January 30, 2015, 05:07:18 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 - hawaiisunsetphoto

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
EOS Bodies / Re: 5diii to 7dii?
« on: September 21, 2014, 05:29:24 AM »
If your goal is to get more money for a prime, I'd say go with a 6D instead as another poster previously stated. That's actually exactly what I did and do not regret it at all.

For the type of shooting you said you do, there really is no "need" for the 5D3. From an IQ standpoint, I also prefer the files out of the 6D for whatever reason. Ever so slightly, but I do.

Also, depending on the deal you get, I'm certain you could probably pocket around 800-1000. I sold my gripped 5D3 earlier in the year for 2600 and bought a 6D for 1400. No brainer for my situation.

The other issue I see with you swapping out for a 7D2 is that it completely changes your lens collection. If one of the main things you do is landscape, you will surely miss the full frame sensor and not having to deal with the 1.6x crop. Even putting landscape aside, it will change the way you use your lenses for everything.

Is there a specific feature of the 7D2 that you feel is necessary for what you do?


Exactly.  Selling the 5DIII and picking up a 6D in the $1250 - $1350 range will leave you about $1200 for a nice prime, such as the 135L (about $800 used) and funds for a nice flash.

Portrait / Re: Second shooting a Wedding
« on: August 09, 2014, 03:46:59 AM »
Enjoyed each of these.  Nice captures.

Software & Accessories / Re: Sub $1000 27" monitor for photo editing
« on: July 12, 2014, 06:08:48 AM »
I have the earlier generation NEC 27" and 30" and I've been very pleased:


EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 6D or 5DM3 need your help guys
« on: June 11, 2014, 10:18:32 PM »
okay guys :)

Just bought the 6D with EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM ..... also 270ex ii and RC-6

is this flash good ? or shall i replace it with 320ex

the seller give good deal for these flashes ......

now i think i need good tripod and EF 135mm f/2L USM

To save you time and money in the long run, I would skip the baby stuff and go straight to big gun 600EX-RT. It's a powerful flash, you can always reduce the power level if need to.

You can add more more speedlite later, plus the 600ex transmitter can trigger 600ex-rt speedlites from 200ft distance. YUP....200 feet  ::)

You bought a nice camera, a great lens...  go for the 600EX-RT.   Buy it once, buy it right.

I have a loaner 200-400 on the way.  Can't wait to check it out!

Lenses / Re: just hit the purchase button
« on: March 13, 2014, 02:15:18 AM »
I have both the Sigma 35A and the 24-70 II.  Both are great, but I find that the zoom is on my camera most of the time.

Lenses / Re: 50mm upgrade or 85mm coverage?
« on: February 16, 2014, 07:15:38 PM »
Bringing back my question, I still debate upgrading my 50mm f.14, but now there is a Sigma 1.4 that may surprise...

The new Sigma 50 and the 50L are going to be comparable in price, both would be good choices.  The 85L is beautiful, and the Sigma 85 would be a great alternative to that at less than half the price.  Another alternative to consider, not mentioned yet, would be the new version 24-70mm f/2.8L II.  It's tack sharp, great bokeh, and would cover the wide end as well as some coverage between 50 and 135.  About the same price as the 85L.  Just a thought.

I'd recommend a second 6D.  Same form factor, great IQ, reasonably priced, and light - so good for travel since you travel a lot.  Since it's the same camera, just need to learn one set of controls, simplifies things.  The extra $$ you'd spend on a 5D Mark III you can put into lenses.  Since your wife likes zooms, I'd rec'd the new 24 - 70 II, which is tack sharp and rivals primes.  Doesn't have the reach of the 24 -105 though but better IQ.  On the other hand, the resale value of the 24 - 105 is plummeting, might be a consideration to hold it.  Then I'd rec'd the 70 - 200 f/4 IS.  Lighter than the 2.8.

Lenses / Re: 200/2 IS Lust
« on: December 21, 2013, 11:41:28 PM »
The ultimate lens.....   Great price assuming it's in good shape.  Can always sell it later for same or more.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Thinking of swapping a 5d3 for a 1D4.....
« on: December 12, 2013, 05:22:55 AM »
Wow.  If you could find an even swap, your 5D Mark III for a 1D Mark IV, I would do it in a heartbeat, assuming the 1D Mark IV is in excellent shape.  I paid around $2350 from my 5D Mark III.  Good 1D Mark IVs are going for $3K+.  I've owned both, both are great cameras.  If you need low light, full frame, you can pick up a used or refurb 6D later for $1400 or less.  My two cents.

Software & Accessories / Re: PC Monitor for photo editing
« on: December 04, 2013, 10:45:01 AM »
I've been happy with a 30" NEC MultiSync LCD3090WQXi and recently have picked up a 27" NEC Multisync PA271W. 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 2nd Body... 1D IV or another 5D III
« on: October 20, 2013, 07:14:32 AM »
I'd recommend the 1D Mark IV along with the 400mm 2.8L IS....  You'd already have the 300ish range covered with the 70-200 + 1.4x....   esp. for football....

Third Party Manufacturers / NEC MultiSync PA271W-BK 27" Monitor
« on: October 20, 2013, 04:52:35 AM »
Heads up.... just picked one up at B&H for $799.00.... 

Sell it and use that money toward 70-200 f2.8 IS II or 135L ;)

I have x2 5D III. Guess what lenses I have on both bodies most of time? 24-70 II + 70-200

Enjoy your new 24-70 II !!!   +1 on the recommendation, above.   Given your shooting needs, I'd rec'd selling the 24-105 and picking up the 135mm f/2L, which is a nice, fast lens that renders beautiful bokeh.

Lenses / Re: EF 70-200 f/2.8L II Horror Stories
« on: October 01, 2013, 05:45:09 AM »
I have owned three copies, because I couldn't decide between the 85 L and the 70-200.

I have had one copy that was completely useless, I had it in for repair, they changed TWO AF-moduls and TWO IS-units, they took out the front end, and three glass-elements and re-aligned the glass and when it came back the AF worked perfectly, but the IS was still not starting as quick as the previous copy, and it jumped, and often worked only one direction, and made a very weird, loud noise. It was VERY soft at 200 when I sent it in, and after all the re-alignment of the glass and front end it came back exactly the same. I sold it for cheap and had the buyer try it to see if if he liked it, and he bought, so I got a third copy, which like the two others had the issue of IS not being perfect, sometimes too slow to start, sometimes only one direction stabilized. But the AF and sharpness and overall image quality and build is as good as it gets. Wonderful lens. Just not as good as the 200 L, which is the reason I no longer have it

I had a ef 200mm f2.8 II L and it was a stunning optic, slightly sharper than my 135L. When I got my 70-200 f2.8 L IS II, I compared it to my 200L and found that the zoom had better contrast and colours. Sharpness tthere was littel between them, manybe a slight nod to the prime wide open. But with teleconverters, the zoom was a lot better. The Zoom has the latest IS unit, faster and quieter AF and it focusses closer too. The bokeh of the prime and general flare control was better than the zoom. The prime is a lot lighter and less obtrusive.
I felt that for my needs, the zoom was a better optic.

I think he means the 200mm f/2.0L IS, not the 200 f/2.8L....

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5