February 26, 2015, 08:02:09 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 - Diverman

Pages: [1]
Canon General / Re: National Park Advice - Location and Body/Lenses
« on: July 12, 2013, 08:08:09 PM »
Thanks for the advice so far. I'm torn between which extender to look at. I've heard to always go with the 1.4 because it will AF with f/4 lenses, and that makes sense. The worry I have is that I don't see myself getting an f/4 lens anytime soon, and I am worried that without the 2x I won't see much of a difference from 200 to 280.

Cali, do you still live in CA?  If so, where are some places you'd recommend a photo trip to?


Canon General / National Park Advice - Location and Body/Lenses
« on: July 07, 2013, 03:39:07 PM »
First, you may remember this thread, (http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=12048.0) in which I claimed to be going to Glacier National Park.  Well, plans have changed since then!  I still greatly appreciate the advice!

I will be visiting Yosemite National Park in September for 5 days.  I have a campsite in the park, and am extremely excited to visit the area Ansel Adams helped make so famous!

I have another camera and lens dilemma though.  My current gear:
Canon 60D – traded the t4i to a friend who wanted a physically smaller camera
70-200 f/2.8 IS II
10-22 USM
50 f/1.8
430 EXII Flash
Macro extension tube
Manfrotto tripod and head

My first question – I have the wide angle covered, but is it worth looking at buying/renting a 2x extender in case there is any wildlife?

Secondly, I have very much been enjoying my macro extension tube.  I tried the 100L macro at a camera shop recently.  I wasn't blown away by it, but I could definitely see how the dedicated macro would be a helpful tool to have.  Is it worth renting/purchasing the macro for these trips?

Third – I tried a 6D and 24-105 combination at the camera store several days ago, and absolutely loved it.  It is definitely something I am thinking about picking up before the trip.  I love astrophotography (particularly the Milky Way) so the incredible FF Iso difference would be extremely helpful.  The issue I face is that I sometimes find the 60D autofocus to be slightly lacking when tracking moving objects.  Would I run into this issue with the 6D as well?

The camera store I go to has a very nice option that if I rent something, if I decide I would like to purchase it after the trip is over, that the rental price will go directly into the purchase price of the lens (but obviously a new one and not the one they rent out).

Finally, I also have the option to visit either Sequoia/Kings Canyon, Death Valley or Zion National park in October.  Does anyone have an opinion on any of those parks?  If Sequoia/Kings Canyon is the choice, which of those should I look at camping in (assuming I can find a spot)?

Any other advice, including which hikes to take at Yosemite, is welcomed and very much appreciated!


Even though I don't post much, please don't delete me!  I already was deleted once I think (about a year ago), because I created an account to ask a question then didn't get on for a while... The thread stayed around and just showed my name forum status as "guest."  Any way to look back at the posts before you delete people, as long as they have posted at least once?

Lenses / Re: Glacier National Park - New lens?
« on: January 05, 2013, 02:04:13 AM »
Again, I can't thank you enough for all your help!

I went to my local camera store today and tried out the 10-22.  10mm is quite a difference from 18!  I then tried to see if they could come anywhere near B&H prices (so I could support a local place), but they wouldn't even budge a few dollars and they certainly wouldn't match the current price.

Needless to say, I went home and purchased the 10-22 for my trip.  Thank you all for your wonderful advice, and for reassuring me with what I was leaning towards in the first place.

Sorry I didn't acknowledge everyone earlier.

rlaverty - thanks!  I'm really looking forward to the trip.

Fat Daddy - I am definitely going to make sure the Going to the Sun Road is included on our trip.  I've heard quite a bit about it.

Texphoto - It's a great idea and as much as I'd like to, I think renting another body would be a little too expensive for my taste for just one location on our trip.

Robby - I do plan on renting the extender, so thanks.  I'll have to look at Polebridge.

RLP - thanks for your input on the lens
Standard - unfortunately, I am not a huge fan of the manual focus only sticker on that lens (at least not at this point... so Zeiss lenses are out too I guess...  :P

Scrappy - I liked the 1.4 extender, as I also tried both of the extenders at the photo store.  I really didn't notice much AF slow down or accuracy issues at all with either extender, so that was super nice!

Neuro - thanks. As a side note I appreciate your more technical posts, as I am an engineering student myself (I believe I remember you are some type of engineer, but I digress)

Steve - yeah that's kind of what I was thinking and seeing via flickr.

Distant - I completely agree!  I've missed several pretty stellar shots because I sometimes just have to put my camera down and soak it all in.

Halfrack - I'll definitely consider renting both converters, and I'll definitely bring my trusty tripod and trigger

Alan - I looked into that after your post, and I must say it looks pretty interesting.  Thanks!

Michi - That kind of surprises me, but that's awesome!  Thanks for your input as well.

bholliman - I am really looking forward to the trip!  Sorry to make you jealous, but hopefully you'll get to make it back soon!

Michael - I will definitely bring a CP with me, as well as a ND.  Thanks for your advice on locations as well.

Thanks again!

Lenses / Re: Glacier National Park - New lens?
« on: January 03, 2013, 03:18:36 PM »
Thank you all very much!  Right now I think I'm going to purchase the 10-22 and possibly rent an extender. Again, thank you for all the input so far - it is greatly appreciated!

Lenses / Re: Glacier National Park - New lens?
« on: January 03, 2013, 08:59:17 AM »
Thanks for the replies already!  I guess I'll look at the 10-22 more seriously now.

Lenses / Glacier National Park - New lens?
« on: January 03, 2013, 12:57:11 AM »
Hello all,

I will be going to Glacier National Park In late July.  I am planning on taking quite a few pictures, as I love traveling to the National Parks.

I have a t4i, 70-200 2.8 IS II, 18-135 IS, and the 25mm macro extension tubes.

I have two main questions concerning this trip.

First, should I look into purchasing (or perhaps renting) a specific wide angle?  I hope I can upgrade to FF sometime, but this likely won't be until about 5 years down the road.  The two options I was considering here are the 16-35 II and the 10-22.  I understand the crop vs FF and everything, but is there a big quality difference?  I also like to try some astrophotography, but either lens would be better than what I currently have as far as that is concerned (and besides, with the 600 rule and my crop body the not as fast lens should allow me to have brighter pictures, all things considered).  Are there any sweeping landscapes at Glacier that beg for an ultra-wide angle shot?  I'm not the best at panos, so I'd rather not count on that.

Secondly, should I add an extender for wildlife?  If so, would the 1.4x III be enough?  I have read many reviews that the 1.4x III is a better extender than the 2x III, but am definitely not opposed to the 2x III at all.  If there is no need for an extender, I would rather save the money, but I definitely don't want to miss that moose/bear/bald eagle shot because I don't have one (or don't have the right one). 

Lastly, are there any locations that are a must?  And is there any other specific gear that I "must" bring to have a successful trip?

Unfortunately, time is kind of a rush as the spectacular lens rebates are ending soon.  Any advice is greatly appreciated!


Pages: [1]