February 28, 2015, 02:35:52 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 - TexPhoto

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 72
Lenses / Re: SIGMA APO 300mm F2.8 EX DG HSM
« on: February 08, 2013, 08:15:58 PM »
I had this lens when I shot Nikon, and it was awesome.  Sigma makes both Gems and Dogs, and this one is a Gem.  I shot wit the Sigma 1.4X and loved it for sports, wide life, etc.

A Canon f2.8 IS II would also be nice, but we would all think you were stuck up and pretentious.  (Kidding)  It's a better lens for Waaaay more money.  Consider the IS I, or pre IS 300mm Canons as well.

Canon General / Re: Physical Ailments From Heavy Gear
« on: February 05, 2013, 02:42:12 PM »
I am getting to the point that gear weight is becoming a problem.  I have made 2 resolutions, and so far they are working.

1.  I don't buy camera bags, or suitcases (really any bag) that does not have wheels.  I do have one smaller bag (2 bodies + 4 lenses) that does not have wheels, but that goes down into my "artist bag"  This is sort of a bigger version of a lawyers bag, a giant briefcase.  It has wheels and a handle. 

2. I use a monopod almost all the time.   Instead of adding weight to my frame, I take some off.  The monopod and camera are a hiking stick, something to lean on.  Occasionally I whack people with it.

Of course pairing down your kit also results in big weight savings. Instead of 6 lenses you might need, take 3 that you will.  Make up the difference with your own skill and creativity (You old fart)

Reviews / Re: Canon 200-400 f/4L IS Review
« on: February 04, 2013, 07:45:00 AM »
It's probably more durable that the lens mount after attaching and removing a TC / camera many thouands of times. The lens mount on most large tele's take quite a pounding over time. This new built in TC should reduce that massively...and let less dust / sand inside too.

Yea, my thinking as well.  Not to mention teleconverters, cameras and lenses get dropped in the swapping process.  Not often, but I have seen plenty of pros do it.  I watched a friend chase a 2X III converter down a hill as it sort of bounced and rolled away from him.  He'd been trying to swap it into a 5DII 70-200 setup to get a quick 400mm shot and it slipped from his fingers.

If this lens were 10K, I'd consider it.  I could sell my 400mm 2.8 IS and both teleconverters, and I suppose my 300mm is f4 as well.  But I don't think it will be 10K, or less than it's retail price for a long time.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Times running out 5D Mk3 or 1DX
« on: February 01, 2013, 11:52:44 PM »
6D + awsome glass + money n the bank for next camera in 1-2 years.

Lenses / Re: Help me choose between the two: 70-200 f2.8 IS or 17 TS-E?
« on: February 01, 2013, 10:45:05 PM »
My solution, get both.  Then, shoot weddings exclusively with the 17mm tilt shift.  Your unique perspective will set you apart in the field.

Likewise architecture: only 70-200.  Tell your clients their interiors are the problem not your shooting technique.  If they can't convey the room in a 2x2ft area of that room, you are not at fault.

You will be called a visionary, an artist unwilling to compromise to conformity.

6D Sample Images / Re: for those who snub the 6D AF...
« on: January 31, 2013, 11:37:41 PM »
Um cool photo, love it. 

But 900 knots is way past the speed of sound, and that airplane is not closing on you, it's flying past you.

Hey, I took some awesome sports photos with my 5DII, nothing wrong with a 6D.  shoot you butt off with it.

Lighting / Re: When do _you_ use a bare bulb diffusor?
« on: January 31, 2013, 08:56:58 PM »
I crack up laughing when i see these being used outside, pointed straight up!
You can laugh, but as a "bare bulb" it does send light in all directions, even when pointed straight up.  Pointing it straight up outdoors works fine if the intention is to give the subject a tiny bit of extra light in the eyes, perhaps a catchlight in the pupils, but without subjecting them to a flash pointed directly at their eyes (which would likely cause them to blink more).  Of course, it won't work well for farther subjects.

I often do it, and that is a major reason why (430EXII & Sto-Fen).  Also, when the flash is down and forward (and ETTL) the camera automatically meters for direct flash, but if you go up one notch it will automatically switch to metering for fill.  It's just one of my shortcuts in rapidly changing conditions.

My normal Flash compensation setting is -1, and i am normally shooting in aperture priority.  I find this a great place to start with the flash, and if it's too much I just drop to -2.  The advantage of this over the diffuser is the flash is going off at 1/8 or even lower power and can thus fire as fast as the camera. With the diffuser and aiming strength up, your going to dump 1005 energy and only be able to shoot every 2-4 seconds.

Lenses / Re: Telephoto choice for Australia
« on: January 31, 2013, 08:15:31 PM »
500 f4 sounds awesome!

But here is the thing.  Are you sure you are up for this?  It's a major investment of money, but even more in the hassle of caring around 12 lbs of "steal me!" on a  vacation.  I love big lenses, but I don't take them on vacation with the family.  i want the family to still allow me in the house when we get back.  I take my 400 2.8 when I go on business trips by myself. 

Anyway, i think you get this lens now, soon, get used to it and then decide if this is going on vacation with you!

I am very fond of 400mm f2.8 and the 1.4 and 2X converters because of the flexibility and the f2.8.  For night sports, f2.8 kicks but.

Lighting / Re: When do _you_ use a bare bulb diffusor?
« on: January 31, 2013, 01:42:37 PM »
I crack up laughing when i see these being used outside, pointed straight up!

I use one when i am indoors and the ceiling (and hopefully walls and floor are white.), especially when I am shooting very wide.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon may be expensive but...
« on: January 29, 2013, 10:41:11 AM »
"Originally trialed and tested under the demanding conditions of the 2012 summer games, the AF-S NIKKOR 800mm f/5.6E FL ED VR maintains...."

Interesting.  Did nobody spot one of these because the Canon 200-400-560 were getting all the looks?

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Canon may be expensive but...
« on: January 29, 2013, 07:57:39 AM »
Seriously?  Canon people are making fun of a higher price over at Nikon?  Somehwere there is a pot calling the kettle black.

How much do you think the Canon 800mm f5.6 IS II will cost?  $24K?

Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?
« on: January 27, 2013, 10:06:30 PM »
I did not choose Canon.  Canon chose me!

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: 6D not usable for shooting video?
« on: January 25, 2013, 11:13:01 AM »
Maybe that guy just has a neon roof?  :o

That was pretty bad.  A shame.

Lenses / Re: Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 on full frame: it's actually quite good!
« on: January 20, 2013, 12:03:48 PM »
As long as your not worried about it... :o  How about posting some more interesting photos taken with your 11-16 on FF?

I mean small bills taped to doors are good, but not awesome.

Lenses / Re: Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 on full frame: it's actually quite good!
« on: January 20, 2013, 11:34:27 AM »
on a side note: When you tear a banknote apart, make sure one part is doubtlessly bigger than half a note.

Just curious: why?

Because if you have more than 1/2 of the bill it is still spendable.

Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 72