Serene Life

by garik

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

897 reputation
317
bio website
location
age
visits member for 2 years, 9 months
seen yesterday

Overly-enthusiastic amateur with an excessive budget and gear that is way too good for me.


May
15
asked Are these images symptomatic of shutter failure?
May
8
comment Is replacing a 70-200mm Canon lens with a 135mm and extender a good idea?
Interesting...the chart certainly gives the 70-200 2.8 the edge at 2.8 (particularly mid-frame and corner), even allowing for a little slop comparing 189mm to 200mm as the tool does. My experience with this differs (135 w/ 1.4x is better overall than the 70-200), though admittedly I have not done the rather rigorous testing such as with the ISO-12233 charts. I'm inspired to try some now, though :-)
May
8
comment Is replacing a 70-200mm Canon lens with a 135mm and extender a good idea?
Keep in mind that I'm referring to the 70-200 2.8 non-IS specifically...which, generally speaking, I think has the lowest IQ out of all of the 70-200s (including the f/4s). So YMMV if you have a different model. But still, prime IQ is nearly always going to be better than a zoom at the same focal length, especially if the 135 is in the mix. It's my favorite lens by far.
May
8
answered Is replacing a 70-200mm Canon lens with a 135mm and extender a good idea?
May
3
answered Any good ways to keep a DSLR with a heavy lens parallel to your body while carrying?
May
1
answered Will a third-party tripod mount collar hold my lens securely?
Apr
29
comment Is a fluorescent filter worth using, and how and when?
I completely agree that the best "filter" is the switch on the wall...it's even more difficult nowadays because "fluorescent" lights can have numerous color casts...and they're often mixed together (e.g. "Daylight" tubes mixed with old-school ones, along with "warm" ones)...making it very, very difficult to balance with any kind of filter (lens or strobe).
Apr
28
answered Is a fluorescent filter worth using, and how and when?
Apr
25
revised How do I reverse engineer a portrait photo?
improved/fixed links
Apr
25
answered How do I reverse engineer a portrait photo?
Apr
22
comment Walkabout: Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS vs EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L I & II
I have heard this "17-55 is L quality" bit before. I think it's utter BS. I have rented the 17-55 and currently own about 1/2 dozen L lenses of various vintages. Even the old, beat-up, second-hand Ls that I own are leagues better than the 17-55 in color rendition, build quality, and sharpness. It is not L quality in any of those categories. I'd agree that it's one of the best, if not the best EF-S lenses (though the 60 f/2.8 would give it a run for its money), but it's not an 'L', hidden or otherwise.
Apr
20
comment Use a shot list or not?
Particularly the case for unfamiliar locations or event types. I imagine if you do wedding photography full-time, you have it down pat and probably don't need to write out a detailed plan. But for something you've never done before/aren't familiar with, or in a unique location, it's probably better to have a plan (and potentially abandon it) than not, for the reasons you state. Great answer.
Apr
16
comment Forgive my ignorance: Aperture changes as I zoom in why?
@Jakub: sorry to nit-pick, but that's not quite right. There's at least one Canon zoom that is constant aperture throughout the zoom range, but is not an L: the 17-55 F/2.8. It is true that most of the "L" zooms are constant aperture, but not all of them are (for example, the 28-300 f/3.5-5.6 L and the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L).
Apr
16
answered Is it worth buying a battery grip for my camera?
Apr
13
comment Pictures of dancers on stage
Yep. Even with 135/f2 (my best "dance" lens), I'm almost always at 1600 unless it's an exceptionally well-lit venue...but those seem rare :-)
Apr
12
comment Pictures of dancers on stage
The pro models are "good" (usable), and maybe "awesome" relative to lower-end models, and certainly much improved from even a few years ago, but I still would not use that adjective to describe the high ISO (>3200) of any camera. That wasn't really my point though...the point is, you have to use it. If you're trying to shoot dance/stage at 400 or even 800, unless you have a TON of light, it's not going to be enough.
Apr
12
answered Pictures of dancers on stage
Mar
29
comment Are there a kind of monopods available which have a minimum height of 10 cm?
OK...I still don't think you're going to find a single monopod that can act as a full-size monopod and collapse down to 10cm. That would require so many segments as to make it extremely wobbly when fully extended. BUT: you could probably fashion your own 10cm 'pod out of some lightweight material (PVC pipe or similar hollow tubing with a cap + 1/4" 20 TPI screw for the mount) that would not be too burdensome to carry outdoors. You could probably even attach it to your main monopod with a velcro strap or rubber band.
Mar
28
comment Are there a kind of monopods available which have a minimum height of 10 cm?
what is the actual problem (or problems) you're trying to solve? I doubt you're going to find a product exactly as you describe, but perhaps there is some other substitute that can do what you require.
Mar
16
comment What to look for when testing a wide angle lens before buying?
Then you should consider buying the lens from someone else who will give you more time to test it and allow you to return it if you're not satisfied, or buy it new with a warranty/return policy. In any case, the point remains: there's nothing special for testing a wide angle that you would/wouldn't do for any lens, and there are lots of answers on testing a lens already.