What will be Kwun's newest camera?

Discussion in 'Badminton Photography' started by Cheung, Sep 4, 2009.

?

What will be Kwun's newest camera for badminton photography?

  1. Canon 7D

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Nikon D700

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Micro 4/3rds camera

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. None of the above but it will be Nikon

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. None of the above but it will be Canon

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. weeyeh

    weeyeh Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Singapore
    Come'on brother... it's never about doing justice... it's about the once in a lifetime moment that you didn't have to correct lens for. :p:p

    Ideas for the 135/2 (assuming FF),
    1. mid-range sports (wife playing badminton will be nice)
    2. Wonderful portrait lens (a bit sharp though so dun bother stopping down).
    3. Wonderful portrait lens #2, available light
    4. Kids running around the park (even better if you are APS-C)
    5. Intensed facial expressions of that cute babe preparing to receive the serve
    6. Your most hated opponent on his bum
    7. Any other permutation of mid-distance/high-crop/available light
    Go BBB!!!! :D:D
     
  2. ctjcad

    ctjcad Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,083
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    u.s.a.
    If i understand it..

    - kwun mentioned he is not immune to any photog gears. But his lack of immunity doesn't apply to a $1800 lens. Meaning: it's a no go.
    - What are his requirements? If he tells us his requirements, then i doubt any one of us would be able to sponsor his wishes; not the least himself..is that correct, master kwun??..:p;)
    - That price tag was for a lens, not a camera body.
     
  3. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    41,043
    Likes Received:
    2,066
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    the 28/1.4 is like $3000 *used*? ;)

    my Canon 35/1.4 only cost me $900 used. yes, agree that it is a great focal range. i used it 75% of the time.
     
  4. Mini Me

    Mini Me Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    540
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Poole
    i managed to get my 28/1.4 for a$2300 used :D there was no way i was going to pay $3000+!!
     
  5. drifit

    drifit newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,609
    Likes Received:
    6
    Occupation:
    PM
    Location:
    Selangor, Malaysia
    :mad:
    what!!!??? which one is dark side?? :mad:

    shall be like this!!

    kwun,
    come back to the true side. the dark side has you for few years and it is time for you to leave the DARK SIDE. :)
     
  6. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    41,043
    Likes Received:
    2,066
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    i will figure that out when time comes. i have no scheduled tournament to take until at least end of 2010 (even that is not sure at this point). i will for sure miss HK/China Open this year.

    so there is no hurry at this point.

    my mk3 still have other lens. it is no where near deprived. ;)
     
  7. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    41,043
    Likes Received:
    2,066
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    it is a great lens if you need that focal length. perfect lens for indoor sports or for portrait. i used it a little for macro with tube as well.

    however, these days i am so busy i hardly have time to shoot any of the above.
     
  8. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    41,043
    Likes Received:
    2,066
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    i have no idea what requirement there are. i seem to be sufficient with what i have. i guess i am satisfied and right now see no reason to splurge on a new lens.

    one thing about lenses is that they really do preserve value. i sold all 3 lenses with minimal loss. maybe around $5-10 loss each. and even more incredible since two of them i bought new.
     
  9. Cheung

    Cheung Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    23,818
    Likes Received:
    4,791
    Occupation:
    wannabe badminton phototaker
    Location:
    Outside the box
    I'm sure you can borrow a lens or two from other BCers;)
     
  10. ctjcad

    ctjcad Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,083
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    u.s.a.
    Hmm..

    - if there is no plan to get a new/used lens, then i'm guessing most likely you'll be stashing the money away for a while. until.......the new 1D MkIV comes out??..:p;)

    - not all lenses preserve their value, no?? i guess only the higher IQ lenses (like the ones you just sold) will preserve most of their value. lower IQ lenses will likely lose more of their value.
     
  11. ae86trueno

    ae86trueno Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    349
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Jakarta & Auckland
    I guess im in same boat with you Kwun. Im sure its a great lens but since I'm just doing photog more for serious hobby rather than pros I think I'm better to stay with 70-200 2.8 IS, I lost some IQ and don't have the 2.0 but gain versatility with the zoom. my current setup is 24-70 and 70-200, and if I need more opening I have 50 1.8 (might getting 85 1.8 but its on the bottom list) also I have 18-55 mk.2 (non-IS) and 55-200 (which I put 3 ext tube to make this into macro lens)
     
  12. Cheung

    Cheung Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    23,818
    Likes Received:
    4,791
    Occupation:
    wannabe badminton phototaker
    Location:
    Outside the box
    I'd put the 85/1.8 at the top of your list for indoor badminton and portrait shots on a 30D;) I can assure you it will be much better than the 50/1.8.
     
  13. Gladius

    Gladius Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2002
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    3
    Occupation:
    Design Engineer
    Location:
    Singapore
    Yes, so would l. Particularly if you have a budget.For the money, nothing really beats it for speedy, low light shots. The one that might come close is the 100mm f/2. The 135mm f/2 would be excellent but the budget stretch is quite a long way off. Also, its not so good if you're space constrained like a small gym court or shooting with no more than 15m to move around from the subject.
     
  14. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    41,043
    Likes Received:
    2,066
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    excellent advice from Cheung. i used to have 4 primes, 135/2, 85/1.8, 50/1.4, 35/1.4. i sold the 135 and 50. i find myself using the 35 and 85 a lot more. the IQ and AF speed of the 85 is one level above the 50. on par with the 135L, actually.
     
  15. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    41,043
    Likes Received:
    2,066
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    haha. that's a real possibility.. *cough* *cough*
     
  16. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    41,043
    Likes Received:
    2,066
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    it depends. true, lower end lens preserve less. also, as long as there is no "mk2" replacement. my 50/1.4 is not really consider high end, but the retail price really shot up since i bought it so does the used price.
     
  17. ae86trueno

    ae86trueno Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    349
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Jakarta & Auckland
    ouch.. more poison on me :eek::p
    I was actually aiming for the 85 initially but Kwun's 135 photo tempted me. But well when money say no, I can't do much..
    85 at the moment is more feasible and fit my budget at the moment.
     
  18. weeyeh

    weeyeh Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Singapore
    Indeed. The 85/1.8 was the reason I almost went Canon -- there was no equivalent in the other systems. Excellent close portrait lens at a reasonable price. Most portrait photographers will want both the 85 and a 135 -- the 135 is easier when warming up the subject. I went with Minolta due to the placement of the dials but will never go Sony for the same reason (how silly).

    I notice that photographers tend to be split between 28+50+100 or 24+35+70-90 when they go prime. I also belong to the latter too with the 35 being my most used FL. It's great for street and group work. Hardly touch my 50 and 45mm.

    Given that you are reducing the lens collection, the tendency then is either in preparation to switch system or to replace the current body. Is the 1DSmk2 getting too heavy? :p:p
     
  19. weeyeh

    weeyeh Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Singapore
    Some antidote for you. You already have a 70-200/2.8 IS. That'll cover most grounds for badminton photography. The thinner DoF of 85/1.8 or 135/2 will not really help you there and the 70-200 provides much better reach/flexibility.

    Unless you are troubled by the weight or you want nicer bokeh of either the 85 or 135.
     
  20. ae86trueno

    ae86trueno Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    349
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Jakarta & Auckland
    Yep, exactly. my 70-200 2.8 really cover that part and more flexibility.. when comparing 85's IQ with 70-200 IQ, I think only at pixel peeper level then I can see difference.
     

Share This Page