SANParks.org Forums


Previous topic | First unread post | Next topic
Page 1 of 16 [ 229 posts ]
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 16  Next
Post new topic Post a reply
Print view

General Photography Chat

Offline
Senior Virtual Ranger
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:41 pm
Posts: 1538
Location: Gauties .
Profile 
Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:11 pm Unread post
Brilliant stuff , awesome photos .
Deffinately need to get that 100-400IS for myself .
Time to go rob a bank methinks !

Edit by DB - this topic was split from Bert's trip report
Last post



Offline
Senior Virtual Ranger
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 10:35 pm
Posts: 575
Profile 
Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:42 pm Unread post
Bucky, 18K? I just bought the Canon 75-300mm and it was less than 3k, or is their such a vast difference between the two?



Offline
Moderator
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 5:54 pm
Posts: 40504
Location: Somerset West, Cape Town
Profile 
Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:52 pm Unread post
pardus wrote
Bucky, 18K? I just bought the Canon 75-300mm and it was less than 3k, or is their such a vast difference between the two?

Yip Pardus Bucky is correct, I am paying pretty close to that for my 100-400 which is due to arrive this week :dance:



Offline
Senior Virtual Ranger
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:41 pm
Posts: 1538
Location: Gauties .
Profile 
Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:20 pm Unread post
pardus wrote
Bucky, 18K? I just bought the Canon 75-300mm and it was less than 3k, or is their such a vast difference between the two?


Pardus , If you can , put another 3k in the bag and get the same lens in IS , it has a 3 stop image stablilizer , which is pretty good .If not I found my canon 70-300 on the 350d to be a fine combo for the park , if you look in my satara report , those owls and the hyena pic where all with the 70-300 (5 years old)

I think , looking at berts pics , that there is no comparisson between that , and the 170-500 sigma I bought , even my old 70-300 seems better than the sigma .
Berts pics have so much colour and clarity !

Yvonne was taking pics of the same ellies and girafes as me in the park (We met up and where searching for cheerah on the s28 in convoy) , i would love to compare her pics with the 100-400 to mine with the 70-300 and sigma 170-500


Last edited by bucky on Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Offline
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:02 pm
Posts: 17042
Location: mind in SA, body in The Netherlands
Profile  WWW 
Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:27 pm Unread post
bucky wrote
Berts pics have so much colour and clarity !

Bucky, the clarity is lens quality but the colour is helped with a little bit of photo shopping.
Depending on the colour already created by light in which the picture was taken i ad saturation with 10-15%
The shot of the hill with the marble rock is natural, but the giraffe has a little bit of saturation added to it.



Offline
Senior Virtual Ranger
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:41 pm
Posts: 1538
Location: Gauties .
Profile 
Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:00 pm Unread post
DB , I have the 350d , just got it before my trip (The day before) .

I am very happy with pic quality from my canon 70-300 , and mixed with the 1,6x effect of the 350d makes a very effective lens .

I cant say im overly happy with the sigma 170-500 on it , and anything that was medium/far away has not got sharp results , even in a window clamp with remote release , so no shake .
I dont know if the dust/heat haze causes issues on long shots with a bigger lens .

Id go for the 70-300 with or without is depending on what you can afford , if he has 18k spare get the 100-400 , or else a 400mm canon L lens , although this leaves him with no short range option .
I would without a doubt buy the 70-300IS for 6k before the sigma 170-500 at a little more cost .
I have got the 55-200 usm canon lens also , and this is a little small for most shots .

I have used a 70-300 for years on my old film camera , as I was not able to afford anything bigger , and all previous photos I posted where with this lens scanned from slides or pics .



Offline
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:02 pm
Posts: 17042
Location: mind in SA, body in The Netherlands
Profile  WWW 
Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:11 pm Unread post
pardus wrote
:hmz: Plastic surgery....I'm a shocked puritan :shock: Guess what I'm doing with my next batch of Kruger pics.



Its like a bit of lip gloss or eyeshadow :wink:
But why have a program like photoshop for eg. if you dont use it. :shock:

I mainly use four tools

Bit of saturation of needed
Highlight/shadow.
Sharpening (only a little if needed. A out of focus or moving object will never be sharp)
And sometimes i cut away a bit of the edges if a branch or bit of grass annoys me.

Nearly forget. Polish away the ugly dusts which comes when changing lenses on one digital body.



Offline
Senior Virtual Ranger
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 10:35 pm
Posts: 575
Profile 
Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:15 pm Unread post
Bert, you are precious! - Eyeshadow and lipgloss nogal! You are in my opinion, a very good photographer because your pictures have soul.



Offline
Moderator
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 5:54 pm
Posts: 40504
Location: Somerset West, Cape Town
Profile 
Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:16 pm Unread post
Because I am going to have a 100-400L lens he was thinking more in the line of a 300mm lens. Thanks bucky for your help!



Offline
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:02 pm
Posts: 17042
Location: mind in SA, body in The Netherlands
Profile  WWW 
Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:27 pm Unread post
DinkyBird wrote
Because I am going to have a 100-400L lens he was thinking more in the line of a 300mm lens. Thanks bucky for your help!


I also own a 300 4.0 L lens
Never disappointed me
And with a 1.4 converter still able to use auto focus.

My friend bought a 450 5.6 L which is taken out of production and was on sale. The leopard in the tree was his image.
Have seen his pictures and quality and sharpness was perfect.

Know a few photographers owning this lens and they are all very satisfied.

You even might find it on the second hand market

@Pardus. Txs, i try to add a bit of the shivers of the precious moments in mother nature.



Offline
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:02 pm
Posts: 17042
Location: mind in SA, body in The Netherlands
Profile  WWW 
Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:36 pm Unread post
DinkyBird wrote
Bert can you use auto focus on the 100-400 with a 1.4 convertor?


No :?

But with a subject not moving and with aid of a rice bag or tripod you can still make good shots
The darter pic was taken with the 1.4 converter from a tripod



Offline
Moderator
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 5:54 pm
Posts: 40504
Location: Somerset West, Cape Town
Profile 
Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:46 pm Unread post
Ok, thanks Bert - I had been told that but I wanted to just make sure.

Your photos really inspire me - I have so much to learn and maybe oneday I will get into your league. You really do have the x factor when it comes to making a special pic!


Some of my photos from the trip to Kruger

Offline
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:26 pm
Posts: 2
Profile 
Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:09 pm Unread post
Image

This one is a little fuzzy when viewed at 100%. What can I do to over come that in the future? Is there any way of fixing it with out sharpening?

Image

Image

I used a Canon EOS 350D with a Sigma 70 - 300mm

Your comments and suggestions will be appreciated.

Thanks

Ivr



Offline
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:02 pm
Posts: 17042
Location: mind in SA, body in The Netherlands
Profile  WWW 
Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:13 pm Unread post
Hi and welcome
Did you use a bean bag or any other kind of rest
The fuzzy part looks like a minor shake



Offline
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:26 pm
Posts: 2
Profile 
Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:19 pm Unread post
No free hand. Just learned about beanbags last week. Will try it in the future. Still very new in the game.
Top

Post new topic  Post a reply
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 16  Next
Page 1 of 16 [ 229 posts ]
Previous topic | First unread post | Next topic

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests





Search for
Jump to