Giants, Halftime, 40D Sigma f1.4
I went a step further into digital (oh you knew this was coming) and bought the Canon 40D with the 30mm Sigma f1.4 lens. This was shot at f1.4 @ 1600 ASA. The 40D and recent Canons are completely usable at 1600. The 30mm is actually the only lens I have for the 40D so far.
As you can imagine, this is a dark New York street. I don’t remember seeing the Giant blow-up doll. Focus with the Sigma was quick and accurate. Frankly, picking up the 40D, was like meeting an old friend again (20D). Same feel. Everything where it’s supposed to be (not always true if you haven’t seen a friend in a while). Muscle memory came back Luke. And Luke - thanks for the tip about the Sigma 30mm.
So off we go. I have an assignment to photograph something for a client in Europe and one in the midwest, and frankly, there was just no way I was going to do this sort of - can you go to so-and-so spot and photograph it for me - with film.
So there you have it. I looked back at my digital 20D shots to see when the last one was taken, and I see it was July 30th, 2005. So it’s like, 2.5 years in film world, and then back to digital. And how nicely some things have changed since my last shot with the 20D.
The 40D, for example, now has a highlight mode, where it will do it’s best to get more data in the highlights (possibly to the extent of losing some in the shadows, I’m still playing with this) - but then to have a good f1.4 30mm lens to put on it (for cropped frame). I haven’t played with “live view,” yet.
And I won’t write up a review of the 40D, there’s enough of them; but as I go along my merry way, I’ll label the 40D pics when posted. And of course, at least for now, you can assume they’ve been done with the 30mm Sigma, since that’s the only lens I have.
I’ll probably end up with the 20mm, and the 70-200L F4 with IS. I had both lenses before. The 20mm is not the best wide angle by any means - that was a Zeiss Contax 21mm. But the 70-200 f4 L is a tremendous class by-itself lens. The f2.8 is too big for me and too expensive.
If you’re a b&w film enthusiast and have only been visiting for the b&w film pictures - than - according to my timetable (which is bound to be wrong) you should check back again next year. However, if you’ve just been enjoying the twists and turns - then stay tuned - more twists and turns are promised.
« Tubes
Comments
Comment from Greg L’E
Time: February 4, 2008, 6:50 pm
Digital:17, Film:14, Details at 11!
Comment from dave
Time: February 4, 2008, 7:06 pm
It must be like Chevy vs. Ford guys. I go back to the Canon AE-1 (I think that’s what it was) and then a big advance - program shift.
Even back then I mostly shot with a 50mm f1.4. The 30mm f1.4 is pretty similar - though of course not the same DOF sort of stuff…
At any rate, I’m back from a few hours in the park with the new 40D - and it really is a lot of camera for the money.
Anyway, I walked around in the winter mist, with the camera (good grip on it) talking to myself - saying things like - ah - this is fun. Wow - look at that. Of course enthusiasm doesn’t always translate into good pictures - but eventually if you keep at it - it does.
Anyway - I used the Nikon FM2 for a while - but I think I had just borrowed it from someone and eventually it went back. Well anyway - I’ve written about this male obsession with gadgets in that Camera Addict article - and yes - it is male. And you can find it with stereos, or cars, or boats, or cameras, or printers, or any other gizmo that does something.
Comment from Greg L’E
Time: February 4, 2008, 7:25 pm
I concur. The ‘gearhead’ mentality is pervasive among the male of the species, and for good reason. Perhaps we just need the fresh perspective of a new set of ‘controls’ to spur us on to greater heights of creativedom. Or it’s simply another fun toy for the big boy in all of us. Sadly, once the newness wears off, we are often left somehow more disenchanted than before. Perhaps that is an inkling of the bigger issue at hand; confusing ones actual needs with our perceived wants. Just a thought…
Comment from Barrett
Time: February 5, 2008, 2:27 am
Well, it happens. 
As it turns out, I have my own tiny digital obsession in this corner. And I do mean tiny: my Casio EX-Z850. My singular digital number, replacing a considerably more-ancient Olympus 510Z. I tend to be a little more interested in how far I can push a camera like this than in what I can do with a dSLR (I’m a bit of a spoiled brat about this…if I wanted to shoot dSLR badly enough, I’d probably be hocking everything I have for a Nikon D3 right about now…or maybe an Olympus E-3? Must be something about me and the number 3).
But, enough about this. The madness has ended. Bring on baseball season!
- Barrett
Comment from Barrett
Time: February 5, 2008, 2:29 am
Hold it, Dave: these assignments…are they location shoots?
- Barrett
Comment from Jasper
Time: February 5, 2008, 2:58 am
If you like the 30mm Sigma and want to go wider, take a look at their 20mm and 24mm f/1.8 lenses. The 20mm is a bit noisy and the edges are sodft wide open, but it’s otherwise an excellent 30mm film equivalent lens, faster than anything available by Canon. If you don’t mind a 38mm equivalent the 24/1.8 is really very impressive across the board.
Stick with full frame lenses if you intend to build a system, because one or two replacements to the 5D are coming by August. (Got a spare $1800?)
http://www.photographybay.com/2008/01/31/canon-5d-mark-ii-rumblings-from-pma/
Comment from dave
Time: February 5, 2008, 9:39 am
Jasper - I love the 30mm Sigma. But it’s true, if at some point I’m going to go full-frame - man, I’d like to, but it seems like I get so much for my money with the 40D — but I don’t know. I just don’t know.
I’m pretty spare with my use of lenses — lucky there. I’ve gone for a year at a time with just one lens. So it may be a while until I have to make the decision as to what else I need.
Right now, the Sigma 30mm really knocks my socks off. I could put up 100% crops at f1.4 @ 1600 but I’m sure that’s been done somewhere.
Comment from Lee
Time: February 5, 2008, 1:55 pm
Dave-
Great shot (though I am a Pats fan). Hey where did you shoot this, it looks like a place I used to go to in the E. Village.
Comment from dave
Time: February 5, 2008, 2:00 pm
Lee — Upper East Side. One of the millions of sports bars. P.S. I used to live in the East Village — about ten years ago. Do you remember Teresa’s?
Pingback from Around the Web: Feb, 2008 Edition | 1pt4 | B&W Rangefinder Photography by Matt Alofs
Time: February 6, 2008, 1:15 pm
[…] Apparently the ‘G’ in G9 stands for gateway drug. […]
Comment from Craig Nisnewitz
Time: February 4, 2008, 5:08 pm
Welcome back Dave!!!!!!!!
As soon as you got the G 9 I knew you were back into digital again.
I have seen the 40D. Quite a nioe machine. I am used to the Nikon feel, etc. and will stay with them. In the future I may add a Nikon D 80 body. The D 200 and new D 300 are overkill for me. I still use the Leicas and Bessas for B&W and won’t give them up. They feel good to use.
Tamron makes a great digital zoom, 18 to 200. I have it in Nikon mount.