October 23, 2014, 02:14:11 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] 4 5 ... 64
EOS Bodies / Re: 7D2 and EF 24 - 105 F4 L IS USM
« on: September 20, 2014, 05:37:14 PM »
The 24-105 IS f4 L will work great with any crop camera.  As will any Canon lens intended for Full Frame.

The zoom range will be a little awkward, but would not be bad for some things.  If you can have only one lens, this is not the choice I'd make.

Why not explain what you intend to shoot most of the time?  Or why this lens?

EOS Bodies / Re: 5diii to 7dii?
« on: September 18, 2014, 02:22:48 PM »
6 years ago I bought a 5DII and loved it.  My first Full frame etc.  But then the 7D came out and I bought that.  The combo was incredible.  The flexibility of 2 cameras each with very different strengths was fantastic. 

Today I think the 6D + 7DII combo are that magical pair.  The 5D3 is a great camera  and I have one, but check back with me in 6 months on that...

Canon EF Zoom Lenses / Re: Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« on: September 16, 2014, 11:18:12 PM »
Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

Lenses / Re: Choose your Weapon: Ultra Wide Zooms for Canon
« on: September 16, 2014, 11:03:46 PM »
8-15mm f4 L
Tokina 11-17

Both work great for me, but did not make your list.  The 11-17 is a nice lens on my 1D Mark IV, and the 8-15 does free on FF to crop.

Lenses / Re: EF11-24mm F4L listed on a Japanese site
« on: September 16, 2014, 02:21:40 PM »
That's not the hood!   That's the body of lens. Yes with some parts stick out and make a hood.  That would not be removable.  And my 300mm f4 has the ring on the sliding but non-removable hood.

OMG it is so Massive!

I don't get the massive part.  Looks like a very normal 300mm f2.8.  Also is that a good thing? Massive?

Anyway good for them.  i hope it's a good lens.

Photography Technique / Re: POLL: Do you crop (and why)?
« on: September 15, 2014, 12:36:17 AM »
I shoot the best image I can depending on the situation.

I crop if needed to get the best image for content and the application.

I don't know what the golden ratio is, I know about, but avoid the shower.

Portrait / Re: Post photos of other photographers in action
« on: September 14, 2014, 01:05:43 AM »
I am the guy in the vest. (and a canon shooter)
Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

Lenses / Re: The New Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II
« on: September 11, 2014, 08:05:42 PM »
Now I can afford the Mark I version!!!!

Hope that works out for you.   ;)  Prices on used MkI versions of the other superteles went up by ~$1K due to the uber-high announced MkII pricing.

I can vouch for that.  I bought my 400mm f2.8 IS for $3950 about 3 months before VII came out.  I then saw them selling at $4500 to $6000 used. 

Photography Technique / Re: Is RAW worth it?
« on: September 10, 2014, 02:13:17 PM »
OMG! 2 other RAW+Jpeg shooters :) I thought I was alone!

Photography Technique / Re: Is RAW worth it?
« on: September 10, 2014, 10:05:33 AM »
Maybe this will help:

jpeg = frozen pizza, limited pre-determined choices

raw = local, fresh, artisan pizza with toppings to your liking

Mmmmmm, pizza!

To be more accurate

jpeg is ordering a pizza and waiting for it to be delivered
RAW is being in the kitchen monitoring and changing how the pizza is made

and just like in cooking, just being in the kitchen changing stuff does not mean the product will be better.

RAW allows the photographer to change a bunch of things with the image.  It does not guarantee that these changes will be good.  ;D

My Dr. says Pizza, frozen or from a restaurant has too much salt.  How about this analogy:

jpeg is like your camera took the sensor data and produced a photo based on the settings you applied in camera like white balance and sharpness.  Adjusting them after the fact is difficult and less effective. Set your camera to black and white for example, and you have no color information.  On the other hand if you don't apply crazy setting these images generally look good.

Raw is like your camera recorded the sensor data.  Settings like white balance and sharpness are recorded.  When the image is displayed these settings may be displayed, but they can be changed.  The black and white setting for example can just be removed and the image rendered in color.  These images ussually look dull and flat to begin with and require some work, but with practice the results can be great.  And groups of images can be batch processed o make many look great.

Oh and I love Pizza.

Sports / Re: FutBall / Soccer / Football
« on: September 08, 2014, 12:01:40 AM »
REX17314a by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

Photography Technique / Re: Ballhead or Gimbal?
« on: September 05, 2014, 06:04:37 PM »
Tele+ Ball head = problems.  It will be forever trying to flop over.  A big lens will take the tripod over with it.

A gimbal is best, but a fluid head will work well. 

But if you have a good ball head, consider a wimberly sidekick or similar that converts it to a gimbal.  Cheaper, much faster to attach. Works great for me.  And I use it with a 400mm f2.8

Lenses / Re: I'm terrified of my EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS II
« on: September 05, 2014, 03:48:56 PM »
I carry a 5D, 24-105, 35/1.4, 15mm fisheye, 580ex, and a 70-200/2.8L IS II with 2x TC III all in a ThinkTank ChangeUp.

I carry a lowepro 650 All weather bag.  It could carry 6 of these lenses, and a laptop.  And then you'd never lift it off the ground.  It is a great bag, but can easily be packed to be too heavy.  I have a wheeled art case that holds it and will often use that when I am "packing heavy"

Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM
« on: September 04, 2014, 09:58:14 PM »
Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 64