September 02, 2014, 08:34:06 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 - scottkinfw

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 50
181
Lenses / Re: Canon 400mm f/5.6 L
« on: December 11, 2013, 10:19:03 PM »
I use the 400 5.6, and love it.  I went through an evolution however.  I calibrated the lens with Focal, and then I upped the shutter speed to over 1/focal length and put 5DIII with lens on sturdy tripod, and now when I use it, get great shots (when I don't, it's my fault).  Learning curve in NOT steep, and with only a bit of practice, you can will get excellent images from edge to edge by all standards, and for a great price.  Also, it is easy to carry as it is light, and relatively small, so it is a great lens.

Scott

182
Canon General / Re: Useless or absurd accessories
« on: December 10, 2013, 12:24:15 AM »
What is that blue and yellow accessory of yours in the background on the floor, and exactly what do you use it for?

Scott

What have you seen for idiotic accessories or for items that were just not thought out....

I saw a car window mount tripod head..... You roll down the window, slip it over the edge of the glass, and mount your camera or spotting scope to it. This one was marketed as XXXXXX window mount, real tree camouflage. Why would you need camouflage? With a couple of square inches of camouflage the critters will not be able to see you? That somehow they will miss the car, the big white lens, and the person behind it, but it is the tiny mount that matters?

Sort of like camouflage flashlights :)

I believe it is intended to mount on the window of a deer blind while hunting.  I actually have a black Bass Pro version. Only used it once.  Most of the deer blinds I am in have a window seal that is two wide.  I know that it shows it attached to a car window but that is ridiculous. 

When I first started I bought a very cheep $19.95 Dynex tripod.  Being low on funds and insisting on owning a tripod it was my only option at the time. 

First thing the plastic tripod head popped right out of the aluminum center column.  I had to DIY fix it.  The plastic head had a small hole in the bottom of the tripod head.  I shoved a peace of an old broken fishing rod in the hold and taped up ring sections to add reinforcement and epoxied the tripod head back on the shaft. 

I would not trust the tripod with a 5d but it is fine will a rebel or other small camera and small lens.  I even used it for a while with my 60d.  (That was a little scary at times.  I finally bough a real tripod but I sometimes use it to hold my NEX or an external flash.

Sense I am using every excuse to test my 6D this week I include pictures.

183
Canon General / Re: Useless or absurd accessories
« on: December 10, 2013, 12:21:33 AM »
I have one languishing in my closet too.

Someone once said (may have been my Father), when you have a great idea, wait awhile, it generally goes away.

The attached is one of the most useless pieces of equipment I've ever had a good idea about.

I think in these Images the "joints" must have been super glued.

184
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« on: December 09, 2013, 01:18:21 AM »
Awesome everything in this pic!

Scott.


Regret by alabang, on Flickr

185
Canon EF Prime Lenses / Re: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
« on: December 09, 2013, 01:15:18 AM »
Fashion week?
Must be one looooong runway?

Scott

More great shots. I always wish I had a 400mm f2.8LIS for shooting fashion week, my 70-200mm f2.8L does OK, but with a lens like this.....would be heaven.

186
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Get a new camera every 150,000 pictures?
« on: December 09, 2013, 01:11:25 AM »
If you are using this camera, you are happy with it, and it is meeting your needs, keep it until it no longer doesn't.  Then, either keep it as a backup, or give it away, or sell it with full disclosure.  If on the other hand, you are thinking, time to get a new camera, and sounds like it might be near the end of life, well, maybe you just have the bug to buy a new camera?

Whatever you do, I agree that ethics do matter.  It is a character thing.

Scott

I take about 78,000 pictures every year with my T3i. I read that entry-level DSLRs can take about 150,000 pictures. I have had mine for about two years. So, it may have taken over 150,000 pictures. Should I sell it and get a new one now?

187
Gladly, I'm not a lawyer, but I would think that the written word would trump the pic, so you got what you paid for.  Nice try however.  On the other hand, customer service is key, and a letter back with an apology would not have taken any effort.  I wouldn't say your "own dumb fault".  Do you like the gear?

Happy Holidays.

Scott

188
Nitroman:

What specs would make you happy for an upgrade and how much do you think the camera would cost (not a flame, just curious, since I am not familiar with your current camera, and I am interested in a similar spec'd rig).  Thanks.

Scott

I'm with privatebydesign  ;)

I have had the 1Ds Mark III since it was introduced five years ago and i've been desperately waiting for its replacement.

The 1Dx was not a replacement to the 1Ds3 - it was a full frame sports camera with 18mp. Why would i downgrade mp when i need more ?! Even the 22mp 5D III was not significantly enough of an upgrade to tempt me ...

I'd like a high megapixel full frame camera with higher DR and a sensor crop mode for tele-sports images. I can't see why Canon didn't introduce this as the technology has been there for some time now.

I do hope that Canon will introduce a high 40+ mp Eos 1 series body that will make replacing my old 1Ds3 worthwhile. I feel we've waited and waited and waited and waited for this upgrade and Canon has just kept us pros dangling and waiting .... Six years ago Canon were market leaders - that was why i switched from Nikon ... and i'm so tired of waiting !  :(

189
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 300-600 f/5.6 w/1.4x TC
« on: December 07, 2013, 01:02:10 AM »
Like Dylan, I just ordered my first big white (300 2.8 LL) and the $6700 was a quantum threshold for me to cross.  I don't know, perhaps after this getting past a 10K barrier will be easier, but somehow, I don't think so.  I am wondering how other people do it?  Are that many professionals (i.e., people making a decent living from photography using these lenses) to justify the price, and drive Canon profits, or are the lenses selling to people like me who are avid/rabid enthusiasts?  Just a question.

Scott.

The >$20,000 estimates seem really high to me.  My understanding is that the front element is a significant cost driver for these lenses.  Dropping from f/4 to f/5.6 is a big deal.  Assessing the size of the front element using the focal length/max aperture, the 400/4 = 100 mm and 600/5.6 = 107 mm.  And the patent is actually for 585 mm/5.6 = 104 mm.    If this holds true, then I'd expect these 300-600 to be priced similarly to the 200-400.  Say ~$12,500?

190
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 300-600 f/5.6 w/1.4x TC
« on: December 07, 2013, 12:49:51 AM »


On your first day of orientation for that second job they will teach you to say the following, "Would you like to biggie size that?"

It just getting better and better with Canon lenses.

BIG QUESTION: HOW MUCH?

I need to start 2nd job ;D

191
Lenses / Re: Canon IS primes sale price?
« on: December 07, 2013, 12:39:26 AM »
Just checked Amazon - $900 USD for the Sigma.


Anyone remember the price for the IS primes (24, 28, 35) earlier this year when they were on sale? Thinking about buying the 35 (mostly for video) soon and wondering if there's a chance of it having a good price for the holidays.

Or you can just buy the amazing SIGMA 35mm 1.4 prime for about 1/2 of what you'd pay for the inferior Canon prime.

...just a thought...

 ;)

Sigma 35 f/1.4 for half of the 24 f/2.8 IS, 28 f/2.8 IS, 35 f/2 IS?  Where can I find the S35 for less than $400 new?

192
Lenses / Re: Patent: Canon EF 300-600 f/5.6 w/1.4x TC
« on: December 06, 2013, 11:35:40 AM »
As I am home bound in Texas due to the winter snow conditions, and bored. My mind is playing evil tricks.  I'm well aware that one can live happily with only one kidney as suggested.  Nah.... Anybody know how much a kidney goes for by the way?

193
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: The Unthinkable: Swapped out 5D3 for 6D
« on: December 04, 2013, 07:28:11 AM »
?

194
EOS Bodies / Re: 5DIV, 7DII and future of upgrades
« on: December 02, 2013, 10:23:36 PM »
Those are all great concepts.  Think of it.  I send my 5DIII off and for say $300-$500USD get a 5DIV, get tuned and cleaned.  Don't have to put out 4K.  I keep my camera in good shape.  Not too bad.  I'm sure Canon will get my money some other way.

Sounds like a great concept to me.

scott

I think we should enjoy photography today and keep the rumormongering to the professionals like CR guy. ;)

Kidding aside I am looking forward to future bodies as well.

I need a new toy!  ;D

195
Lenses / Re: Best lens for night time lapse
« on: December 02, 2013, 07:46:24 PM »
I would second this.  It is on sale now for less than $300 and is almost a throw away lens, compared to some of the expensive Canon offerings.  I posted a few from my slot canyon trip to show what it can do under some difficult contrasty lighting conditions, with minimal pp.

Don't be put off by manual aperture an focusing, the lens will perform.  You do need to put time with it to learn how to use it, and DON'T even think of using the distance scale on the focusing ring- it is on there only for decoration as far as I can tell.

Best to you with you new goodies.

Scott

If you want to do night timelapse when the moon isn't out, such as timelaapsing the milky way, then you need to shoot at ISO 3200 @ f/2.8 for 30 seconds.  This makes most f/4 lenses unsuited to the job. 

For astro timelapse, I use the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 which is only $350.  This is a full manual lens, meaning you have to manually set the aperture and focus.  For timelapse and landscape photography, this is a good thing.  It's good good sharpness, color, and contrast.  Flare can be a problem if there is a bright light source off to the side.  All in all, it is a phenomenal value.  All the milky way shots in my timelapse reel were shot with it https://vimeo.com/57908848

I also have the Rokinon (or Bower or Samyang, they're all the same lens) 24mm f/1.4.  Again, fully manual, but it bests the Canon 24mm f/1.4 L when it comes to coma distortion of stars. 

For night timelapses with moonlight, I use the Canon 17-40mm f/4L.  This lens is cheaper, smaller, lighter, and sharper than the 16-35.

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 50