Comments on: The Wedding Lens Song http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml You tell that other boy, not to touch the woodwork... Sat, 06 Sep 2008 05:36:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7-hemorrhage hourly 1 By: The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Two shoes http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-523003 The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Two shoes Fri, 08 Aug 2008 16:15:20 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-523003 [...] Women and shoes. Honestly, I’ll never understand. [...] [...] Women and shoes. Honestly, I’ll never understand. [...]

]]> By: The Woodwork » Blog Archive » The boxes we are http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-487195 The Woodwork » Blog Archive » The boxes we are Thu, 03 Jul 2008 00:37:14 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-487195 [...] her chin—not there! So this is what she looks like? Nice eyes. Oh, I think she’s done talking about shoes. I better say something. “…because normally you’re really [...] [...] her chin—not there! So this is what she looks like? Nice eyes. Oh, I think she’s done talking about shoes. I better say something. “…because normally you’re really [...]

]]> By: j0k3r http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-445841 j0k3r Sun, 25 May 2008 19:11:02 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-445841 Oh... I was trying to choose between 12-24 and 17-40, now I'm thinking about 16-50.. Oh… I was trying to choose between 12-24 and 17-40, now I’m thinking about 16-50..

]]> By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-401108 tychay Mon, 07 Apr 2008 19:45:54 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-401108 @Jeremy Johstone: Already the 24-70mm f/2.8 is quite bulky. The extra distance on the low end is quite difficult. Imagine the differences between a 17-35 f/2.8 and the 24-70, then imagine combining the two. @Jeremy Johstone: Already the 24-70mm f/2.8 is quite bulky. The extra distance on the low end is quite difficult. Imagine the differences between a 17-35 f/2.8 and the 24-70, then imagine combining the two.

]]> By: Jeremy Johnstone http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-400603 Jeremy Johnstone Sun, 06 Apr 2008 20:12:51 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-400603 "I’d love to see a constant f/2.8 aperture 16-80mm, but it isn’t going to happen due to physical limitations." What physical limitations would this entail? One would think it would be possible since there are numerous lenses "close" to this focal range at that aperture. “I’d love to see a constant f/2.8 aperture 16-80mm, but it isn’t going to happen due to physical limitations.”

What physical limitations would this entail? One would think it would be possible since there are numerous lenses “close” to this focal range at that aperture.

]]> By: The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Faking long exposure http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-398011 The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Faking long exposure Thu, 03 Apr 2008 09:49:56 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-398011 [...] background separation, portrait lenses are considered “portrait” because the relative depth between something like [...] [...] background separation, portrait lenses are considered “portrait” because the relative depth between something like [...]

]]> By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-384328 tychay Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:35:06 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-384328 A little update since I wrote this article: I found that the lens developed some play on my front element. I don’t think this has affected the focusing. Also the lens vignettes at ALL focal distances on my FX (“full frame”) camera. OTOH, this is a sign of a good telecentric design. <a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=326" rel="nofollow">Fred Miranda user reviews</a> A little update since I wrote this article: I found that the lens developed some play on my front element. I don’t think this has affected the focusing. Also the lens vignettes at ALL focal distances on my FX (“full frame”) camera. OTOH, this is a sign of a good telecentric design.

Fred Miranda user reviews

]]> By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-384321 tychay Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:21:09 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-384321 To <a href="http://terrychay.com/blog/article/home-alone.shtml" rel="nofollow">A comment here</a>. @Scott This is my review, I'm not a lens tester, just a photographer. The Tokina 165 is a APS-C specific lens. If you are a Canon photographer, then I highly recommend the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/425812-USA/Canon_1242B002_EF_S_17_55mm_f_2_8_IS.html/BI/1080/KBID/1358" rel="nofollow">Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS</a> over this lens, despite its price. First, because it has image stabilization and almost all photos taken with this sort of lens will be handheld. Second, because Canon specifically designs for the EF-S mount (there is extra register distance they can exploit) which means they can push a little better optical value than a third party system which has to design for the most generous specification. Not that the Tokina is bad. I sort of like it. It has excellent corner contrast (sharpness), very little distortion. Apparently it has bad CA (<a href="http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Nikkor%20/%20Nikon%20Lens%20Tests/46-nikon--nikkor-aps-c/274-tokina-af-16-50mm-f28-at-x-pro-dx-nikon-lens-test-report--review" rel="nofollow">The Photozone review link moved here</a>). If you have a full frame, then this is not the lens in this class. The lens would be Canon <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/264304-USA/Canon_8014A002_Zoom_Wide_Angle_Telephoto_EF.html/BI/1080/KBID/1358" rel="nofollow">24-70 L</a>, by all reports an excellent lens. The lens you have would be a great stop gap until a 5D or 1Ds purchase. On those cameras it becomes a documentary lens in the news/street photography style. I'm really sorry to hear that it died, I don't think I've ever shot that lens, but I have shot the baby L version (17-40 f/4L) and it’s a wonderful lens. :-( BTW, a caveat here in my article and this comment that I realized yesterday talking to someone. Which is when I say “wedding lens” or “documentary lens” I mean this in an ideal or suggested usage sense, not as an absolute. I tend to think the best photos come when doing things different from “the usual” especially if that means using a lens different from its suggested use. Even today we see wider and wider angles in news photographs (remember when 35mm was considered wide angle? Now we have portraits done with 21mm lenses!) and we’re starting to see a lot of wedding photography follow this. This probably magnifies if you are a two body wedding photographer. I guess what I’m saying is it’s about finding your style, whatever that is, so take my suggestions with a large grain of salt. I hope this helps. To A comment here.

@Scott This is my review, I’m not a lens tester, just a photographer. The Tokina 165 is a APS-C specific lens. If you are a Canon photographer, then I highly recommend the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS over this lens, despite its price. First, because it has image stabilization and almost all photos taken with this sort of lens will be handheld. Second, because Canon specifically designs for the EF-S mount (there is extra register distance they can exploit) which means they can push a little better optical value than a third party system which has to design for the most generous specification.

Not that the Tokina is bad. I sort of like it. It has excellent corner contrast (sharpness), very little distortion. Apparently it has bad CA (The Photozone review link moved here).

If you have a full frame, then this is not the lens in this class. The lens would be Canon 24-70 L, by all reports an excellent lens.

The lens you have would be a great stop gap until a 5D or 1Ds purchase. On those cameras it becomes a documentary lens in the news/street photography style. I’m really sorry to hear that it died, I don’t think I’ve ever shot that lens, but I have shot the baby L version (17-40 f/4L) and it’s a wonderful lens. :-(

BTW, a caveat here in my article and this comment that I realized yesterday talking to someone. Which is when I say “wedding lens” or “documentary lens” I mean this in an ideal or suggested usage sense, not as an absolute. I tend to think the best photos come when doing things different from “the usual” especially if that means using a lens different from its suggested use. Even today we see wider and wider angles in news photographs (remember when 35mm was considered wide angle? Now we have portraits done with 21mm lenses!) and we’re starting to see a lot of wedding photography follow this. This probably magnifies if you are a two body wedding photographer. I guess what I’m saying is it’s about finding your style, whatever that is, so take my suggestions with a large grain of salt.

I hope this helps.

]]> By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-144806 tychay Mon, 13 Aug 2007 23:41:39 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-144806 @Craig: It's now my kit lens. I like the slightly extra wide. There is some play on the front group that I think if I have time, I'll send it to Tokina to get looked at. The smart shift feature is loosy goosy because I have a habit of playing with anything that clicks when I’m nervous, but since it is so large, I almost never have it out of position (wish I could say the same about the AF switch on my D200). I'll be posting more photos taken with it to my Flickr account. Also, if you friend me you can always view the originals. @Craig: It’s now my kit lens. I like the slightly extra wide. There is some play on the front group that I think if I have time, I’ll send it to Tokina to get looked at. The smart shift feature is loosy goosy because I have a habit of playing with anything that clicks when I’m nervous, but since it is so large, I almost never have it out of position (wish I could say the same about the AF switch on my D200).

I’ll be posting more photos taken with it to my Flickr account. Also, if you friend me you can always view the originals.

]]> By: Craig http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-144745 Craig Mon, 13 Aug 2007 20:29:46 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/the-wedding-lens-song.shtml#comment-144745 What do you think now after having the lens for a while. I've been waiting for this lens and I'm worried about 1 of the reviews that I read. What do you think now after having the lens for a while. I’ve been waiting for this lens and I’m worried about 1 of the reviews that I read.

]]>