I rarely use mine, but I have left it on since it's shorter folded up backwards with it on than it would be without. My 3 Legged Thing won't fold backwards around the head without the center column, at least I don't think it will.
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.
I just simply cannot believe in the fanthom 24-70/2 Art lens. Look at the current 2.8 offering - size and weight. Do you really want 1,5 kg lens with 86+mm front lens diameter? I'm glad with ~800g of the current 24-70/2.8L II, even still, sometimes feels a bit on the heavier size.
three legged thing (3LT) brian. A fantastic travel carbon fiber tripod. I used with my 5d3 + 70-200 no issues. Super light, super strong.
Plus one of the legs unscrews and it becomes an extremely light monopod
This question is related to one that I have.
I was thinking of packing my old Rebel with a kit lens in my trunk, so I always had something with me. Do I have to worry too much about heat damage or are these cameras designed to take that kind of abuse?
The only thing I would worry about is the battery. I'd leave it out of the camera. Also, humidity is important.. You don't want foggy lens when you pull it out. I'm sure too much hear isn't good for any camera though.
I don't have the bodies you are interested in but do own the 18-200mm lens. Fine lens, but it does have distortion at the 18mm range so I'd be pairing it with the new 10-18mm if I didn't already have a better lens in the 18mm range. I'd consider bringing the Canon 50mm f/1.8 for nicer portraits and it doesn't add much weight (or even the pancake 40mm).
Just FYI, you can see a full-resolution jpeg of the samples by clicking on: (点击此处查看大图) located directly below each image.Doesn't look very sharp in the corners (photo of the white house and the church). Or am I a pixel peeper now and does it look better than the 16-35 f/2.8 II?
-brought to my attention by Bryan over at TDP.
This new lens seems pointless to me - it's even longer than the f/2.8II and weighs almost the same. The 17-40 is the hands down winner for travel and portability in general. If I'm going to lug a WA that big, then it better have a 2.8 aperture.
Totally disagree. I could care less (grammar police, using this in the NEW accepted form so shhhhh ) about f/2.8 for this range. IS matter a lot more as does raw image quality.
You may want to look at 3leggedthing.com - they have a few models that offer a detachable leg. If memory serves, they are stocked by B&H.
On your choice of lenses - my experience is that you need a very robust tripod for a 400mm but can get away with a reasonable monopod. (For the physics inclined, a long lens / camera combination has a large moment of inertia. This interacts with the torsional stiffness of the tripod to lower the resonant frequency.... and low frequencies tend to have large amplitudes.) A monopod is much stiffer in torsion, so it doesn't feel the pain.