July 25, 2014, 07:40:13 AM

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 - scyrene

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12
1
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 22, 2014, 01:52:15 PM »
I'm sure mammals require more effort (staying downwind, etc), but I've never attempted to photograph them.

Mammals can be easy.  They let you get nice and close sometimes.  Just make sure any bunnies you try to take pictures aren't from Caerbannog...

I'm afraid I had to look up that reference :-[

I have done rabbits, actually. They used to forage in front of a fixed bird hide at my local nature reserve. Feral British rabbits always seen very timid otherwise, though.


2
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 22, 2014, 08:23:07 AM »
We have run into the better vs. best (budget vs. money-no-object) argument once more. There ain't no way of solving this. Yes, equipment matters. Yes, fieldcraft matters. Yes, technique matters. Next question?

Well, MY next question is how many of us wear ghillie suits like Jrista describes vs. just plain camo vs. blind vs. no blind and no camo? How many people use camo covers on their lenses ("Lens Coat" or other)? How many use products that claim to suppress human odors?

Maybe wildlife in the UK is more used to people - I've never felt the need for camouflage gear. I did get a portable bird hide, but it's too bulky to carry along with my camera gear, so I never use it. I tend to photograph whatever birds I encounter - only going after particular species occasionally - so it's more a matter of walking miles and hoping to bump into something good.

Species vary a lot, of course. Woodpigeon are common around people, but maybe because they're a legal quarry here, they tend to fly off the moment you point a big lens at them. Other tiny birds, like goldcrests, don't seem to care even if you get within a few feet.

I'm sure mammals require more effort (staying downwind, etc), but I've never attempted to photograph them.

3
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 20, 2014, 06:40:55 AM »
On top of this, these animals come closer during crepuscular hours, and the 7D just falls flat here with noisy, rough RAW files.


I found the AF somewhat more consistent, but I absolutely agree the 7D is a good light camera.  I cringed when the ISO went above 800.  I barely blink when my 1D X hits ISO 6400.


Not just the 1D X. I shot these at ISO 12800 in at-sunset/post-sunset light on the 5D III (I have to say, I was blown away by the fact that these came out as well as they did...people who complain about the 5D III, it's dynamic range, or its overall performance haven't put one through it's paces):








Those are lovely, especially the first one. And they demonstrate one thing a longer lens and greater subject distance gives you (with caveats) - a nicer background. People arguing one must get close for good photos ignore this aspect. Those bear shots further up the thread were good, but the background was nowhere near as blurred. Obviously the distance of the subject from the background is a determining factor, but assuming it's the same, a longer lens from a greater distance will blur things better than a wider-angle lens from a closer distance (I mean, I *suppose* one could try and use a really wide aperture lens like the 200 f/2 to even things out, but I still find the best blurred backgrounds are produced by the longest focal lengths - 1000mm f/10 beats 100mm f/2.8, except maybe at macro distances).

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Eos7D mk2, How EXCITED will you be if . . .?
« on: July 19, 2014, 06:22:06 PM »
A bit odd, this. Of course both technique and gear matter. Who could argue otherwise? The level of gear you want, and the amount of time you devote to using it, is a matter of personal preference and circumstance. And whether one decides to upgrade a camera body or a lens, or try and push their current gear further by taking it out more or to new places - that too is personal.

The Yellowstone thing is a bit of a red herring. Most people can't go to the top places for wildlife on a regular basis - and that expense might be just as worthwhile put into better gear used locally. I've got (especially bird) photos I'm proud of in my local area - many of which would not have been possible without the equipment I used. Of course I could take an iPhone to a beauty spot and get a nice photo in good conditions - but if I took a 1Dx and 600L I'd get even better photos of certain things.

I like walking round knowing the only impediment in 99% of situations is me. In the past I used less able equipment, and it was frustrating. Now I can think, if I go out more, go to more places, polish my fieldcraft, then nothing can stop me except bad luck. Some people might want to do it the other way round - but it's not either/or.

5
Great egret - 1D X +300 f/2.8 IS II + 2x III, handheld - I yanked it off the tripod while shooting an owl and caught this bird in the first light of the day with the sun just above the horizon.  An osprey with fish came a few minutes later but I wasn't fast enough!  f/6.3 1/2000s ISO 3200:




Gorgeous light, and well controlled exposure.

6
EOS-M / Re: Next official EF-M Lens
« on: July 18, 2014, 11:11:22 AM »
I'd love a small macro lens with reasonably long working distance. Would the M's design allow for an equivalent to the 100L macro or 180L in a much smaller package? I've found the M a really good macro camera, with both the 100 and the MP-E - most of the time I'm using Live View for macro work anyway (especially with the MP-E) so the lack of a viewfinder isn't a problem.

But these lenses are rather bulky on the small body.

7
Excellent job scyrene.  They are very difficult and fast.  If you can get them when they head into the wind and control your lens you have the greatest chance for success IME.

Thanks! That's absolutely right - sometimes they will fly into a headwind and hang motionless for a moment or two.

8
Canon General / Re: Canon PowerShot SX60 HS Update [CR2]
« on: July 15, 2014, 06:55:43 AM »
Well, my SLR lens kif has a 1500x range.

Looking forward to hearing about this one.
Impressive! 1500X!

My kit has a 60X range.... From 10mm to 600mm... 

You must have some interesting lenses......

Full frame fisheye to 2800mm telescope plus 2x TC on 1.6 crop.

I've wondered this before, so I may as well ask. Are telescope focal lengths equivalent to lenses? Does a 2800mm telescope have the same field of view as a 2800mm lens?

9
Beautiful. I really like this picture. Nicely done scyrene.

Thanks!

10
A (probably juvenile) swallow, one of many feeding low over a cornfield yesterday. Very strong wind - at first I didn't think it would be worth trying (holding a big lens steady in a crosswind is pretty difficult), but the background was so lovely, I relented. They move so fast, you need a lot of patience, but also it was on the threshold of the focus limit, so I had to use full focus, which slows it down a fair bit. This one turned out okay though :) 500mm, f/4, 1/4000, ISO 320.

11
5diii + 1.4x III  + 2x II + 600 f 4 ii +moon

The "old 2x tele ii" does stack with the 1.4iii here are some moon shots from inside Portland city limits.  I really like the definition the shots are adjusted for WB and contrast as well as exposure.  Most are reported as F8 but must be f11, LV tried to focus but rarely did.  No extension tube used.

Good stuff. The moon is a great target for this sort of thing. The mark II 2x will stack with any of the others afaik, as it has such a deep recess at the rear (it has to go in front of the others). The camera won't register the fact there are two - it will only recognise the TC closest to the lens, so exif for aperture and focal length will be incorrect as you've noted. I wouldn't bother with autofocus, but IS works as normal :)

12
Canon General / Re: Dragonfly, Powered by Canon Lenses
« on: July 13, 2014, 05:13:40 AM »
What I wouldn't give to have just one of those lenses... With all those, they couldn't miss one, right? :)

13
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: D810!!!
« on: July 01, 2014, 06:43:08 AM »
Stupid many of you thinking about buttons and stuff, if you buy a new beautiful car you don´t think about the buttons YOU GET USED TO IT ... i´ve been a canon owner since 2008 when i started shooting , and been shooting aurora, volcano's and models and using 1ds mk III now , i like it but i´ve been waiting for something like the d810.
Really cant wait for the results in aurora and night shooting and the d810 really F****d the 5d mk III up in video shooting BIG differences so grow up and think about the facts if you really are a good shooter and need a better quality in your photos, if not stick to your favorite. As in now Nikon got the best one on the market ( sorry to say for you religious people )  but it´s a fact

all the best to you
Gunnar

Poor ergonomics can spoil one's experience. (I'm not saying Canon has better ergonomics, I've never used Nikon cameras so can't compare). But I encounter poorly designed products every day, and it's depressing. Somebody actually designed a jug or kettle that spills when you pour, or tissue that tears anywhere but the perforations, or plastic film that requires a set of surgical tools to remove. Sure, we can (and usually have to) get used to these things, but I don't think it's asking too much that these problems are ironed out before going into production.

Of course, these are much more clear cut than button positions on a camera, I suspect, which is more a matter of personal taste. Fwiw I also have my dials programmed so one does ISO with a button pushed down - it is a lot quicker than the other cameras I've used, and tiny differences can add up to a better experience.

14
Something just slightly different . . .

Exquisite light.

15
Some common terns :)
The 2nd photo: so that how it looks before it end up on my car.... ;D
Nice catch  ;)

Ha, thanks. I had no idea it would do that until I looked at the LCD. Luck > skill a lot of the time :)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12