Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Tuesday September 2, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > Member's Car Gallery

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-24-2013, 04:06 PM   #2326
XERO287
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 253541
Join Date: Jul 2010
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Silver Spring, MD
Vehicle:
2011 WRX 5DR Premium
OBP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vision.dynamix View Post
17-40 or 16-35 are both good.
I saw those, but it just makes me sad that there are no EF options for the 10-22 that I have.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
XERO287 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 04:07 PM   #2327
INKMAN
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 267837
Join Date: Dec 2010
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NY
Vehicle:
2014 Focus ST (ST3)
Tuxedo Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vision.dynamix View Post
17-40 or 16-35 are both good.
I was looking at the 17-40. I figured if I have that along with my 70-200 I would be pretty covered.
INKMAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 04:11 PM   #2328
vision.dynamix
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 139955
Join Date: Feb 2007
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Boston
Vehicle:
2015 Subaru STI
Black, like my soul.

OMGHi2U

Quote:
Originally Posted by XERO287 View Post
I saw those, but it just makes me sad that there are no EF options for the 10-22 that I have.


The 16-35 on FF is focal length equivalent of the 10-22 on crop.
vision.dynamix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 04:16 PM   #2329
vision.dynamix
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 139955
Join Date: Feb 2007
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Boston
Vehicle:
2015 Subaru STI
Black, like my soul.

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by INKMAN View Post
I was looking at the 17-40. I figured if I have that along with my 70-200 I would be pretty covered.
I had the 16-35 and I sold it for the 17-40. The 1mm on the wide end is definitely noticeable and the full stop of light is definitely missed, but when I shoot that wide I'm usually stopped down anyway. The 17-40 is much lighter (good for rigging) and much cheaper.

There's some sharpness differences at the corners but Its a sacrifice.
vision.dynamix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 04:26 PM   #2330
INKMAN
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 267837
Join Date: Dec 2010
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NY
Vehicle:
2014 Focus ST (ST3)
Tuxedo Black

Default

The 17-40 should be a good lens for rolling shots too right?
INKMAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 04:31 PM   #2331
Southtown57
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330761
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charleston, SC
Vehicle:
13' STi
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vision.dynamix View Post
I had the 16-35 and I sold it for the 17-40. The 1mm on the wide end is definitely noticeable and the full stop of light is definitely missed, but when I shoot that wide I'm usually stopped down anyway. The 17-40 is much lighter (good for rigging) and much cheaper.

There's some sharpness differences at the corners but Its a sacrifice.
Did you have the original 16-35 or the newer version ii?
Southtown57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 04:31 PM   #2332
Southtown57
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330761
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charleston, SC
Vehicle:
13' STi
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by INKMAN View Post
The 17-40 should be a good lens for rolling shots too right?
Yuup.
Southtown57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 04:32 PM   #2333
rsutton1223
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 280744
Join Date: Apr 2011
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Vehicle:
2009 CTSV 6MT 537whp
Black Raven

Default

I have the 17-40mm from Canon. It's a great lens. It is the lens I use for all of my rig shots...and other applications.
rsutton1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 04:34 PM   #2334
INKMAN
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 267837
Join Date: Dec 2010
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NY
Vehicle:
2014 Focus ST (ST3)
Tuxedo Black

Default

Good to know. That will be my next lens after my zoom. I wish I could afford the 2.8 versions, they are just super pricey!
INKMAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 04:38 PM   #2335
vision.dynamix
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 139955
Join Date: Feb 2007
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Boston
Vehicle:
2015 Subaru STI
Black, like my soul.

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by INKMAN View Post
The 17-40 should be a good lens for rolling shots too right?
yeah I use it for my chasecar and rigshot rolling shots.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Southtown57 View Post
Did you have the original 16-35 or the newer version ii?
MkII

An advantage of the 17-40 is the 77mm filter thread vs the 82mm of the 16-35
vision.dynamix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 04:42 PM   #2336
Southtown57
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330761
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charleston, SC
Vehicle:
13' STi
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vision.dynamix View Post
yeah I use it for my chasecar and rigshot rolling shots.


MkII

An advantage of the 17-40 is the 77mm filter thread vs the 82mm of the 16-35
Yeah I've been trying decide between the two for my next L. I just really dislike not having 2.8.
Southtown57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 04:46 PM   #2337
XERO287
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 253541
Join Date: Jul 2010
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Silver Spring, MD
Vehicle:
2011 WRX 5DR Premium
OBP

Default

Oh right. The whole full frame thing messes with my head
XERO287 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 04:52 PM   #2338
Chuckls
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 280696
Join Date: Apr 2011
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Kentuckiana
Vehicle:
2005 WRX
OBP

Default

While spotting my own car today, felt like experimenting with HDR

Exposure 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 35 mm


Finished_Tonemap by ђὗƈќłṩ, on Flickr
Chuckls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 05:03 PM   #2339
INKMAN
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 267837
Join Date: Dec 2010
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NY
Vehicle:
2014 Focus ST (ST3)
Tuxedo Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckls View Post
While spotting my own car today, felt like experimenting with HDR
Uh oh....
INKMAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 05:14 PM   #2340
rsutton1223
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 280744
Join Date: Apr 2011
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Vehicle:
2009 CTSV 6MT 537whp
Black Raven

Default

I do not know anyone who shoots a super wide at 2.8. The application of that lens (unless you are shooting an entire crowd at concerts) is generally more closed. F4 is plenty for a super wide.
rsutton1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 05:17 PM   #2341
vision.dynamix
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 139955
Join Date: Feb 2007
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Boston
Vehicle:
2015 Subaru STI
Black, like my soul.

Default

F2.8 is a clear advantage over f/4 for indoor PJ style work.
vision.dynamix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 05:42 PM   #2342
Southtown57
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330761
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charleston, SC
Vehicle:
13' STi
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rsutton1223 View Post
I do not know anyone who shoots a super wide at 2.8. The application of that lens (unless you are shooting an entire crowd at concerts) is generally more closed. F4 is plenty for a super wide.
Night cityscape shots.
Southtown57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 05:48 PM   #2343
rsutton1223
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 280744
Join Date: Apr 2011
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Vehicle:
2009 CTSV 6MT 537whp
Black Raven

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Southtown57 View Post

Night cityscape shots.
I hope you aren't shooting those at 2.8.
rsutton1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 05:57 PM   #2344
vision.dynamix
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 139955
Join Date: Feb 2007
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Boston
Vehicle:
2015 Subaru STI
Black, like my soul.

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Southtown57 View Post
Night cityscape shots.
Wouldnt you stop down for those? Since you'd be shooting those on a tripod anyway?
vision.dynamix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 06:31 PM   #2345
XERO287
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 253541
Join Date: Jul 2010
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Silver Spring, MD
Vehicle:
2011 WRX 5DR Premium
OBP

Default

My thoughts exactly
XERO287 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:15 PM   #2346
Jubert69
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 167739
Join Date: Dec 2007
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: CT
Vehicle:
04 WRX
ej207 spec C 18g

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rsutton1223 View Post
I do not know anyone who shoots a super wide at 2.8. The application of that lens (unless you are shooting an entire crowd at concerts) is generally more closed. F4 is plenty for a super wide.
Stars. Like Milky way shots.
Jubert69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:34 PM   #2347
Southtown57
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330761
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charleston, SC
Vehicle:
13' STi
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rsutton1223 View Post
I hope you aren't shooting those at 2.8.
Yeah on a tripod. But I hand hold a lot of shots at night in a fairly lit city. Just gotta bump the iso up. Which is one main reason I want full frame. Better iso capabilities.
Southtown57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:35 PM   #2348
Southtown57
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330761
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charleston, SC
Vehicle:
13' STi
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubert69 View Post
Stars. Like Milky way shots.
This too.
Southtown57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 06:08 AM   #2349
rsutton1223
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 280744
Join Date: Apr 2011
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Vehicle:
2009 CTSV 6MT 537whp
Black Raven

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Southtown57 View Post
Yeah on a tripod. But I hand hold a lot of shots at night in a fairly lit city. Just gotta bump the iso up. Which is one main reason I want full frame. Better iso capabilities.
That shouldn't be the reason for wanting a full frame honestly. The 7D and D7000 have excellent ISO capabilities. If you are wanting more control over depth of field, a wider field of view or other aspects that actually set a FF apart from cropped? Then ok. In all reality, they both have their place for different reasons. I personally like having a cropped body at the track or for sports as you get the extra throw without having to lug around bigger than a 70-200mm for most cases. ISO is only one aspect of the shot. If the others aren't setup correctly...you could have all of the ISO capabilities in the world and still have grainy shots.

Shot a f8 ISO 400 full res here ---> http://500px.com/photo/12083391


f16 ISO 800 full res here ---> http://500px.com/photo/14828305

Last edited by rsutton1223; 01-25-2013 at 06:47 AM.
rsutton1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 12:54 PM   #2350
BrendanTheGreat408
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 271207
Join Date: Jan 2011
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Morgan Hill, CA
Vehicle:
2011 WRX
SWP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rsutton1223 View Post
That shouldn't be the reason for wanting a full frame honestly. The 7D and D7000 have excellent ISO capabilities. If you are wanting more control over depth of field, a wider field of view or other aspects that actually set a FF apart from cropped? Then ok. In all reality, they both have their place for different reasons. I personally like having a cropped body at the track or for sports as you get the extra throw without having to lug around bigger than a 70-200mm for most cases. ISO is only one aspect of the shot. If the others aren't setup correctly...you could have all of the ISO capabilities in the world and still have grainy shots.

Shot a f8 ISO 400 full res here ---> http://500px.com/photo/12083391


f16 ISO 800 full res here ---> http://500px.com/photo/14828305
So amazing
BrendanTheGreat408 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.