August 20, 2014, 11:16:34 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 - Valvebounce

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 54
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Lens to body pairing
« on: Today at 08:51:27 PM »
Hi Folks.

I was at the Weston Super Mare show and go to the Swansea show as well. These are similar coastal events. I use a full frame camera with a Canon 300mm F2.8 L IS for the larger aircraft and add a 2 x Mk3 extender for the small aircraft (or a 1.4 if I am near the center of the flight line). Your 70-200 will give you excellent results but bring along the Sigma for when it's too short. You will have plenty of time to change lenses so I would suggest just taking the 7D.

Thanks for the info.
The last time I did an event like thus was the flying boat seaplane event at Southampton Water, I was shooting film and video alternately, neither of which turned out well due to loss of focus on the event.
I am very wary of deciding in advance to change lenses on the beach in case the wind should get up, salt and sand are bad enough on the outside, on the inside it would be terrible!
Plus I have had a couple of camera failures, one the 40D shutter failed and I had to resort to my 300D, the other was Magic Lantern, the 7D and my brain not playing well together, I wasn't ready to go live with ML and between us I had my 7D doing strange things and had to uninstall ML right at the crucial point in a ceremony to get a normal functioning camera back, fortunately I was carrying the 40D so used that whilst the 7D recovered!

I went to Farnborough with a 7D, 70-200II and 2xIII, I kept the TC on for 60% of the day I think. Didn't need it with the Vulcan. Whilst I did occasionally want more reach, it was only the smallest of planes (WW1 battle recreation) and when the Harrier was hovering (I was just too far down one end of the runway). With things like the Red Arrows, some of the wider shots I took were at 70mm to get more of the overall formation in, I don't know if you shoot that type of shot, but its worth considering.

I'd have thought you could crop from 400 on the 7D to get the equivalent of the 40D + Sigma combo without too much loss of quality? Would save on carrying an extra lens/camera!

Wish I could go to this but I'm working sadly. Going to Clacton on Sea on thursday though, looking forward to the Vulcan again (who doesn't  :P )  but I wish they could have got the P51, that put on a great performance last year!

Thank you for your thoughts.
When I was at the Southampton event the Harrier hovered right in front of me, I had to cover the camera for most of the performance and turn my back during the bow due to the grit and salt spray thrown up! I love the Vulcan, such a beautiful aircraft, and the noise well..... 
I do take shots of the overall display for things like the Red Arrows, also I might get some general wide angles of the crowd. I was not sure I would need the 2x III but from what you say I guess I will most of the time, I will be adding/removing it as little as possible, see reason above!

I would recommend the Sigma 150-500, with a caveat that I don't actually have it, but that I have tried your other alternative and it doesn't really do it for me in that situation.

At the focal lengths where it really matters, I feel confident that you would get better plane pictures both optically from the 150-500 lens and physically from being able to handle / pan / zoom, especially at the 500mm end which is really what you need for taking really good plane photos. Even a "wide angle" plane photo with several planes is going to call for a very long focal length, unless the planes are extremely close (roaring in your ear drums kind of close).

I doubt that the 70-200mm with the 2x extender (resulting in 400mm) is going to compare to the quality of the image you'll get with the 150-500 lens at 500mm with no extenders.

UPDATE: I think I'm wrong. I had heard that the 150-500 was really a pretty great lens overall, but I have just Googled some image comparisons and some of them seem to show that the 70-200 II is sharper, even with the disadvantage of a 2x teleconverter attached, and even comparing Canon details at 400mm equivalent focal length vs. Sigma details at a true focal length of 500mm.

(And if those comparisons I read are true, then really 150-500 lens is NOT a great lens at all like a lot of people have been saying, but a terrible lens.)

All that I can say based on my personal experience is that I am NOT satisfied with the quality of the 70-200mm II in this kind of situation with teleconverters. But the 150-500mm might be even worse.

Thanks for your input.
I will say that the 150-500 responds well to AFMA, the images I got in the past were not great, but since FoCal entered my arsenal and tested the 150-500 the images are sharper, though not on the same level as the 70-200 with 2x.
I was thinking of ditching the 150-500 but it is with me for the foreseeable future now, the quality is not that bad if you can't afford Canon glass of a similar focal length!  ;D
As for how close the planes are, I think from what I have heard that they are pretty darn close to the crowd, statements like they flew over the pier place them pretty close, but then one persons view of them flying past the end of the pier is another persons view of them flying over the pier!  ::)

So no one would pair the cameras and lenses the other way round then?

Cheers, Graham.

Hi Brian.
I don't have either of these devices, but I believe the cable is designed to trigger the camera from the flash, not the flash from the camera. The remote port appears to be unidirectional. I think you might get the ST-E3 to trigger with a PC cable and flash shoe, but you would loose all of the E-TTL functionality, the only way to get the head remote would be the E-TTL cable, but then you loose the hot shoe anyway.
Hope this helps.

Cheers Graham.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Lens to body pairing
« on: August 19, 2014, 09:53:17 AM »
Hi Folks.
I am going to the Bournemouth air festival, for those that don't know it is a free display with the aircraft flying over the coast, no access to parked aircraft as far as I am aware.
I would like to know the thoughts of those wiser than myself on which lens to put with which body for best image quality?
My thoughts are:-

Bodies                    lenses
7D        With      EF 70-200 f2.8 IS II with or without EF 2X III depending on how close or far the planes are. 
40D      With      Sigma 150-500 f5-6.3 DG OS HSM

Please could I have your thoughts on whether this is right or wrong!
Is it worth having the extra camera just for the extra 100mm?
I am looking to get a Black Rapid Double for carrying both, as it converts neatly to a single too when I only want to carry one body. Thoughts on that?
Anyone been and able to tell me if I will need the 2X III on the 70-200 or not?
Thanks in advance for your input.

Cheers Graham.

Canon General / Re: Need help to get deleted Canon photos back
« on: August 15, 2014, 04:35:12 AM »
Hi Aimeeuoy.
Sorry to hear of your plight, much good advice has been given so far.
Do not format the card, many (most or all?) of the newer OS do a low level format which overwrites the card with 0's which can prevent even the best software from finding the images! I believe cameras that use SD cards also do low level formats though I stand to be corrected on this!

This Statement scares me though!
Quote "Till now, about 238 images are stored on the SD card of this camera."
This implies that you have not downloaded the images since you got the camera?
For you and anyone else out there that may be doing this DO NOT DO THIS. After taking photos go home and download them to a computer and MAKE A BACKUP. If you don't have a PC you have a tablet or phone (you are posting here after all) and it is possible to get leads for all these. I have an iPad (posting on that now) an android tablet for DSLR Controller, and an android phone, I have the dongles for each of these to enable image transfer in the field (or on holiday to make duplicates).
Among the hardest things I have dealt with is the little old lady who asked me to get her pictures of her dog back off her PC, when I told her that my software and efforts couldn't find them she started sobbing "but he's dead they were all I had left"
Please back up, don't end up there!

Cheers Graham.

Thank you for any advice!

Landscape / Re: Rural Landscapes
« on: August 14, 2014, 04:22:42 AM »
Hi jwilburn.
Very nice series, what happened to the bridge, was the approach washed away by floods or something?

Blenheim Covered Bridge.

Landscape / Re: Rural Landscapes
« on: August 14, 2014, 04:17:01 AM »
Hi Click.
Thanks for the pointer to that post, thank goodness they went back to large size thumbs.

Cheers Graham.

Hi Folks.
Some nice looking shots on here, but what's with the ones that need a magnifying glass?

Cheers Graham.

Hello Graham,

Have a look here:

Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!
« on: August 14, 2014, 04:10:36 AM »
Green or no green, a stunning shot, I really like this, colour, composition, perfect.

Cheers Graham.

Finally had the does come by with six of the fawns this last Sunday evening.  This one got pretty close.  Just wish it would rain and put some green back on the hillsides.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: August 14, 2014, 04:07:00 AM »
Hi Milvus.
Nice shot, still looks like a cygnet but has lost the muddy grey down replaced with white, I keep missing this phase at our local pond! Nice first post, welcome.

Cheers Graham.

this is my first post on the forum...
Here's a young swan from two months ago. Quite a boring and over-shot species but a picture that I am personally happy with.

Site Information / Re: Smartphone users - interested in Tapatalk?
« on: August 13, 2014, 08:03:25 PM »
Hi folks.
I don't mind people wanting to use tapatalk, but please for the sanity of those who don't want to use it and are happy to use the web browser Please Please Please I Beg of you disable the pop up box nagging me to use it every time I visit.

Cheers Graham.

Site Information / Re: Small or Large Thumbnails - Poll
« on: August 13, 2014, 07:02:06 PM »
Hi tolusina.
I believe you are correct about the single call per page, but often replies quoting large numbers of images spread to the next page, and sometimes to a third page, though not often.

Cheers Graham.

I'm not certain on this, perhaps someone more geeky like Rusty will conform or discredit.

As each unique image has it's own unique URL, when a page calls for that unique URL multiple times, it only gets downloaded once using only the bandwidth required for a single download, the browser then locally positions the display of that single copy in multiple locations.
So, if that ^ is correct, there's no bandwidth penalty when displaying the same image multiple times on the same page, the visual clutter issue certainly remains and is often very annoying even on a desktop, much worse when viewing mobile.
Best would be where posters learn how and implement a post/reply method that removes all from the quote that has no relevance to the reply. Being as we are all perfectly flawed humans with widely varied knowledge and experiences, this is not likely to happen.
Hmm, to eliminate visual clutter, let's all learn to post at f1.2, narrow focus and depth of field, clutter be banished to Bokeh.
edit...... visual clutter applies to text that is needlessly quoted, most especially when multi-quoted, visual clutter is not limited to images.

Site Information / Re: Small or Large Thumbnails - Poll
« on: August 13, 2014, 04:18:49 AM »
Hi sagittariansrock.
I see a lot of advantage to this, I often use a slow connection and loading the same post full of images over and over can be a bind. When possible I edit photos out of replies with a few exceptions, like I will edit all but one with "I prefer this one most" as the general reply. Also nested replies are a bore, 7 or 8 replies one inside the other in the quotes is mostly superfluous!
I am not talking about the replies during a discussion where a response is broken down in to many parts with a reply to multiple quotes from the same post.
Perhaps we could edit for brevity?
I was also told off on forums years ago for not replying at the top of quotes, Hence my reply style! ;D
Please keep the large size pics as during the times I connect on the slower connections I cannot open large click throughs, and in general I find clicking out of a forum and back in detracts from the reading continuity of the site!

Just a few of my thoughts!

Cheers Graham.

I think it would be a courteous thing to remove images from replies, in the image galleries. It causes unnecessary repetition and wastes screen real estate. Can this be enforced in some way? Does anyone see any advantage to this?

Software & Accessories / Re: Insurance is an accessory right? :P
« on: August 11, 2014, 09:23:29 AM »
Hi Neuro.
Wow that really puts it in to perspective, I would guess that makes it totally intangible to not have insurance!

Cheers Graham.

When I go out with just the camera and only one of my lenses, depending on the lens a 'single loss' represents 30 – 67 years of the premium I currently pay to have all my gear covered.

Landscape / Re: Rural Landscapes
« on: August 09, 2014, 02:52:06 PM »
Hi Folks.
Some nice looking shots on here, but what's with the ones that need a magnifying glass?

Cheers Graham.

Hi Jrista.
I'd just like to add my thank you for this post, it is people like yourself taking the time and effort to do scientifically relevant tests like this that makes this such a great forum, with reliable accurate answers to questions.
It is posts like this that enable people like me to know that I can rely on the info, I can see the calculations, and even though I might have to look up a term like "seeing" and may not have used my maths enough to remember how to do the ratios, I can tell the method was sound.
So thank you for this.

Cheers Graham.

Business of Photography/Videography / Re: Copyright
« on: August 08, 2014, 07:49:11 PM »
Hi privatebydesign.
Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. Should this thread be pulled as it is a duplicate! Any idea if I can do that or is that a moderator job, does deleting the first post kill it or just make a mess? I'm really surprised it wasn't in the general section, but then I guess it is a business related question.

Cheers Graham.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 54