[stevebb]

....and other far away stuff

Ive been given a Canon EOS 300d by my dad with the standard 18-55m lens and a Sigma 17-125mm (?) lens.

I dont understand all the terminology yet as Im new to DSLR and Ive got photography books on the way to me to learn the basics and more. THese are the books for your interest:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0240519671

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0240515927

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0240514866

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0340869860

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0715311271

from reading the forums for advice i have ordered the following from bristol cameras

Sigma EF 500 DG Super Flashgun
Canon Lens EF-S 60mm f2.8 USM Macro

Ive already got photoshop cs2 and am learning that also.

So, my next requirment is a super zoom type lens for photographing the moon etc - my query is wehther the cheap no brand ebay menses are worth it or should invest more (i.e. garbage in garbage out?)

Would i need a tripod for a big lens also?


Many Thanks

Steve

[stevebb]

Like these that ive seen?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/500mm-1000mm-T...QQcmdZViewItem

[T0MAT01]

Originally Posted by stevebb

Like these that ive seen?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/500mm-1000mm-T...QQcmdZViewItem

f/8 means that it is unlikely to autofocus, so TBH I'd save the money and spend it on something like the SIGMA 70-300mm.

[lmccauley]

Originally Posted by T0MAT01

f/8 means that it is unlikely to autofocus, so TBH I'd save the money and spend it on something like the SIGMA 70-300mm.

That's the lens I used to take this shot tonight:

I had to wait for it to be partially obscured by cloud in order to capture it and the clouds with one exposure. I shot at f/8.0 for 1/4 sec at ISO200. Shooting without the cloud cover would have been 1/200 sec.

Cheers,
Liam

[barongreenback]

Can I just advise you to cancel your order for the second book and third books on your last - Langford's Basic and Advanced Photography. It's really a technical book make for students - the other books on your list are better. It's rather old fashioned, black and white and terribly dull. There's also a large emphasis on film and filters, which don't really apply to digital in the same way.

[Peakoverload]

If you want to photograph the moon so that it fills the whole frame then........you can't. Well you can but it means buying a powerful telescope and an attachment to allow you to use your camera with it.

Even the lens you have seen on Ebay (do NOT buy this by the way) won't get you anywhere near close enough so the best solution is to buy a good zoom lens and just crop the photo in Photoshop. On something as faaaaaarrrrr away as the moon the difference between 300mm and 500mm is minimal so a lens with the focal length of 70-300 will be fine and be very useful for other subjects like wildlife etc. If your budget will stretch to it then the Sigma 50-500 is a very nice lens to have but it is heavy (and therefore a bit harder to handle) and a lot more expensive than a 70-300.

[stevebb]

Originally Posted by barongreenback

Can I just advise you to cancel your order for the second book and third books on your last - Langford's Basic and Advanced Photography. It's really a technical book make for students - the other books on your list are better. It's rather old fashioned, black and white and terribly dull. There's also a large emphasis on film and filters, which don't really apply to digital in the same way.

they were delivered yesterday - TBH I'd like to know the technical stuff about lenses etc so maybe could be bedtime reading. abit like buying a MSDOS book if you want to learn about Vista maybe

[stevebb]

Originally Posted by Peakoverload

If you want to photograph the moon so that it fills the whole frame then........you can't. Well you can but it means buying a powerful telescope and an attachment to allow you to use your camera with it.

Even the lens you have seen on Ebay (do NOT buy this by the way) won't get you anywhere near close enough so the best solution is to buy a good zoom lens and just crop the photo in Photoshop. On something as faaaaaarrrrr away as the moon the difference between 300mm and 500mm is minimal so a lens with the focal length of 70-300 will be fine and be very useful for other subjects like wildlife etc. If your budget will stretch to it then the Sigma 50-500 is a very nice lens to have but it is heavy (and therefore a bit harder to handle) and a lot more expensive than a 70-300.

Thanks for that i will look at prices of that lens now.

[stevebb]

so is it this one:

Sigma Lens 70-300 f4-5.6 DG Macro

or this:

Sigma Lens 70-300mm f4-5.6 APO DG Macro

Thanks

[hutters]

Here's one I did earlier...taken on my 350D with my Sigma 70-300 at full stretch and then cropped. Not as sharp as I would have liked, but didn't have much time to play around with the settings.

a couple more here

[stevebb]

Originally Posted by hutters

Here's one I did earlier...taken on my 350D with my Sigma 70-300 at full stretch and then cropped. Not as sharp as I would have liked, but didn't have much time to play around with the settings.

a couple more here

Thats fantastic mate - just what im after -

[stevebb]

i found that APO means:

APO (APO Lens)
In order to attain the highest quality images, the APO lens has been made using special low-dispersion (SLD) glass and is designed to minimize color aberration.

Is this worth the extra £70 over the non APO Sigman Lens?

Also would any of ther following be suitable:

Canon Lens 75-300 f4-5.6 III USM £149
Canon Lens 75-300 f4-5.6 III £115

Thanks

Steve

[jomike]

I have the Sigma 70-300 APO on my Nikon D50. Is it worth the extra ££ ? I think so. Havn't seen any CA with it yet.
I think the Canon lenses will be the equivalent of the non APO Sigma, but I may be wrong.
No moon shots yet, but you can also do this with the Sigma:

[Soundgeek]

I was able to get this pic with my 350d and 75-300 f4-5.6 III.



1/250 second
f10
ISO 100
@300mm

A lot of people knock the 75-300 lens, and there are better lenses, but when stopped down to f7.1 you can get rather pleasing results.

[stevebb]

[QUOTE=jomike;4051870]I have the Sigma 70-300 APO on my Nikon D50. Is it worth the extra ££ ? I think so. Havn't seen any CA with it yet.
I think the Canon lenses will be the equivalent of the non APO Sigma, but I may be wrong.
No moon shots yet, but you can also do this with the Sigma:

How far away were you from the subject - i like this pic !

[jomike]

I was about 1.5m from the subject, in Macro mode. This is not a true macro lens as it gets a 1:2 magnification, but very handy. I can't wait for summer to try this lens out on some better looking beasties.

Regards, Mike

[stevebb]

ive got the canon 60mm macro coming tomorrow and the sigma 70-300 + tripod.

the wife's gonna kill me

[Puli]

Heres My attempt at one from a couple of nights ago using my 70 to 300mm lens. Very please with the result to.......

Paul

[Fozzybear]

I use a Nikon D50 and Nikkor 300mm f/4 prime lens mounted on a monopod for my moon photos. I shoot in manual exposure mode and use RAW files for improved image quality.

[chrisw]

I'd just fired off my first shot of the moon last night when the battery went! D'oh!

Anyone recommend some cheapish decent batteries for a Canon 400d. Sorry to hijack the thread a little.

[M-C-P-M]

Originally Posted by Soundgeek

I was able to get this pic with my 350d and 75-300 f4-5.6 III.

Attachment 44813

1/250 second
f10
ISO 100
@300mm

A lot of people knock the 75-300 lens, and there are better lenses, but when stopped down to f7.1 you can get rather pleasing results.

where abouts below the equator did you take this?

[Soundgeek]

Originally Posted by the_caretaker

where abouts below the equator did you take this?

Someone has a sharp eye for detail, or a keen interest in astronomy!
The photo was taken from Sydney, Australia, my home.

When viewed with the human eye from down under, the moon appears to have a face due to the crater formation on the part of the moon's surface we see

[denno75uk]

Originally Posted by Soundgeek

I was able to get this pic with my 350d and 75-300 f4-5.6 III.

Attachment 44813

1/250 second
f10
ISO 100
@300mm

A lot of people knock the 75-300 lens, and there are better lenses, but when stopped down to f7.1 you can get rather pleasing results.

Very impressed with that shot mate. I got this lens a couple of years back and to be honest have never been too happy with it. Be it handheld for wildlife at around 15-20m or on a tripod shooting the Pyrenees at 60 miles it never seemed sharp enough. Under what other conditions have you used it? If stopping down is the answer I guess that increases the need for a tripod? Did you use the timer or a remote?
I was thinking of flogging mine but I've just got a 30D so may hang on to it and experiment a bit.

[Soundgeek]

Originally Posted by denno75uk

Very impressed with that shot mate. I got this lens a couple of years back and to be honest have never been too happy with it. Be it handheld for wildlife at around 15-20m or on a tripod shooting the Pyrenees at 60 miles it never seemed sharp enough. Under what other conditions have you used it? If stopping down is the answer I guess that increases the need for a tripod? Did you use the timer or a remote?
I was thinking of flogging mine but I've just got a 30D so may hang on to it and experiment a bit.

Hey there,

I myself eventually would like to get a 70-200f4L IS due to its constant f4 aperture, and snap sharp results. However finances just never allow me to get these things, so I use and exploit what I have, as much as I can!

I don't know if it is just the copy of the lens I own or what, but i have always found it quite usable. If stopped down to f7.1/f8 the lens does start to show that it can produce some rather acceptable results, however you will need a good sturdy tripod when stopped down.

I used a tripod and the timer to take the moon shot and I would suggest if you want to keep and make the most out of the lens, to use a shutter release cable with your 30d tripod mounted.

[denno75uk]

I think I'll give the 75-300 another go shooting the moon next clear night we have.
To be honest I did get it thinking I'd be able to use it for more hanheld work. Beauty of having gone digi now, I can just go out and try it see if I can get a bit more out of it. If I'm still not happy I'll get rid.
Ta

[senu]

Originally Posted by denno75uk

Very impressed with that shot mate. I got this lens a couple of years back and to be honest have never been too happy with it.
I was thinking of flogging mine but I've just got a 30D so may hang on to it and experiment a bit.

NO dont
the 70- 300 IS USM may be £350 odd but it looks that much better on your 30D ( and is much sharper) ... As for IS you'll absolutely love it!

[cruncher75]

Heres one i took wit a fuji s5600 ive tryed getting a better one with my 350D but just cant seem to do it
[IMG]

[/IMG]

[denno75uk]

Originally Posted by senu

NO dont
the 70- 300 IS USM may be £350 odd but it looks that much better on your 30D ( and is much sharper) ... As for IS you'll absolutely love it!

I find it difficult to believe the addition of IS makes it that much better than my bog standard one. I've had it on the tripod and it's still less than I was expecting (however naieve). Is it really worth the money to get the same lens with IS?
Anyway, asI said I'll follow the advice of using it around f7-8 and see what I can come up with. Rest assured if it's any good I'll post it.
Might be a clear night tonight and a half moon for interesting shadows.
Hmmmm!

[senu]

Horses for courses. Obviously, on a tripod IS makes little or no difference. but handheld , there are really different.

I have the Sigma 70-300DG APO and handheld, it a struggles at the long end, but it shines on a tripod. IS will make you take Zoom images with more spotaneity where is is not practicable or possible to use a tripod and light levels are low

I concur though that if you would use a tripod most of the time, keep what you have by all means