46
Lens Giveaway Contest / Re: *Contest* Wildlife - Post Here.
« on: October 11, 2011, 12:22:24 AM »
Taken at Safari Park, West Java, Indonesia
May 22, 2013, 01:46:41 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.
48
Lenses / Re: Why in the hell did Canon make EF-S lenses
« on: June 07, 2011, 09:37:04 PM »Newer lenses use internal zooming so they have to FAKE the focal distance - which is why you see a lens that is easily 200mm long having a 17mm (equivalent) size as the 17 - 85 does - the lens can not get near to 17mm so it has to FAKE this and the easiest way involves moving the rear elements closer than 42mm, if you limit yourself to cheaper cameras with smaller, cheaper sensors you can do this
It is not FAKE. It is one of many lens design technique called retrofocus which was first introduced by P. Angenieux. It is also called reverse telephoto and has nothing to do with moving the rear element closer than 42mm, mate.
FYI, 17-40mm ALSO designed this way, and take note that it is an EF mount lens and is designed for larger, pricier sensor to us.
Oh, and if you insist on calling it FAKE, then please include telephoto lenses in the category. Most has shorter physical length than its marked focal length.
I myself would not imagine a true 1200mm long non-telephoto lens... That lens would simply be longer (taller) than my 3-y.o. niece.
49
Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF 200mm 1:2.8L USM
« on: June 02, 2011, 07:55:29 PM »
As per previous post, in the zoo this lens can be a bit too tight esp. for those larger animals. For wildlife outing, it might be too wide though. Never tried it with 1.4X or 2X, I don't have either.
Another possibility is for stage photography. Here is my photos on the 2011 Java Jazz Festival somewhere around last March.
Rhoda Scott (Hammond)
Maurice Brown (Trumpet)
The first one was taken far from stage, as far as behind the last seat. The second was from just under the stage.
If you have more images, please don't hesitate to share!
Another possibility is for stage photography. Here is my photos on the 2011 Java Jazz Festival somewhere around last March.
Rhoda Scott (Hammond)
Maurice Brown (Trumpet)
The first one was taken far from stage, as far as behind the last seat. The second was from just under the stage.
If you have more images, please don't hesitate to share!
50
Lens Gallery / Canon EF 200mm 1:2.8L USM
« on: June 02, 2011, 01:22:49 PM »
Hello, and thank you for the space. Since I can't see anyone post images from the lens, then please allow me to post first.
As a background, this is my first lens (consider the nifty fifty as an "ens"
). Use it on an ol' 20D, and so far, shooting with this lens is far more fascinating compared to my Pop's 16-years-old Sigma 28-200 on the long end.
So, long story cut short, these images are taken at the zoo, near our home in Jakarta.
Sumatran Tiger
Western Lowland Gorilla
Australian Pelican
Unfortunately I can't recognize the last bird. My poorly-educated guess is that it's a Javanese Pond Heron. Also, the last pic is around 100% crop from the whole image. The small bird itself stood behind those Pelicans.
As a background, this is my first lens (consider the nifty fifty as an "ens"
). Use it on an ol' 20D, and so far, shooting with this lens is far more fascinating compared to my Pop's 16-years-old Sigma 28-200 on the long end. So, long story cut short, these images are taken at the zoo, near our home in Jakarta.
Sumatran Tiger
Western Lowland Gorilla
Australian Pelican
Unfortunately I can't recognize the last bird. My poorly-educated guess is that it's a Javanese Pond Heron. Also, the last pic is around 100% crop from the whole image. The small bird itself stood behind those Pelicans.
51
Lenses / Re: Lens for bicycle race?
« on: May 14, 2011, 07:47:12 PM »
Don't overlook the nifty fifty, mate. You don't need IS on a lens that fast AND that light. f/1.8 is 3 1/3 stops [?] faster than 18-55 and 3 stops [?] faster than 55-250 at 50mm. Of course you will rarely need f/1.8 in broad daylight, but you can always stop down.
Even if you have to leave it in your bag or your pocket (yes I did), it's not a burden. And how did all those photographers from pre-IS era took their shot?
Well, probably it's just me and my primal desire (bad pun).
Btw, if you need lens to rent, I see it's much-much better to rent the better of a lens, the likes of 70-200mm 1/2.8 IS (II) or 24-70. The latter is not too wide, but I reckon you have 18-55 in hand already, correct?
And last suggestion, use fast cards (class 10 SD card, if I recall it correctly), and turn off the high ISO noise reduction to fully utilise the burst speed of your camera.
Good luck for your outing!
Even if you have to leave it in your bag or your pocket (yes I did), it's not a burden. And how did all those photographers from pre-IS era took their shot?
Well, probably it's just me and my primal desire (bad pun).
Btw, if you need lens to rent, I see it's much-much better to rent the better of a lens, the likes of 70-200mm 1/2.8 IS (II) or 24-70. The latter is not too wide, but I reckon you have 18-55 in hand already, correct?
And last suggestion, use fast cards (class 10 SD card, if I recall it correctly), and turn off the high ISO noise reduction to fully utilise the burst speed of your camera.
Good luck for your outing!
52
Lenses / Re: Lens cap solution?
« on: May 06, 2011, 07:40:40 PM »
Why, I leave all my (front) lens caps back home.
Well, it's mainly because I'm just started, I started off with a nifty-fifty some times back. The front element is deeply recessed I found no use of neither cap nor protective filter.
My second lens, a 200/2.8, comes with a neat lens pouch. The pouch itself will NEVER protect your lens from falling etc. But the thick leathering (or sort of it) on the bottom side is enough to protect the lens against scratches and brushes, as long as you put the lens correctly in it. Well, let's say I'm dreaming of heavy, big, white, monsters of Canon's supertele lineup.
Now where did I put all my lens caps is another story...
Well, it's mainly because I'm just started, I started off with a nifty-fifty some times back. The front element is deeply recessed I found no use of neither cap nor protective filter.
My second lens, a 200/2.8, comes with a neat lens pouch. The pouch itself will NEVER protect your lens from falling etc. But the thick leathering (or sort of it) on the bottom side is enough to protect the lens against scratches and brushes, as long as you put the lens correctly in it. Well, let's say I'm dreaming of heavy, big, white, monsters of Canon's supertele lineup.
Now where did I put all my lens caps is another story...
53
Lenses / Re: 17-40mm f/4L replacement
« on: March 04, 2011, 11:13:55 PM »
Just because it is wide-angle does not mean it doesn't deserve a larger aperture. Have you ever found yourself in a tight, dimly-lit room and wished you can have less noisy image (or freeze the movement), for example? That is where larger aperture comes to play, isn't it?
IMO, having larger aperture will not hurt.
Okay. I lied.
It does hurt if you have to lug it around for the whole day. Also it hurts your wallet, too.
IMO, having larger aperture will not hurt.
Okay. I lied.
It does hurt if you have to lug it around for the whole day. Also it hurts your wallet, too.
54
EOS Bodies / Re: canon 600d or 60d?
« on: February 18, 2011, 02:57:57 AM »By the way, what is the point of the top display on the 60D? When is it of use?All the time.
I own 20D, and before that, used a 500N (a film camera) which explains my behaviour. But to have large, power-consuming LCD just to change settings is nonsensical to me.
55
Lenses / Re: EF-S L Lenses
« on: February 14, 2011, 07:05:46 PM »So...add weather sealing, up the build quality and slap on a red ring. Come'on canon, what are you waiting for?
Hey, NOT all red-ringed L are weather sealed, no? I mean, I recently acquired 200/2.8II and nowhere in its manual stated that it is weather sealed. Or may be I am the one who is wrong.
And back to the topic, I heard that optically, some EF-S lenses like 10-22, 17-55, and 60 Macro is up to the L standard. Of those lenses, I had only used the 10-22 for like an hour. The build quality, if I may say, is decent at least. It will surely leave the likes of nifty fifty or 18-55 in dust. It's robust and probably just lacking red ring around its front element. Again, may be I am the one who is wrong.
56
Lenses / Re: New L Primes
« on: February 03, 2011, 07:20:21 PM »Canon manufacturers lenses like these in Batches. If the Canon warehouse that serves your area is out of stock, then you will have to wait for a new batch.
Ah, I see. I ended up buying one used just yesterday. The previous owner admitted that the lens was so rare even an the time he bought it (precisely a year ago).
Maybe I'm just lost in the zoom lens era.
57
Lenses / Re: New L Primes
« on: January 27, 2011, 06:58:35 PM »
Hello, I have just registered here although have been following this site for quite some time.
About a new L prime, well, I don't know if this helps. I've put an order on 200mm 1:2.8L II since October, the shop said they put the order back in November. But up until I write this post, no news about the lens.
Oh, I live somewhere around SE Asia, in case someone asks.
Thank you, and sorry for my bad English.
About a new L prime, well, I don't know if this helps. I've put an order on 200mm 1:2.8L II since October, the shop said they put the order back in November. But up until I write this post, no news about the lens.
Oh, I live somewhere around SE Asia, in case someone asks.
Thank you, and sorry for my bad English.