July 29, 2014, 11:20:30 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 - charlesa

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 21
241
EOS Bodies / Re: More Big Megapixel Talk
« on: August 19, 2012, 11:09:03 AM »
Damn if a 40+ MP body with an 8 fps burst rate appears... but I believe it is too good to be true, and if you need 40 MP to crop, your composition MIGHT be a bit off...

242
Lenses / Re: 100mm f/2.8L IS vs 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II for Macro
« on: August 19, 2012, 11:06:58 AM »
Get the zoom first and the macro lens later.

243
Sports / Re: Shooting the Olympics - what separates us from the pros
« on: August 19, 2012, 11:05:35 AM »
I can vouch it is backbreaking, even for a fit 31 year old. Two bodies (a 1D4 and and 1DX), a 400 mm, a 70-200, an 8-15 fisheye and a 24 mm tilt-shift and your back starts hurting pretty soon.

244
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Digital Rev video review of 1D X available
« on: August 19, 2012, 11:04:15 AM »
I love the way he calls the body a 1D-(SE)X. I tend to agree with him. Had a photoshoot today, everyone was grumbling and reaching for their tripods and flashes in very low light situations, whereas I was happily snapping away at 12800 ISO...

245
Street & City / Re: The Helmsley Building
« on: August 19, 2012, 11:02:32 AM »
It is an excellent capture. I would suggest converting to monochrome though, it might have more impact that way.

246
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 1D X won't wake from sleep
« on: August 19, 2012, 11:01:42 AM »
I have noticed the same difficulty in waking the camera body from sleep mode with most lenses of mine. Up till now it happened several times with the fisheye, the 70-200 mm, the 135 mm f/2 and the 400 mm prime as well... did not enjoy that one during a fast-paced waterpolo match...

247
Lenses / Re: Looking for a EF 70-200 IS USM II. Used is fine. Ideas?
« on: August 16, 2012, 04:12:53 PM »
Good luck, not many would sell that lens second-hand. If they do, they are either borderline insane or getting out of photography :)

248
Lenses / Re: Do you switch off IS in sunny days?
« on: August 16, 2012, 04:11:55 PM »
Never switched off, neither on the 70-200 mm or the 400 mm, tripod or monopod, it stays on. Might improve battery life but sharp captures are more important than draining the battery in my book.

249
Lenses / Re: Lens choices for airshow
« on: August 16, 2012, 02:03:59 PM »
Would take the ultrawide and the 70-200 mm, although that might create issues by having to keep changing lenses constantly. For airshows I usually take fisheye, tilt-shift, 70-200 and 400 mm prime +/- 2x III TC.

250
Lenses / Re: Choice for a landscape lens
« on: August 16, 2012, 01:57:45 PM »
Depends on budget, but the 24 mm TS-E II is a prime contender. Sharpest wideangle Canon produce with added bonus of depth of field manipulation and fixing converging verticals. Price a concern maybe though.

252
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Does Zeiss glass ever go on sale?
« on: August 14, 2012, 10:21:57 AM »
Not really, but you can find Zeiss glass second-hand. Might I interest you in a 50 mm f/1.4, brand spanking new?  :P

253
Lenses / Re: If you can have ONLY 3 lenses, what would they...???
« on: August 14, 2012, 10:18:47 AM »
24 mm TS-E II L
70-200 mm f/2.8 II IS L
400 mm f/2.8 L IS I

254
Editing my first real batch of 1d X pictures, and I can't believe how much I can bend the files, how superclean the 100-400 range is and just how much sharper they are compared to the 5d3! I am amazed!


That camera is the embodiment of love at first sight of RAW!

255
Lenses / Re: Owning the Canon 200-400 f/4L Vs 400 f/2.8L II
« on: August 12, 2012, 03:16:22 PM »
When the 200-400 lens becomes available I will be purchasing it or the 400 2.8 prime. The delima of which of these 2 lenses would be more effective is making me mad.

The versatility of the 200-400 with the built in ext will be excellent. To think, though, that with the 1.4X and 2X ext gives you 3 incredibly useful focal lengths is equally incredible.

Owning the 70-200 f/2.8 II and using both ext's on it often, I think that the 200 to 280mm range of the 200-400 would go unused much of the time.

I have owed the 600 f/4 300 f/2.8 and the 200 f/2. Of all of those lenses, the 300 f/2.8 was my favorite.

Has anyone else given this much thought?

The 200-400 f/4L zoom lens cannot REPLACE the 300 2.8 and 400 2.8 primes.  For most sports shooters, f/4 isn't going to cut it and I've experienced this myself, especially night football where all you have are stadium lights. You also need access to all of the AF sensors in the 1DX and/or 1D Mark IV.  All other purposes, yes, it's a great lens and would alleviate the need to buy a 300 and 400 prime perhaps.

Although in theory I agree, it provides useful versatility. I am just back from shooting a waterpolo match, and although the 400 f/2.8 on a 1DX performed like a beaut, not having the second body with the 70-200 or the fisheye made me lose quite a number of shots (second body is being serviced). Just saying, 200-400 is useful versatility wise.

Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 21