Qantas737 From Australia, joined Jul 2000, 738 posts, RR: 4 Posted (12 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1439 times:
Well guys, I saved some extra cash and bought a new Canon 75-300mm zoom lense for $459. Before now I have been using the standard 38-76mm lense that came standard with the Canon EOS 5000 camera. The old lense has served me well but I have been limited to mainly General Aviation Photography. That is set to change tomorrow morning when i pick my new lense up and try some departure photos for the first time. I cant wait and will be hoping to get more uploads accepted with the extra zoom I will now be able to achieve.
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (12 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1391 times:
I've used that lens. It's a pretty good lens for the money, but make sure you stop down the aperture to f/8.0, or 6.7 in a pinch, because it will have vignetting. Vignetting is when the outer corners of the picture are underexposed relative to the rest of the picture. Here's a couple of example shots with that lens and at wide open aperture (I didn't know better at the time).
These were shot using the Canon's "Sports" setting (the one with the drawing of a runner), which selects the widest possible aperture for the highest speed. I strongly recomend that you don't use that. Instead, select "Av" mode and set the aperture to 8.0 and let the speed ride automatically. You'll have to keep an eye on the speed to make sure it doesn't go too low. If the simply isn't enough light at f/8.0, you can try f/6.7, but you may start having vignetting problems, especially at long focal lengths.
Qantas737 From Australia, joined Jul 2000, 738 posts, RR: 4 Reply 2, posted (12 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1381 times:
Thank you very much for the tips. I have been using the sports setting for arrival shots and didnt have much of a problem with the 38-76mm lense. But i guess I will have to wait and see when i pick up the new lense tomorrow. Once again thanks for the tips
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (12 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1382 times:
Vignetting shouldn't be as obvious on a short lens, generally.
Experiment a little. Put the camera on a tripod and shoot a full roll at the exact same subject (and keep note of which frame number had which setting for when you want to compare.)
By the way, this is not very useful if you shoot prints, as the development process will "correct" for errors. But if if you scan the negatives or shoot slides, the difference should come out.
I recommend you do this with very fine film, so that you can tell the subtle differences. K25, Provia 100, Or Velvia.
Try this. At the longest focal length, (300mm on yours), shoot the following (let the speed adjust automatically):
- a shot each at f/5.6 (largest setting), f/8.0 and f/16
- set exposure compensation to +1.0, and shoot 3 pics at f/5.6, 8.0 and 16.
- set exposure compensation to -1.0, and repeat.
So you'll have 9 reference shots at 300mm
Then repeat the same process at 28mm, 50mm, and 150mm. That should make you 36 shots in all.
When you compare, you may find the following:
- Vignetting is more apparent when slightly underexposed.
- you f/8 shots should be clearer, with more detail than other apertures.
I'll let you make your own discoveries after that. There are plenty to see.
The important thing here is that you will learn about the impact of different apertures and focal lengths, as well as the impact of under/over exposing. (underexposing in the right conditions, for example, can make the sky very dark. that's what I did for the 737 shot I posted above).