Messages

46

Lenses / Re: Best lens for baby portraits?

« on: February 23, 2013, 03:23:09 PM »

congratulations on the new addition to your family!

I actually like the 35L as a standard/wide-ish prime.  It focuses relatively close and gives a shallow enough DOF but isn't as hard to use as the 50L or 85L.  I know some people might suggest the new sigma 35mm instead (and I'm not opposed to that either).  That 85mm 1.8 does 95% of what the L does so if that is more within your budget, I think thats a great recommendation too for the tight portrait shot.

47

Lenses / Re: How low will it go? (50L)

« on: February 19, 2013, 07:45:44 PM »

How long have you waited to get this lens? Are you missing shots by not having this lens? If you don't need it urgently then by all means wait and see if price drops further.

Personally, I won't be able to put off buying a new L lens for a chance of possibly saving an extra $100 when I'm already paying $1299/$1399.

Hope you get the lens soon and start enjoying it.

IMHO as always

Cheers

+1

+2

+1 as well.  I want to get the 50 f/1.2L one of these days but it's not urgent for me, even after selling my 50mm 1.4.  I'm keeping an eye out for a good deal but I noticed that the Christmas ('12) deal was the one of the best I saw all year.

48

Lenses / Re: Weddings 70-200mm 2.8 is vs 4 is

« on: February 19, 2013, 07:43:22 PM »

So I guess my final choice is f4 for me, f2.8 ii for him.

I think that's the perfect compromise.  It would be nice to have the 70-200 f/4 when I'm out shooting during the day and don't need the 2.8.  The 2.8 IS II is a pain when I have to carry it for 12 hours.

That said, I've actually started using the spider holster system on my think tank belt.  Have you considered a belt carrying system.  It beats having anything around your neck or on your shoulder(s).  I'd give it a try.  I have a Black Rapid strap and even that bugs after a while.  I hardly even feel the camera weight (5dmk3, 600ex-rt, and 70-200 2.8 IS II) on my hips/waist.

49

Lenses / Re: Input on Lens Decision

« on: February 18, 2013, 01:56:00 PM »

I find zooms to be more "convenient" for casual shooting.  Primes are nice but against my set of lenses, I don't feel the need to buy every single L prime lens anymore.  Lately, for casual shooting, I've been trying to discipline myself by carrying only 1 or 2 lenses at most and making it work with what I have on hand. 

In short, yes, I say slim down your kit to what you absolutely need.  It look like you can use an ultra wide angle lens in your kit. Also, the 24-105 might pair up nicely with the 100-400 instead of the 70-300.

50

Lenses / Re: Canon 24-105 f/4 L IS vs. Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 IS vs. Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L II

« on: February 17, 2013, 01:35:51 AM »

I own both the 24-105 and 24-70II
I bought the 24-70II even though i own the 24-105 for 1 reason, sharpness at f2.8. That's also a big reason why many other buy this lens isn't it?
Depending on what you shoot, for me, it's 90% portraits, 10% events and for both, i don't need IS.
What i need is a sharp lens.
If possible, most times i'll use my primes but there are situations where a good zoom is essential and this is where the 24-70II really shines..it's almost as sharp as my primes for portraitures..

+1 I ended up selling my 24-105.  Not nearly as sharp.  The extra stop of light comes in handy too.

51

Software & Accessories / Re: BlackRapid & Kirk clamp hook-up

« on: February 16, 2013, 03:24:53 PM »

i love this forum.  I had the same question last night as I was switching my clamps to Arca Swiss clamps and lo and behold... here it is on the forum.  Thanks to the OP and all the answers.  That helps me out too.

52

Lighting / Re: Speedlite ST-E2 v's ST-E3-RT

« on: February 14, 2013, 04:15:19 AM »

Before you buy anything get this book
http://www.amazon.com/Speedliters-Handbook-Learning-Craft-Speedlites/dp/032171105X/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1360813328&sr=8-3&keywords=Syl+arena

It should come free with every flash. It covers all your options with pros and cons for each, it tells you the best value and what you need to buy to get he kind go pictures you want, whatever they might be.

+1  i love this book

also, the st-e3-rt does not have an AF assist beam.  I believe the st-e2 emits one.  If the the e3 had it, I'd pick one up instead of getting yet another 600-ex-rt

53

Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 40 f/2.8 STM

« on: February 13, 2013, 02:42:49 PM »

I love my shorty.  sure I don't use it everyday but it helps out the shoulders/neck when walking around all day at an amusement park.  I use it for it's intended purpose.  non-mission-critical, casual photography when I don't want to lug around the big guns.  It's the ninja lens.  The rest of my guys are big Samurai and Sumo wrestlers!

54

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 7D or 5D3 for low light candids?

« on: February 13, 2013, 02:51:52 AM »

5D3 is a better low-light camera.  But the 24-105/4 is not the lens for low-light candids — generally speaking.  If low-light candids are a priority, get the 5D3 and buy a different lens.  Pretty much any fast prime or f/2.8 zoom would be my preference for low-light candids.

+1

55

Canon General / Re: Physical Ailments From Heavy Gear

« on: February 12, 2013, 02:12:22 PM »

I felt some pain after carrying my DSLR around Disneyland for the first time.  It got me to start working out again.  Is that an option for you?  even some daily push ups could help...not sure of your age or general health but a normal exercise routine has done wonders for my back and shoulders.

56

Lenses / Re: 16-35L or related primes

« on: February 12, 2013, 02:03:52 PM »

I have a bunch of primes and the only zoom I kept was my 16-35, it's just too useful with that focal range.

If you're looking for something wider, go for the Samyang 14mm.  It's only $400 so you can't really lose, and it's sharper than the Canon 14LII (which I own, and it pains me to say that but it's true).  The distortion is a bit worse but that's easily correctable in Lightroom/PS/Aperture.

If you can deal with the pain of swapping lenses all the time and not having AF on all of them, I say go for the other setup, all the lenses you mentioned are excellent.

+1

57

Lenses / Re: Is this inconsistency acceptable? Sigma 85 1.4 question.

« on: February 12, 2013, 01:51:58 PM »

If its not acceptable to you, thats the only thing that counts!  Return it!

+1
Ultimately, if you have the impression that it is off in one corner or the other, enough of an impression to put it in writing with example pictures, as you have done here, that's what matters...you will always have that view whatever is said here...return it.

+1

58

Lenses / Re: New Member / Lens Recs

« on: February 12, 2013, 04:04:21 AM »

Wider angle lenses will help tell the "story" of a scene while telephotos will give you a more "intimate" look. 

I think the 24-105 is a great lens to start out with.  I'd start with that (in the kit, as suggested in prior recommendations) before you purchase your second lens.  See what focal length you like using.  most people choose between the 35mm and the 50mm, and sometimes the 85mm.  I personally went with the 35mm f/1.4L.  It suited my tastes.

59

Canon General / Re: anyone had someone over their shoulder on a job?

« on: February 07, 2013, 04:36:27 AM »

LOL.  I actually think I was one of the annoying guests/photographers at my cousins wedding last December.  I shoot weddings every once in a while.  for my cousin... of course I'm gonna take pictures.  The paid photographer was most definitely annoyed by all the other guests with DSLRs.  (I was not the only one).  The MC even made an announcement over the PA for everyone to "not to get in the way of the professional photographer".... it (the announcement) was pretty f'n douchey if you ask me. 

To be honest, you get no sympathy from me.  When I'm at a wedding gig, I've just learned to deal with others who own cameras.  It doesn't annoy me.  You work around it.  Hell, take a picture of them taking a picture.  Get the subjects attention if they're trying to figure out which camera to look at.  It's just gonna happen....it'll get worse for you if you don't change your attitude.

remember: a reasonable man adapts to his environment.  an unreasonable man will expect his environment to adapt to him.... think about it

btw, I saw the guys work afterwards.   it was "aight"... seems to me, the photographers who are having trouble getting the job done "because guests are in the way" are the same ones who need a little more practice.

60

Lenses / Re: Which 15mm f2.8?

« on: February 04, 2013, 09:20:44 PM »

I think the 8-15 fisheye is plenty sharp.  One of my funnest lenses.