February 26, 2015, 06:02:36 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 - lux

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1
Lenses / Re: Which Lens to buy for Portraits
« on: February 20, 2015, 03:10:10 PM »
How about a comparison between 85 L I and 85 L II.  opinions?  I have the opportunity to purchase at 85 L I at a good price.  How much better is the II?

2
EOS Bodies / Re: Bingo! New Canon 5Ds has 50.6 MP new rumored specs
« on: January 30, 2015, 08:33:34 AM »
I surprised it doesn't beat the low light of my 6d.  I guess I'll keep using the 6d for portrait and event and my 70d for birds and both for sports.  This doesn't sound like it adds a lot to my current combination.  I'm better off spending the money taking the family to a cool spot to take pics. 

3
United States / Re: Second Body Investment
« on: January 19, 2015, 09:51:22 PM »
I have a 6d and just bought a 70d as backup...has nice video, more reach and less expensive so I don't worry as much when hiking and canoeing.  The 6d remains my primary...ISO dr .  It's a lot better

4
Lenses / Re: New Rebel & EF 11-24 f/4L USM Coming Shortly
« on: January 16, 2015, 06:47:52 PM »
So it seems not only great for landscape (which I thought would be a small niche for a 3K lens) but also for architecture.  That makes sense.  If that pays the bills and this is significantly better than the 16-35 then it would be great for those folks. What percentage of professional photogs pay the bills with architecture?


5
Lenses / Re: New Rebel & EF 11-24 f/4L USM Coming Shortly
« on: January 16, 2015, 01:27:11 PM »
Ok so reading through these threads I did see one person say that this is a perfect lens for him because it will likely be relatively light and really wide and therefore perfect for using when hiking to get amazing landscape photos. 

I assume that 11 is so much better than 14 that it will be better than using the samyang and that the person using the 11-24 is a much better hiker than I and not worried about tripping and breaking a 3K lens.  Who else is this lens for?  It does sound like people have been dissapointed with the 16-35 II.  if this is just a better lens then it might replace that but I always felt that the 2.8 and 24-35 range were important for that lens for event photography. 

I'd love to know what applications this lens is great for...It sounds like a professional landscape lens to me....the wide angle equivalent of the 400 2.8 for sports photographers.  If that is the case and it performs as well I'm sure those folks will be thrilled and the rest of us will just gawk at their amazing photos. 

However, that is a pretty niche group.  The rest of us will settle for 17-40 or 16-35

6
Lenses / Re: New Rebel & EF 11-24 f/4L USM Coming Shortly
« on: January 16, 2015, 11:33:44 AM »
as a hobbyist who is mostly taking pictures of family and kids sports and wildlife I can't justify that type of cost for a lens that I'm not going to be using constantly.   I recognize that that type of width is great but what can it do that my samyang 14 2.8 (which cost me more than 10x less and is a set it and forget it kind of lens) can't do.  For that matter what can it do that stitching together two shots with my 24-70 can't do?  I've thought about getting a 16-35 F4 at some point...when they are used and less expensive but 3K...that's used big white territory

7
Animal Kingdom / Riverlands Missouri
« on: December 13, 2014, 09:21:03 PM »
The first…two mallards debating which will go into the icy water first
The second…an eagle fending off an entire murder of crows
The third…a heron posed quite nicely for me


8
Animal Kingdom / Re: BIRD IN FLIGHT ONLY -- share your BIF photos here
« on: December 13, 2014, 09:07:10 PM »
Marsh Hawk at Riverlands (confluence of Missouri and Mississippi rivers)

9
Lenses / Re: 6D and BIF
« on: November 22, 2014, 10:36:25 AM »
I have used 6D with 300 2.8 on monopod for BIF and done "ok" though it felt like my lack of practice was a larger factor than the gear.  That being said I am upgrading my back up camera from 2ti to a 70D (will give me some more reach, better AF and much better video than what I have now) I will be interested to see what I'll be able to do with the 70D 2xiii and 300 2.8.  The eagles haven't landed here yet but they are coming.

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II
« on: October 29, 2014, 11:31:44 AM »
could it be that "the year of the lens" was just off by a year…that is they thought they would have all these lenses this year but just didn't get around to it…so instead 2015 will be the year of the lens?

11
Lenses / Re: how to get 300 2.8
« on: September 22, 2014, 05:42:35 PM »
So with the telephoto the kids looked larger but so did the Elk so it gives the illusion that they are closer together.  I guess I wasn't paying attention to the distance to the kids...just the buck

12
Lenses / Re: how to get 300 2.8
« on: September 22, 2014, 12:31:47 AM »
I can't believe I'm adding to this but I'm asking a question. 

Regardless of what it is called.  If I use a telephoto background looks closer than it is. 

That is, the pictures of my kids with the elk in the background using the telephoto gets me in trouble with my wife while the one with the wide angle is fine. 

Is that because my eyes are about 50mm and the elk looks 4x closer using the 200mm zoom?

13
Lenses / Re: how to get 300 2.8
« on: September 18, 2014, 05:09:26 PM »
Thank you all for the advice.  The search continues.  "Too many hobbies" nice chick-a-dee photos…I know they are common but I'm quite fond of them.  The primary purpose is kids soccer.  I have three kids that play and I typically am at 3-5 games a weekend if I'm not working. 

For fun for me I would love to someday sit in my canoe with a used 7D and a cheap tele zoom and try to do some birding that way.  (I just can't imagine flipping the canoe with a 6D and 300 2.8)

Reading through the responses:
120-300: those who have it say that it focuses fine and they like the zoom but they also seem to always state that for the same price they would have gotten the canon (unclear if these folks have the newest sigma or an earlier lens).  I do have the 70-200 ii and there is a lot of overlap. 

300 mk 1 everyone says that the mk 2 is better especially with the extenders…that being said I won't be using 2xextenders for my primary purpose..maybe the 1.4.  The 2x would only be for secondary uses like birding. 

some have suggested that the 70-200 plus 1.4 is essentially the same as the 300 2.8.  I would say this…for night games and heavy overcast games I'm at ISO 6400 to 12800 with the 70-200  2.8 in order to get a shutter speed to 1/800 or better.  one stop just to F4 makes that Iso 12800 to 25000 which is no good on a 6D.  I can't imagine that it would work on the new 7DII

keep the advice coming.  I appreciate all of it

14
Lenses / Re: how to get 300 2.8
« on: September 18, 2014, 07:45:11 AM »
The original question was used 300 2.8 l is or new 120-300 2.8 sigma sport.  I would love to get the 300 2.8 ii but that just isn't going to happen and if I wait 3 years saving money for it my eldest will be almost done with high school soccer. 

The trade off is sharpness for zoom and weight considerations.  Has anyone used both lenses?  I'm never going to have two great full frame cameras. Maybe a used 7d and my 6d but that is likely the best I could have in the foreseeable future.  I don't see myself therefore using 2 bodies during a game.


Oh and someone was suggesting 85 ii for kids...maybe if they are sedated.  85 1.2 plus some Benadryl and you can get great pictures

15
Lenses / how to get 300 2.8
« on: September 16, 2014, 06:59:03 PM »
I have long coveted 300 2.8.  I have used 100-400 but heavy overcast, night games and sidelines with lots of clutter have stymied my photography.  It is possible that I have made this complaint on more than occasion and my ruthless annoying complaining has finally worn the boss (my wife) down and I have been given permission to seek the 300 2.8.  But how to obtain such nirvana.

1)300 2.8 L IS II…just kidding you didn't really think I could do that did you?
2)300 2.8 L IS I…seems like it can be purchased for around 3500 depending upon from where/condition etc
3)Sigma 120-300 sport (around 3500 again)

So 300 L IS I or sigma 120-300…

Primary purpose is for taking pictures of kids playing soccer.  I use a 6D (though might someday buy a used 7DI as a second body).  I shoot with a monopod when renting a 300 I which I have enjoyed.  I have not ever used the 120-300.  I would like to try some birding.  I live near a lot of good birding locations.  I would probably buy a 2xTC for that. 

Any thoughts?

Pages: [1] 2 3 4