Messages

1

Lenses / Re: 600mm lens

« on: May 02, 2013, 06:44:54 PM »

This is why you hear people talk about really right stuff or Kirk replacement feet, take off the canon put on replacement.

If the original cases came with wheels they might be worth traveling with alas they do not.

Neuro has talked about the feet in other threads.

I have a Kirk which needs more foot toward the camera to balance ,  Like a 1dx and flash so RRS may be better.  Check them out.

2

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits

« on: April 28, 2013, 01:15:06 AM »

Thank you for the kind comments.

My technique is to go alone so no one is bugging me to to move on :-), the full exif is on flkr at http://www.flickr.com/photos/56580542@N05/8687860452/#in/photostream .

I was shooting manual with shutter at 4000 iso at 1250 and f at 5.6, given enough light I'd lower iso and raise shutter and f stop.  Using a canon 600 rt flash with the better beamer on high speed sync ettl mode, power adjusted up one stop.  My idea was just to fill in the shadows with the flash as opposed to using it to stop action.  Put the sun behind me and would hold on the wing flutter until there was a clean shot, then tried to shot singles to let the flash keep up.  The shot below was the same as previous posted sans flash.  Flash really makes the shot pop.

3

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits

« on: April 27, 2013, 09:36:23 PM »

A flowering cherry tree near Portland OR was full of these probably immature rufous or Allen's hummingbirds.

Throats showed no color at all.

1dx at 4000 f 5.6 iso 1250 better beamer for some.

4

Lenses / Re: 300 f/2.8L and 400 f/2.8 at f/2.8

« on: April 19, 2013, 10:58:45 PM »

Carl thank you for your kind words. The woodies were at a park and if not tame then less wild. And a little secret better Beamer is her name.  Gains maybe a stop or so, and cuts the shadow areas.  Don't think I mentioned that before.

5

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits

« on: April 18, 2013, 11:28:56 PM »

Great stuff krob like the light on the egret and the American kestrel.

Rpt the yellow on the scrub jay pic is some kind of lichen, all our pacific nw trees have moss lichen or mistletoe it seems.

6

Lenses / Re: 300 f/2.8L and 400 f/2.8 at f/2.8

« on: April 18, 2013, 03:19:01 PM »

Jack shooting with the big whites especially with extenders demands some attention to technique if you want to print tack sharp images.  I learned this the hard way

As noted in previous posts one must;

-pay attention to depth of field, its a camera lens not magic

-have realistic lighting expectations even with IS consider keeping shutter speeds above at least the length of the lens don't be afraid to raise iso to 800-1000 or even more esp with the 6D to keep shutter speeds high enough

-use a tripod whenever practical

-consider using live view and shutter lock up, moon pictures benefit from this a lot

-It would be helpful to me at least if when you post for help you include your shot settings.

-Read some of the successful long lens shooters like Art Morris and CR's Gary Samples, Art at least does not expect every shot to turn out.

Your squirrel shot seems to have had several things against it starting with a shallow depth of field, and a cluttered view with branches in front of the squirrel too many things to focus on.  The tree shot looks fine to me except an area in-between the first and second big branches from the ground there is a foggy area? there.

Here are two of mine handheld with 300 2.8 ii with 1.4iii  shot at f5.6 1/1600 iso 1000 just to show what that lens combo can do.  The stationary wood duck is plenty sharp to me maybe improve able with lower iso.  The second shows I think the depth of field, and perhaps a slightly slow shutter speed giving the wing tips blur (not really a bad thing).  These were the best of probably five each so four throw aways per keeper, some for composition as well as technique.

7

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits

« on: April 17, 2013, 11:52:28 PM »

Scrub Jay at Knoll wetland.

1DX   7.1   1/640  iso 1000

8

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits

« on: April 14, 2013, 12:23:42 PM »

Thank you Steven Kessel for the bird id
Yellow Rumped Warbler,, a skittery little bird caught at 1/2500 f6.3 iso 1600 1dx

9

Animal Kingdom / Re: Show your Bird Portraits

« on: April 11, 2013, 08:11:48 PM »

Steven about the yellow rumpled warbler, does it skitter in a tree and then make a short loop out into a clear area as if catching bugs.  I've been seeing a bird like this in portland or, and having equal difficulty catching it.    Later I'll see if I have any portable images, I was having trouble identifying it.
Regards

10

Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM

« on: April 10, 2013, 01:04:01 AM »

Portland is famous for these, in fact I think both US Portlands are:
300 with 1.4ext iii @iso 640, 4.5 1/1000

11

Animal Kingdom / Re: Zoo Pics 2

« on: April 09, 2013, 11:25:51 PM »

Portland zoo first a bird in the African aviary 1dx f5.6 1/1600 iso 1250, all with 300 f2.8 ii with 1.4 extender.

Second fish at f4 1/30 iso 400

Third orangutan f4 1/80 iso 3200

12

Animal Kingdom / A couple of osprey shots

« on: April 02, 2013, 11:48:46 AM »

Please feel free to critique.  The series was done watching an osprey swoop down on a baseball field and hitting the edge of the grass as if fishing.  The technique appeared to be the same, I like the ground picture which seems to show the two toes facing front and two in back which I understand to be an ability unique to osprey.

All shots at 600mm with a EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM +2x III  and all cropped about 50%
First photo  f 5.6 1/2500 iso 1600, second 5.6 1/2000 iso 1600, third 5.6 1/2000 iso 1600

13

Technical Support / Re: 5D III RAW Import problem in Mac OSX Mountain Lion

« on: March 29, 2013, 12:11:06 AM »

Have you run software update?

I'm pretty sure there have been raw compatibility updates.  Start here. http://support.apple.com/kb/ht5371 and go to support downloads if you need to.

I recall also updating adobe bridge don't have URL handy but it is on adobe site or update server.

14

Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200mm F/4L or Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 USM or other suggestions?

« on: March 21, 2013, 11:15:12 AM »

Have you read the digital picture take on this? http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx. I'd recommend it.

You stipulated somewhere that you wanted to be able to avoid a tripod.  Going from 85 to 200 to 300 I think you'll find that either is or support will help get crisp pictures.  In general I've found that the l lenses are worth the long term investment.

Good luck with either decision.

15

Lenses / Re: best NON L long lens

« on: March 15, 2013, 09:25:37 PM »

While there are many lenses that reach 300mm + and are non-L most of those are not  going to make even back yard photographers happy. 

Granted the thread premise is a non-L lens with 300+ tele power, the reality is that the best bet is probably to get a used L lens and be happy with the result, as opposed to getting a sub-par lens and giving up on getting a good picture.  While this doesn't address the ops question, it is  what it is.

A budget based criterion (how much do you want to spend) as opposed to a model based plan would probably be better.  By the time you spend enough for a poor lens you could probably get a point and shoot with better optics and response. Case in point a PowerShot SX500 IS Digital Camera with 720mm equivalent can be had for $300 at bhphotovideo, and there are others with more reach that should compete in the "not gonna be the best optically, probably noisy, slow autofocus" category.  Really I am trying to be helpful.