John Bennett
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Lol I know what you mean Graham.
I know a few dozen bird and landscape shooters.Not another FF or even outdoor lifestyle shooter..Makes “outings” difficult when I want to hit some streams or other unless I can talk someone into it. ;D
Ive used an 85mm fired remotely to get small birds. Mixed results.
TCs rarely work well on zooms. Can only surmise it’s because the inner workings on zooms are more complex than a prime. I won’t mount a TC on a zoom, just find the hit to IQ too much.
I’ll use my 1.4 TC on either my 400 or 500. Most recently my GF bought me the 2X for my bd. Had been thinking about adding that for Oct when I start chasing White Tails. Even with the 500 and 1.4 its still tough to get close to big bucks and want the extra reach just incase I see one across a field I have no hope getting closer to.
Like anyone with a new toy I had to test it out, wondering how large the IQ hit would be.
1000mm at 1/200th handheld
1000mm at 1/320th
For Birds in Flight I like the 400mm. Havent used a lens that focuses as fast as that one other than the 300mm f2.8. And its light 🙂 <
The day I stop learning photography is the day the fun starts diminishing. Yeah, I like looking at problems and then figuring out to meet them head on, work arounds or simply coming at them from left field.Tubes and TCs are something you should always have regardless of lens, they open many doors otherwise made difficult.
400mm f5.6 and 12mm in tubes becomes a ghetto macro lens without the need to carry both my 400 and my 180mm f3.5 macro
dont like double replying but I forgot to answer your question Mike.
135mm f2: Yeah Ive taken a few shots with one. Loved it but don’t really have a use for it given I have the 85mm f1.2 for portraits and similiar.
And to clarify an earlier comment.
Getting lenses to return under various shots types is usually doable, your hummer shots are testament to that Graham.im just replying from the viewpoint of….Ok, I want to shoot hummers in flight tomorrow. What should I mount…So with the choice a 1:1 macro would be a 2nd or 3rd choice to a 300mm f4 or 400mm with a tube.
Tubes also “magnify” the image for any given focal length/distance to subject. Â So it allows you to stay just that bit further back and yet still have fast focusing (when needed).
Mike this isnt my shot the photographer is James Sjl
400 f5.6 L and a tube
if you enjoy hummers and shooting them thnk about getting a tube or 3 for the 400
Mike the 400 isnt really designed for in close, thats evident by its focus limiters and MFD. That said add a tube and now your working in close.
shots of this nature kind of fall into a in between area. fairly small subjects like hummers and butterflies which require a need to be fairly close ( making long lenses in appropriate), yet also large enough that you run into DoF problems.
this is a Dragn at 180mm and
great hummers Graham. Are those Annas?
Mike if your talking about a true 1:1 as in Canons 100 f2.8 macro your probably better off using an extension tube (maybe 12mm) on the 400 f5.6
Macro lenses because they are required to focus from the MFD (measured in inches) out to infinity are stupid slow to focus. Not really suitable to birds in off the cuff birds in flight. If your over a set up as in a spot where you know the birds going to fly and pre-focus that alleviates the focus speed issue.
180mm f3.5 macro
There’s a delicate balance between getting close enough that the hummer/ butterfly and simliar sized fliers fill enough of the frame and the resulting DoF. Remember your DoF is determined by focal length, aperature and distance to subject.
Even stopped down to f14 or f18 your DoF on a 1:1 macro can be measured in fractions of an inch. Not enough to get most of your subject in focus. That bee was shot at f10 and only half of it is within the effective DoF
full frame (uncropped) 400 f5.6 with 12mm in tubes (so shot at roughy 6 feet) f7.1 iso 1000 1/1000th. Note the DoF isnt enought to get all of the dragon critically sharp.
If your worried about the f5.6 max aperture on the 400……dont be. If you tried this kind of shooting at f2.8 and in close so your not cropping your DoF would wafer thin. Youd have a hard time getting just a fraction of a hummers bill in focus.
Probably the best lens for hummers etc in flight in Canons line up is the 300 f4. It has a nice MFD of I think 6feet and is fast to focus. Not as fast as the 400 but still very fast.
About three years ago, a guy showed up with a 500mm on a bush-hawk shoulder support, and someone called the cops, thinking it was some sort of weapon, and dozens of LAPD patrol cars sealed off the area…lol…
No laughing matter
It has happened to a friend of mine.
One minute in a field, the next thing he knew he had cops all around him telling him not to move and put it down..I’ve had a close call.
Wanted to check a couple fields for bucks 2 falls ago. The fields are adjacent to a Nuke gen station. Since 9/11 they all have their own on site tactical ERUs.Even though I was in adjacent fields, it was dawn, I was in camo and I am carrying what can look like a weapon/rocket launcher. Adn those fields are covered by closed circuit.
I dont go back much and when I do I stop in at security to let them know I’ll be in the bush and let them check my gear/trunk.
Jarrod there are lots of choices. Which to get depends on a number of factors.
I own or have owned and shot with.
400mm f5.6 L ( still use this occasionally for faster in flight birds and with tubes for close in stuff like dragons, butterflies, hummers or when I want to go light and small say with my kayak or on a hike)100-400 f4 L IS (sold, will re acquire one day)
500mm f4 L IS (main wildlife lens)
Have borrowed
Sigma 300-800mm..love the reach and zoom capabilities which amde framing the shot so much easier…but its a beast to lug around and a bear to hand hold.All have their merits where Id choose one over the others. Some factors being focus speed/reach/flexibility with zooms/ease of holding/tracking <
Wildlife:
For most wildlife shooting starts at 300mm, truthfully no matter what lens you have you will usually feel as though you never have enough reach.Four legged or two legged wildlife?
With four legged you may appreciate a zoom lens, with two you will always be at the long end. Dawn/dusk which is common for mammals you might value IS. With birds IS is not as much a factor.Focus speed?
How important will that be? Much as I love the 500mm F4 L, the 400mm f5.6 kicks its ass for focus speed.At times the difference between getting the shot or not.Sports.
As Kurt mentioned your looking at more of a mid range lens (70-200). Also with sports how fast the glass is will be a deciding factor. If indoor sports or twilight sports f2.8 may not even cut it. For sports like basketball/volleyball Id want f2.0 or faster.the combination of fast glass and reach is A) really expensive B) heavy
Budget.
Long lenses are priceyLots of debate all over the web about the change in law allowing firearms in parks. There are those (antis) that are dead fast against it..Only going to result in wildlife killings as people who dont know animal behavior will shoot first, ask questions later is the mantra.
Discharge vs Bear Spray?
Famous case of a photographer who litterally lost his face a couple years ago photographing bears..One charged, he was surprised, bear got to him and swiped once before he could use the bear spray. It took his face with him.Then you have nerves of steel under extreme duress
http://videosift.com/video/Crarging-Grizzly-captured-by-B-C-filmmaker?loadcomm=1Think id take the firearm tyvm.
Deb Freele.
Lives in London Ontario ( born in MI). Quite well known in Ontario FFing circles and many outsdoors/FFing sites. Attends alot of shows as well.Uses the board name Mato Kuwapi on a number of site ( translates to chases bears )
Shes a tough oudoors woman..that mostly walks the walk. Shes going to be ok from all accounts..Hopefully no lasting scars other than those on her arm.
One account in one of Torontos papers with her FB profile pic incase any of you have met her at shows or something
http://www.torontosun.com/news/world/2010/07/28/14858761.htmlI know and have met “the woman” through another fly fishing website. Shes on quite a few. If you frequent other boards theres sure to be post.
Most yaks are very stable contrary to popular mythbeleif.. Ive stood up in my ultimate to cast and that was with my camera gear on board and the Pelican case open. For fising I bring my body, 24-70 f2.8 and 400 f5.6. Ive taken my 500mm in it and feel safe doing so. Thats 15g worth of body/lens when I do that.
Also hence why I chose the Ultimate. Very stable but also lots of room for my gear and equally important being able to get at the gear quickly for shots.
Normally when I go fishing I bring one spinning rod and one fly rod..As Jason said you can cover alot more water, alot faster with spinning gear to locate fish.. Also there are times/situations when casting to a likely spot would be very difficult or near impossible with a fly rod but less so a spinning rod. For my fly rod I use the Sage LM with 340 grain spey line from SA. It shoots big plugs like a Canon.
I dont know if there’s a “best” it really boils down to how you plan to use them, under what conditions and so on.
Love my Ultimate.
Like any personal watercraft there are Pros/Cons or tradeoffs. There’s no 1 solution however the Native Ulitmate is the closest I’ve come.
Do some research on SoTs and SiKs. Each have their advantages and disadvantages. Because I bring and am risking bulky expensive camera gear, as well wanting something I could overnight in if the occassion arose I opted for the hybrid.
A Sot might suit your needs more.
Lol 🙂
Quality stuff always holds its value. The problem is convincing yourself you should sell it. 🙂I bet you use it alot in Alaska. Clear water, great photo ops abound.
The problem I have is our waters simply arent clear enough to take advantage. So it will likely always be a novelty thing for me.In the spirit of the thread heres 1 pic from each of the rivers near to home.
The Grand
The Big
Bowmanville creek
The “Geen”
The secret not to be named
The Credit
Duffins creek
Wimot creek
Lake Ontario (excuse the pinners 😉 )
Another Lake O
G Zachs advice is spot on. Freelancing as a “photographer” only is tough. It can be done but you need to set yourself soem realistic goals in terms of what you hope to acheive. Â And realise its tough to break in, and to maintain a relationship. You have to deliver, not just the odd shot here/there but consistantly, in good numbers and with a wide range. To add to a put some of what Zach has said into perspective.
At its simplest, consider this.How many runs per year? How many articles per issue? Generaly speaking how many photos purchased from other than the writers of the articles.?
Do the math. So if your favorite publication runs say 6/year, averages 5 articles and maybe purchases 3 or 4 images issue.Your looking at only a few dozen images purchsed/year. Now try to fathom how many people are submitting photos all vieing for the same limited space and budget dollars….. It’s a numbers game as much as anything else. So to get established such that your photos are getting used for the few dozen
Know your client.
For example I have one publication that typically only purchases Covers and a double truck. Images of mine that are more than good enough but don’t lend themselves to covers ( theres shooting for covers and then ……everything else) or double trucks I dont submit to them.However, and this plays into the above regards to multiple querys/submissions. Be very careful. If an Art director has to change his layout at the last minute because an image of yours he had planned to use turns up in a competitors pub…or worse both run it…………………..
For the most part publications pay for North American First Serial Rights. In short they are buying the rights to use the image one time, however the want to be the first to use it. Resales *are* possible ( I have 2) but the 2nd buyer had better know it’s already been published…at which point its the ADs choice to use it or not.
Its tougher with photos and on photographers I think. When a writer submits their queries, they generally know if its accepted or not. Â Not so with photos. They can be kept in archives almost indefinately.
Can’t go wrong with it.
You might also want to look at the Canon S90.
Same price, same image qual, slightly smaller/lighter, slightly faster lens, less shutter lag and “supposedly” better vid capabilities. I wouldnt know about the latter though.They are vitually the same camera. With the S90 being a little smaller (deciding factor for me), f2.0 vs f2.8 and for a PnS I was surprised at the shutter lag (or lack of it).
That surprises me Kendal. A couple guys at work picked one up right away and had them in the office. Right away I thought about photo tank uses and started picking their brains. Neither felt it could do the job nor did they know if you could DL the images from a camera to the Ipad. Both said they could only transfer from a pc.
interesting.
It’s true that people often try to use things as they aren’t intended but to me that’s the attraction.
If the iPad was nothing but an e reader and uncapable of anything more there’d be very little interest.
It doesn’t need the power of a laptop to serve as Photo tank. Anytime I go away for a few days or more I wish I had one to dump images into for preview and back up purposes.
With the iPad I’d have better resolution, a larger screen and it’s smaller/lighter than a laptop not to mention less expensive.
Would I want to be able to load CS5? No
But iPhoto or similar absolutely and I can see that possibly occurring. The tech is still new, who knows what a year or two will bring[align=left:3pfak8cl][/align:3pfak8cl]
