October 01, 2014, 02:55:04 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 - streestandtheatres

Pages: [1] 2
1
Excuse my ignorance, but I've read about people returning lenses and I wonder how this works. How does one even go about finding a retailer that would accept multiple returns? The place where I bought my sigma lens from has a once only return policy, and it wasn't like they had multiple copies in stock anyway... (Not that I want to return my lens!)

2
I'd like to upgrade my 600d+400 5.6, and I'd say that 50% of my photographs are of stationary subjects where the 600d's af is absolutely fine. And about 50% of the time I photograph birds in flight and if I have the camera on f5.6 I'm lucky to get 20% of the frames in focus. With the lens at f8 I don't miss much.
How big a difference is the af now?

3
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D Mark II- September 15th at midnight? Whose midnight?
« on: September 15, 2014, 01:16:14 AM »
Photokina's? Japan's? Amarillo Texas'? Just curious if anyone knows...

Canon announcements usually drop 12AM or 1AM EST.

So I'm guessing you don't mean EST in Queensland.  :)

4
Lenses / Re: Your favorite older EF lens
« on: September 03, 2014, 04:21:59 AM »
400mm f/5.6L, the oldest lens still in the current lineup. Lightweight, well-balanced, fast AF, sharp, affordable - the perfect birding lens for beginners and those on a budget.
^ Yupp, I agree exactly with what she said!

How on earth can a telephoto lens without IS be described as a  "perfect birding lens for beginners"? I would have missed 70-80% of my best photos of birds without IS. The lens' former greatest proponent Arthur Morris has long discarded it because lenses because it doesn't have IS.

I am not saying the lens is no good - it is excellent for birds in flight, and it is fine on a tripod. But, there are just so many opportunities, especially with small birds, where you have to be able to take shots at a 1/100 to 1/400s hand holding. The lens without IS is not "perfect" but limited in its usefulness and that is why we want a new one with 4 stops of IS.

I think of myself as a beginner. I have a 600d and the 400 5.6 is the only L-lense I own. Prior to the 600d I had a point and shoot.  I bought the 400 it as a step up from the 55-250. Since having the lens I have switched to always shooting in manual, and I have a much better understanding processing because I have to pay more attention to iso. And I'd say that once the first few months were out of the way I don't miss much. OK maybe if a bird of prey is diving at speed or I'm in a rainforest then I don't expect too much. But for a beginner birder it's an awesome lens, not least because it's available second hand in terrific condition for so little money (I paid about the same for a mint condition 400 as I did for a new Sigma 35 1.4).
I guess it might depend on where you live. In and around where I am there's plenty of light and many of the small birds are curious, and it's quite possible to get reasonably close.
I'm not saying that it wouldn't be better with IS (there are times, for sure), but I would recommend it to anyone else starting out trying to photograph birds.

We will disagree on this: I would strongly recommend against the 400/5.6 L. And I always put my money where my mouth is - here is a link to photos I took last month, which would not have been possible without IS and it would have been a wasted holiday for bird watching as virtually all the birds to be found were done so opportunistically and under adverse conditions.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=22284.0

See also http://www.birdsasart.com/b13.html for the advantages of the 100-400l IS over the 400/5.6

Fair enough. Nice shots! There was no Tammy when I bought the 400... Getting the 400 for 1/2 the price of a new 100-400 made the decision easier. There were no second hand 100-400s near me. And when I took this the week after I bought the lens...: https://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelhooper/11315987185/

5
Lenses / Re: Your favorite older EF lens
« on: September 03, 2014, 03:47:41 AM »
400mm f/5.6L, the oldest lens still in the current lineup. Lightweight, well-balanced, fast AF, sharp, affordable - the perfect birding lens for beginners and those on a budget.
^ Yupp, I agree exactly with what she said!

How on earth can a telephoto lens without IS be described as a  "perfect birding lens for beginners"? I would have missed 70-80% of my best photos of birds without IS. The lens' former greatest proponent Arthur Morris has long discarded it because lenses because it doesn't have IS.

I am not saying the lens is no good - it is excellent for birds in flight, and it is fine on a tripod. But, there are just so many opportunities, especially with small birds, where you have to be able to take shots at a 1/100 to 1/400s hand holding. The lens without IS is not "perfect" but limited in its usefulness and that is why we want a new one with 4 stops of IS.

I think of myself as a beginner. I have a 600d and the 400 5.6 is the only L-lense I own. Prior to the 600d I had a point and shoot.  I bought the 400 it as a step up from the 55-250. Since having the lens I have switched to always shooting in manual, and I have a much better understanding processing because I have to pay more attention to iso. And I'd say that once the first few months were out of the way I don't miss much. OK maybe if a bird of prey is diving at speed or I'm in a rainforest then I don't expect too much. But for a beginner birder it's an awesome lens, not least because it's available second hand in terrific condition for so little money (I paid about the same for a mint condition 400 as I did for a new Sigma 35 1.4).
I guess it might depend on where you live. In and around where I am there's plenty of light and many of the small birds are curious, and it's quite possible to get reasonably close.
I'm not saying that it wouldn't be better with IS (there are times, for sure), but I would recommend it to anyone else starting out trying to photograph birds.

6
Animal Kingdom / Re: BIRD IN FLIGHT ONLY -- share your BIF photos here
« on: August 20, 2014, 07:53:32 PM »
Buzzard with catch.

7
Landscape / Re: ....and the sun shone through it.
« on: June 09, 2014, 08:52:54 PM »
I'll add a sun+grass shot.
Glen Alice, sigma 35mm@f2.5

Sunset
by M Hooper, on Flickr

8
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7d2 IQ thoughts.
« on: May 27, 2014, 07:24:40 PM »
Well, I am going to be optimistic. My 60D will last until the 7D2 shows up. And I want the 7D2 for a birding camera - the reach is important. Also important is AF at f/8. I hand-hold a 400mm f/5.6L for all my birding photos, and if I successfully bulk up my scrawny arms, have plans for a hand-held 500mm or 600mm f/4.

+1 for the desire for AF at f8. To be honest, being able to set iso ranges in various modes would make me happy. In my experience the 400 5.6 is great if you get the exposure just right, but at higher iso this is tricky, and a highly customizable 'auto' iso would be endlessly useful. If I'm walking through a forest, being able to switch quickly (half a second) from iso 400-800 @f8 for bif, and then to 800-2000 @5.6 for a bird on a perch would be terrific, especially if I was also able to keep ss above 1/1250.

9
Can someone help me out. Why would I buy the new 10-18 and not the existing 10-22?

What might be the difference in iq?
I can only think I'd use it for landscapes (probably using a tripod, though even without I don't find too little light unless it's way before dawn or if I have a nd filter, in which case I doubt IS would be enough.). I find photomerge works pretty well with a 35mm (and is pretty hopeless at 18mm (my existing widest), and I can't imagine ever taking a picture which included people at less than 18mm due to the distortion.

10
Black-shouldered kite from the weekend.

11
Lenses / Re: Value Lens for birding
« on: April 21, 2014, 09:31:06 PM »
I bought a 400 5.6 for my 600d and I haven't noticed the lack of IS. OK, I live in a sunny country, but the autofocus on the 600 isn't exactly stellar, nor the iso performance, and I haven't had any problems. I mostly get away with 1/1250-1/1600 at f5.6-7.1 and iso under 800. For me, not having to fuss over zooming makes my life easier, as there are fewer options for composition, which is what I need with quick moving animals. (It's fun for surfing portraits too! 1/1200, 5.6, 400)
I bought the lens second hand for a very good price, too, cheaper than I could buy the Tamron...

12
Lenses / Re: Tele-lens on a budget
« on: March 05, 2014, 06:24:25 PM »
I'm not sad that I bought the 400 5.6 just before the Tamron came out. Something about not having to think about zooming works in my head. OK, I can't take photos in the rainforest, but I haven't found the lack of IS a problem. I though pushing the ISO would cause graininess but I haven't found it at all a problem. And I bought the lens in perfect condition second-hand for 25% less and a new Tamron. (The attached photo is a slight crop, for aspect only. f5.6, 1/1600, iso 640, crop-sensor camera. Looks pretty good to me!)

13
Portrait / Re: Post photos of other photographers in action
« on: February 16, 2014, 06:30:45 PM »
The guy on the beach has 'F I L M' inked into his fingers.

14
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: February 12, 2014, 08:11:58 PM »
Always nice to catch a willie wagtail!

15
Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits
« on: January 14, 2014, 08:32:27 PM »
A kestrel in Sydney.

Pages: [1] 2