New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Looking to buy DSLR. - Page 3

post #61 of 87

I have some comments on some of the posts above:

 

Camera RAW's largest benefit, in my view, is you get a digital negative. You don't have that luxery in JPEG.

 

I shoot most of my stuff with a Canon 100-400 IS. If I really want a close-up of a distant critter, I add a Canon 2x Extender. I can't hand-hold this and need a substatial tripod. There is a new, updated version of the Extender comoing out from Canon. I haven't seen anything in the stores that I use. With the extender on, it doubles the focal length of the lens. The extender is compatable with fixed L-lenses 135 and up, and 70-200 and 100-400 zooms.

 

Training vidios is a crapshoot. For Photoshop CS and CS2, I used Total Training with Deke McClelland. I was quite happy. For CS4 I used Total Training and I was disappointed. I just got CS5 and I did some shopping. I ended up geting a video from Adobe Store. I'll have to wait and see how it works out as it is in transport.

 

A note about Adobe and upgrades: The upgrade policy has changed. Where you used to be able to go back a few versions, you can now only go back 2 versions, ie, to CS3, CS5 is looking good, but it is too soon to tell.Bridge has been upgraded  and does some trick things. RAW processing is easier to use.

 

On a normal day in Yellowstone National Park, I shoot 300-500 shots on my Canon 7D. On my old 30D, it was 250-350 shots.

 

Rick


Edited by Rick H - 9/17/10 at 11:48am
post #62 of 87

Rick, with the extender on that lens you lose auto focus.  Have you found that at all an issue?  I have the same lens, but have shied away from getting the extender because of the focus loss, and possible image quality loss.  I'd be interested to hear your first hand findings. 

post #63 of 87

After a few emails I've discovered the fellow had the white Nikon lens - but had it on a Canon camera.  In particular, he had a Canon EOS 1D Mark II N with all the trimmings.

 

Seems he normally shoots 1,500+ pics on a standard day so I'm guessing he meant to say "3,500" shots on race day vs the 35k shots he stated (or perhaps we just heard him wrong).  

 

The Mark II N can shoot at 8.5 fps and deliver 48 JPEGs in a full resolution burst, so pics add up fast.  In "JPEG Middle 2" mode it puts out 77 shots per burst making it ideal for the 10-seconds or so it takes a hydro to enter, navigate and leave each turn.

 

It's also "weather resistant" and one review suggested it's largely water resistant so it might be a fun camera to rent for a day of skiing to see how it does on the slopes.  At $4 grand I'm not sure it's on my To-Get list though...

 

.ma

post #64 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post

Rick, with the extender on that lens you lose auto focus.  Have you found that at all an issue?  I have the same lens, but have shied away from getting the extender because of the focus loss, and possible image quality loss.  I'd be interested to hear your first hand findings. 



I had the 2x mark II, but have just got rid of it cause of the loss of IQ. Supposedly the MkIII is better. You're probably better to stick to the 1.4x.

BTW, the AF will still work on some of the pro bodies up to f8 AFAIK.

post #65 of 87

Michael, a bit strange putting a Nikon lens on a Canon. (Oh, and Nikon call them "light grey", so that people don't say they've decided to copy Canon with their white lenses!). Most of the xD range from Canon are weather sealed (5D/7D/1D/1Ds) to varying degrees - I'd have no concerns about taking them on the slopes, but make sure you put a suitably weather sealed lens on it (most of the L series are weather sealed).

If you were thinking of getting one for the slopes, consider the 7D (fast AF, designed for sports, smallest, lightest & $1700) or 1DIV (big, heavy, expensive, top of the range, $5000)

post #66 of 87

Rick,

 

I still have AF; a little slow and not so accurate as without it. What I do lose is a bunch of f stops. It starts out at f 13. So I lose shutter speed. The trade off is worth it. I have an 800mm lens for under $2000!! I have not found the Extender Mk III in the US as yet. I'll be glad when they come out.

 

Gotta stop typing and get in the car. Fall colors are upon us!!

 

Rick H

post #67 of 87

Rick sorry, but you definitelly don't have AF with 2x converter on 100-400. 100-400 is 4.0-5.6 lens, which brings you to f8.0-11.0 with 2x converter attached to it. 1d bodies (with film also eos 3 and 1) have af working till f8.0. Every other Canon body works only till f5.6, but there's no body which would have af with f11 lens. There is option to keep af with no matter what aperture, but this includes disabling certain contacts between body and lens. And considering I actually tried how af works with my 500/4 coupled on 2x converter and all together attached to my 1dmk4 (it's still "only" f8.0 lens, not f11), I would hate to see any kind of body, trying to focus with f11 lens ;) Not to mention picture quality you get in such combo, and you still have to consider 500/4 is a whole lot sharper then 100-400 is. 

post #68 of 87

Primoz,

 

And the 500 cost a pantload more money. I get pretty good shots with what I have.

post #69 of 87

I totally agree. I'm most likely wrong, but in my mind, lenses like 300/2.8, 400/2.8, 500/4 and similar are only good to own when you actually make money with it... a lot of it. For hobby and fun, they are way too expensive, way too big and way too heavy. Personally I never took any of these 3 lenses with me to holidays (ok I actually might take 500/4 with us next summer, if we finally manage to get to Namibia for holidays :)). They are way to big and way to heavy to carry them around just like this. So owning them for 2 or 3 times a year to get better photo then with your combo, is, at least in my opinion, "a bit" too expensive. :) When earning money with them (like in my case), things are of course different.

post #70 of 87

primoz, I'm off to Africa on Thursday (including a few days whale watching and a few on safari)

Packing lenses has become a tough choice, but the first thing I did was to sell my 2x and my Sigma 12-24. I had thought about replacing them with a 100-400L, but got offered an excellent deal on a Sigma 150-500, which I've played around with a little and quite enjoy.

The great thing about extending zooms is that they pack away shorter than their full length.

The 180 macro is staying at home (mainly due to weight/carrying space), so the setup will be:

5D + 24-70L

5DII + 70-200L

...and for trips where <70 isn't required, then the 150-500 goes on the 5DII, and the 70-200 on the 5D

Flash, tripod, gorrilapod, polariser filter, close up filter (in lieu of the macro lens), batteries, memory cards, etc.

 

I'm working on the principle that if I'm using a longer lens, it's cause the subject is further away, so if I have more pixels to play with, then I've got more room to crop, also I'm happy taking shots at 1600/3200/6400ISO on the 5DII, so I'll have a bit more lattitude on speed/aperture/light.

 

What am I missing?

post #71 of 87

To be honest, I can't give you any suggestion. I was never in Africa before, so I'm hardly waiting for next year, but I'm totally clueless what could I expect there.

My normal setup for holidays is 1dmk4, 16-35/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 with 1.4x converter. Until now it was always enough for holidays, but I never had chance to shoot lions and co. before " class="bbcode_smiley" height="" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies//smile.gif" title=":)" width="" /> Normally we were going around north Europe, SW of USA and stuff like this, so this means nature, where wider is better, and there was no need for long lenses. For Africa I'm hoping to get chance to see some of those animals in real life, and I doubt 16-35 would be advisable lens for lion or tiger, so for that, 500/4 will go with me. But I have no idea if I will really need it or not. " class="bbcode_smiley" height="" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies//smile.gif" title=":)" width="" />

post #72 of 87

You'd be suprised how close you can get to a lion in a vehicle!

post #73 of 87

I'd for sure be sporting dual pistols.  I did that at the balloon fest I went to a few weeks ago.  Was glad I did. 

post #74 of 87

A few from the wasatch...

  DSC02342b.JPG
 DSC02354b.JPG

 

 DSC02335a.JPG

post #75 of 87

How long is the shutter on those water pics?

post #76 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

How long is the shutter on those water pics?



And, how much saturation did you add to the mountain/moon photo?  I haven't been to the Watsach in the autumn for a while, and forget how brilliant the colors really are.  That photo is making me want to move to PC once some family medical issues are addressed!

post #77 of 87



Quote:

Originally Posted by epic View Post

How long is the shutter on those water pics?



 

Between 1.5 and 4 seconds.  ISO 100  f/22

 

I don't think there was any saturation bump.   I think what your seeing on that shot is a white balance adjustment a bit to the warm side.

 

post #78 of 87

 

Just for a second.  Do you guys have a favorite strap for your cameras?  I know anything is better than my current stock canon strap, but just thought I'd ask before I pick up just any ol' neoprene strap.

post #79 of 87

 

I went down south for a little trip a couple of weeks ago and got a few things.  Wasn't really a photo trip, but I got a few nice images.
 
North Window Reflection (Arches NP)
DSC02789a.JPG
 
South Window Sunup (Arches NP)
DSC02783a.JPG
 
I shot these two because I didn't want to get involved in the junk show that was turret arch thru the N. window.  I think I did much better, as I like the composition of this shot, and it hasn't been done to death.  Funny thing was, as soon as the other folks saw me doing my thing, BAM they had to come and do the same.  I had to shoot #1 really quickly so the herd of sheep wouldn't see me!  ;D
 
Canyonlands sunset 
DSC02683a.JPG
 
This photo was an after thought.  I wasn't even going to PP it, but after I did, I'm glad I did.  I thought it came out nice.
 
Native American Ruins
 DSC02658a.JPG
 
A fun shot of a SW classic.  Worth the hike and scramble to get there... 
post #80 of 87
Thread Starter 

Amazing color saturation!

 

DSC02789a.JPG
 
South Window Sunup (Arches NP)
DSC02783a.JPG
 
I shot these two because I didn't want to get involved in the junk show that was turret arch thru the N. window.  I think I did much better, as I like the composition of this shot, and it hasn't been done to death.  Funny thing was, as soon as the other folks saw me doing my thing, BAM they had to come and do the same.  I had to shoot #1 really quickly so the herd of sheep wouldn't see me!  ;D
 
Canyonlands sunset 
DSC02683a.JPG
 
This photo was an after thought.  I wasn't even going to PP it, but after I did, I'm glad I did.  I thought it came out nice.
 
Native American Ruins
 DSC02658a.JPG
 
A fun shot of a SW classic.  Worth the hike and scramble to get there...
post #81 of 87

Lonnie,

 

I just received one of the photo mags in the mail, and can honestly say I enjoy looking at your landscapes more.  Being surprised by the familiar (your SW Classics) is a good thing when the photos are excellent.   Why don't you put them up on Smugmug or something similar so we can see them in full screen?  Great stuff!

post #82 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

I think it's just amazing that an 18-200 zoom is even possible. For sure it will have it's limitations, but 10x zoom is nuts! With DX sensor, 200 is like 300, so I can't imagine needing the 18-270. If you went there, you'd probably need a tripod and then you've blown the whole idea of going light.

The thing is, it's not. These super zooms are the poorest performing lenses on the market and are all about hype and marketing not actual performance. A person would be so much better off buying two non-stabilized lenses of a similar spread. Super zooms are for one thing only, selling cameras.
 

post #83 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by primoz View Post

Rick sorry, but you definitelly don't have AF with 2x converter on 100-400. 100-400 is 4.0-5.6 lens, which brings you to f8.0-11.0 with 2x converter attached to it. 1d bodies (with film also eos 3 and 1) have af working till f8.0. Every other Canon body works only till f5.6, but there's no body which would have af with f11 lens. There is option to keep af with no matter what aperture, but this includes disabling certain contacts between body and lens. And considering I actually tried how af works with my 500/4 coupled on 2x converter and all together attached to my 1dmk4 (it's still "only" f8.0 lens, not f11), I would hate to see any kind of body, trying to focus with f11 lens " class="bbcode_smiley" height="" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies//wink.gif" title="wink.gif" width="" /> Not to mention picture quality you get in such combo, and you still have to consider 500/4 is a whole lot sharper then 100-400 is. 


True f8 is the AF limit, have found that extenders don't work that great with zooms period. They were designed to be paired with primes. I've been thinking about selling my 2x, I'm never happy with the results, too much distortion, even through my best glass.

post #84 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by primoz View Post

To be honest, I can't give you any suggestion. I was never in Africa before, so I'm hardly waiting for next year, but I'm totally clueless what could I expect there...



Primoz, I've started another thread on why I've sold my 5D... I bought a 7D. There's a few photos on the thread too.

So, the three lenses and the two bodies.

When out on game drives the setup was:

7D + 70-200

5DII + 24-70

 

Back at the lodge I used the 150-500 on the 7D for taking shots across the watering hole.

 

On the drives I rarely zoomed in to 200mm if I wanted a shot of a lion, but I did to get head shots. I could have done the trip without the 150-500, but I used it for a few shots. Of the 2000+ images I took, I'm still editing them down - about 600 left to go!

post #85 of 87

A few more from this past weekend.... 

 

Calf Creek Falls

 

DSC03565.jpg

 

 

DSC03118a.jpg

 

DSC03218.jpg

post #86 of 87

Some time back I mentioned I was going to buy the Tamron 18-200 lens for my Canon XSi.  I took it on a Rhine Cruise in October and was very happy with the results.  In low light the autofocus struggles but otherwise I'd give it top marks.

 

I got a pleasant surprise today as one of the shots I took with it was selected Photo of the Day at DPNow.com.  Check out the link.

 

One of my earlier submissions to bytephoto.com won Photo of the Quarter.  The prize was a nice copy of it on canvas which is now on our hallway wall.

 

spiral staircase650.jpg

 

Just bought my wife the Canon SD1400 IS Point and Shoot.  The reviews are good. 

post #87 of 87

Congrats!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: