July 24, 2014, 03:08:14 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 - applecider

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
Lenses / Re: Safari 300 2.8 Mkii or 200-400 1.4x
« on: July 17, 2014, 11:58:48 AM »
The 28-300L never gets any love in these situations.  Should it?  If not why not.  Seems like it would at least cover  all the bases except beyond 300. 

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 60d results - the bird feeder
« on: July 16, 2014, 04:06:19 PM »
You said that the images looked a little soft but that you did edit in LR.

Question were you shooting raw or jpeg.  How much in camera sharpening was selected?

If Raw did you sharpen in LR? My work flow is usually to use bridge to adjust raw images and  I usually boost up the sharpen to about 70-75 and the radius to 1.2-1.4 and luminance as needed to get rid of grain. 

The other thing is that shooting at 2.8 give yourself a pretty narrow dof, I try to shoot at 5.6 if the light permits and at least with a 5diii go up to 2500 iso if needed.  The 7D and presumably your camera is not as friendly of high isos but I go to 640-800 or 1000 so to get shutter speed higher for the tweety birds.

The temptation to blame micro focus adjustment t is there but I'd look at some of the other variables as well.  Sounds like you have a good set up to get great picts.  More cardinals please.....

Do you put orange halves out?

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.

Have you handled a larger great white?  I'd suggest that you do and decide if you want a hand holdable or not.

The 400 is ii us m and 600 ii is usm  are for me marginally hand hold able (and thus less good for difficult birds in flight).  I have no experience with the 200-400.

The 300is ii usm and to a lesser degree the 500 ii usm are hand holdable and the 300 for sure takes extenders really well.  The MTF would indicate that the 500 does so very well as well.

So Id go for the 300 or the 500 unless you are in very good shape in which case any of the great white sharks would work for you.  If I were to buy a 500 I'd consider camera canada as they have a deal on the 500....

Landscape / Re: Seashore, Beaches and Harbours
« on: June 28, 2014, 04:51:01 PM »
A few more from the Cape Cod area around Sesuit Harbor.

Landscape / Re: Seashore, Beaches and Harbours
« on: June 28, 2014, 04:47:48 PM »
Hey that's no dog it's a grif.  Here's one playing with his ball.  Oh and on the other coast-Cape Cod.

A few osprey most with 400 2.8 ii with 1.4xiii 5diii

From a nest along lower county road x swan river West Dennis  Massachusetts

Software & Accessories / Re: Apple to Cease work on Aperture
« on: June 27, 2014, 06:06:41 PM »
At least in this case apple is being public about their plans and proposing an upgrade path. The usual apple MO is to just  be quiet about their plans until they really have to go public from user outcry.

A little detail about the future photos program like raw handling library size, location options and post processing tools would not kill them, not their style to give us that though.

Animal Kingdom / Re: Portrait of your "Best friend"
« on: May 31, 2014, 03:36:29 PM »
Young Griffon out sniffing near sunset, Portland Oregon.

1DX ISO 1000 lens 420 300ii +1.4 640sec  f4.0

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS Sample Images
« on: May 19, 2014, 07:13:58 PM »
Photo editor any shots at f4?

1D X Sample Images / Re: Any Thing shot with a 1Dx
« on: May 19, 2014, 05:44:39 PM »
Eml  not only do I love your images but your watermarks are tastefully placed and done as well, there but subtle Kudos

Oregon coast haystack rock end of April tufted puffin in flight.  Had to approach at low tide early in day. Still highly cropped.
Ef 600 ii w 1.4 ex ii handheld not a technically great photo they are supposed to be there through May the little buggers nest in tunnels or cracks in the rock high up on the north side 

Lenses / Re: Bought the 300mm 2.8 ii and think its huge
« on: April 21, 2014, 01:21:44 PM »
Steve don't want to get off topic but if you have the sigmonster would you please start a thread and post some images taken with it and with the teleconverter.

With regards the Op...
The 300 will grow on you and it is really a 420 f4.0 with a 1.4 tele, and way smaller and easier to control than the 400mm f2.8 i or ii.

Camera Body Gallery / Shot with an EOS-M
« on: April 16, 2014, 10:39:42 PM »
Got a chance to sit sideline at an NBA game.  The camera rules indicated on the ticket were that no detachable lens camera/ lens combinations were allowed, and there were plenty of security types prowling the court when play was not in progress.

So I thought that the EOS-M and a 24-70 lens might sneak by, and it did.  Needless to say no flashes were allowed either, but the light was surprisingly good.

I prefocused on the basket and tried to catch action that occurred around the net the best shot is below.  Surprisingly the 24-70f 2.8 was almost enough lens.  The pros that were shooting the game were firing the 1dx and what looked like a 200f2.   Rebound photo ƒ/2.8  50.0 mm  1/800   800     Shutter speed priority AE

And a second one showing static crowd picture: https://www.flickr.com/photos/56580542@N05/13906821583/

Lenses / Re: Teleconverter advice
« on: April 15, 2014, 01:21:30 PM »
And just to make it a visual discussion here is a picture taken with the 600 plus canon 1.4iii.


This was hand held, which is possible even for a middling in shape person such as myself.  But daily use and three days a week in a gym doing shoulder exercises doesn't hurt.  If I was going on safari I'd spend at least an hour a day with my biggest lens for a month before to get ready.

To the point of this thread, I'd go with the canon iii tc unless you never planned to upgrade your equipment to another white lens.  I'd take the tamron 70-200 to a shop and try the 1.4 iii on the lens to see if it worked.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6