Messages

1

Lenses / Re: Do you wish your 70-200L were black?

« on: May 22, 2013, 07:12:09 PM »

Sure you get looks holding a white telephoto lens but think of the alternative.  If you were holding a large black lens such as the sigma 800mm, would it not look like some type of weapon from a distance?

And of course if you use it like the guy below then people are sure to run. 

2

6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D

« on: May 19, 2013, 01:30:57 AM »

Bat

6D
207mm
f/5
1/13 sec
ISO 12800

3

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits

« on: May 15, 2013, 12:02:19 AM »

Victoria Crowned Pigeon
6D
221mm
f5.2
1/200

4

Lenses / Re: Who has pre-ordered or will order 200-400

« on: May 14, 2013, 11:55:47 PM »

Hmmm...  Buy a new car or this lens.  Cant decide.  I think I will wait for the 100-400L

5

Lenses / Re: Tokina 16-28 PRO FX or Canon 16-35 L II or....

« on: April 26, 2013, 04:15:14 PM »

Thanks so far on your insights.  What I am reading here pretty much imitates what I am reading on reviews.  The Tokina being sharper, yet more prone to flare.

A Canon 14-24 would be sweet.  I guess I shouldn't hold my breath for that one.

Thanks killswitch for the tip on a filter holder system.  I may look into that if I decide to get the Tokina.

6

Lenses / Re: Tokina 16-28 PRO FX or Canon 16-35 L II or....

« on: April 26, 2013, 01:33:03 AM »

The other lenses I have are Canon 24-105 L, MP-E 65, 100 2.8, Canon EF 100 2.8, Canon 70-300 L, Sigma 150-500

So I am looking for something below 24mm.  Below 20mm would be ideal.

7

Lenses / Tokina 16-28 PRO FX or Canon 16-35 L II or....

« on: April 25, 2013, 11:58:52 PM »

So yet another wide lens question. Sorry.  I am looking for an ultra wide lens for my Canon 6D.  I have narrowed it down to two lenses of interest.  The Tokina 16-28 F2.8 PRO FX and the Canon 16-35 F2.8L II.  Please do not recommend a fish eye lens.

First thing, I know there is a  big price difference.  Canon being more expensive.  This is one thing effecting my decision. 

I have heard some positive things on the Tokina lens and wish to hear from anyone who has this lens or has used it.  Is it optically better than the Canon?  Any flare?  How is sharpness?  I am also aware the Tokina  has a bulbous front element that prevents filters from being used. I suppose I can live with this.  I mainly want to use this lens for landscape, street shots at night and even photograph the night sky.
I realize there are other lenses like the Canon 17-40 L but that is an F4.  If I am doing any night photography an F2.8 would be better.  Correct?

So. The Canon 16-35 L II or the Tokina 16-35 F2.8 PRO FX?

8

EOS Bodies / Re: Bye Canon?

« on: April 23, 2013, 07:00:37 PM »

Not bye Canon but buy Canon. 

9

Canon General / Re: Canon Number 1

« on: April 23, 2013, 05:51:24 PM »

Canon is definitely #1.  First at emptying my wallet and bank account. 

10

6D Sample Images / Re: Photographs taken WITH the Canon EOS 6D

« on: April 23, 2013, 05:45:57 PM »

A thread of 6D sample photos was started 4 months ago.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11600.0

11

6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D

« on: April 10, 2013, 10:43:25 PM »

A mute swan and some geese

12

Animal Kingdom / Re: How would you fix this RAW of 2 baby snow leopards

« on: March 18, 2013, 03:18:15 PM »

I honestly can't remember what I just did.  It was done fast and under 10 seconds.  Lowered exposure, raised contrast and raised clarity in Photoshop.  Nothing major.  I am interested to see what others will do.

13

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Chikadees in flight

« on: February 12, 2013, 04:19:56 PM »

Chickadees are curious little birds.  All it takes is a little food on the hand and they come.  At least in my area.  When they land on your hand, fire away.  They are either too friendly or just hungry that they don't care the food on my hand.

14

Lenses / Re: Sigma lens for birding?

« on: February 06, 2013, 04:03:39 PM »

Btw, have you ever noticed that what you see through the viewfinder on your crop camera, with your own pupil, when a fast lens is mounted (such as a 50 or 85 f/1.4)...is not what the sensor is seeing?  The sensor's "pupil" is much bigger than your eye's.  So your eye is effectively skewing what you think will be captured, by giving you an unwanted "depth of field preview" of its own...This occurs on full frame as well.  It's no wonder it's so difficult to focus fast lenses...there are just too many factors at play.  I love them anyway though.

I haven't really paid much attention to that.  I will keep my eye on that next time and let you know.

15

Lenses / Re: Sigma lens for birding?

« on: February 06, 2013, 03:22:27 PM »

In my opinion anything shorter than a 400mm on a full frame body for shooting birds is going to be hard to get good, close results.   Birds like sparrows, finches, blue jays, cardinals and robins don't stay still very long and can spot you coming in close to them. At least with a crop body you get a little bit of an extra reach.  Even with a 300mm.  Also with a crop sensor you can crop your photo more than a photo shot on a full frame sensor before it starts to deteriorate in quality.