Canon *will* change something with the 6D...the price...soon after release.

Here in (hot) Arizona, a few zoos wisely decided to start opening at night on select days during the summer. The famous San Diego Zoo also does this. And Singapore Zoo opened a separate night only wildlife park called Night Safari. I will kick things off, but I would love to see some other photos taken at zoos and wildlife parks during evening hours. On two of these (porcupine and screamer/capybara) I used a small LED pocket flashlight to highlight the animals. All with 5D2.

Porcupine at Arizona Sonora Desert Museum (Tucson, Arizona)
Mountain Lion at San Diego Zoo (San Diego, California)
Grevy Zebra at Phoenix Zoo (Phoenix, Arizona)
Crested Screamer and Capybara at Reid Park Zoo (Tucson, Arizona)

vuilang said:

shoot tight: head & shoulder (use 70-200).. use couple angle from top down (get a ladder).

Click to expand...

Agree.

Camera angle is important; make sure the camera is a few inches above her nose, nostrils are not attractive and this makes your subject look up at the lens, which is more appealing. This type of angle will also help thin out their face slightly.

As a gun nut, I had never thought of mounting a red dot to a DSLR, but that sounds like a very cool and pragmatic thing on a big telephoto. Good suggestion.

Yeah, it's tricky.
November and December are really busy and renting is expensive.

Thanks for the advice. I'm going to call the Canon-Approved repair shop in the morning to see what they think.
A shame there isn't some quick fix.

Louis --

You get a neck strap, couple end-caps and other fribbles, Canon's Big Book of Lens Porn and (most usefully) significant discounts and turnaround improvements for equipment repairs. At one level (Gold? Platinum?) you also become eligible to try a piece of kit before you buy, sort of like a free rental but without the control.

DB said:

I have the Manfrotto 055XPROB tripod + the rubber/spikes optional feet + 701HDV fluid video head and they work great with my gripped 7D, plus I shoot mostly video too. I paid roughly $150 for the tripod legs + $30 for the Spikes + $120 for the fluid head, so approx $300 in total (except I purchased in the UK for < £200).

I'd highly recommend the fluid video head for 2 reasons: (1) great for panning up/down or left/right really slowly and smoothly for HD video work (and I mean S-L-O-W-L-Y), plus (2) the video head is great for still photography too (if you want to shoot portrait - then use the 90-degree shift in the 055XPROB stem instead) - just as good as a ball-head.

Click to expand...

Ditto this. If you're doing video, you absolutely DO NOT want a ball head. Ball heads are great for photography, but for video they're useless unless you never want the camera to move. Get a decent fluid head like the 701HDV and you'll never be sorry.

Thanks for the opinions. Money still safely in pocket.

During my last trip to Scotland, I was lucky enough to see the Northern Lights. They weren't as bright as in Norway last year, but for so far south, it was a good viewing. I then had to try my hand at some astrophotography of the Milky Way. Not perfect by any means, but probably the best I could get with standard equipment.


Scottish Aurora by Kernuak (avalonlightphotoart.co.uk), on Flickr

Aurora Frame by Kernuak (avalonlightphotoart.co.uk), on Flickr

The Milky Way by Kernuak (avalonlightphotoart.co.uk), on Flickr

Alextian said:

Wow Glencoe I've been there for many times of ski and shooting when I stay in glasgow. really wanna back there again. miss glencoe so much.

Click to expand...

It's certainly a place worth going back to.

Vulture

TotoEC said:

rpt said:

Funkmobile said:

Did you cover over the viewfinder the entire time?

Click to expand...

Yes, that is the third thing I did when I got consistent results. I forgot about it when I posted earlier...

Click to expand...

All the time while the test was conducted, except when acquiring the target after moving from 25x or 50x the focal distance, or when I tested it at 5' and 10' prefered shooting distance for portrait.

Click to expand...

Ok. So you could try this:
Set the MA values for Wide and Telephoto as suggested by FoCal. Then take a set of pictures each at 24mm, 50mm and 70mm. Each set would consist of two photos. Both taken of the same target at the same distance. One imaged thru the viewfinder and the other imaged with live view. You may change the distance of the target for the three focal lengths. If the pair looks equally in focus, that MA setting is good. If not, it is not. If both extremes are good and the 50 is not I think you should replace the lens. If one of the extremes is good and the other two are bad, you need to run FoCal again and then repeat this test.

My 100-400L is in the shop and when it comes back I am going to run this exact test on it. Hope this helps.

Caveat: I have never used a Sigma 50 f/1.4, so I can't say anything about it. I do use the Canon 50mm F/1.4, though, and it suits my needs just fine. I've had to learn a few things about it through trial and error, and so will anybody who uses it for any length of time. Although many beginners start out with it (it's a cheap-ish prime with excellent IQ), many of them also get frustrated with it because of it's finnicky nature. Learn how it autofocuses. Know that sharpness is ok-but-not-great at f/1.4, but gets really, really good when you get into the f/2-f/8 range. Microadjust if you have the ability to, and learn how it responds to you and your camera body. Once you do that, I think you won't want another 50 (unless it's the 50L, of course). It's by far the lens that I own that has the biggest bang-for-the-buck value, and I own two L lenses.

So rent the 135 for a few days to see what you think. All in all, though, I think you answered your own questions in your opening post. It sounds like the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS isn't for you. You're looking for an acceptable alternative, and that alternative just might be the 135mm f/2 L.

DCM1024 said:

DB said:

PackLight said:

Daniel Flather said:

What did this guy do when it was 36 exposures a roll?

Click to expand...

He probably never shot film.
With the new Canon DSLR's you can set your camera to P "pro" mode and go right to work with little or no experience.

Click to expand...

P = Program Mode on Canon DSLR cameras. The P for Professional is an urban myth. Just read the manual.

Click to expand...

Um - I'm pretty sure the P = Pro comment was intended to be sarcastic.

Click to expand...

Sure, but perpetuates a myth that it is. Google it - you'll be surprised that 80%+ still believe that it stands for Pro. That's the problem with misinformation, it becomes a double hermeneutic.

edit: sarcasm works only when everyone knows it is sarcasm, people come to CR for factual info, when they see a comment like that, many will assume it to be true, because most do not bother to read their manuals, thus they see a throw away line and believe it - they then tell their friends and others that P is the Professional mode and word of mouth does the rest - hence it becomes a misinformed self-fulfilling prophecy and hence most people tell others on blogs etc. (see Google for instance). What starts out as a sarcastic line becomes regurgitated fact...unfortunately.

Your opening statement mentioned you were interested in everything, including zoos (which is my particular photo interest). If you like cats, the best wild cat facility in the world by far is Le Parc Des Felins in Nesle, France. It is about an hour east of Paris. They have 26 species of cats (plus numerous subspecies) in huge natural enclosures. The lion and tiger exhibits (of which there are multiple) are between 1-2 acres each.

The best zoo in England, if you happen to be in the area, is Chester Zoo. The town of Chester is also somewhat photogenic and has an ancient Roman wall that you can walk along.

I have not been to Berlin Zoo, but it is reported to have the most diverse animal collection in the world (although quality of enclosures seems to not be top notch).

Dylan777 said:

I use to have 5-6 lenses in my bag and now just 3 most use.

1. 24-70 II - it's on my camera most of time - indoor
2. 70-200 f2.8 IS II - when kids running around front yard & Portrait shots
3. 16-35 II - landscape

Click to expand...

THIS

Actually, I was really hoping Canon would have put an EOS 1D X window decal in the box, like Apple does. *sigh*

the pocketwizard has no af assist beam either and i have shot low light weddings and parties and had no problems yet

Kernuak said:

There are other justfications for the 135 f/2. The wider aperture will be better for indoor sports and it also makes a useful landscape lens for longer viewpoints (although you do already have a 70-200). Also, if you're tracking sideways, the 5D MkII will cope better, as the focal distance won't change so quickly.

Click to expand...

Excellent. I'll clip this out and show it to the wife. Her son also plays basketball and will be featured more in that sport. It's imperative that we get the appropriate glass to use in a fast-moving sport that takes place in a dimly lit gym.

ahsanford said:

@jocau: will try that. Good tip.

Click to expand...

You're welcome.

preppyak said:

drjlo said:

Ironically, I have been thinking Sony is looking better and better, especially with the finally-NEX-I-can-live-with NEX6 and A99. Sony is bound to release a scaled-down full frame body to compete with 6D and D600, and the price is likely going to be much nicer.

Click to expand...

And they still have weak lens selection for both lineups. The NEX line barely has 10 lenses, and that says nothing of whether they are any good. Same is true of A-mount, especially if we are talking for full-frame; the cheap primes just really aren't there. You have to go third-party in many cases.

Click to expand...

Although they did have nice cheap crop primes, a £120 RRP 35mm 1.8 and a £100 RRp 50mm 1.8 but only worked on crop were loverly lenses although they were extremely plasticity and had terrible polygonal apertures :s

lauren by Lseriesglass, on Flickr

@Daniel Flather: this is a good one! ;-)
@Drizzt321: Thanks. I know it is a difficult question, I just wondered what might come according to your ideas....

I've travelled with both the 55-250 and the Sigma 100-300 f4. I now take just the 55-250. Why?

- Gaining 55-99 is more valuable than the relatively subtle difference between 250-300, even with a standard zoom - particularly when with others one doesn't always want to change lenses.
- Weight
- Size
- Weight again
- 55-250 IQ is absolutely adequate
- Rarely needed the f4 of the 100-300
- IS on the 55-250 was useful
- 58mm circular polarisers are cheaper
- Weight and size again

Hope that helps.