October 31, 2014, 12:20:22 AM

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 - TexPhoto

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 64
Photography Technique / Re: Need air show advice- Wings over Houston
« on: October 28, 2014, 12:38:25 AM »
Practice your panning technique.  Cars on a road make a nice a analog. Remember to focus on something on the plane, pic a feature, put the center focus spot on that.  Set the IS to the right mode.

Are you close?  There will be planes coming in the days before, acrobatic teams will be practicing.  Might be your chance to shoot some keepers without having to fight for space. 

Get a schedule, know your events, don't miss something you don't want to miss. 

This is like buying an 18K gold cell phone.  What do 2 years later when the next one comes out? 

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
« on: October 25, 2014, 11:20:32 AM »
I had a nightmare with this lens.  In theory the 300mm f/4.0L and 1.4x converter combination should have been better than a 400mm f/5.6L.

300/4.0 + 420/5.6 + IS vs 400/5.6 No IS

In practice it didn't work like that at all.  I managed to get a few decent shots out of the 300 f/4.0L, but the vast majority were completely unusable.  I took it to Canon's service facility in Singapore for checking and calibration, but it was still no better.

The first generation IS is clunky and not very effective.  My other IS lenses feel as if a giant pair of hands has grabbed the lens and is holding it still.  The 300 f/4L IS helps a little, but not very much.

I sold it and bought the 400 f/5.6L.  This lens has been stellar with far superior image quality and consistency.  I don't miss IS all that much, but an update with the latest IS would be very welcome.

I can't really understand all the written praise in this thread.  Most of the sample images have been downsized so much that there is no detail visible, or horribly over-sharpened in PP.  The squirrel shot wasn't bad.

Perhaps I had a particularly bad copy, but after my experience I could never recommend this lens.  YMMV.  This is just about my own personal experience.


Unfortunate experience, but glad the 400 is working for you.  My 300mm f4 IS has been great.  I also like it with the 1.4X converter.  My first was a canon VI but I traded up to a VIII and saw an improvement. 
Here is a FLIKR Group I made for this combo: https://www.flickr.com/groups/2164037@N20/   

Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

EOS Bodies / Re: Patent: 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 With a Liquid Element
« on: October 20, 2014, 03:56:07 PM »
This will not end well.

Lenses / Re: Selling my Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS II
« on: October 18, 2014, 10:56:39 PM »
My 70-200 is my most used and most loved lens.  I bought a 200mm f1.8 a little over a year ago.  Touched the paint up and sold it for $300 more than I paid.  It was interesting, but I never felt like it was a replacement for my 70-200.

Technical Support / Re: Do I Need $ 634 US Dollars Light meter ?
« on: October 18, 2014, 10:17:11 PM »
Call me crazy....
So if you are going to get a light meter.... Get a REALLY good one that will tell you more about your light than the camera will.

Not to worry.  I am not going to get another one.  Actually I have a nice mid 90s Minolta flash meter, and a 1910 era model from my grandfather that seems to work quite well.  But my favorites are embedded in my cameras... :)

Technical Support / Re: Do I Need $ 634 US Dollars Light meter ?
« on: October 18, 2014, 03:00:53 PM »
Call me crazy, but if you are shooting digital, the need for an accurate meter is much less even in studio, because you can shoot, review, adjust, 10 times in 2 minutes. 
And you can probably pick up a used meter on ebay for $20-50 that will get you within a half stop of the high end meter you are looking at.
And last, even a super-duper high end meter is not going to give you a perfect exposure because we all have some personal taste in what we want to see. Are you shooting a scary Halloween scene, where you want it extra dark?  Toothpaste commercial, where it has to be extra brute etc? 

On the other hand is this the last piece of the puzzle in $100K studio where you intend to make a living or enjoy your retirement?  Is this going to provide the inspiration you need to shoot that piece of art that will hang in a gallery and earn a ton a $$?  Go for it.

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: October 17, 2014, 11:52:01 PM »
Cool shots TexPhoto  8)  I especially like the first picture.
+1 Absolutely cool!

Thanks.  I had to set that one up and explain what I was doing to the four photographers pictured.  Everytime I moved to get them in the photo they moved to get out of my way.  And our fire spinner at the time kept making the spin too small, I had to sort of lecture him.  It was his first time and he was very scared of the sparks.

5D MK III Sample Images / Re: 5D MK III Images
« on: October 17, 2014, 08:25:34 AM »
REX59308 by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

REX59272 by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

REX59270 by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

Abstract / Re: This image may have been photoshopped
« on: October 14, 2014, 12:21:09 PM »
Nobody said it had to be good photoshop.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: EOS 7D mk2 or 5D mk3
« on: October 12, 2014, 04:33:03 PM »
I'd go with a 6D and 7D II over a 5D3.

I had V1 but sold it.  I keep looking ant VII on eBay and thinking what if...

Third Party Lenses (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) / Re: Sigma 300-800mm f5.6
« on: October 10, 2014, 01:06:00 AM »
Very cool.  Thanks of rthe review. 

This lens intrigues me because I shoot surfing and the range is about perfect.  At the last surf contest there was a guy with one and I asked to try it, offering to let him try my 400f2.8 IS and both VIII converters, but he acted like we would catch kooties from trying lenses like that... 

I see these on eBay from time to time, but way too much money and of course you can't try it out first...

Sorry i was away, I was using an after market flash extension cord, I was around 120th I think and yes I had a B&W pro filter on.

Hmm, makes me think less of B&W pro filters. Those things should be multicoated to prevent this.

Sorry to be obtuse here, but when light hits surface of the glass on both surfaces, there is reflection, and refraction.  But in the glass there is transmission and absorption.  Some light will always be lost to being absorbed.  It makes heat.  So

Even the best multicoating won't completely stop this phenomenon.  Think of it this way:  if you can *see* a piece of glass, that necessarily means it reflects some incident light, otherwise it would be completely invisible to you.  To be immune to this phenomenon, you'd need a glass that would look invisible and fail to show any reflected light over a wide range of viewing angles.

The fact that the flash is throwing a ton of light directly into the lens at an angle that is not image-forming virtually guarantees that there will be a lot of veiling glare.  That non-image-forming light bounces off the lens sub-barrel and diaphragm, comes back out, hits the filter, and because it's a macro shot, ends up forming a very nice detailed ghost of the inside of the lens.

Sure, without doing something more drastic, such a reflection is pretty much guaranteed. I'd love to see a filter like this with a nanocoating. Where multicoating can cancel out enough reflections to allow up to 97% transmission, that's still 3% reflection. A nanocoating, on the other hand, can simply prevent reflections entirely, resulting in 99.95% or better transmission. I bet a nanocoated UV/protect filter would have handled this situation nicely. ;)

HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Singel Image HDR
« on: October 07, 2014, 09:21:31 PM »
Combine all this 3 images to give a single shot HDR RAW.

Well, if there are three shots, it's not really single shot HDR.  It's HDR.  But you might get some nice results.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 64