December 20, 2014, 05:41:47 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 - BrettS

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
31
Lenses / Re: Is there any chance this is legit?
« on: April 09, 2013, 05:52:07 PM »
I don't see what's so unbelievable about a guy buying a $14,000 lens, using it a couple times in his backyard, and then selling it at an 80% loss.  He even notes that "Copy very strong"; he wouldn't know that kind of photo jargon if he wasn't a real photographer.

Loved it! LOL

32
Third Party Lenses (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) / Re: Sigma 35mm f/1.4
« on: April 08, 2013, 09:53:37 PM »
first sign of spring in the garden. F-1,4

Beautiful.

33
Lenses / Re: 24-105L or 70-200L f/2.8?
« on: April 08, 2013, 09:50:54 PM »
The 24-105 is an awesome lens, and hands down the best single lens to own if you're only going to own one with a 6D -- assuming, of course, that you don't need something else for specialized photography.

But if you're always going to have some other lens mounted to the camera, it's obviously a waste.

Since you're dithering between the two...and, since, by "car shoots" I assume either car shows or portraits of cars, I'd very much suggest the 24-105. Just from the size of the subjects, I'm guessing you'd only ever use the 70-200 at the shorter end of its range, and the 24-105 has that covered just fine, plus it's got all the way out to as wide as you ever want in general-purpose photography. (Wider than that can, of course, be amazing, but it's getting into more of a specialized range that requires a bit of care.)

Horses for courses. If you were shooting football, you'd have a 400 f/2.8 glued to one body, a 70-200 f/2.8 glued to another, and that's about it. A landscape photographer could make a good living with just a TS-E 24 and a 1.4x teleconverter. If you were seriously into the macro world, you might not have a lens that could focus past three feet -- if that.

But if you want a jack-of-all-trades lens, the 24-105 is it. It goes wide; it goes long; it's stabilized; it's got great image quality; and it's not terribly slow (as in, it's faster than any other "kit" lens out there). Indeed, you can get a shallower depth of field with less noise at a the same shutter with a 24-105 on the 6D than you can with the 15-55 f/2.8 IS on APS-C -- and at wider and narrower fields of view, too.

Awesome lens.

Cheers,

b&

+1

34
EOS Bodies / Re: diy ideas on how to protect camera from rain?
« on: April 07, 2013, 02:27:30 PM »
I have done this when in light rain. If it is pouring out it probably won't work:

Get a simple plastic bag, small, mid, or large sized bag depending on lens you want to use. Using scissors or similar create a hole in the bag on the bottom of it large enough for your lens. Be careful not to make it too big. Put camera in the bag, facing the hole. Do not poke your lens outside the bag. Use a rubber band outside the bag where the lens is so the lens and bag are close and tight. If you do it right, the camera should be completely protected and you should still be able to access the controls and use manual focus if necessary. AF works fine as well.
It works for me, make sure you keep a few extra "pre-cut" bags with you and some rubberbands as well. You can wrap a paper towel around the lens with another rubberband if you want extra protection.

Could you better describe the hole you cut?!?! Did you take any measurements? Where did you source this "plastic bag"? Bands of rubber, not sure what these are?!?!? What type of scissors? I am left handed, do they make these left handed? Could you post a DIY video and a mini-review?

Harsh, but ROFLMFAO... !!

35
Given what you've posted, my suggestion would be 6D + kit 24-105 if you can swing it.

36
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Autofocus not impressive
« on: April 05, 2013, 07:08:17 PM »
I think that in this context, value is a subjective term.

For me, the 6D provides good value. For someone else, it might not. Do your research, make your own decision.

IMHO absolute statements about value don't help the conversation.

37
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 5d Mark III Shadow recovery
« on: April 05, 2013, 06:08:38 PM »
Say, that's a real nice shed.

38
Site Information / Re: Love or Hate Canon Rumors Forum
« on: April 04, 2013, 05:58:58 PM »
Good post, unfocused.

I feel that there is, on rare occasion, an excess of pedantry, usually as a tool in reaction to cognitive dissonance.

And there are a couple of members that I find sometimes bordering on obnoxious in their attempts to persuade others of their beliefs. Yet a day or a week later, some of those very individuals seem helpful and rational. I guess it goes with the territory.

Bottom line: I do love the site, and there are many very helpful and interesting people here.

39
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Autofocus not impressive
« on: April 02, 2013, 06:15:34 PM »
I'd pay $1900 for a brand new 6D rather than $2300 for a refurb 5DIII.

In fact, I did...

40
Lenses / Re: Re-kitting on FF
« on: March 30, 2013, 11:11:25 PM »
You won't use your 60D once you get FF.

+1 (at least in my experience)

41
Software & Accessories / Re: Wimberley Head versus Wimberley Sidekick
« on: March 30, 2013, 10:13:15 AM »
Tremendous input gang, thank you - I value it highly.

42
Software & Accessories / Wimberley Head versus Wimberley Sidekick
« on: March 29, 2013, 02:26:33 PM »
Hey folks

I just picked up a Canon 500mm. I already have Gitzo a Gitzo 3530 tripod with a Markins M10 ballhead that I use mainly with my 180mm Macro.

I'm undecided on the right approach for the head. I'd like to choose either the Wimberley Sidekick, or a Wimberley WH-200 Head. Of course, the disadvantage to the Wimberley Head is that whenever I want to do any Macro work, I'd have to pull the Wimberley head off and pop the Markins back on. From surfing the web, I get the impression that a ballhead is more convenient for smaller lens like the 180 and the 70-200 than the Wimberley Head.

I don't want to get a second tripod, and while I have considered a monopod, I'd like to work with the new tele on a tripod - for a while, at least.

Has anyone here used both a Sidekick and a Wimberley Head? Does anyone have any first-hand experience, suggestions, or thoughts on my choices?

Cheers

43
EOS Bodies / Re: 6D Autofocus not impressive
« on: March 26, 2013, 06:06:21 PM »
One thing I don't get is before the 5DMIII came out, people were doing fine with 5DMII. I did. I shot a lot of wedding with 5DMII. My clients are happy, and I'm proud of my work. It's still a great camera for me. I bet it is still an awesome camera for many working pro out there. Yet, the 6D is a little better overall but it seems like everyone is trying to bash the camera. If you could take great pictures with the 5DMII, you can take great picture with the 6D. I know its AF is not in the same league with the 5DMIII but it is still a great camera IMHO.
It has its limit, but I've seen many great bird in fly photos taken with the 5DMII. I don't see any reason why the 6D can be any worst than the 5DMII. Or suddenly, the 5DMII became a worth-less camera at the end of its cycle.

This.

44
Lenses / Re: How Much do you use your Canon EF 16-35mm L ??
« on: March 23, 2013, 08:26:09 PM »
(I say "had" coz it was stolen)
That sux bud. Sorry. :-(

45
Reviews / Re: Most Objective and Less Objective REVIEWER?
« on: March 22, 2013, 10:45:21 PM »
I think that Michael Reichmann at the Luminous Landscape does great reviews.  Of course he doesn't review a whole lot of gear & he doesn't do technical reviews, which is what I appreciate.  He's really unique in taking a camera & kicking the tires, getting a really good feeling for the handling and practicality of the thing, and talking about it in a way that one can relate to.

+1

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5