Messages

1

Lenses / Re: Do you wish your 70-200L were black?

« on: Today at 12:13:25 AM »

You can spot a Canon shooter instantly?  Are not Sony telephotos also white?  I would prefer my 70-200 to be black.  I had the original 80-200 2.8L that was black and liked the color better.  But it does not take tele extenders and it was too much carrying that plus the 300 4L to cover the range (in addition to standard lens), so I sold them for the 70-200 2.8L plus 1.4X extender.  (Actually in between I used a Sigma 100-300 4 which was all black and sharp and great, but it stopped autofocusing and Sigma said repair parts were no longer available).

I kind of think the silver Pentax telephotos are cool.  Alternatively, I really like the white bodies like the Pentax shown above and wish Canon made one because it would look great with their white lenses.  If I was rich I would probably just have all my bodies and lenses done in a matching original paint scheme from Pimp Your Camera in Germany http://www.pimpyourcam.com/

2

Landscape / Re: Jippieeee! It's spring! Post your first spring pictures here.

« on: May 16, 2013, 11:09:51 AM »

Pretty kitties in pretty flowers!  April 26, 2013, at Le Parc Des Felins in France.

3

Animal Kingdom / Re: Zoo Pics 2

« on: May 12, 2013, 05:33:05 PM »

Really nice stuff - thanks for all the contributions.  I just returned from a two week European wild cat tour (six zoos/parks).  Here is one (black leopard) from the group photo workshop at Wildlife Heritage Foundation in southern England (near Ashford).  Really a worthwhile experience if you are ever in the area.  They do three different tours, mine was the least expensive at 149 pounds.  This is for a group of ten where you go right up to the fences and they throw meat to entice the cats to walk towards the camera.  They also do a smaller group tour for only four people for 249 pounds, where they do the same plus go inside a couple small cat enclosures.  Then they have an individual tour for 500 pounds where you have the staff all to yourself and tell them which animals you want to photograph.

Here is the link to their website.  Click on the photography tab at the top to see the different offerings.
http://www.whf.org.uk/

4

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: "I am boycotting Nikon" campaign

« on: April 13, 2013, 04:32:57 PM »

I am not a hunter myself and do not see the attraction of it.  Nevertheless, properly regulated hunting can bring in lots of money for conservation.  And the statements above about feral hogs - which are non-native invasives - are certainly true.  The boycott is ridiculous.

5

Landscape / Show me cactus!

« on: April 11, 2013, 11:22:30 AM »

Post your favorite cactus photos here.

I got this one last weekend at Gates Pass in Tucson, a popular overlook for watching the sunset.  On the shadow side of the pass, the last rays of the sun can strike individual saguaro cacti like this one.

6

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: CF card recommendation for 1DX

« on: April 09, 2013, 11:52:17 PM »

I have not tested different brands, but the photo lab I work at sells Delkin because they are the only cards (as far as I know) that are made in the USA.  Just food for thought for the US forum members.

7

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Heading to Scottsdale, AZ..anyone with suggestions for landscape photography?

« on: April 09, 2013, 11:48:22 PM »

Sedona does have its charm and undeniable beauty of the rocks but I really hate the way they have let cheap nasty development sprawl all over the place.

Agree 100 percent.  Sedona should have been designated as a national park and now it is too late.  (Yes parts are national forest land so you can get some clean views, but not general overviews which are marred by the city).

8

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Heading to Scottsdale, AZ..anyone with suggestions for landscape photography?

« on: March 30, 2013, 11:30:19 AM »

24-105 (same general zoom I use) is fine if all you want are large vistas.  70-200 (which I also use - non IS) is recommended if you want shots of isolated subjects, like the couple shots I posted of a tree on the edge of the Grand Canyon or dead tree silhouetted against red rocks of Sedona.

9

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Heading to Scottsdale, AZ..anyone with suggestions for landscape photography?

« on: March 30, 2013, 01:39:21 AM »

(photos continued)

10

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Heading to Scottsdale, AZ..anyone with suggestions for landscape photography?

« on: March 30, 2013, 01:37:46 AM »

(photos continued)

11

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Heading to Scottsdale, AZ..anyone with suggestions for landscape photography?

« on: March 30, 2013, 01:36:13 AM »

Another Tucson resident here with my two cents worth (and accompanying thumbnails).

Near Scottsdale/Phoenix.
1. Estrella Mountain Regional Park.  Short hike out to open views of saguaros and the setting sun (not much else of interest though, no cool cliffs or the like).
2. Superstition Mountains.  Never personally been, but lots of photographers in Phoenix go there.

Near Tucson (which is about 2 hours south of Scottsdale).
1. Sabino Canyon.  The most scenic spot in the Tucson area, nice interesting cliffs, nice stream, high likelihood of desert mule deer.
2. Catalina State Park.  Good vistas of saguaros and the cliffs above it (Pusch Ridge) is very scenic at sunset (terrible at sunrise).
3. Tucson Mountain Park and Saguaro National Park West.  Classic views of dense stands of saguaros.

Northern Arizona (between 1 1/2 to 3 1/2 hours north of Scottsdale).
1. Prescott - Watson Lake.  Interesting rocks surrounding lake.
2. Sedona.  A must see - just go there.
3. Grand Canyon.  See comment above.  Also, elk have become ubiquitous in the last few years - it is impossible not to see them now.
4. Highway 64 (east of Grand Canyon).  Interesting deep gorge on a scenic pullout off the highway.  Light is very harsh - would be best at sunrise or dusk probably.

12

Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?

« on: March 28, 2013, 03:29:45 PM »

Late 1990's was using a Pentax K1000 but wanted autofocus.  Pentax AF bodies were cheap looking, so I considered Nikon (N90?) and Canon (Elan2 or A2?).  Sent in a reply card for free brochure to Nikon, never received.  Called Nikon's toll free phone number for brochure, they took my name and address, still never received.  Called Canon and had a brochure in my mailbox in less than a week.

I figured if that is the kind of service Nikon provides, that is not a company I want to deal with.  Bought a Canon Elan2e, eventually a second one, then a used eos1 (cheap cause everyone was going digital), and finally a 5D2 (the only digital body I have owned).

13

Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8 cropped vs 400 2.8 non cropped vs 200 2.8 with teleconverter?

« on: March 27, 2013, 11:53:50 PM »

The 400 f/2.8 is not only outrageously expensive, it is huge.  Are you really prepared to lug around something that big and use a tripod all the time?  You did not indicate what you are using it for, so maybe this applies to you, but unless you are a professional wildlife or sports photographer, I do not see how a lens like that could be justified.

If you need the reach, I would concur with the previous post to use the 400 f/5.6.  Or perhaps split the difference and get the 400 f/4 DO.

14

EOS Bodies / Re: 5DMK2 just dropped from canon website.

« on: March 21, 2013, 06:16:22 PM »

The 5d2 is dropped from their USA website, but they still list the Rebel t2i??? (Along with the t3, t3i, t4i, t5i, SL1).  Isn't it about time some of those went away?

15

EOS Bodies / Re: Congratulations Canon to another great Camera release!!

« on: March 21, 2013, 04:18:49 PM »

Here is a nice short review of hands on with a pre-production SL1.

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2013/03/21/first-impressions-canon-rebel-sl1/