Comments on: What’s in Patti’s camera bag?

By: ccsccs7

ccsccs7 — Sat, 09 Jul 2011 14:34:22 +0000

Thanks for mentioning a lens rental company that’s local to me. There are lenses I’d like to try, but I’m not too keen on all of that shipping. :-)

By: stopshootingauto

stopshootingauto — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 19:27:53 +0000

A UV filter is somewhat useful for protecting the front of your lens if you drop it. A lens hood is too, though, and I think it’s more optically valuable. I don’t find a whole lot of use for a UV filter in my shooting.

The only filter I use is a circular polarizer, and that only occasionally.

By: Chad B

Chad B — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 18:27:15 +0000

Patti,
Do you have any advice in regards to filters? Someone told me a UV filter is a must. Thak you for sharing all your knowledge!!

By: stopshootingauto

stopshootingauto — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 08:17:49 +0000

Slower lenses generally do have some advantages. They’re smaller, lighter, and less expensive than fast lenses. Here’s a page that compares the Canon 70-200 f/4L, the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L, and the IS versions of both lenses.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-4.0-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

The price comparison is dramatic. The 70-200 f/4L is about $600, while the f/2.8 is $1200. The IS versions of the two lenses come in at $1100 and $1700.

By: TJ

TJ — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 03:28:55 +0000

I saw an ad on craigslist for a 300mm F2.8 lens today. And I drooled. I have not begun to get to the end of my current equipment. But I lust for faster lenses. When I can’t get a shot that I want, I often think, if my lens was just faster… :) Today I was wondering is there ever a reason to want a slow lens? What do slow lenses do that fast ones won’t?

By: Michael Wishvashi

Michael Wishvashi — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:38:53 +0000

Thanks a lot!

This really helped me get a clear view of photography. I purchased my first dSLR, a Sony Alpha 200 and your class is really excellent.