Time to be with your loved ones

Time to be with loved ones

by sat

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

6,441 reputation
1432
bio website chuqui.com
location California
age 55
visits member for 3 years, 9 months
seen 4 hours ago

May
28
comment What is a good lens for a Canon 5d for birds/wild life with a budget of 1500 dollars
the 24-105 is the wide angle zoom I use, and it's a nice partner to the 100-400. you can pick it up for $800-850 used in good condition from places like KEH. I recommend being really careful about buying a 100-400 used, because it's design makes it susceptible to bumps and bruises, but I bought my 24-105 used and it rocks.
May
6
comment What should I look for when shopping for my first DSLR?
agree with you on the 24-105, but that's not a typical kit lens. I'm thrilled Canon matched it up with the 6d instead of a less expensive one, but the 6d isn't what I'd call a "first DLSR" camera, either, which is what this topic's about.
May
1
comment Do lenses lose sharpness when they age?
As the person Esa quotes above, let me comment as well. When speaking specifically to the 100-400 it's all about wear and tear and internal dust. So the real answer to this question seems to be "Yes, but since you exclude all of the conditions that might cause it, by your definition of the question, the answer is no. Except it does happen..."
Apr
26
comment What camera feature to look for to capture moving subjects clearly?
high shutter speed only helps if you have fast lenses that let you take a proper exposure with those high speeds, so you need to worry about the quality of the glass and the maximum aperture. ISO comes into this, too, so you need to figure out how far you can crank up ISO before noise becomes a problem (or perhaps, 'fixable' noise). With objects in motion, you end up shooting in burst mode, too, so how fast and how many images you can shoot in a burst starts to matter, and.... and it so seemed like an easy question...
Apr
23
comment How can I get to 400mm+ for wildlife photography on a budget of around £1000 with a Canon DSLR?
there's a big difference between the 70-200F2.8L IS and the IS II. If you're talking about the older lens, this is correct. But the newer one? it's incredibly sharp and fast with the 2.0x tele on it. Having tested all of these combos, if the IS II and 2.0x isn't the sharpest at 400, it's very close, and a lot more flexible.
Apr
15
comment Reorganizing After Import In Lightroom
Another option -- you could remove all of those images from Lightroom and re-import them. Or better, create a new catalog, and import them into the new catalog. if you like it, you can then either replace your catalog with the new one or delete the images out of the old catalog and then merge the new catlog into it.
Apr
15
comment Does the Canon M have actual, significant deficiencies vs. the competition?
the Canon M seems to be a camera designed primarily for those already committed ot the Canon platform, not to attract people to it, and to not cannibalize other products in the Canon product line. So if you're not already a Canon shooter, don't consider it. If you are, maybe it's worth it, maybe not. I'm a canon shooter, but I'm considering the Fuji.
Apr
12
comment Do paid online photography classes have advantages over free online tutorials for a beginner?
If you want to spend a little money ($100) on an introductory course, I've watched this one from Creative Live by John Greengo and it's quite good: creativelive.com/courses/digitalphotography
Apr
5
comment Should I buy a Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS or 70-200 f/4 L USM (without IS) for a wildlife safari?
if landscape is your primary interest, the wide lens is the one to focus on: 24-70 or 24-105 is a good starting point. the 70-200F4 is a good lens to complement that. The 100-400 is, also, IF you have an interest in wildlife or bird photography. If not, go with the 70-200F4. 70-200 isn't good as your ONLY lens, especially for landscapes. But great along with a wider one.
Apr
4
comment Should I buy a Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS or 70-200 f/4 L USM (without IS) for a wildlife safari?
The more I think about it, to be honest, he probably ought to get a 100-400. A T5i, A 24-105 and a 100-400 will more than suffice for a trip like this, and you can but that for about what a 70-200F2.8L IS II and a 2.0X teleconverter alone would cost.
Apr
4
comment Should I buy a Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS or 70-200 f/4 L USM (without IS) for a wildlife safari?
since the questioner is self-admitted as a beginner in photographer, I'm really unable to suggest he spend huge amounts of money for lenses when I have no idea what his plans are beyond the trip, or what his preferred photographer is. Which they may not know, iether. And the 70-200F2.8 IS II is a seriously expensive lens. I can't suggest they invest 7-8,000 on camera gear as beginners...
Apr
4
comment Should I buy a Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS or 70-200 f/4 L USM (without IS) for a wildlife safari?
but the 400mm is ONLY 400mm. The combo I suggest covers 70-400mm. And he'll want that flexibility.
Apr
4
comment Should I buy a Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS or 70-200 f/4 L USM (without IS) for a wildlife safari?
while I'd normally agree with the idea of renting a big lens, for a new photographer going to africa for the first time, hauling big glass around may be a nightmare. I'm not sure that's the right approach with someone who doesn't know the details of schlepping gear around.
Mar
24
comment What the best telephoto zoom lens for everyday use with a Canon 7d with a $2500 budget?
"A huge bazooka superzoom can hardly be considered an everyday lens." -- sure it can. It depends on the type of photography you do. try saying it's not an everyday lens to a professional baseball photographer or someone shooting bears in Alaska....
Mar
23
comment What the best telephoto zoom lens for everyday use with a Canon 7d with a $2500 budget?
by the way, if you really do kit out for serious critter and landscape work, don't be surprised when you realize your camera bag weighs out at 25 pounds. Make sure you invest in a good, large, backpack style bag to carry the stuff in. Trust me on that.
Feb
27
comment Is digiscoping a good alternative to using a super-telephoto lens for birding?
You might also want to look at the Canon SX50 camera. It's getting some buzz among birders as an alternative to digiscoping. Take a look at what the Stokes say, for instance: stokesbirdingblog.blogspot.com/2013/02/… -- I'm going to be experimenting with one soon and see what I think.
Feb
27
comment Is digiscoping a good alternative to using a super-telephoto lens for birding?
I just upgraded my scope. My new one is a Bushnell Legend Ultra HD 12-36 x50, which ran me about $350US at Amazon. Haven't put a lot of use in it, but it's a nice upgrade from my old, $150ish scope that had seen better days. I'm looking forward to trying some digiscoping on it using my iPhone as camera, just to see how it works.
Feb
27
comment What camera & lens combination(s) are ideal for animal and bird photography?
Thank you! the best way to justify a cost like that is to realize it saves you from having to buy a 500mm or 600mm lens at $5000-11,000. (grin). (seriously. with a good body, you can crop instead of buying even bigger, nastier lenses...)
Feb
25
comment What camera & lens combination(s) are ideal for animal and bird photography?
more on my current thinking on my blog, in way more detail than I can fit here.. chuqui.com/2013/01/… -- FWIW, the 100-400 and 300+1.4x combos both cost about $1400US. The 70-200F2.8LISII+2.0x is closer to $2500. Not an easy cost to justify...
Feb
25
comment What camera & lens combination(s) are ideal for animal and bird photography?
it's complicated. the 100-400 is less sharp, but the zoom may make it a better option. The 300F4+1.4 is sharper with better AF, but the lack of zoom meant I was carrying a 2nd body and lens with me most of the time. If weight/flexibility is most important, go 100-400. If sharpness is, go 300. Both are usable and good options. I ended up going to 70-200F2.8LISII and a 2.0XIII. Sharper than both AND with a zoom, but a lot more expensive. But for me, it made sense.