

What does shake stops mean??

[Poseidon]

The IS feature helps eliminate camera shake, I have 2 lenses with IS and I can get sharp pictures with shutter speeds as low as 1/8 of a second! The rub is that the SUBJECT can't be moving, but at least the IS eliminates your movement.

The IS would not help for the Nascar race, but it sure comes in handy in low light conditions.

[charlie]

I wonder if that "Mode 2 would help with movig objects. It says it does???

[Poseidon]

It helps with Panning, but outside in Las Vegas, bright sunshine, you will have a shutter speed much faster then you use while panning.

You could use a polarizer filter and a small aperture to get slower shutter speeds, that way you can create a sense of motion. (Spinning tires etc) Taking pictures of moving race cars can actually be pretty difficult to get something that conveys the motion and speed, but is in FOCUS!

The IS is a very cool feature, I really like it, and I plan on upgrading my 70-200 to the IS model someday. I figure I can sell my current model for $800 or so, so I need another $700 to get the IS model.

[charlie]

Mike, I took these pics last year with this lens,Mfr Catalog #







Let me know what you think about them. I bought this lens from Gene right before we went down last year.

[charlie]

Sorry I dropped this like a stone yesterday, but we ended up having a bunch of people come over, things got pretty hectic!!!!

[Poseidon]

No Problem Charlie, we were starting a movie anyway....

Those are ok, but you missed the front of the cars.... I know I know they are going 180mph+. It is a hard subject catch. I would say the 70-200 F4L would be much better for you, it focuses fasted then that 28-135 does, and it has a little more reach too. The 28-135 is an IS lens, I have that one, and it is pretty nice, but the L glass is just a bit better.

Back to the pictures.... Notice the lettering on the tires? That helps convey a sense of speed. A shutter speed just a tad slower would be even better, but it would reduce the "keeper ratio" too as you would get more shots that are slightly out of focus. Here is a BONUS though, if you slow the shutter then the aperture must be larger, and that larger aperture gives you a shallower depth of field. That shallow depth of field will help make that fence DISAPPEAR. Well except for the vertical posts, but the horizontal wires will fade.

The 300mm zoom I linked too, the one with IS that is around $600 will give you even more reach, but at a cost of light. It minimum aperture is smaller then the f4, but you gain IS to help make up for it, at least with still subjects. NASCAR is not STILL if it is anything.... So you see, you need BOTH! LOL

No really I think Canon does that on purpose sometimes, they have one lens that does this, another that does that, so you have to buy BOTH. Frustrating isn't it? I faced a similar dilema when I was deciding what lenses to buy for my back up camera this season, I could have bought 2 Sigma lenses and covered from 28-200 at f2.8 for about $1100. Instead I chose the Canon lens 24-105 at f4 with IS, it was $1250. This lens is not as "fast" (meaning it opens to f4 instead of f2.8) but it focuses faster. The 24-105 covers a larger range without having to change glass. See how you can build a case for more then one lens that is pretty convincing, wouldn't it make sense to make a 24-200 with IS? That would solve my problem.... Well laws of physics certainly apply, but there has to be a way to do it well, and in the price range of $1200 it seems like it could be done.

My .02 cents says get the 70-200 f4L, and be HAPPY!!!

[charlie]

My .02 cents says get the 70-200 f4L, and be HAPPY!!!

Thanx Mike, I will see if I can do some deep persuasion!!!
Maybe if we split the cost of it, she might agree. Thanx for your help, as alway I appreciate it.

[Poseidon]

No Problem! You might be able to make up the difference with change from the coach, and pop bottle returns...

[charlie]

Hey Mike, I do have another question for ya, is the macro that is available on those lenses any good?

[zhenya]

Originally Posted by charlie

Hey Mike, I do have another question for ya, is the macro that is available on those lenses any good?

Charlie, I think you can do really well on a macro shots with that 70-200mm f4L if you screw on some diopters, but true 1:1 magnification will be only possible with a true 1:1 macro lens, like your 100m macro. Didn't you get that one last year? It's probably the best macro lens out there. Why did you ask about the macro with those other lenses?