Messages

31

Street & City / Re: Your best street shots of any kind.

« on: January 24, 2013, 01:35:39 PM »

I can't say if it's my best, but I would say it's one of them.  It's certainly one I have always enjoyed.

32

Black & White / Re: Your best Architectural & City B&W shots?

« on: January 24, 2013, 01:27:02 PM »

I don't know if it's one of my best, but it's one I have always liked.....

Victoria Hall

33

Lenses / Re: Going to get the 24-70 2.8 II. Want a 70-200 as well

« on: January 12, 2013, 07:49:18 PM »

Just pick up the non-IS version. It goes for $1200 right now. It's also arguably sharper than the II.

That's just plain wrong.  I have had every version and can state categorically that the 70-200 2.8L IS II is far sharper than the non-IS version.  Not even close.

This can also be verified at the Digital Picture.....
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=242&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=687&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

34

Technical Support / Re: Unusual rapid battery drain with 5D III

« on: January 09, 2013, 06:55:01 PM »

Card readers are cheap and it's a lot easier on the camera.   

35

Animal Kingdom / Re: Your best animal shots!

« on: January 08, 2013, 08:18:09 PM »

Got this red fox in late November.....



1D MkIV + 100-400 L @ 400mm, ISO400, 1/320, f/5.6
Approximately 50% crop

36

Lenses / Re: 300 f2.8 Ser 1 vs. Ser 2?

« on: January 08, 2013, 02:39:34 PM »

Way too good to be true.  Even a Nigerian prince down on his luck could easily get high $3000s to low $4000s if it was legitimate.

Be very, very careful.

37

Lenses / Re: 8-15L cut it yourself gelatin

« on: December 21, 2012, 04:50:38 PM »

Supertelephotos take similar filters.

b&

Good point, but I thought they had glass. I am borrowing the 200 F2.0L and it has a special filterholder that you can replace. I just assimed that that was glass or resin.

Super telephotos have a drop in rear filter holder that uses conventional filters.  The only exception is the POL which has it's own holder and a wheel to rotate it.

38

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Cannot Keep Screwing It's Customers Over

« on: December 21, 2012, 10:29:29 AM »

Every day is a learning experience for me.  I've always thought that I bought my cameras to use taking photographs.  Now I find out it's all about tracking depreciation.

If some of the posts on this thread were not so entertaining, they would be pitiful.  I suppose I missed the class 'Winning Thru Whining 101'.

For those who feel Nikon would treat them better, they should make the jump.  Just remember, the grass is often seen as greener on the other side of the fence because it is so well fertilized with BS.

Just saying.   

39

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: The seemingly amazing Sigma 35

« on: December 20, 2012, 12:17:43 PM »

Why fix what ain't broke?   

40

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 30 vs 35?

« on: December 14, 2012, 03:59:48 PM »

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=405&Camera=396&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=829&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

There ya go, it looks like the 35 is indeed crushing the 30.  I know charts aren't everything, but it's a large enough of a difference to make that conclusion.

These are with two different cameras.  The 30mm is mounted on a 30D (1.6 crop, 8MP) and the 35 is mounted on a 1Ds III (full frame, 21MP).  Not a good comparison.

41

EOS Bodies / Re: Are you really serious about 6D?

« on: December 13, 2012, 05:30:52 AM »

Please help me understand why people are excited about 6D? I cannot be excited about 97% VF, 1 x-pt AF, crippled 6D with wifi and facebook buttons. I will stick to a 5-year-old beloved 5D Mark II which is identical in IQ to Canon's newest sensors. Canon, you are not getting a dime of my money on your recent cameras. I have diversified my lenses so am not hostage to inferior sensors anymore.

I suspect the troll filter has malfunctioned.  We should really get that thing repaired before more trolls slip through.

42

Canon General / Re: Determining the Age of a Canon Lens Based on Serial Number

« on: December 11, 2012, 05:27:57 AM »

For what it's worth, Canon still used the old system until at least August of this year.  I know as I took delivery recently of an 'L' lens with the date code "UA08xx" which is August, 2012.

It depends.  New lens models seem to have done away with date codes, while existing models still have them.  apparently, Canon is not going to spend money to convert existing lens models to the new system, it will happen by attrition.  The 70-200mm f/2.8L MK II was the first over two years ago.

You're probably correct as the lens I purchased is an existing, older model..... the 100-400.

43

Canon General / Re: Determining the Age of a Canon Lens Based on Serial Number

« on: December 10, 2012, 07:06:46 PM »

For what it's worth, Canon still used the old system until at least August of this year.  I know as I took delivery recently of an 'L' lens with the date code "UA08xx" which is August, 2012.

44

EOS Bodies / Re: Your thoughts on M-RAW vs RAW in 1DX vs 5D3

« on: December 07, 2012, 01:50:41 PM »

I can't speak to the 1Dx or the 5D3, but I did some testing with my 1D4 a little while back.  You can see the results for yourself at the following link.....

http://pixel-shooter.net/forum/threads/mraw-vs-raw-with-the-1d-mark-iv.424/

Hope this helps.

45

Lenses / Re: Best Lens for photographing children

« on: November 17, 2012, 09:32:20 PM »

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the 100 f/2....  A sharp, fast lens at a very affordable cost.