April 24, 2014, 10:48:55 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.

Messages - brad-man

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 41
Canon General / Re: I Need Help Finding A Camera Bag
« on: February 22, 2014, 10:00:05 PM »
I have the Retrospective 5 and the 7. The 5 will hold a 5D mounted to a Tamron SP24-70VC along with an EF70-300L in the other slot with room for a 270EX. It's snug, but not unreasonable. The Retro 7 will hold a 5D with a 2.8 standard zoom attached and pretty much any two other lenses up to and including a 70-200 2.8L. They are terribly well built and about as inconspicuous as you can get with a shoulder bag.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 6D body deals
« on: February 17, 2014, 07:35:04 PM »
This is a good resource for lens/camera pricing:


Portrait / Re: Post photos of other photographers in action
« on: February 17, 2014, 05:27:29 PM »
Old School

Animal Kingdom / Re: Let's Get it On
« on: February 17, 2014, 04:37:37 PM »
Happy Lions  8)
Food and sex - an interesting mixture for sure...

Oh, come on. You've never taken a lady out for dinner and...

Lenses / Re: 70-200 2.8 advice
« on: February 16, 2014, 04:30:16 PM »
Personally, I wouldn't consider a 70-200 without image stabilization unless the majority of your shooting is fast moving objects. You'll want it for portraits. If you can live with the deeper depth of field, the 70-200 f/4L IS is the 2.8's equal in most other aspects (though much easier to carry) and can be had refurbished from Canon for less than $1100. Otherwise, I would agree with sagittariansrock and vote for the Tamron. I have their 24-70 f/2.8 VC and love it.

Software & Accessories / Re: Looking for a new tripod and head
« on: February 12, 2014, 05:26:39 PM »
Being as tall as you are is problematic for getting a stable pod (not raising the column) for cheap. I would recommend the previously mentioned Sirui M3204X. Collapsed it is 21" and it extends to 70". It weighs under 4 pounds and will easily handle your present rig (it's rated at 40 lbs). I have one and it's very well built. Trouble is, the cheapest it can be had right now is $380, and that's a good price. If you can continue to use your old ballhead until you can dig up a little more cash for a new head, you will not be disappointed.


Canon specifically said WiFi wasn't built in due to concerns from their military customers.  That's why it's the optional module.

The 6D comes out in a WiFi and non-WiFi version - or is that a GPS and non-GPS version? Either way, that's a truly weak excuse on the part of Canon.

Not really. The 6D is a consumer model, so no worries. 1 series cameras are professional models, and Canon would have to come up with security protocols to protect intellectual property. It's easier to download to a computer or hotspot or whatever, and send the photos on a secure network.

Lenses / Re: Most Anticipated Rurmored Sigma Lenses?
« on: February 10, 2014, 03:44:52 AM »
Am I the only one incredibly psyched about the rumors that have been floating around about a few rumored (unannounced) Sigma lenses?

There have been rumors of several incredible ideas:

16-20mm f/2.0
24-70mm f/2.0
24mm f/1.4
135mm f/2.0 OS

Dear god, please make these lenses a reality.

Don't know why we need another 24-70 lens, but a 16-20 that doesn't have a bulbous and curved front element like various 14-24's and others would be very welcome.

Likely it's very difficult (or impossible) to have a flat front element in a sharp-across-the-frame rectilinear uwa zoom. So you either get a convenient and lightweight, but not-so-sharp-off-center zoom, or a sharp but heavy bulbous scratch and flare monster that's inconvenient to filter.

Though if anyone can do it, my money would be on Sigma. Put me down for an 85/1.4 (with or without OS) and a 135/1.8 OS of the Art variety please...

Photography Technique / Re: The Cheapo Camera bag to fool the bad guys.
« on: February 08, 2014, 03:11:55 AM »
that's a sweet setup (cam/lense)
That tripod looks like it couldn't possible hold that weight.
Is it stable?
I was having trouble reading the label, did it say "Desmond"?
what is the manufacturer and model?

Actually, as long as you stay reasonably level, it's quite stable. It's a set of Manfrotto 209 legs with a Manfrotto 494RC2 head on top that I converted to the arca system with the $25 Desmond clamp. They also sell the legs with a dedicated ballhead, but it's far too weak to be of any use with a DSLR.

Photography Technique / Re: Shoot from the rearend of the subjects.
« on: February 07, 2014, 11:05:21 PM »
Now that's just funny...

Photography Technique / Re: The Cheapo Camera bag to fool the bad guys.
« on: February 07, 2014, 10:58:36 PM »
I was noticing in one of the pictures a table-top tripod that was able to hold a large dslr and large lense.
I am looking for something of that nature.
What is that brand and model
I would need to be able to support a 5d3 and a 70-200 L2.8

You mean like this?

Very nice setup. I've been following these threads as well, and decided to pull the trigger on a TVC-34L + TA-3-LB-HK leveling base to upgrade my 2-series Gitzo. Just got it yesterday - what a difference in stability! I'm 6'2" so it's also great to finally have a tripod I can use to shoot up with and lower one leg on uneven ground without having to crouch.

I decided to keep my Markins Q10 with screw clamp for now rather than spring for the BH-55, since I have a mix of plates and really like the smoothness and lower weight of the Q10 for the same or higher load rating as the BH-55. I can see trying one eventually, though, given the tremendous quality of the rest of the equipment.

Enjoy! (I know I will)

Definitely try the BH-55 before you buy. I seriously doubt there is a better head on the planet than the Q10. I've never used the BH-55 head, but I do own a BH-40 that I picked up for my macro rig, as the one and only downside to the Markin's heads is they have a relatively weak panning lock. I can tell you that my Markins Q3 (half as strong as my Q10) absolutely blows the BH-40 away in both smoothness and strength (panning lock aside). So I don't know how much better the 55 is than the 40, but definitely try it first. No offense to all of you RRS fanatics 8).

Whenever I leave my 5D MK III + Tamron 24-70 VC with VC turned on (even though the camera power is turned off), the battery drains very within a couple of days ... does anyone else face this issue?

I had a similar issue.  Call Tamron, send it in, and they will fix it quickly.  It needs an updated circuit board.

This is another reason why I don't like 3rd party lenses. Send it in for an updated circuit board on a £750+ lens so it won't drain my battery!! Be without the bread and butter lens... Ridiculous and if your a pro 'small' issues like this are a big deal.

I guess you've missed the numerous postings about problems with the EF24-70 ll. Many of those posters report receiving no satisfaction from Canon. I've read no such posts about the Tamron, and their warranty is for six years.

Lenses / Re: Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art Price leaked
« on: February 06, 2014, 06:44:47 PM »
During all this speculation, keep in mind that the MSRP of the 35 Art on Sigma's own website is $1400. As we all know, the actual price has always been $899. I would expect the new 50 to be similarly priced. Since I'm waiting for the 85 & the 135 Art, I really really hope so...

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 41