Messages

16

Software & Accessories / Re: Nik Software worth it?

« on: March 25, 2013, 09:11:53 PM »

A bit annoying as I just bought the whole Aperture/LR collection in December for about $275.   Although with the free download I was emailed, I suppose I could look at it as getting th PS compatible version as a free upgrade.  Oh well, it still worth it to me at the price I paid.

17

Pricewatch Deals / Re: 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II Refurbished for $1699

« on: March 17, 2013, 06:11:40 PM »

Mine came with the strap (which is for the case).  Yours should have.  Check the box.

Their intent is to provide everything the new lens would have some with, except the nice red and white box.

18

Software & Accessories / Re: IMac vs MacBook Pro vs Custom PC for editing?

« on: March 11, 2013, 09:18:28 PM »

AND you're talking about adding another $1000 for Final Cut Pro. 

It sounds like a PC would be a better choice.  But FCPX is $300, not $1000.

19

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Tamron 28-300mm as walk around lens with 5D Mk III???

« on: March 11, 2013, 05:16:09 PM »

I also have a 5D3 and the Tamron.  I used to use it fairly regularly on my 40D.  Used it a couple of times on my 5D, and decided it wasn't worth the drop in IQ to avoid carrying a small bag with other lenses.  It's just really not very good, unless you are price constrained.  Now I use my older 28-70L (which is far, far better than the Tamron) and my 70-300L to cover that range.

I had read that posted blog as well, and had tried taking some very controlled shots to see if I was missing something.  Nope.  He is.

20

Lenses / Re: EF70-200 f/2.8L IS ll refurbished @ Canon for $1699.20 & I'm screwed

« on: March 10, 2013, 06:31:19 PM »

.

I tried the 12-step program. I exceed expectations when I bought my 13th lens. 

As a friend of mine used to say, rehab is for quitters.

21

Pricewatch Deals / Re: 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II Refurbished for $1699

« on: March 10, 2013, 04:38:28 PM »

Thanks for the post, nabbed one as well.

22

Lenses / Re: Samyang 14mm T3.1 for still photography?

« on: March 04, 2013, 08:50:02 PM »

No reason not to use it for stills, its even possible thet the distance scale on the lens might mean something, it certainly is totally inaccurate on the non cine version.

The later versions were fixed, I got that lens from the german distributor Walimex in December 2012 and it my scale was perfectly correct.

Debatable. I got the Rokinon version this fall (September I think) and the scale is completely off.

23

Software & Accessories / Re: I'm not much of a techie, need some advice on my iMac...

« on: March 01, 2013, 10:35:38 PM »

Just an FYI about the late 2009 iMac, it will take 32GB of RAM if you were so inclined, I've got one using that much using the OWC 1366MHz 8GB dimms intended for the mid 2010 iMacs.  Even runs them at the higher bus speed instead of the 1066 of the original RAM.

24

Lens Gallery / Re: Samyang 14mm f2.8

« on: February 25, 2013, 11:49:38 PM »

There is a discussion thread with some images (night skies and such), but I can't locate it at the moment.  Might have been under Bower or Rokinon.

25

Canon General / Re: Bag question

« on: February 15, 2013, 06:08:52 AM »

Sorry forgot to post the budget, ideally somewhere around US $150. This looks really promising: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/577361-REG/Lowepro_LP35271_PEU_Flipside_400AW_Backpack_Black.html

Thanks.

One thing I'd note is that with a pack that big, same as my older one (apologies for the minor derailing of your thread BTW), it tended to put me off wanting to use it, which is why mine is in like new shape.

If it were me, i'd be looking at something as minimal as possible. Paul's suggestion looks like a good candidate.

26

Canon General / Re: Bag question

« on: February 15, 2013, 12:36:26 AM »

Actually, if he's interested in something like that, I have a 12 year old original pro trekker AW (I not II), in nearly brand new shape that I'd sell for half that.

Where you live? I'd be interested.

Los Angeles.

27

Canon General / Re: Bag question

« on: February 15, 2013, 12:16:09 AM »

Actually, if he's interested in something like that, I have a 12 year old original pro trekker AW (I not II), in nearly brand new shape that I'd sell for half that.

28

Canon General / Re: Bag question

« on: February 15, 2013, 12:06:52 AM »

Judging by the cutaway image, it would likely not be able to fit both bodies.  Its description reinforces the impression it was designed for only one as well.

Budget?

29

Lenses / Re: Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II "Fix"

« on: February 12, 2013, 06:57:44 AM »

Hmmm.  Maybe I'll have my lenses chrome plated.  Even less heat absorption, and they'll inconspicuously take on the color of their surroundings.

30

Lenses / Re: Need advice on telephoto zoom Lens

« on: February 12, 2013, 06:48:59 AM »

Here are my options to decide from
1. Buy 70-300mmL and sell the Non L (may be buy a kenko teleconverter in the future)
2. Buy 100-400mm and keep 70-300 Non L for travel
3. Buy 100-400 and sell the 70-300mm Non L

http://www.flickr.com/photos/98679084@N00/sets/72157631596245964/

Some parallels between you and me.  I upgraded from a 40D to a 5D3 last fall.  I have a 100-400L and was contemplating a 70-200 2.8 ISII, but decided (mostly due to an upcoming trip where I will be highly mobile and after dragging the 100-400 around Tokyo) to get the 70-300L instead. 

I have to say I am really pleased with it, and find I do not use the 100-400 very often any more.  Zero complaints on its performance, and the shorter reach, while every now and then a drawback, is often mitigated for me as the resolution of the 5D3 lets me crop to get the composition I wanted anyway.

To really know which I'd lean towards in your shoes though, I'd need to know how important weight, size and portability are to you.  It looks like you are doing a lot of hiking and outdoor work (somewhat similarly to me), so I
think you would end up appreciating the 70-300L.  On the other hand, for the bird shots, you will end up using the longer range of the 100-400 more than I do I think.