A valid reason to lose your gear...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
#6
Re: A valid reason to loose your gear...

Holy sh!t ... I'd probably cra9 my pants in that situation ... lucky for the exhibition guide that the shark decided to leave the gear just 100 meters away ... imagine if the shark took off a few thousand meters away with the gear, the embarrassment of cra9ping yourself in the pants and the pain of losing £11000 worth of gear would be too much to bear.
 
Upvote 0
#7
Re: A valid reason to loose your gear...

Diving with tiger sharks. No cage. Camera gear to attract attention. Uh huh. That's what I want to do. After that, I'll head off to Taliban country for some boudoir photography. Yeah, that's the ticket!
 
Upvote 0
#11
I have posted this image of mine before, but it fits in well here too.

I was hit by a tiger in Laos, the 1D and 16-35 were fine, though they did have some tiger slobber on them!
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    99.1 KB · Views: 1,159
Upvote 0
#14
privatebydesign said:
I have posted this image of mine before, but it fits in well here too.

I was hit by a tiger in Laos, the 1D and 16-35 were fine, though they did have some tiger slobber on them!
Click to expand...

It may just be me...but your image doesn't look all that sharp.

Some reasons I might suggest:

1) Too close, inside MFD (I always wanted to try a Tiger Macro shot)
2) Lens needs AFMA (after you change the front element to remove Tiger claw marks)
3) Shutter speed too slow (wow, I didn't realize Tigers could move that fast)
4) The rapid increase in the size of the Tiger in the viewfinder caused massive camera shake that even the IS couldn't overcome

I hope this helps ;D
 
Upvote 0
#15
serendipidy said:
privatebydesign said:
I have posted this image of mine before, but it fits in well here too.

I was hit by a tiger in Laos, the 1D and 16-35 were fine, though they did have some tiger slobber on them!
Click to expand...

It may just be me...but your image doesn't look all that sharp.

Some reasons I might suggest:

1) Too close, inside MFD (I always wanted to try a Tiger Macro shot)
2) Lens needs AFMA (after you change the front element to remove Tiger claw marks)
3) Shutter speed too slow (wow, I didn't realize Tigers could move that fast)
4) The rapid increase in the size of the Tiger in the viewfinder caused massive camera shake that even the IS couldn't overcome

I hope this helps ;D
Click to expand...

Tiger + FF+ 16-35? You're asking for trouble man... :D
 
Upvote 0
#17
serendipidy said:
privatebydesign said:
I have posted this image of mine before, but it fits in well here too.

I was hit by a tiger in Laos, the 1D and 16-35 were fine, though they did have some tiger slobber on them!
Click to expand...

It may just be me...but your image doesn't look all that sharp.

Some reasons I might suggest:

1) Too close, inside MFD (I always wanted to try a Tiger Macro shot)
2) Lens needs AFMA (after you change the front element to remove Tiger claw marks)
3) Shutter speed too slow (wow, I didn't realize Tigers could move that fast)
4) The rapid increase in the size of the Tiger in the viewfinder caused massive camera shake that even the IS couldn't overcome

I hope this helps ;D
Click to expand...


Funny...but seriously, I think it's #3, lens needs AFMA. ::)
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Fbimages
Svalbard and Arctic pack ice, summer 2025
Replies
16
Views
1K
ArdoSmith
A
cayenne
Adapting lenses to the R52 (or any R system camera)....any experiences yet?
Replies
21
Views
5K
cayenne
cayenne
GirlsAreBeautiful
From 5D Mark III to R5 Mark II - photographer review - first 1 month and a half - 12k shots
Replies
30
Views
1K
GirlsAreBeautiful
GirlsAreBeautiful
C
Where Have all the Camera Stores Gone????
Replies
22
Views
12K
docsmith
docsmith
Canon Rumors
Merry Christmas & Happy Holidays from Canon Rumors
Replies
25
Views
13K
magarity
M
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu