September 30, 2014, 07:50:58 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 - qwRad

Pages: [1]
I have the Tamrac Rally 6 5 and use it occasionally with my 5D3 + 24-105L + 70-200 f/2.8 II and it leaves the third space left for one lens (you could fit a UWA zoom there or two small primes stacked) or a flash. The outside mesh pockets are also useful for carrying flashes/gorillapod/blower or misc items. The front zippered pocket fits a couple of filters and spare batteries + cleaning cloths and lenspens etc. nicely.

Mind you that it is not very feasible to carry the 5D3 with 70-200 attached in the bag if you want to fit much else there, you have to lay the combo sideways into the bag and you can fit some small lenses in the compartments under the lens barrels but nothing too big. Also if you use a grip on the body it is possible to squeeze the camera in the bag but it is not designed to fit well and will be bulging pretty badly.

Something I sometimes wish is the ability to add a small ultrabook into the bag with my other gear but unfortunately the compartment in there is too small for any 13" laptops and only works for tablets but those fit well even with nongripped 5D3+24-105+70-200 in there.

I wouldn't call the bag extremely well padded but there is enough protection for small bumps if you handle it carefully. Overall I'm quite happy with it for the price.

EDIT: I have the Rally 5 and not the 6, difference being the 5 has the small compartment for a tablet and the 6 does not but otherwise they seem to be basically the same.

Lenses / Re: Should I choose the 70-200 2.8 II?
« on: December 18, 2013, 05:02:17 PM »
Hi, the 70-200 + 5D3 is a killer combo but here is my opinion:

I have both the 70-200 2.8 II and the 70-300L + the 5D3. I rarely take the 70-200 with me if i'm going on a vacation or a trip. It is just too heavy for hiking/carrying around all day. The 70-300L is much better in this regard and as a bonus it's longer. If you add a 24-105 or 24-70 you won't need anything else for general purpose shooting.

The image quality is of course a bit better on the 70-200 (especially when stopped down to f/5.6 or f/8) but mainly noticeable in the corners. For situations other than very dark dawn or dusk or pixel peeping test chart shots the 70-300L will deliver quite good enough image quality compared to the 70-200 and does so in a much more travel friendly package. The IS and AF are also on the same level in my opinion. You can also ad a 1.4x Kenko TC but I've found almost no difference just cropping the image.

Then again the 70-200 will be used exclusively when I'm shooting an event, a wedding, sports indoors or portraits. But these will be things I will go to shoot for one or a couple of days as the main thing and not a holiday or a trip.

So in my opinion it depends on your shooting needs. If you plan to use the lens as a general purpose tele on vacations and trips then go for the 70-300L and maybe buy a 50/85 f/1.8 or a macro to accompany it. But if you must have the best IQ in a zoom or need the low light cabapilities for event/indoor shooting and are prepared to carry the weight around if you occasionally use it as a general purpose lens then go for the 70-200.

Or you can do what I did and end up getting both :)

Very interesting release. Would be a great and light high system for wide landscapes while hiking with a 17mm TS-E or even the suggested dark horse Nikon 14-24 f/2.8. With the long teles (especially fast) the weight savings aren't that great and of course there's the issue of AF for tracking etc.

From the video that was linked to this thread a while back I have two issues though.

1) The shutter sound is quite loud vs. the recent silent modes from Canon. This I can live with.

2) Battery-life just plain sucks. The reviewer says "under 300 shots" with the A7r which is just laughable. Imagine a a week long hiking trip or even a weekend trip. All the weight you save vs. a 5D3 for example would be negated by all the batteries you would have to lug around... ;)

My 5D3 (FW 1.1.3) works fine with the Kenko 1.4x PRO 300 DGX (blue dot) even if I have AFMA enabled. Lenses tested so far are 70-300L and 24-105L and both had AFMA adjustments by lens on both tele and wide ends.

My 5D3 (FW 1.1.3) works fine with the Kenko 1.4x PRO 300 DGX (blue dot) even if I have AFMA enabled. Lenses tested so far are 70-300L and 24-105L and both had AFMA adjustments by lens on both tele and wide ends.

Software & Accessories / Re: "Best" budget filters?
« on: October 26, 2012, 06:33:49 AM »
I use Hoya HD series filters. They are tougher than normal filters and are easy to clean. Much easier vs. a couple of the Pro1 Digitals I have. I can recommend them and they are not much more expensive than the Pro1 and good quality.

Here is a video:

Pages: [1]