1
Software & Accessories / Re: 5d3+70-200mm: Is there a Sling Bag that can handle this + one other lens?
« on: May 19, 2013, 10:24:25 AM »
Crumpler "5 Million Dollar Home" does just that. I have one - would recommend it.
May 23, 2013, 09:23:38 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.
2
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Fuji x100(s) to Supplement an SLR
« on: May 16, 2013, 04:58:02 PM »
Canon flashes will work on the x100s on the shoe or on cord but in manual only. Have done both. The 430 is a nice fit on the camera for a bit of bounce light.
I love mine - it doesn't replace my 5d2 but its excellent at what it does and is definitely worth it in lieu of say just another L lens
I love mine - it doesn't replace my 5d2 but its excellent at what it does and is definitely worth it in lieu of say just another L lens
3
Lenses / Re: 24-70L II is fantastic
« on: April 25, 2013, 10:55:18 PM »
Agreed. It's very good. Whilst they can't really be compared, I prefer the IQ of the 24-70ii to my 70-200ii 2.8 - and that is a great lens too.
4
Lenses / Re: Just got the canon 16-35 ii and having a hard time seeing the value in this uwa
« on: April 20, 2013, 12:14:02 AM »Kkc...stop it. Unless you are a pro or rich amateur...then stop spending your cute kids college education funds and your family's retirement fund on lenses that give you almost no discernible difference in IQ to your current gear.
I write this because you've wrote that you're not a pro, and you indicated that your money is limited...so screw your head on straight and realize (like you did a few months ago when you posted about downgrading your entire system) the you've probably already over indulged in camera gear for your your needs.
You've got gear-itis...a form of gear addiction....go report to a shrink for therapy and be happy with the incredible gear you already have...and again....STOP.
Very sorry for being direct and without tact...but it's so obvious that this is what you need to hear that I can't help it.
Really? Trying to expand my creative options with adding lenses is a good thing am I supposed to be bound to the 24-70 70-200 because thats good glass? I like changing lenses and playing around with different shots. 6 months ago I was uninspired snd now I am getting into shooting again so I said to myself i am going on vacation and at walt disney there are a lot of uwa shots. Then i thought well what other reasons could i use this so after the purchase i second guessed my decision so I asked this forum for what only a few people provided PICTURES of examples to give me some perspective. I also want a macro for flowers and bugs. I want more reach, a travel telephoto (70-300l). d o I buy all them at once or one at a time as the need arises. I thought since this trip was coming up and I am going on a cruise next june that I should give it a try. Apparently this forum is not what I thought it was and yeah who does not go thru spells of wanting to carry less. I solved that by getting a sony nex 6 for short trips. I listened to your advice and kept my 5d vs getting a 1dx or moving down to a 6d. Now I ask it on uses for a lens and I am criticized?
Each to their own - and I'm the last person to warn against buying too many lenses. But I do think creativity sometimes is better fostered with LESS gear rather than more. Some of my most creative photographic experiences have been with just a single prime lens.
5
Lenses / Re: Just got the canon 16-35 ii and having a hard time seeing the value in this uwa
« on: April 19, 2013, 11:37:34 PM »Kkc...stop it. Unless you are a pro or rich amateur...then stop spending your cute kids college education funds and your family's retirement fund on lenses that give you almost no discernible difference in IQ to your current gear.
I write this because you've wrote that you're not a pro, and you indicated that your money is limited...so screw your head on straight and realize (like you did a few months ago when you posted about downgrading your entire system) the you've probably already over indulged in camera gear for your your needs.
You've got gear-itis...a form of gear addiction....go report to a shrink for therapy and be happy with the incredible gear you already have...and again....STOP.
Very sorry for being direct and without tact...but it's so obvious that this is what you need to hear that I can't help it.
Agreed. Or go and buy something like a Fujifilm X100s and begin to wonder why the hell you're spending all this money on big and expensive lenses and cameras
6
Lenses / Re: Just got the canon 16-35 ii and having a hard time seeing the value in this uwa
« on: April 19, 2013, 07:30:56 PM »
Does the 100 go with an extender? I thought not....?
7
Lenses / Re: Better for head shots, portraits: 100mm f.2.8L Macro IS or 70-200 f.2.8L IS II?
« on: April 18, 2013, 05:26:22 PM »
I've got both and find that the 100L produces slightly more clinical feeling portraits for some reason whereas the zoom always has a lush but sharp feel. I can't explain it beyond that but I think I prefer using the zoom.
8
Lenses / Re: Which Lens Canon 85mm 1.8 or 135 L
« on: April 12, 2013, 04:36:13 PM »
I rate the Sigma 85 1.4: luscious and unique look - very close in IQ to the 85L and faster AF.
Half the price, too.
Half the price, too.
9
Lenses / Re: ok so i did it and bought into FF... now i need a good standard zoom
« on: April 07, 2013, 03:56:51 PM »
I have found from experience that the 17-40, 24-70 and 70-200 zooms all have a practical place in my kit for landscape work. I don't understand how people preclude the longer zooms - you can't always trek that extra three kilometres to capture the scene you really want...
10
Lenses / Re: Prime vs zoom
« on: April 07, 2013, 03:44:08 AM »
Landscape and architectural work: zooms
Portraits/events. primes (usually)
Conveniently aligns with aperture needs for both, too
Portraits/events. primes (usually)
Conveniently aligns with aperture needs for both, too
11
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: What does Vincent Laforet Think is a Game Changer?
« on: April 04, 2013, 09:08:59 PM »My guess it will something way less exciting than anything we guess now.
yep
12
Lenses / Re: Advice on replacement/upgrade for my kit 18-55 Ef-s kit lens
« on: April 03, 2013, 02:50:26 AM »+1 for 15-85 or 17-55 f/2.8
If you are low on budget, you can try Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro as well. It might not be as sharp as Canon 15-85 but then again it is $300 cheaper, a stop faster and has Macro capabilities.
I used to own this lens. Agreed. Good fit for a kit replacement too.
13
Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM
« on: April 01, 2013, 03:57:47 PM »
This is a BW image to me.
Agreed but I like the subtle tones which I fear would be lost in a monochrome take.
14
Lenses / Re: Is the upcoming 50mm F/2 IS USM for me?
« on: March 30, 2013, 05:41:55 PM »
I find your thoroughness impressive but I can't agree with your assessment of the 50 1.4 - "much worse than (the) L"
They're not significantly different- optically- at least. Not in my opinion.
They're not significantly different- optically- at least. Not in my opinion.
15
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Long exposures won't record to 5d mark iii
« on: March 30, 2013, 04:31:07 AM »
Yes that was my thought too - however someone experienced in star trails I'm guessing should/would be aware of this? Personally I never use it. Hope that's the solution for you.