August 01, 2014, 12:01:14 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - randym77

Pages: [1] 2 3
Never had a 6D, but my 5D Mark II doesn't seem to like rain much.

I had it out all day in the rain. With a rain cover, but it was so wet that day I guess the rain cover wasn't enough. 
The shutter went wonky.  I would just touch it and it would shoot off in burst mode forever. Until I turned the camera off. 

I took it home and gently blow-dried it.  It was fine the next morning.  I was worried there would be permanent damage done, but it's been a couple of years now and the camera's been fine.  Knock on wood.

The IR cameras used on Ghost Hunters and the like are not the kind most of us use when we do infrared photography.

IR photography (the kind where the trees are white) is near-infrared.  Just outside our vision range.

The IR cameras the ghost hunters use on TV are very expensive and "see" wavelengths  much longer. 

Of course, some people claim to have photographed ghosts even with normal visible light, so you might luck out with an infrared conversion.

UV photography is fascinating, but probably not worth it for ghost hunting.  You will need special lenses, because most lenses block UV light.  Last time I checked, UV lenses were crazy expensive.

Software & Accessories / Re: Small Bag Recommendation?
« on: July 02, 2014, 04:18:50 PM »
If you're a woman...check out the camera bags at Epiphanie or Jo-Totes.  There are some stylish bags that look like purses, not camera bags.

Lenses / Re: Tanzania with minimal gear
« on: June 23, 2014, 10:36:46 AM »
24-105 is practically useless for wildlife

I have a completely different perspective having done the northern Tanzania safari circuit as the OP is going to do. I found the 24-105 to be the perfect lens for times when the animals were close to our land rover, which was pretty often.

Thanks.  You've talked me into it.  I'm going to go with the 70-300 and the 24-105.  I'll miss the super wide angle and the fast glass, but sacrifices must be made.

Lenses / Re: Tanzania with minimal gear
« on: June 22, 2014, 01:01:06 PM »

just lift bro

I'm not a bro.  :-Þ

Men have 3 times the upper body strength of women. What is a reasonable weight to hand hold for you might not be for matter how much lifting I do over the next month.

Lenses / Re: Tanzania with minimal gear
« on: June 21, 2014, 05:54:41 PM »
I may be naive but it seems like you can have a one lens solution in the 28-300L lens.  It seems to be a perfect fit.  Wide and long.  Although heavy at 3.7 pounds.

I considered it, but it's definitely too heavy for me. Even the 100-400 is probably too heavy (at 3 lbs.)

I want something I can hand-hold all day without killing myself.

Lenses / Re: Tanzania with minimal gear
« on: June 21, 2014, 04:22:01 PM »
I just returned from a trip to Namibia (a little different from tanzania). Like you I had questions about the gear to take with me. In the end, as many members recommend, I went with 24-105mm and 70-300mm. It covers almost all my needs. You can take a look at some of my pictures if you want!

Personally I prefer the 70-300mm than 100-400mm especially concerning bokey (and weight)

Hope it helps

Nice photos.  I like the nightscape - "Road To Nowhere."  I guess 24mm is wide enough.

Lenses / Re: Tanzania with minimal gear
« on: June 21, 2014, 04:05:10 PM »
too short and compromised, I'd look 100-400L (or at least 70-300L + kenko 1.4x DGX TC)

I'm considering the Kenko.  The 100-400 is too heavy.  This is a trip where we will be walking a lot and staying in tents.  I anticipate having to carry my camera gear with me on moderate trails and not being able to use a tripod or monopod.

FWIW, the tour company recommends a 300mm lens. 

Lenses / Re: Tanzania with minimal gear
« on: June 21, 2014, 02:32:59 PM »
The Tamron 150-600 is way too heavy for me, at least for this particular trip. 

I have a 16-35/2.8 that I use a lot, but if I bring it and the 70-300, I wonder if that 35-70 hole in my focal range will be a problem.

That said...I'm also considering going with just the 70-300, and bringing a Fujifilm X100S for non telephoto situations. 

Lenses / Re: Tanzania with minimal gear
« on: June 21, 2014, 12:26:08 PM »
The 24-105 would not be for wildlife.  It would be for everything else.  Landscapes, street photography, family photos, etc. 

I think I have decided to take the 70-300mm as my telephoto.

Still making up my mind on what else to bring.  I'd really like to limit it to two lenses. 

Lenses / Re: Tanzania with minimal gear
« on: June 19, 2014, 10:55:42 AM »
Well, the full frame 5d II and III have more megapixels than the 7D, so I'm guessing they get plenty of pixels on the target. 

Right now I'm leaning toward the 70-300 L, possibly with the Kenco teleconverter. 

For my other lens...I'd like to take my 16-35 f/2.8.  When I go wide, I like to go really wide. 

But will I miss that 35-70 hole in the focal range? 

I could bring the 24-105 f/4 instead.  Not as fast, but it has the advantage of being a very useful walkaround lens, should I find myself in a situation where I want to carry just 1 body and 1 lens.

Or I could buy the 24-70mm f/2.8L.  It's only $900 if you buy it with the 5D Mark III.

Lenses / Re: Tanzania with minimal gear
« on: June 19, 2014, 09:03:25 AM »
I'm not sure I buy the crop factor advantage.  If the extra reach is due to a smaller sensor, wouldn't it be the same as using a full frame camera and cropping the final image? 

Vivid, thanks for sharing your experience.  I am now leaning toward the 70-300. 

Has anyone used this lens with the Kenco extender?

Lenses / Re: Tanzania with minimal gear
« on: June 19, 2014, 06:44:10 AM »
400mm is still a good length. The tammy is still the best all rounder when it comes to all in one, the 70-300mm is a decent choice but I still think 400 is a minimum.

For me, the Tamron is way too big.  It's over four lbs.

Problem with the 70-200mm is that removing the conv anywhere in the field will most probably create dust and do you want to lug that around for low light a fast prime makes more sense. 35mm F2s a good choice and is a nice length for landscapes.

I assume I'll know what the lighting situation will be before I leave my tent, and will be able to set up accordingly.  I love fast primes, and have a 35mm f/2, but I don't think I'll bring it.  Just not versatile enough.  I like to go much wider than that for landscapes.

if the 16-35mm your missing 35-100 or 150. Instead I would take the 24-105 and a fast prime for low light, 24 will be wide enough for landscapes.

I might take the 24-105 instead of the 16-35.  But I don't think I'm going to take a fast prime (unless it's a telephoto).  Others have said they brought one but didn't need it.  And that's kind of been my experience as well, on other trips.  Brought it, hardly used it. 

Thanks for the link to the review of the 70-300mm.  It weighs about half as much as the Tamron, which makes it much more practical for me.  Definitely considering that one.  Maybe with the Kenco extender.

Lenses / Re: Tanzania with minimal gear
« on: June 18, 2014, 05:40:26 PM »
Thanks, lots of very useful tips.

The tour company says that every seat is a window seat in their vehicles, so that shouldn't be an issue. 

However, we will be walking several miles a day over easy to moderate terrain, and so I'd like to keep my gear light. 

I am going to try and bring two bodies (5d Mark II and 5D Mark III), so I have a backup.  They take the same batteries, and I guess I could bring both chargers, too - they're pretty small.  I plan to take only two lenses.

Still undecided about which lenses.  Probably the 16-35 f/2.8, and a telephoto lens.

I'd like to have the range of the 100-400mm, but it's an older lens, and at 3 lbs. might be too heavy for me to hand-hold all day.  Like TomScott, I also worry about its reputation as a dust magnet. 

The 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS is newer and lighter (2.3 lbs).  I've heard it also has better image quality. 

Or I could go with the 70-200 f/2.8 and the 1.4x and/or 2x extender.  That would actually be heavier than the 100-400mm, but I'd have the advantage of being able to remove the extender for low-light situations. 

Also considering going super-light, with the 24-105 and the 200mm f/2.8 (and extenders).  I'm quite fond of the 200mm f/2.8, because it's so light compared to the 70-200 f/2.8.  It's also compatible with the extenders, and if it's true that 400mm is the most useful focal length, I won't miss the zoom range too much.

Lenses / Re: Tanzania with minimal gear
« on: June 15, 2014, 09:36:00 PM »
Follow up to this post, as my trip approaches...

The tour company sent me a packet with more info.  We will be doing some touring in Range Rovers, but will also be walking a few miles a day over uneven terrain.  We will sometimes be traveling in small planes, so there are strict weight limits.  44 lbs. for the provided duffel bag, and 15 lbs. for the carry-on.  I plan to put all my camera gear in the carry-on. 

They said point and shoot cameras don't have enough range for wildlife.  They recommend a superzoom camera, or a DSLR with a mid-range zoom (up to 300mm) and a fast prime for low-light shooting. 

Based on the comments in this thread, I am going to try to bring two bodies.  Both so I have a backup, and so I don't have to switch lenses in the field.  I have a 5D Mark II.  I was going to convert it to IR, but I think I'll hold off until after the trip.  I plan to buy a 5D Mark III, and will bring that, too.  Electricity will be unreliable, so they recommend bringing extra batteries.

I'm still deciding on lenses.  The lens I bring when I bring only one lens is the 24-105.  But I'm thinking I might want to go longer and wider.  Maybe my 16-35mm F/2.8 instead of a fast prime, and my 70-200 f/4 plus 1.4 extender.  Not as fast as the f/2.8, but so much lighter.

I usually use prime lenses when I need reach, so the 70-200 the longest zoom I have.  Well, I have a Sigma 150-500mm, but it's too bulky for this trip.  I am considering buying a zoom lens for the trip. 

I think the 28-300mm will be too heavy.  The 70-300mm and the 100-400mm are possibilities.  The 100-400mm might also be too heavy, though it has the advantage of being compatible with the Canon extenders.

I am planning to buy the Pocket Rocket card holders as Vivid Color recommended, and the B&W filters (once I nail down what lenses I'm bringing).  And I'm stocking up on memory cards.

Still considering what other cameras I'll bring.  I have a point and shoot Lumix I use as a backup and when I don't want to bring all my gear.  (I'm planning to leave my smartphone at home.)  And a SX50 HS.  The superzoom might come in handy, though I am generally not thrilled with the image quality.  I also have a point and shoot Lumix that's been converted to infrared.  I love IR photography, but I doubt I'll have time on this trip for the long exposures needed when using an IR filter on a regular camera.

Pages: [1] 2 3