April 24, 2014, 01:00:54 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 - pwp

Pages: 1 ... 74 75 [76] 77 78 ... 95
1126
This entirely depends on the direction and location of the shock.  The G-force sine wave, and other factors.  You might drop your lens from .5" and have it totally messed up, or it might fall off a table and be just fine...

Everyone has their "drop" stories, some miraculous, some tragic. I had a 70-200 f/2.8is on a 1Dmk3 body drop from waist height onto soft carpet. The body was a write-off and the lens was repaired twice but never the same and had to be replaced. Grrr...

Generally most gear is pretty tough within obvious reasonable limits. The best protection after good common sense is the lens hood, followed closely by the screw-on filter. Time and time again these two items have taken a knock and left me with a smashed filter, a bent or gouged hood but an undamaged lens.

Paul Wright

1127
Lenses / Re: 300/2.8 L (IS MK1) or 400/2.8 L (non-IS)
« on: April 16, 2012, 04:00:58 PM »
If you're shooting sports f/2.8 is a must. Pure & simple. You need to keep your shutter speed as high as practical. And a f/2.8 lens does focus faster... a must with sports if you want consistent results. Unless you have muscles like Mr Universe you'll need the monopod for anything longer than a couple of minutes work.

You have not mentioned the body you are working with. Plenty of photographers including myself who use the f/2.8 300 on a Mk4 with the x1.3 crop are effectively shooting at 390mm. When we transition to the FF 1DX we'll lose that reach and a 400 f/2.8 will become a required purchase.

If you shoot APS-C with x1.6 crop you'll find the 300 f/2.8 a very satisfying useful lens for sports. For birds with a 1.4 extender you'll have an f/4 420mm on FF, and a healthy 672mm f/4 on an APS-C like the 7D.

Because of the likely transition from 300 f/2.8 to 400 f/2.8 by a good number of sports shooters there MAY be more 300 f/2.8 glass coming available second hand as the 1DX reaches the market. This may also put upward pressure on pre-owned 400 f/2.8 lenses as people like me with 1DX bodies on pre-order look around for low cost entry to a good 400.

Optically and performance wise either lens is a stellar performer with the capacity to continue to surprise with its very rapid AF and unique image qualities.

Paul Wright

1128
Software & Accessories / Re: Best resource to learn Lightroom
« on: April 15, 2012, 05:26:19 AM »
One of the most comprehensive LR tutorials is from Michael Reichmann & Jeff Schewe over at Luminous Landscape. This covers EVERYTHING.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/videos/lr4_combo.shtml

Paul Wright

1129
Software & Accessories / Re: Software
« on: April 14, 2012, 04:12:54 AM »
Forum rules say no selling...
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=1442.0

Check out Craigslist as a highly viable alternative.

Paul Wright

1130
Lenses / Re: Which 70-200?
« on: April 14, 2012, 04:02:39 AM »
I'd go for the MkII straight away. It's funny how the world works. I've found time and time again if I back myself in a capex purchase for the business, my income increases. That's why I buy 1 series bodies, buy the best L glass available and drive new cars. Sounds weird but it works.

With a 70-200 f/2.8isII in your kit straight away you'll probably take better wedding images. That usually means more business. You have only got to pick up ONE extra wedding and you've more than covered the upgrade cost of your lens. In the meantime you have an extra 12 months using a lens you always wanted and will inevitably love.

Paul Wright

1131
OK! Any discernible improvement in exposure control with the new flash?

Paul Wright

1132
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon releases are getting expensive!
« on: April 14, 2012, 12:03:04 AM »
The 1D X will be discontinued even before they decide to ship it :P

Yes it will almost a year from announcement to shipping date at the present rate.
Maybe when it ships it will be the 1DXn.  ???

Paul Wright

1133
Lenses / Re: 1DX affect on used 300 and 400 2.8L Prices
« on: April 13, 2012, 11:56:38 PM »
I see a number of shooters (like me) planning to continue usage of my 1DIV right along side my on order 1DX.  I will continue to attach the 1DIV to the 300 or 500 and have the 1DX permanently attached to the 70-200.

As another 300 f/2.8 on APS-H shooter that's exactly my plan for the short term, but the 1D4 won't last forever in daily use. Unless Canon surprise us with a new APS-H release, a 400 f/2.8 will be a required purchase when APS-H eventually reaches the end of the line. (300 x 1.3 = 390)

Alternatively, Canon may really surprise us with a true high performance, sports grade APS-C body.
I'm talking something well beyond 7D spec. The 300 translates into 480 (300 x 1.6 = 480) Nice!


Paul Wright

1134
Hmmm! I do have 1DX bodies on order. OK I'll add the 600exRT as well. Thanks.

Paul Wright

1135
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5D Mark III for Sport
« on: April 13, 2012, 04:03:34 AM »
I shot four polo matches today using a Canon 5D. The files are extremely ROBUST. By this I mean that they are highly amenable to extreme Lightroom adjustments without beginning to look like crap. Impressive as hell.

6 fps is barely adequate. The swing of an arm happens in a fraction of a second and the length of time between clicks means an entirely different picture. I think to do it right you need minimum 8. Ten is borderline overkill, and you start getting quite a few of exactly the same shot. I think beyond 10 is a recipe for filling your hard drive needlessly.

The autofocus is "jumpy" and a bit frenetic. I just don't know how better to put this. Over the course of the day I tried ever different autofocus preset and it remained jumpy. It would latch onto subjects, then unlatch.

Reach. Obviously I miss the crop factors of the 1D4 and 7D a LOT on a huge polo field.

This is exactly the type of real world feedback I've been waiting to read. Thanks Smirkypants. +1

6 FPS feels slow? Yes, it's amazing how much action happens between frames shooting at 10 FPS on the 1D4. Anyone serious about shooting action needs to sit tight for the 1DX or stock up on 1D4 bodies with the very useful x1.3 APS-H sensor. I've said it before & I'll say it again...I like APS-H. Canon?

Reach? Yep this is another issue with expensive solutions as we move from APS-C & APS-H to FF whether that be 1DX or 5DIII. Who else is looking at less useful 300 f/2.8 lenses and realizing they are going have to drop the Mastercard on a 400 f/2.8 sometime this year. Sigh...

AF? We were told the 5DIII would AF better than the 1D4. Maybe it will improve when the grip ships with the twin battery option. Could be the complex configuration of the AF didn't suit your subject.

Paul Wright

1136
Besides the obvious RT functions and ST-E3 functionality, are there any valid reasons to upgrade from 580exII?

Paul Wright

1137
EOS Bodies / Re: I still don't get the crop debate
« on: April 11, 2012, 06:26:01 PM »
I shoot 1D4 bodies and will miss the x1.3 crop of the APS-H sensor. It's going to COST me.
My 300 f/2.8 will lose an effective 90mm on the FF 1DX bodies which I have on pre-order.

The pricey required solution is a new 400 f/2.8II. I like APS-H.

Paul Wright

1138
Lenses / Re: Used 400mm f2.8L IS lenses - good value now?
« on: April 11, 2012, 03:10:26 AM »
The 400 f/2.8 is the all time favourite with sports shooters, along with the equally remarkable 300 f/2.8. Even older beat up 400 lenses hold their value remarkably well. I think you'll see a lot of demand for 400 f/2.8 lenses as the 1DX starts to sell in meaningful numbers to sports shooters who are upgrading from MkIV bodies with their very useful APS-H x1.3 crop sensors. This will keep second hand prices buoyant for some time, even as photographers  upgrade to the 400 f/2.8II and release their old lenses onto the secondhand market.

With the FF 1DX shooters who rely on the reach of the 300 f/2.8 and APS-H will be wanting more, and their answer lies with the 400 f/2.8.

Paul Wright

1139
Lenses / Re: Active Sports - 135 or 70-200 2.8 II?
« on: April 11, 2012, 02:58:01 AM »
I shoot a lot of sports and have to say it's surprising how often I crank the 70-200 f/2.8isII out to 200mm and want more.  And just as often I'm glad to be able to pull back to 70mm when the action is right on top of me. At most events I shoot with a 300 f/2.8is one one body and the 70-200 f/2.8isII on the second body.

The 135 f/2 is one of the true gems in the Canon L range, but will be a little restricted when shooting something as dynamic as sports.

A lens that has always fascinated me is the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 zoom. They released an updated, no doubt improved version recently. I know they added OS. (Sigma's IS) Personally I'd love to hear from anyone on the list who uses this unique lens.

Paul Wright

1140
Lenses / Re: Why is Canon so slow updating (legacy) lenses?
« on: April 09, 2012, 06:28:27 PM »
I voted, "Until recently, Canon thought that people would like to have zooms..."  Although I don't actually think that's changes - Canon still thinks people want zooms, and I'm sure they think that because they can look at their sales figures and easily see that trend.

Yes, outside of a statistically tiny percentage of photographers who are completely "prime" focused and incorrectly perceive zooms as  optically and creatively lightweight trash, the vast majority of the market either chooses or very happily accepts the flexibility and very high performance of particularly L zooms.

Why are Canon slow to update older glass? First and foremost they are a business with obligations to the long term viability of the company and to shareholders. Pragmatic business decisions are being made daily, based on a whole raft of criteria, none of which would include what they may see as distant background noise from lists such as this one.

I didn't vote as the options were too narrow.

Paul Wright

Pages: 1 ... 74 75 [76] 77 78 ... 95