Messages

16

Lenses / Re: Just got the canon 16-35 ii and having a hard time seeing the value in this uwa

« on: April 19, 2013, 11:58:58 PM »

Fwiw I don't usually listen to folks who tell me how to spend my money, especially those behind a computer. If you got it who am I (or we) to tell you how to spend it. If it makes you happy so be it. That being said I think you're chasing happiness in your photography and while new shiny toys isn't a bad way to go about it, I think you've reached the point where you've realized that's not entirely true. Get out and shoot, and when your tired shoot some more. I think once your skills start to refine themselves you'll get back to appreciating what you have.

17

Lenses / Re: 24-105 &/or 24-70

« on: April 19, 2013, 07:00:43 PM »

My mind is made up! Thanks for all the comments & help! I am going to get ride of the 24-105 & buy a 24-70 MArk II. I have a 24-70 Mark II coming as a CPS loan to try it out in May......I might not even make it to May before I buy one! HAHA

Don't say that too loud, you'll get the pro who thinks CPS is only for them in a tizzy. I'm sure you'll be happy, until of course the next object of desire comes out with a thin red line on the end  

18

Lenses / Re: 24-105 &/or 24-70

« on: April 19, 2013, 06:58:11 PM »

I just don't see the points keeping the 105 - period.

One less lens in the bag, more money in your pocket or take the wife out for dinner

Always have a backup, but he mentioned he doesnt shoot professionally so that may be a invalid reason for him.

Invalid when you have too many lenses with similar focal range and not getting use. mrk II will out perform 105 at any focal range, including cropping in PP to get 105 look.

Ah that just solves the zoom problem but gives up the perspective. I see a value for both, if nothing else the 24-105 makes a great one lens travel solution.

19

Lenses / Re: 24-105 &/or 24-70

« on: April 19, 2013, 12:45:59 PM »

I'd take a hard look at the new tamron 24-70 in that case. It's saves you a grand over the canon and the IQ difference is very small. I personally had a hard time figuring out why id pay all that extra cash for a maybe 5-10% difference in IQ. My tamron is not perfect (nothing is) but it gets the job done better than my canon 24-70i, has IS, and I like the feel of an extra $1000 in my pocket.

20

Lenses / Re: 24-105 &/or 24-70

« on: April 19, 2013, 10:25:58 AM »

Looking at your gear list I'd have to wonder why you'd actually need the 24-70ii unless your doing a lot of event work? even then I'd be happy with two bodies your 16-35 on one and the 70-200 on the other. Just my $0.02

21

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1dx plus 85 1.2 is great for night street photography.

« on: April 19, 2013, 09:44:35 AM »

So $9000 worth of gear means you're able to take good night shots...go figure...#sarcasm

22

Lenses / Re: Just got the canon 16-35 ii and having a hard time seeing the value in this uwa

« on: April 19, 2013, 01:06:11 AM »

ok here is another one of my favorite shots to take. I think now that I like more reach than a uwa gives and my style is not landscape so you are all right in that I should have bought based on need rather than completing a trio of excellent lenses because other people have them.http://www.flickr.com/photos/69086871@N03/8661001977/#

This was with my sigma 35mm. I am just into isolation and that 3d affect. I am seeing already too much is left in the frame for my type of photography. I probably should have grabbed the 50 or 85mm prime. I know I would not be on here asking its use. I just figured I would try something new and I do eventually want to grab some of my downtown Chicago skyline and this lens would fit that bill. Just on the fence.

Obviously you're doing well enough professionally (in whatever field that may be) to afford these nice things and go on nice vacations with the family. to get to that point in your career likely took a good deal of time and effort. Apply the same now to your photography.  A lens wont improve your photography as much as shooting thousands of images will. Get out there and shoot and don't worry so much about keeping up with the gear head nuts who think nothing can be done without a $2000 lens. If I was in your shoes I'd pick one lens and only shoot with that for the better part of a year, maybe even try a 365 or 52 project. That will teach you more about photography than any course/book/shiny new object of your desire ever will.

23

Software & Accessories / Re: How do you print your photos for those who still do?

« on: April 18, 2013, 10:37:17 PM »

I love to print. There is something somewhat cathartic about it, at least for me. My go to is Costco. For the price it's tough to beat the quality, plus it's a great excuse for a $1.50 hotdog and soda.

24

Lenses / Re: Just got the canon 16-35 ii and having a hard time seeing the value in this uwa

« on: April 17, 2013, 11:51:56 PM »

Are you just using it at the widest setting?  I hate the idea that a lens is "meant" for a certain purpose, but some certainly lean a direction.

25

Software & Accessories / Re: Looks like we'll actually get it soon!

« on: April 17, 2013, 04:41:30 PM »

Wow that is pretty cool but part of me worries we soon will reach a point with software that technique or getting it right in camera are just silly notions sported by old men with greying beards. Then again we're probably already there.

26

Lenses / Re: Which Lens Canon 85mm 1.8 or 135 L

« on: April 12, 2013, 08:00:53 PM »

In the studio?  Shooting, I'm assuming, at 5.6 or smaller I'd say save the cash and get the 85 1.8 unless you want a flatter perspective if so the 135 is good. Maybe compromise in the middle 100 f2? 

27

Lenses / Re: IS mandatory? 70-200 f/4 IS vs. f/2.8 Non-IS

« on: April 12, 2013, 09:28:44 AM »

Personally I'd rather have IS and not need it than need it and not have it. For me the advantage of IS is a steady viewfinder which even when using high shutter speeds helps you keep focus on target. You honestly can't really go wrong with either of the two lenses above.

28

Lenses / Re: Stuck on whether to return sigma 35mm for 35mm 1.4L or 35f2 is

« on: April 08, 2013, 09:15:05 PM »

Have you done a Afma yet? 

29

Lenses / Re: ok so i did it and bought into FF... now i need a good standard zoom

« on: April 08, 2013, 12:29:59 AM »

the 24-105 is a good option, but you should have bought it in the kit, no worries as there are tons for sale used at or near the same price you'd pay in the kit.  that's your choice if you want good reach and don't care if f4 is a little on the slow side.  The canon 24-70 f4 is maybe a hair or two sharper, but not enough to justify the price difference IMHO.  If on the other hand you need f2.8 and if you can afford it the canon 24-70ii is really peerless, however that comes at a insane (IMHO) cost.  Having an extra $1000 in my pocket and IS is important to me, so the Tamron is the clear choice, at least for me, between those two lenses.  Don't concern yourself with the internet babble about lens elements coming unglued, those things get blown way out of proportion by the gear patrol on the internet.  Yes Roger at Lens rentals had a problem with 2 of his first 10 lenses, he has not had a problem with any of them since and Tamron quickly repaired the issue.  Roger is also fond of saying Tamron has one of the best service departments in the photo business these days with three day turn arounds and rarely ever a hassle.  He hasn't seen a problem since, nor have I seen anyone else complaining of that issue with that lens.  My copy has worked flawlessly since day one (about 6 months now) and is noticeably sharper than the canon 24-70i it replaced and the IS really good.  I can get a solid 2-3 stops when needed, I don't blink an eye now at 70mm and 1/15. 

30

EOS Bodies / Re: Dilemma: Need new body by May 1st (7d alternatives/successor timeline?)

« on: April 07, 2013, 12:07:33 PM »

Sell 17-55 $700 if in good shape. New budget 2700 and should be able to fit in a 6d kit plus even possibly a 85 1.8. Good luck and enjoy fatherhood!  You'll never be so tired in your entire life but its loads of fun and worth a lot less sleep.