Pregled posta

Marketing

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM UD Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras

Designed to deliver ultra-high quality images along with lightning fast operation, the new Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS USM telephoto zoom lens brings a favorite zoom range to the celebrated Canon L-series of lenses. It features two Ultra Low Dispersion (UD) elements for improved image quality and reduced chromatic aberration, incorporates a floating focusing mechanism for sharpness from close up to infinity, plus an IS system that increases usability by approximately four stops. The EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS USM features a function that prevents erroneous operation when the lens is mounted on a tripod or monopod. Gleaming white, with an optional removable tripod collar, dust and water resistant construction, and a newly developed Fluorine coating that keeps soiling, smears and fingerprints to a minimum, its phenomenal performance and flexibility is assured. For portraiture or to bring what's far away up close, this addition to the L-series is guaranteed to perform.

Because I was bored and nothing worth to capture was around, I started to compare two lenses. Since a while I allready had the feeling, that the pictures, which I did with the Canon standard lens looked a bit poor in contrast. So I grabbed my oldest standard lens, an almost 50 years old yashinon 55mm f/1.8 from a Yashica J-5, bought in 1962, to compare it with the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS. The sun was shining in an angle of 60° onto the garage wall, so I mounted my EOS 450D onto a tripod and positioned it 90° to the wall. In mode AV I made exposures of the bricks each in f/8.0, f/11 and f/16 with the canon lens and also the Yashinon, mounted on a proper adapter to fit the Canon bayonet mount. From this exposures (4272 x 2848) I made crops in the size 400 x 300 px from the upper left corner (position 0,0), just to be outside of the better range of the lens for my comparison. The shots where taken in JPG-mode and not treatet with any software!
In the result above you can see clearly, that the almost 50 year old Yashinon with fixed focus shows much better results as the Canon standard zoom lens. In the peripheral area the Yashinon is much sharper and shows better contrast as the Canon lens. Also the quality stays equal throughout the aperture range, while the Canon lens lacks contrast with closer aperture. I already heared, that zoom lenses have less quality as fixed focus lenses, but I didn't expect such a notable discrepancy, particularly with almost 50 years of development inbetween. Therefore I decided to make some more tests with my other lenses, I'm quite curious of the results, comparing old and new zoom lenses.

50 Jahre Unterschied: Da mir langweilig war und keine Objekte zum Fotografieren zu sehen waren, habe ich einen Vergleich zwischen 2 Objektiven versucht. Ich hatte schon langer das Gefuhl, das Fotos, die ich mit dem Originalobjektiv machte, etwas flau erscheinen. Ich habe also mein altestes Standardobjektiv herausgesucht, ein - in 1962 zusammen mit einer Yashica J-5 erworbenes - Auto Yashinon 55mm f/1.8, um es mit dem Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS zu vergleichen. Da gerade die Sonne schien, schraubte ich meine EOS 450D auf meine Wechselplatte und fixierte sie auf meinem Stativ in 90° zur Garagenmauer, auf welche die Sonne in einem Winkel von 60° von rechts schien. Ich machte dann jeweils eine Aufnahme im Modus AV von dieser Mauer bei Blende 8, 11 und 16, einmal mit dem Canon und einmal mit dem alten Yashinon und einem passenden Objektivadapter. Aus diesen Aufnahmen (4272 x 2848) wahlte ich einen Ausschnitt von 400 x 300 Pixel am linken oberern Rand (Position 0,0), um nicht im qualitativ hochwertigen Bereich zu vergleichen. Die Aufnahmen wurden im JPG-Modus gemacht und weiter nicht bearbeitet!
Im Ergebnis oben ist deutlich zu erkennen, das das fast 50 Jahre alte Yashinon mit fester Brennweite deutlich besser zeichnet als das Canon Standard-Zoom. Es ist im Randbereich nicht nur deutlich scharfer, sondern zeigt auch einen besseren Kontrast! Wahrend beim Yashinon bei den unterschiedlichen Blenden ein annahernd gleichbleibendes Bild zu sehen ist, nimmt beim Canon der Kontrast mit kleinerer Blende ab. Das Festbrennweiten besser zeichnen als Zoomobjektive, war mir bewu?t, aber einen so deutlich erkennbaren Unterschied habe ich nicht erwartet, zumal fast 50 Jahre Entwicklung zwischen beiden Objektiven liegen. Deswegen habe ich mir vorgenommen, auf gleiche Weise auch meine anderen Objektive zu untersuchen. Gespannt bin ich auf den Vergleich alter und neuer Zoomobjektive.

This is a speedlight of the most basic variety. It has a relatively small 4 stop range of light (down to 1/16th) versus the latest from Canon or Nikon, and is sizably bulkier too, but at $85 brand new, I don't think there's a better speedlight out there for people to begin with. It's resale value is great too, there's really almost no cost to the light itself. It also has the most important feature: Manual.
If you're thinking of getting into strobist lighting, regardless of whether you're a billionaire or a college student, I think it is absolutely essential to shoot both your camera and your lights in manual. There's no better way to understand what your camera is doing, and what your lights are doing than shooting in manual mode. I know there are much more sophisticated ways of setting up, and much can be done through the camera's and lights' brains, but this doesn't make you any better as a photographer. It may take a bit to get used to, but once you do, you'll have a much better understand of what you need to do to get the photos you want, and will have much better control over your lights.

I've included notes on the picture, but this is the basic anatomy of a setup.
1. Flash unit: On this particular unit, there are no screens and minimal buttons. A dial for setting the aperture and power, or a second dial on the front to manually set the power.
2. Flash Cord: In order to trigger this flash, you'll want to have a transmitter of some sort. I use Pocketwizards, which cost about twice as much as the flash does, but you can get along just fine with RF-602's, which are about $50 for a set of 3 (and also work really well, I may publish a test for those soon...maybe after I take them to Thailand?). I bought this cord for about $15 on flashzebra.com
3. Trigger: My beloved pocketwizard. At $170, it's not any kind of a deal, until you start pushing the limits of what triggers can do, and it's the only one still standing. Triggers range from about $20-200
4. Hot Shoe Mount: This is needed to hold the flash to the umbrella adapter (5)...it's basically just a hotshoe like the one that's probably on your camera, but removable and has a stud hole in the bottom. ($15-20)
5. Umbrella adapter: Holds umbrellas (shocker, I know), but also articulates so you can change the angle of the flash, and is a connector from the flash to the light stand. Mine's a manfrotto and was about $30. I'd avoid going any cheaper if you actually want to use any sort of modifier. The nice thing about the manfrotto one is that it comes with all the necessary (for me) studs too.
6. Lightstand: Huge range of sizes and costs, but the one I have here is an Alien Bees 10' lightstand and I believe it was about $35.

A new, one light setup like this could range from:
"inexpensive": $85 flash + $15 hotshoe + $25 umbrella adapter + $30 trigger and cord + $15 B-sale stand : $170 (the price of a pocketwizard),

or "expensive" : $500 flash (newest Nikon or Canon) + $30 hotshoe + $60 umbrella adapter + $200 trigger and cord + $100 stand = ouch.

Generally, the price reflects quality, but most of us can create great images without the top-of-the-line gear. I have a lot to say on the subject, but I'd like to organize it and get it all in one place (Note to self: get your damn website together!!?!), but this is all for a caption of a flickr photo haha.

Thanks for looking, sorry this took so long Steph!