Skip to Content

General Photography Chat

Discuss and share your wildlife photography, filming and equipment
User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14520
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?

Unread post by DuQues » Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:13 am

New toys for the boys:

Canon 1Ds Mark 3

Canon 40D

And this could be handy to take offending bits out of your photos...
Not posting much here anymore, but the photo's you can follow here There is plenty there.

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c

User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14520
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?

Unread post by DuQues » Thu Aug 23, 2007 9:47 am

For those of you considering going to visit parks in South(ern) Africa, here is a list of what to bring photographywise. Creditcard not included...
Not posting much here anymore, but the photo's you can follow here There is plenty there.

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c

User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14520
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?

Unread post by DuQues » Fri Sep 14, 2007 1:50 pm

Those working with Lightroom: Version 1.2 was just released. You can find it on this page.

Interesting how that program grows....

Version 1: 22.1 Mb
Version 1.1: 30.6 Mb
Version 1.2: 47.3 Mb!
Not posting much here anymore, but the photo's you can follow here There is plenty there.

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c

User avatar
Johannes van Niekerk
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 6:22 pm
Location: Lowveld - Near Kruger!

Unread post by Johannes van Niekerk » Mon Sep 17, 2007 4:45 pm

Thanks DuQues!

I would think that as a fully paid and registered used of lightroom, Adobe would at least send me an email about this - but no such customer care from them!

Do you see an improvement in the speed with this new version? I like the features of lightroom, but get frustrated with it being so sss...lll...ooo...www.... And then I almost always want to do some more editing in photoshop as well - so I have just about left lightroom out of my workflow!

I'll download the update and give it another try!

User avatar
Mgoddard
Senior Virtual Ranger
Senior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 8:07 am
Location: Doha, Qatar

Unread post by Mgoddard » Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:23 pm

I put this on the ODP website and got a few replies, but thinking that most of you take the same pics as me...what advise can you give....?

I am going to buy a Canon 40D and need to know which is the best lens to get with it. I am currently looking at the following:

EF 200 f2.8 USM or
EF 28-200 F3.5-5.6 USM or
EF 70-300 F4.5-6 IS USM

Keeping in mind that I will mostly photograph birds and wildlife, which is the best?

Thank for your help

User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14520
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?

Unread post by DuQues » Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:38 pm

For birds you'll need the longest lens you can get.
In case of these lenses you will be wanting to use an 1.4 teleconverter, which costs you a stop. The 40D will not give you autofocus above f/5.6 so only the EF 200 f/2.8 USM would be a handy lens. That would become an f/4 unlike the others which would become f/8...

In your list I miss the 70-200? There are different versions, with or without IS and running from f/2.8 to f/5.6. There might be one that fits your wallet, and they are very sharp!
Not posting much here anymore, but the photo's you can follow here There is plenty there.

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c

User avatar
Mgoddard
Senior Virtual Ranger
Senior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 8:07 am
Location: Doha, Qatar

Unread post by Mgoddard » Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:44 pm

Thanks again DQ, so please tell me, if i had the finances...which one would you get...even not on the list...I have been told to look at the 100-400..but weight is a problem...If I could have any lense I want..which one would it be..?

User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14520
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?

Unread post by DuQues » Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:04 pm

I have the 100-400 myself and am very happy with it. But given unlimited funds the 300mm f/2.8 (with 1.4 and 2.0 converters) would be bought like a snap! It's sharper, but heavier as well.

The 100-400 travels very well. Most airlines allow 10 kilo handluggage, but in actual fact they have never ever weighed it. Given that the 100-400 only weighs in at 1600 grams that still leaves you a lot for batteries, bodies, lenses etc.
Not posting much here anymore, but the photo's you can follow here There is plenty there.

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c

User avatar
bert
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14292
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:02 pm
Location: mind in SA, body in The Netherlands

Unread post by bert » Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:52 pm

A relative cheap, but sharp lens is the 400 5.6 L
And a lightweight.
Been on a Kruger trip last year with my 100-400 L and my friend had the 400
His images were sharper

I myself use the 100-400 as well
Also own a 300 4.0L
Also very sharp, even with 1.2 converter (No Autofocus)
Didnt bring it with me on my recent trip :doh:

Imo, the 100-400 is a great alrounder, but next time i will use
the70-200 4.0L (non IS version) in combination with the 300.
Both fit easily in my photobackpack and still allowed on the plane.

But if you dont have the big bucks the 100-400 is a great compromise

User avatar
NightOwl
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 328
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 3:52 pm
Location: Port Elizabeth

Unread post by NightOwl » Sat Nov 03, 2007 12:15 pm

I have both the 100-400 and the 300 f/2.8.
Bought the 100-400 first, then got the 300 f/4.0 and ultimately upgraded to the f/2.8 and sold the f/4.0.
My Advice: Get the 100-400. It's the ultimate VERSATILE wildlife lens. AND it's an L lens. Now obviously zooms aren't as sharp as primes, but the 100-400 is an L lens and it's pics are still incredibly sharp.
I'll never sell my 100-400, even though I have the incredible 300 f/2.8
The 100-400 is just to versatile and travels a lot easier as mentioned above.

User avatar
Peter Betts
Posts: 857
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:38 pm
Location: Port Elizabeth

Unread post by Peter Betts » Sat Nov 03, 2007 12:40 pm

NightOwl wrote:I have both the 100-400 and the 300 f/2.8.

Now obviously zooms aren't as sharp as primes,


Depends which zooms you are talking about. The Nikkor 70-200VR f2.8 has just been voted the best in this category in a review in the latest "Digital Photography" mag with 100% image quality and a 93% overall rating. The Canon equiv got 80% IQ rating with 88% overall Rating and the Sigma version got an overall 83% Rating. The 200-400 f4 Nikkor is without peer as a wild Life Zoom and I would back these 2 Nikkors against any Prime available on this planet...cant comment on the 3 new Nikkor large primes as they havent become available yet. The days when an average Prime was better than the tip top best zooms are over
2009
Punda Maria Sept 27,28
Bateleur Sept 29,30 (free award)
Tamboti Oct 1,2,3,4
Biyamiti Oct 5,6,7,8

FGASA Local Area Guide

Nikon D700 FX, Nikkor 24-70 G f2.8, Nikkor 70-200VR f2.8, Nikkor 200-400 VR f4, Nikon 1.4 & 1.7 Convertors

User avatar
NightOwl
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 328
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 3:52 pm
Location: Port Elizabeth

Unread post by NightOwl » Sat Nov 03, 2007 8:54 pm

Peter: You obviously didn't realise that I was comparing apples with apples... I only used L lenses in my recommendations and the L primes out perform the L zooms.
I also did not mention your brnad since the original question was about C kit. I can only comment on what I have experience with and that's the brand that the original poster requested info on.

User avatar
delboysafa
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:48 pm
Location: From East London S.A., but living in Surrey, UK

Unread post by delboysafa » Sat Nov 03, 2007 10:25 pm

Guys, please lets not start a N vs C debate.

Both great camera's and lenses. I think the Nikon 70-200 and the 200-400 are fantastic lenses. However, as is the Canon 70-200. Agree that the Nikon 200-400 is a better lens than the 100-400. Have played with both.

User avatar
NightOwl
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 328
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 3:52 pm
Location: Port Elizabeth

Unread post by NightOwl » Sat Nov 03, 2007 10:51 pm

Delboysa: There's no N C debate here. I have no experience in N and plainly stated it as such.
What I was referring to is that I compared Primes and zooms within a specific manufacturer and even more specific in the L range. That was my response to the mention about zooms and primes. If I remember correctly... The original poster asked exactly about this advice. I couldn't care less whether its a N or a C lens, but if the person needs advice on a specific brand, then advice on lenses of the other brand is pretty useless to them and does not actually help them at all.

User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14520
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?

Unread post by DuQues » Wed Feb 13, 2008 12:22 pm

For those working with the Mac: Apple has released Aperture version 2. (Which is a program like Lightroom for those who don't know.)

CUPERTINO, California—February 12, 2008—Apple® today introduced Aperture™ 2, the next major release of its groundbreaking photo editing and management software with over 100 new features that make it faster, easier to use and more powerful. With a streamlined user interface and entirely new image processing engine, Aperture 2 also introduces new imaging tools for highlight recovery, color vibrancy, local contrast definition, soft-edged retouching, vignetting and RAW fine-tuning, and lets users directly post their portfolios on the .Mac Web Gallery* for viewing on the web, iPhone™, iPod® touch and Apple TV®. At a new low price of $199, anyone can easily organize, edit and publish photos like a pro.

(...) and the Aperture library database has been re-architected to provide fast project switching and near instantaneous search results, even when working with extremely large libraries of 500,000 images or more.

Half a million photos... I think that will be enough for most of us... :lol:

If you want to
read more...
Not posting much here anymore, but the photo's you can follow here There is plenty there.

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c


Return to “Wildlife Photography Enthusiasts”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


Webcam Highlights

Addo
Submitted by Anonymous at 15:16:43
orpen
Submitted by Foxy at 08:10:49
satara
Submitted by vacation at 11:14:00
nossob
Submitted by coisjvr at 05:58:08