Upgrade your software to install the latest updates. there is no cost unless you change versions.. I know it works in CS5, you did not tell us what version of Capture one you have. Also update to Lightroom 4.3.

neuroanatomist said:

Do you require autofocus? If not, older Minolta supertele lenses (500mm and 600mm) come up on eBay, etc., from time to time, and are not too expensive (relatively, that is).

Click to expand...

Yes, AF is required. Using 60D, 5D2 (and maybe in some month the 7D2
Seen the Sigma 800mm. Is this lens ok?

No need for me to waste my time, I'm colour-blind, green's and grey's

The second shot I'd have immediately said "35L". It is a combination of the "look", color, and bokeh rendition.

AmbientLight

Love you venice shot..
I could spend my days ...with a glass of wine watching the boats go by..

that night shot looks fun

you have some nice 14mm shots ...thanks for sharing them

TOM

comsense said:

Its pretty clear that you are being oversensitive. Humor off. s/he did not mean to offend you. Just warn in a straightforward way. Also, what do you interpret your reference to Nobel Laureate colleagues as?. I have some and so would many others here. Like normal people some of the Nobel Laureates are very humble but some are incredibly arrogant. And similar are colleagues without Nobel Prize.

Click to expand...

+1

Indeed, but my point with posting those, was that it kind of flies in the face of those reviews that say the 120-400 is very soft. Obviously there are bad samples that are, so I hope I don't end up with one.

I'm not sure I agree that all lenses get sharper by f/9. My 135 f/2 doesn't, and neither does my 70-200 f/4. By f/5.6 yes, but by f/8 there's a tad of softness.

Well, you are ready to move up to a large supertelephoto, and are ready to spend $3000 to $6000 or more. I am not. I've tried them. I'm comfortable where I'm at right now. I'm happy to just shoot larger targets in low light with my 135 f/2 (such as deer, raccoons, foxes, water fowl) and continue to save for a supertele. I have other monetary commitments right now.

The best you could do for low light birding, would be the 1Dx with the 400 f/2.8 ii or 600mm f/4 ii. If you need a low light zoom, the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 2013 version is probably it. Supposedly it will be released mid March.

I would go for 6D for couple reasons:
1. It does exist
2. Cleaner image in higher ISO

definitely pick up an st-e3-rt as everyone else has mentioned...My main reason for it was it was slightly cheaper than another 600 unit, and much lighter/less bulky.

We run eneloops in all our "AA" required stuff fyi.

..yesterday, luck, location lighting and the fact that I had my camera with me all played a part in getting a few nice images. During the course of 12 minutes I made about 40 exposures and managed 2-4 keepers...I didnt plan this and if I wasn't lucky that the traffic was smooth flowing I wouldn't have had the time...More images and info on my lucky 12 minutes here at...http://thelazytravelphotographer.blogspot.com/

Thanks for sharing - it was hmm charming

koffie5D said:

if you can live with manual focus there is the Voigtländer 20mm f/3.5 SL-II

Click to expand...

+1

This little guy goes everywhere with my 40mm pancake
they share 52mm filters too which are cheap to get CPL, 10 stop ND etc

Hard stop infinity focus, awesome build
also its electronic aperture control and the AF confirm is fast and accurate but at f8 and infinity basically everything more than 2m away is in focus anyway,

its a brilliant street photography lens

good ol KR has a review of it
http://www.kenrockwell.com/voigtlander/20mm-f35.htm

I can't see the video, so I can't tell you for sure, but I'll try. Did you color correct it or add any sharpening? This is why I don't use Cinestyle, it really brings out the noise, especially at high ISO settings. By the time you get the footage back to normal it looks the same as it would have otherwise but with more noise. I use Neutral or Faithful, Sharpening 0, Contrast -3 or -4, Saturation -2 (also known as the "ProLost Flat" picture style). Also I'd shoot IPB over ALL-I, there have been tons of comparisons and you either can't see the difference between the two or the IPB looks slightly better in some cases. ALL-I is more edit friendly but the files are HUGE.

Also shutter speed should be 1/50, just thought I'd throw that out there.

For a travel tripod, it doesn't get much better than the Really Right Stuff TQC-14 and BH-30 LR. But the Gitzo 1542T with the Markins Q3T would do nicely - a friend just got one to use with a 5DIII/7D + 100-400, and is quite pleased with it.

rpt said:

I am sorry. My bad

Click to expand...

No problems. At least if I ever do go to Bangalore, I now know where to go shopping for Canon stuff. Haven't been to India at all yet. ;-)

eli72 said:

You could also get a long sync cord (see, e.g., http://ocfgear.com/) which would let you use the 600 off camera and still trigger the 430 optically as a slave in ETTL or Manual, I think. The 10m cord is $65 and the 5m cord is $48.

Click to expand...

Thanks, having spent circa £250 on an ST-E3 trigger I want to avoid cables if I can but its still a good option, thanks again.

Hi! I just opened my Canon 6D! Woot woot!

Anyways, I have been using the 5D Mark II and I usually mess with the white balance/Kelvin while in Live View. So I can actually see the color and temperature change. I can't figure out how to do this on the 6D. I can do it in the menu, but not in Live View.

Does anyone know if this is possible and if so, how?

Thanks!

Thanks for the replies and the insight everyone. I will give you an update when his camera gets back from repair

These look great!

My favorite is the 2nd photo you posted. Great shots!

Cheers guys for you help... I was really hoping that you were going to say the 600mm... I think it's a done deal so after i'v been up to Focus on imaging to have a play with one I will place the order and see myself a little lighter in the wallet

Landtosea said:

Don Haines said:

I would head to a decent astronomy store. They will have a selection of decent spotting scopes and high powered binoculars that you should be able to get at a reasonable price..... and the best thing is you get to touch and try the gear first.

My suggestion is: Print/draw your target with your 1/4 inch hole... plus one or two sizes larger and smaller, park car 300 yards from store with target on the roof, and try out what the store recommends right there..... there is nothing better than seeing it work to let you know that it will work.

Click to expand...

Thanks, but I have done the homework on the spotting scopes and know what models perform and which do not. I am really surprised that senor Steve can see them with his 42x Nightforce, even though that is an expensive high end scope? This is a prime example of glass quality making the difference and why a cheaper spotting scope is not going to help.

What I did not think to try and you brought to mind is my son has a decent telescope. I have to at least give it a shot... I am still interested in my lens options and may pursue the above mentioned 400mm combo.

Click to expand...

I was thinking 4"telescope myself..... and a telescope tripod allows fairly easy aiming. I suggested the astronomy store as there are some really nice spotting scopes and astronomical binoculars that you see in astronomy stores that you don't tend to see in hunting stores.... a very different purpose.

BTW, the rifle range at work uses a 4" telescope on the 200 meter range and binoculars on the 100 and 50 meter ranges.

I came across an interesting article on Anandtech.com this morning, and while it's not quite Roger detailed, it still was an interesting read with enough to whet my appetite.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6777/understanding-camera-optics-smartphone-camera-trends

neuroanatomist said:

AvTvM said:

But Neuro ... especially as a Canon-user it is really tough to spot the feature in the somewhat unwieldy spec list!

Click to expand...

Tough to spot on a Nikon spec list, mabe...but that's better than impossible to spot on a Canon spec list, since it's not there at all (e.g. the 7D has AFMA, but it's not referenced in the specs).

Click to expand...

Totally agree on that one. AS I already mentioned when I quoted the D7100 viewfinder details ... it is not possible to find the same, still rather basic product information for a Canon EOS camera on a Canon website.

troy19 said:

CCY020 said:

French lady

Click to expand...

Great catch.
Did you try to get more DR out of the blacks to visualize her body. Otherwise the head is "flying" over the guitar.
Or maybe it's just my monitor hiding this?

Click to expand...

Thanks for mentioning it Troy, comments like this really help! I didn't really try to get more dynamic range, because I also just started with using RAW, Photoshop CS5 and Lightroom. I have a lot to learn haha.