[John Bennett]

Just a note on the resolution.
Canon has been revising most of the top lenses for that reason.
16-35 f2.8
24-70 f2.8
85 f1.2
70-200 f2.8
500 f4 L
600 f4 L
have all been to revised for todays body’s to name a handful.

Re 4/3rds and mirror less.
Yep, so far the Oly EPL3 I picked up has and continues to exceed my expectations.  True it’s more $ towards new glass but I have zero intentions of mirroring lens. In time I expect to have
14-45 kit lens (have a look at my fly in post, many of those shots are with  it)
8mm fisheye
maybe their 45 f2.8 or something a little better to replace the 14-45.

Small, light, and more than up capable as a back up, ready go 2nd body or travel, pocket system

[John Bennett]

Love the 1st Jay.

[John Bennett]

Thanks guys.

Just got back from the fly in for Wallye/Pike. Wasn’t able to capitilise on UW stuff. The lake we were on has to be about the “worst” Tea stained I’ve ever fished. Not uncommon North of Superior, but it was heavily stained…That and storms that had us gun shy after getting caught on open water twice, really kicked up the turbidity…Long story short….Full UW was near useless with visibility often being less than 12 inches….but I did get lots of splits and water line shots.

Corey you are bang on….Leaning as far out as you can, and one handing the body at water level is soooooo much more “comfortable” 🙂

I’ll post some up once I start uploading to my website. All I have thus far is some few I uploaded to FB via my laptop while at the lodge.

Editting them is taking getting some used to. Olympuses color reproduction is very, very different from Canons. Hard to articulate but the colors seem more vivid.

Heres one sample Im sure some here will like

[John Bennett]

So far Ive been shooting at
ISO 200, f8 to f11…
1/60th to 1/100th.

I let the flash handle exposure and adjust that manually for more/less if needed and if needed/desired change SS to compensate/expose for the BG…So far its a charm.

And yeah I got the Oly E-PL3, housing and a Sea and Sea strobe.

[John Bennett]

Thanks Neal.
More like I get obsessed with anything outdoors related, try them, some I get mildly proficeint at and some few really dig deep. Archery and Photography being two of those. 🙂 I’ll never win any Ts or awards at it but I do love shooting.

I can hit the coarse/range myself and enjoy some down time. I get a real charge, anytime the entire “family” joins it. Like fishing its a great medium to teach kids different things and spend real time together.
I got a huge smile when I read your first post and saw the young kids
🙂

[John Bennett]

I have both my family and my girlfriends family in it now.

My oldest (18) daughter has been shooting a diamond edge for a few years
My youngest (14) just got her mission craze earlier this year.
I shoot all 3…50# long bow, Excal crossbow and just got a G5 Rev a wewek ago.

My girlfriend started in Apr (borrowed my eldest ) and shortly picked up her own diamond edge. Within a few more weeks her boy (10) went out and bought his own recurve.

We love it. We try to hit the range once a week with the kids. Start on the butts to warm up then hit one of the 3D coarses. The Range also has a large pond that loaded with SM bass.  Come Oct Mary plans on being legal (40#) for WT and my youngest is asking about hunting as well.

My youngest

My LB

Mary

Self portrait with the Excal

Ms cabin where I’ll be taking her on first hunt ever come Oct

[John Bennett]

Just thought Id update this for anyone considering. The new(ish) player in the game are the micro 4/3rds cameras. A large step up from compacts and just a hair short of DSLRs.

[John Bennett]

Mike to be honest.

I had the 800mm at one point. Loved it, but that extra pound over the 500mm for what I do was a deal breaker. Sure the extra reach was nice at times, lugging it around wasn’t.

If I shot say 80% sure birds, then yeah I might have kept it. Reach is always an issue not matter what your flavour but I find these days I shoot between 200 and 500 more often then not.

[John Bennett]

Just to put this in perspective, no other reason.

One of those was taken at 180mm, has been purchased and will be with all 2012 Deer Seals.

One at 180mm and from about 10feet.

One was taken at 245mm (70-200 + 1.4 TC)

One was taken at 500mm (bare lens)

One was taken at 1000mm (500 +2.0 TC)

One was taken at 1400mm (500 + 1.4 + 2.0 TC)

Can anyone tell me (without checking EXIFs) which is which?

1) you dont have to fill the frame, nor fill 40% all the time, even when you “can”

2) Reach (while great) is not everything.You do not need the hubble to get good pics.

[John Bennett]

As stated alot depends on the “species” your hoping to get.
Some species are notoriously hard to get close to. For these reach becomes very important. Some species while not hard to get close to don’t sit still very long, and focus speed/acquisition becomes more important than reach. Some species really only present themselves at dawn/dusk so light becomes an issue. This can be compensated for with a tripod, but only if the subject itself is stationary or moving very slowly.

For example.
Backyard type birds/critters.
A bird feeder and a shooting station can get you within 15feet easily.

Waterfowl: Good technique, patience, maybe a blind gets them within reach

White tails: See Waterfowl. I have all kinds of great White Tail images taken with my 70-200mm

Basically no matter the species, if people can hunt them with bows and shotguns, you can get great images without dropping serious coin on high end telephotos.

Just something to think about.
Filling out a kit takes time and $$. If you are happy with the 55-200mm overall and are predominantly looking for something that gets you more reach.

Go to straight to a 300 f4 prime or something like the Tamron 200-500. Does make a whole lot of sense to spend X hundred on a 70-300 just to duplicate your focal range coverage from 70-200mm.

Basically.
55-200
70-300

vs

55-200
+ 300mm and maybe adding a TC

The 300 f4 prime is going to be far superior to the 70-300 at the long end (300mm) and for everything else (shorter than 300mm) you already have 55-200mm that your happy with.

Its faster at f4 than a consumer zoom f5.6. So at dawn/dusk/overcast it will seriously outperform.

Being a prime and a very good one it will have superior optics.

It will have noticeably better/faster focus speed. Nothing will frustrate you more than having something in your sights, but your not getting any images because the lens is slow to grab focus or its hunting. This opens so many doors to birds in flight, animals moving at high speed…Opportunities that are there 1 second, gone the next.

Being an f4 prime it will take a 1.4 or 1.7 TC very well with only minimal hits to IQ….Light loss, focus speed also take hits but not as noticeable.

With the 55-200mm already in your kit and given your happy with it.,…..Honestly I would counsel against a 70-300 given your stated reasons for wanting something with a bit more reach.

[John Bennett]

I’ll just add a couple thoughts.

Generally speaking, for wildlife you want to hit 300mm. This is widely accepted as the starting point. There are a number of ways to do this. Budget plays a big role, as does expectations.

More reach is always desireable. The more you want the more you will likely shell out. That said there are a number of good long lenses people can look at, without having to shell out for Canons and Nikons beast. There are trade offs but your saving a lot of coin. The Tamron 200-500mm is very popular and is a lot cheaper than Canon or Nikons 300 f4.

For the most part pairing a TC with a zoom is not something I would advise. Even with the best zooms (read big budget) the hits are noticeable. Hits can and do include.
1) IQ
2) Light loss
3) Focus acquisition and focus speed

Thats not to say you can’t. Everyones expectations are different and what I consider unsuitable (delete) another may not. Then to is the arguement that any shot is better than no shot.

Basically what Im trying to suggest is if you want reach and want to utilise a TC to gain even more reach, a 300 prime + TC is better than a zoom that reaches 300mm + TC.

I would not use TCs with consumer lenses. Atleast I wouldn’t expect the results to be what I wanted. Again, though this is subjective.

In the end as with most things photography there are trade offs and you want to decide what you are willing to “sacrifice” to get what you “want”.

Patience, technique, being able to get close (a blind) and

[John Bennett]

Sweet files Steve.

I’ve pretty much decided that UW for me will rarely be anything more than a novelty. Id love to do more, but clarity just sucks.

[John Bennett]

Im going to echo what Zach and Eric pointed out if your still shopping.

1st) I have the 1450 and love it
2nd)I am considering a larger model
3rd)I have more packs and bags I can shake a stick at including a toploader pelican for when in my kayak. It functions where the 1450 doesnt.

And I still dont have a bag, pack, or case that meets every need.

I have done some bushwacking carrying the 1450. Its doable and if the risk of water damage, falls is fairly high I’ll use it, but only if I really feel I need it.

I’ll leave it at home to. As Zach said, one of the bigger inconviences is getting into whatever, getting your camera and taking a pic. I’ve yaked a lot of water with the 1450 at hand, lid open because I wanted quick access. Makes you wonder why your “protecting” your gear in a Pelican in the first place.

Guess what Im saying is, you have to start somewhere and the 1450 is one very good place to start. But I would take some time and think about the different ways you expose your gear to risk and what else you may want/need.

Larger is a good bet to, but the more your “able” stow, to more you will. There may and likely will be times when you really dont need the kitchen sink.

[John Bennett]

CB as touched on earlier.
Don’t worry about what anyone else thinks….good or bad…

The reality is the “photography” market has changed drastically in the past 5 years. Started maybe 10 years ago.

I know for a lot of Professionals (One definition is those who make a living and it’s their only/main source of income) it’s a bitter pill to swallow.
I can’t find any fault in that. Fact of the matter is, I to am one of “those” guys. People like me…you…everyone.. came along and changed the market place.

Am I any less a “Professional”?
Yes in some ways, No in others.

Everyone has to start somewhere. Inlcuding those very same Professionals who at one time in their lives were “those people”.
How you conduct yourself is all that really matters (imo).

Act like a “Professional” in all ways, in all business dealings, in personal and “Professional” growth…..

Those that do will “succeed” on some level.
Those that don’t won’t

While they are certainly far fewer there are still many “buyers” out there that see and recognize the value that a “professional” brings to the table vs a hack and versus someone to whom Photography is a hobby with some potential gravy.

When I started some 5-7 years ago way too many people (virtually everyone with only the rare exception) said

You can’t make it as a photographer anymore.

Maybe Im thick skinned and thick headed but Im glad I didn’t listen to them.I heeded their advice, but I was determined to prove them wrong. Not for them, not for anyone….But for myself

Does it pay me enough to put my kids through college, pay their orthodontic bills 🙂 Good god no 🙂

But in an insanely competitive market place where everyone is a “photographer” and thats true whether your in the “Outdoor” editorial market, the wedding/portrait market, the commercial market, the Pet portrait calendar market, the sports shooter market.

I am doing exceedingly well “relatively” speaking.and thats all that concerns me…That I am successful by my own measurements.

Why?
There are thousands and thousands of “shooters” trying to do the same (in every market)…some, most equally as “capable” with the end product (imagery) and some better….So what sets one person apart from the next?

Take care of yourself, worry only about yourself. Not about what others think, not about the legions trying to do the same.

Be a professional. Don’t dream it. If/ when you are (not everyone want to devote that energy and thats perfectly ok to) what the thousands of others think/do/whatever won’t matter to you one iota

[John Bennett]

Going well thanks Mike.
But sooooo busy with life

[John Bennett]

Define the following.
1)Art
2)Photographer/photography
3)Success/successful
4) Professional

Personally I don’t know that you can.
1)One persons “junk” is another person Art.
2) What makes a person a “photographer”? Is it strictly the ability to take “technically” correct images? So at what point do move from being a hack to a “photographer”
3) How do you define success? Is it strictly $$ earned?
4) At what point do you move from being a hack..amateur..to a “pro”

Personallly much as “art” is subjective, I think many people can find their own definitions to the above.

I have my own measure of “success” that has nothing to do with how much I earn (or don’t) in any given year. Has more to do with how competitive it is and knowing that Im growing, getting consistant “business/growth”I don’t consider myself a Pro in the classical sense, others tell me I am..

To me…The definition of Professional Photographer/Writer is 75% how you conduct yourself and your “business”. The other 25% is the quality/consistancy of your work. Anyone can score a golden BB these days due the “hardware” that earns them a full page, a cover and enlarged print sale………

Can you go out tomorrow no matter the situation, lighting, conditions, time constraits and shoot something to spec and have the buyer happy enough that you continue that business….grow that relationship such that the thousands of others trying for that peice dont pull the rug out from under you?

Jay and I have talked about it a bit.

As Jay said.
If your doing your own thing, working at your “craft” always trying to learn something new, better something….and concerning yourself with just yourself…..grow, learn, at your own pace which ever that happens to be……………………………

What others do/dont do, charge/dont charge, think/dont think……….

[John Bennett]

What Eric said. If you want to take an extra precaution any Lowepro, Think Tank lens case will do and then wrap it in a fleece sweater. Good way to carry an extra layer of clothing with you should the need arise.

J

[John Bennett]

I do 🙂

Well done Maarten

[John Bennett]

They look good to me Joel. Only thing I would try to improve on is foreground/surroundings. I find the firework images I like the most are those that are similar to nights capes. So part night sky and part foreground/surroundings. So basically these are about as well as you can get them, and next time you have a chance where a show is occurring with a lake/water in the fg etc, your good to go.

Cheers,
J

[John Bennett]

So many ways to go with this kind of request.

With that budget, that wide a range of kinds of things and no real desire to get better quality glass. Id point you towards the Sigma 18-200 with OS. The Canon equivelant (18-200 IS) might be out of that price range at retail. Here is Cda it retails for 700-800, where as the Siggy is in the 400 range. If you can find a used Canon your comfortable with Id go with the C before the S (despite the S having arguably better build quality and definately a better warranty).

I got one for my GF to have and use on her 60D anytime I’m not around or she couldnt simply use the key to my place and get what she wants. So realistically she just needs something for those blue moon occasions when I or my glass isnt available. So we wanted “bang for the buck” and not alot of buck. Kind of silly for her to spend good coin when she has access to a wide variety of lenses, even if Im out of town when on assignement thered still be good lenses behind for to use.

IQ is pretty good given various factors, if I had a real “complaint” about it, is that its slow focusing for my taste/preferances and can hunt a lot in low light. It gets there, but it can struggle to do so.

[Author]

Posts