Newsgroups: rec.photo
From: acs@csri.toronto.edu (Alvin Chia-Hua Shih)
Subject: Re: Big/fast EOS lens advice sought
Distribution: usa
Date: 11 Nov 92 05:23:45 GMT

In <1992Nov11.001842.12592@odin.corp.sgi.com> bongers@gto400.asd.sgi.com (Hans L. Bongers) writes:

[ Please format your text with a width of 80 columns!!! ]

> As long as you are going to buy a new body, you might try a Nikon F4S.
> The money you save over buying a canon 300/2.8 would more than cover
> the rental of a Nikon 300/2.8 or even a 600/4.0.
> 
I agree that the original poster should consider a body different from the
Elan, but for different reasons.

The Elan is the Canon "enthusiast" camera.  It is not designed to have
heavy lenses hanging off its lens mount.  The mount is seated in plastic
and may become misaligned if not handled properly.

If you are not interested in autofocus, then the F4 is an OK body to
have, but personally, I would go with the EOS-1.  Its AF is *much*
faster and more reliable, the user interface is much faster to use in
action situations, and metered manual is also much friendlier.  (Try
handholding the F4S with 300/2.8 while fiddling with the aperture ring!)
At the U.S. open, you see photographers just walking around with EOS-1's
with their 300/2.8L dangling unsupported.  Now *that's* a strong mount!

> I have the Nikon 300/2.8 and its a great lens.  I also have the 1.4x &
> 2x tele convertors.  IMHO, the 2x isn't worth the bucks but the 1.4x is
> OK.
> 
A while back there was some talk about a Swedish photo magazine testing a
large sampling of 300/2.8's with the following outcome:

1.  Canon 300/2.8L
2.  Leica R APO-Telyt 280/2.8
3.  Canon 300/4L

The post made no mention of Nikon.

The only possible problem with USM lenses is that animals can hear them
even though you can't.  It might be worth investigating.

> The reason I suggest switching to a "real" body is two fold:
> 
> 1. It is usually easier to rent Nikon equipment

Again, this depends on whether or not you want AF.  Many places carry
manual focus Nikon stuff from years ago, and some carry Tamron with
Nikon mount, but I haven't found a place around here that will rent out
a Nikon 300/2.8 AF.  (To be fair, I haven't found a place that will rent
me a Canon 300/2.8L either! :-)

> 2. If you are going to spend 2.5-3K for a lens, it better fit on that body
>    they will come out with 10 years from now.  Canon has clearly
>    demonstrated their lack of commitment to the existing base of
>    lenses, whereas Nikon have retained compatibility (albeit somewhat
>    reduced functionality) for lenses built more than 25 years ago.
> 
Yes, it was a disappointment to see Canon abandon the FD mount.
However, for those with no initial investment if FD lenses, it
shouldn't be a factor.  The new mount now supports any reasonable
change in AF technology that the Nikon F mount might support.  The
breech mount mechanically stronger than the bayonet mount, but was too
fiddly for some people who needed to change lenses quickly.  So Canon
went with the bayonet mount that Nikon made so popular.

With a fully electronic interface to the lens, it seems that any new
feature could be accomodated with an expanded communications protocol.
(This is what they did with the upgrade of the 420EZ to the 430EZ with
flash exposure compensation.)  Finally, the EF-mount is larger, making
it easier to design better lenses.

> just my $0.02 worth

So, in summary:

1. Buy an EOS-1 if you want to shoot with heavy lenses.  (I don't know about
	the EOS-5/A2.  Haven't seen one up close.)  The Canon user interface
	is very, very nice.  The AF is better than that of the F90, and 
	*much* better than that of the F4s.
2. Canon lenses tend to be more expensive, but give extra quality for the
	money.
3. If you're not interested in spending the big bucks (and chiropractic fees),
	the EF 300/4L is a good value for the money (if you can afford
	that 1 stop).
4. If your subjects don't like the sound of USM lenses, then Nikon is a
	good alternative.

For still photography, I think the Nikon system is much more complete
and quite nice.  Lots of finders, backs, and power packs.  For sports and
wildlife photography, however, I have to give the nod to Canon.

ACS

-- 
 ___ ___ ___ ______________________________________________________________
|   |   | __|      Democracy is not a way of getting better solutions.     |
| - | --|__ |           It's just a way to spread the blame.               |
|_|_|___|___|______________________________________________________________|
Alvin_C._Shih____________________acs@csri.utoronto.ca______________________|