For any of you who have been reading this blog for any length of time, you probably know that I’m not a big fan of technical reviews. You’ve never seen me shoot color cards, comparing RGB values, looking at lines per inch of resolution. When I look at a new piece of equipment, I take it out into the real world, work it over, and make a decision of whether I like it or not.

This review will be no different. I’ve had my Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS for over a month now. I’ve had a chance to use it in the real world both for personal use and for paid portrait sessions, even a wedding. Here’s what I found.

75mm @ f/4

But First

Before I get into specific thoughts on the lens, let me back up and bring any non-gear heads up to speed.

Canon makes two general lines of lenses. There’s the regular lenses, and then there are the professional lenses, those designated “L” in their name and all have a red stripe near the front element. L lenses (or “L glass” if you want to look cool) are made of metal construction rather than plastic, the glass elements have better coatings, and are generally made to a higher quality standard.

The lens I bought is part of a group of lenses by Canon, all in the 70-200mm range:

• Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM – Priced around $625
• Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM – Priced around $1025
• Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM – Priced around $1200
• Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM – Priced around $1600 (this is the one I got)

As far as image quality goes, all four are basically the same. The glass has the same coatings and the quality of the image is great. Now I know that there are those pixel peepers who will point out differences between the f/4 and f/2.8 versions, but I believe that in real world use they are the same. There are two main differences here: maximum aperture, and whether it has image stabilization (IS). You can see that the prices vary widely, and you may wonder whether the cost differences are justified.

Now that we have that out of the way, let’s move on to my review.

95mm @ f/4.5

First Impressions

The first thing I noticed when I took it out of the box was how large and heavy it was. This is something that most reviewers harp on. “It’s so heavy! There’s no way I’d carry it around all day!” Indeed, this beast weighs in at a whopping three and a quarter pounds. It will make your camera body look like an accessory for the lens (considering the lens cost nearly twice my camera, it kinda is). In contrast, the f/4 non-IS version of this lens is only 25 ounces and is considerably thinner in diameter and shorter in length.

But here’s the rub: if you’re ponying up this kind of money for a lens, I’m assuming you’re serious about your photographs. Which means you won’t mind lugging around such a large weight. Or at least you’re willing to for the prospect of better images. This lens has 23 elements in it, and that’s what it takes to get such a sophisticated lens. Besides, it’s fun to come up with nifty nicknames for your new pride and joy. I call my “the bazooka”.

This lens has internal zoom and focus, which means that it doesn’t extend and change length while zooming and focusing. In addition, the front element doesn’t rotate, making the use of lens filters a breeze. One of my favorite features of this lens is that the focal point stays put when you change zoom. What this means is that you can zoom in, get a good focus, and zoom out without losing focus. It takes a little getting used to, but it’s a great feature.

200mm @ f/3.2

The Extra Stop Argument

Let’s say you’ve decided to go for one of these lenses, but you’re undecided on which version. Proponents will tell you that the extra stop in maximum aperture is worth the extra money for the f/2.8 versions. Opponents will say, “It’s only one stop! Save your money.” Most people focus on the issue of low light here. For me, that’s not something I worry about. If it’s getting too dark for me to get decent shutter speeds, I’ll bring in the help of flash. For me, the aperture question is about image quality. Let me explain.

My favorite aperture for shooting portraits is f/4. I like this aperture because it gives a nice sweet spot depth of field. I can include small groups with enough DOF to include all the subjects, while throwing the background out of focus. If I had the f/4 version of this lens, I’d be at the maximum aperture. However, with the f/2.8 version of this lens, I can be stopped down.

Lenses have a wide range of sharpness, and they’re usually a little soft when wide open at their maximum aperture. By this logic, if you close a lens down a stop or two, you’re getting sharper images. So by using the f/2.8 version and shooting at f/4, I can get a sharper image than using a f/4 lens wide open.

And when I want to shoot at f/2.8, it’s there for me, and who wouldn’t want a little extra aperture?

105mm @ f/4

On Image Stabilization

So this is where people get really heated. Some believe IS to be the best thing since sliced bread. Others don’t think it’s worth it. Rather than beat around the bush, I’ll get straight to my opinion here.

If you can scrape up the cash, do not get this lens without IS! Previous to this lens purchase, I had a 70-300mm Sigma lens. It had no image stabilization. At 125mm or so and above, it’s very difficult to get sharp photos with no blur from camera shake without IS. You need lots and lots of light to get fast shutter speeds. This is not always an option. I’ve discovered that IS saved a number of my shots already. And when there’s no do overs, a saved shot counts. I’ve been able to shoot as slow as 1/30th at 150mm and above and have razor sharp images. There’s no way I could do this without IS. A tripod would do the trick, but sometimes that just doesn’t cut it.

I do have a note of caution though. IS is not a magic bullet. If you’re shooting at slow shutter speeds, IS will save you from blur from camera shake, but it won’t help you with subject motion blur. Beware. Also keep in mind that the IS takes about a half second to spin up once you half press the shutter button. You can’t just grab the camera, point and go. You must plan ahead a bit to give the IS time to engage.

150mm @ f/2.8

Bokeh

Bokeh is that blurred background that looks so flattering in portraits. Lots of factors go in to quality of bokeh. Aside from the lens design itself, you get more bokeh (a more blurred background/foreground) by zooming farther and/or widening the aperture.

By this logic, you can get the most bokeh by taking photos at long focal lengths with a wide open aperture setting. With this lens you get both, which results in beautiful, gorgeous, creamy bokeh. It’s simply amazing and jumps out at you the first time you look through the lens. I routinely shoot portraits at a focal length of at least 135mm and at f/4 or sometimes f/2.8. Doing so gives the most flattering image and puts background distractions at a minimum.

75mm @ f/2.8

Sharpness, Contrast, and Color

If there’s one thing these lenses do well, it’s produce sharp images. All four of them. They are widely regarded as some of the sharpest lenses Canon makes. Sure, if you want true tack sharp images you’ve got to go with a prime lens, but today’s photographer is willing to sacrifice some sharpness for flexibility. I have several prime lenses, and I love them. But they’re nowhere near as flexible as this lens. My Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM is every bit as sharp as this lens, but it’s stuck right there at 85mm, all the time.

One of the best features for me is the contrast and color that I get from this lens. There is just something special about the images produced. The human eye interprets local contrast as sharpness. So this means a lens with better contrast looks sharper. Not only that, better contrast just plain looks better.

I’ve attempted to mimic the look from this lens with other lenses. No matter how much post processing I do on an image, I just can’t get the same look. The raw data just isn’t there.

Watch That Flare

This is something I read about before buying. This lens gets a real bad case of flare. I saw this first hand at a wedding last weekend. Tried shooting without the hood for a bit and it was real bad. So take my advice: never, ever shoot without the lens hood!

70mm @ f/4

Tripod Collar

The f/2.8 lens comes with a tripod collar. If you get the f/4 version, you have to buy it separate. I don’t quite understand this, but it is what it is. I will tell you that with the collar on, it’s rather clunky to manipulate the zoom ring. So for me, if it’s not on a tripod, that collar is left off the lens.

Conclusion

After using this lens for over a month, I’m in love. I mean really, really in love. This lens is amazing. The sharp image with good color and contrast, combined with the silky bokeh every portrait photographer loves makes this my new favorite portrait lens.

I can tell you that you can’t go wrong with this lens. It’s difficult to botch a shot.

Elizabeth at Eileen Donan Castle.
18mm focal length

My wife and I recently took a vacation, a really big splurge for the two of us. We’ve been married six years now, and we have not taken a “real” vacation since our honeymoon. So we decided to go big. It was kind of a last minute thing, as we have baby #2 coming later this year. So we went on a 15 day trip to Europe. Started in London for one day, went to Edinburgh, Scotland for three days, then to the highlands of Scotland (stayed at a B&B on Loch Ness) for four days, then back to London for three days, then Paris for four days. It was quite a trip, and I’ll never forget it.

But enough of that, let’s get this back to photography, and specifically portraiture. Knowing there would be lots of scenic views to capture, I bought a new wide lens, the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 to fit on my Canon 20D (yep, still using that old dinosaur, but my new 40D will arrive on Friday).

I gotta tell ya, that lens impressed me. In fact, I used it almost exclusively for the whole trip. You see, I brought a range of lenses: new Sigma 10-20mm, Sigma 28-80mm, Canon 50mm f/1.8, Canon 85mm f/1.8. I brought the primes so that I could do some nice portraits in Europe. But then disaster struck on day one; my all purpose walk around lens, the Sigma 28-80 broke. The aperture blades close down, but won’t open back up. So left with two primes and a super wide zoom, I naturally went for the zoom for flexibility. That lens got a workout, and it was a nice test drive for the next 14 days.

This Thing Is WIDE

Eiffel Tower. 10mm

I mean really wide. At ten millimeters, standing at the base of the Eiffel Tower in Paris, I was able to get the whole thing with frame to spare. The wideness of this lens is great if you’re trying to catch a landscape or suck in an entire London hotel room bathroom (wow…small). Not so great for portraits though. Or is it?

As A Portrait Lens?

Our London room at 11mm

So since my primary lens broke, and the wide lens was my only flexible option, it became my all around landscape/architecture/portrait lens. I quickly discovered one thing about using it at the wide focal lengths: it stretches things around the edges. This is fine for faraway landscapes, but death for a portrait. Let me give you some advice: don’t take a photo of your lady at 10mm, place her off-center, and expect to get away with it. You know how they say the camera adds ten pounds? Well, you’d have to put about 50 Canon 1D’s on your subject to equal the weight this baby puts on at 10mm.

Now, once you get the focal length above about 15mm, you can avoid some of the face stretching. You can put your subject closer to the edge of the frame. The first photo above shows my wife standing in front of Eileen Donan Castle out near the Isle of Skye in Scotland. I took this shot at 18mm, and was able to compose the shot how I wanted, without worrying about stretching. At 20mm, you’re pretty much in the clear except for the very edges.

The Price Is Right

In choosing which super wide lens to buy, I looked at three makers: Canon, Sigma, and Tamron. The Canon has the name recognition and reputation. The Sigma had the price advantage. The Tamron had the largest range of focal lengths. Ultimately, I chose the Sigma because of image quality and price. At the time I purchased the lens, it was more than $300 cheaper than the Canon version. My European test drive proved to me that the image quality is top notch, and I’m glad I saved the dough, since it will go toward replacing my broken lens.

Conclusion

Driving on the left! 10mm

This is a really great lens to have in your bag. I love the image quality (contrast, color, and sharpness) and the ability to go wide when I need to. If you’re a photography generalist, get a lens like this. If you’re a portrait photographer (as I am), then you’ll still find it very useful in your bag.

It’s no portrait lens by any means, but works well in a pinch if you keep the focal length to the longer half of the range, or if going wide, keep your subject dead center in the frame. You’ll find it’s pretty big (much larger than you’d expect for such a short focal length) and somewhat heavy (lots of elements).

While it has the smallest focal length range of the three (10-20 for the Sigma, 10-22 for the Canon, and 10-24 for the Tamron), the cost savings and image quality are significant factors that to me puts it at the top.

To see lots and lots of sample shots with this lens, check out my “Europe 2009″ Flickr set. As of the time of this post I have about the first five days of the trip processed and posted. More to come in the next few days.

Most of all, having a lens this wide is fun! I had a blast playing around with photographic opportunities that were only possible with a wide lens (such as the driving on the left photo above). And when I had too much room in the frame, then let’s face it, nine megapixels is plenty so I just cropped the photo.

Get yours at Amazon.com now.

I got a new toy recently. Shortly before Christmas, I purchased an AlienBees B400 monolight and 30×60 “giant” softbox. The main driver behind this purchase was A) I like Paul C. Buff gear, B) PCB stuff is very cost effective, and C) I wanted to get a really big softbox without doing something home made with my non-standard existing strobes.

The Test Drive
Here’s pretty much the first image I made with the new strobe and softbox. I had literally taken it out of the box ten minutes before. No other lights were used, and I took this in the middle of the living room. I was able to drop the ambient to black by placing my wife and son right next to the light. This shot showed me that I really love the soft light coming from that big softbox.

Getting Down and Dirty
We recently moved into a new house that needed renovation before it could be lived in (a beat up foreclosure). So the new toy went into storage and didn’t get played with again for several weeks. But this past weekend I got to a point where I could take some time for photos. The new house has a great big basement that we’ve decided to make a dedicated studio space. It just needed to be set up. So I took a little time to get things all squared away. Then I decided not to let that work go to waste, so I brought out the new toy again.

For this shot, I used classic butterfly lighting. I put the giant softbox up high pointing down. Then I used a reflector down below to lift any shadows. But I decided to try the gold side to warm up the light. Seeing the nice warm color, I decided to put a deep blue gelled flash on the background for some warm/cool pizazz. I like how it turned out.

Then it was my turn in front of the camera. This time I took away the reflector and just went with the straight softbox. Again, the blue gelled flash on the background, but this time lying on the floor pointing up.

A few observations while testing out the new strobe:

• It’s plenty powerful. I would easily be able to light a decent sized group with the 400 w/s flash.
• The softbox is big, but it folds down easily with the umbrella type mechanism.
• Because the softbox is so big, it’s heavy, and needs a larger than normal stand to hold it up and keep from tipping.
• The flash recycles really fast, especially at lower power settings. It will keep up with my camera’s burst speed. Awesome.
• I like that the modeling light can track the power setting. I also like that it cuts out and turns back on when the flash is recycled. My other strobes beep when ready, and that gets old.

Conclusion
It’s awesome. I highly recommend this combination if you’re looking for a new studio strobe setup. I plan to buy a couple more.

This article is part of the ‘Portrait Lighting For Beginners’ series. This series is meant to help you go from a beginning photographer to making beautiful portraits.

Wow, it’s been a long time since I left off on this series. The last article from the series, Mid Key Lighting, was over a year ago! I’ll try to be better about writing more of these. So here we go, high key lighting.

My son on his 1st birthday

The Concept

So now you’ve learned about low key and mid key lighting. To recap, low key is where the photograph is dominated by darker tones. Mid key is dominated by medium tones. Can you guess what high key is? Yep, totally dominated by bright tones.

A high key image lends itself to a bright and cheery feel. It evokes happy emotions.

This is exactly why I chose to photograph my son in high key for his first birthday portrait. It’s an awesome, happy time, full of cheer and pride for tackling that difficult first year. The first year is full of challenges and triumphs, both for baby and parents. The first birthday also marks the beginning of the “sweet spot” (in my opinion). Year number two is awesome! Then comes year number three, when the terrible twos start, then the honeymoon is over! Ahem, ok back to the program.

Background

Obviously, since high key is bright, you’ll need a bright background. White seamless paper is my choice here. You could use white cloth, but paper seems to work best. You could use a less than white background, and nuke it with lights, but I wouldn’t suggest it, especially if you’re just starting out with this style of lighting.

A few weeks ago, I took the photos of about 30 employees for a government contractor in Fort Collins, CO. These were to be simple head shots for the company’s use on the web and in an employee directory. Nothing special.

Here’s a diagram to show how the lighting was set up for the employee photos:

The camera was about 15 feet from the subject, set to 70mm with a shutter speed of 1/250th to kill the ambient light. Aperture was set to 6.3 to throw that background a little out of focus (helped by the longer focal length). This also let me choose a low power on the flashes to use less juice and recycle quickly.

The key light was a Canon 430EX set to 1/4 power, and shooting through a translucent umbrella. I feathered the light forward to soften it and direct a good portion of the light across the subject and onto the reflector.

The gold reflector bounced the light back into the shadow areas and warmed them up, giving the subjects a nice glow.

The background light was a Vivitar 285HV, set to 1/16th power and zoomed out all the way to give a tight light pattern. It was up about 8 feet off the ground, and placed about 6 inches from the wall. The light was pointing down at about 45 degrees. This made the light sort of “skip” or “scrape” down that wall, adding lots of shadow to the rugged stone. Had I pointed the light straight at the wall from a distance, it would have come out looking flat and lack interest and shadow.

This was a very quick throw together shot. I got to the hotel about ten minutes before the employees, picked the spot in about a minute, and threw everything up in a hurry. Two test shots to get the lighting nailed and I was off and running. Bang bang bang, 30 people in about ten minutes. Each person was literally less than 20 seconds. They sit down, a couple posing instructions, *click*, “Next”.