[M_Six]

Oy, just fostering them?

[M_Six]

Two years ago I saw this guys (three of them at that time) playing Ecuadorian folk music in Central Park. They were really good. I listened for a bit, shot some pics, drop them a few bucks, and left. Later I realized that they had been selling CDs and I stupidly failed to get one. So the other day I'm walking through the park again and there they are, except just two of them this time. The third guy was back in Ecuador. I didn't miss the chance to grab two of their CDs this time, though.

[IRide]

Saturday evening in Little Rock.

[Itsed65]

That's quite the tripping hazard!

[Weebl]

Mark,
I need your wifes email and address to send you some....

Ed,
One of them insists on sitting on top of my foot.

I expect to have the black ones probably a year before they are adopted. All of the others should be gone by the end of the year.

[M_Six]

Spectacular image, IRide. Well done.

My shoulders still ache from toting my 5D MkIII and lenses around Manhattan. I'm seriously leaning towards an X-T1 for future city trips.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by Weebl

Mark,
I need your wifes email and address to send you some....

wifey@not-a-friggin-chance.com

[Weebl]

Ok, I get it.


Just show her how I live then....

[IRide]

Originally Posted by M_Six

Spectacular image, IRide. Well done.

My shoulders still ache from toting my 5D MkIII and lenses around Manhattan. I'm seriously leaning towards an X-T1 for future city trips.

The big gear is awesome stuff, but my bag with the X-T1, three zooms (covering from 15mm to 300mm) and my Gitzo Traveler tripod weigh just over half of my Canon bag with one zoom and two primes and no tripod. I'm quite happy with that.

Of course the image quality isn't the same, or the price, but it's close. As I get more familiar with massaging the Fuji files I hope the perceived IQ is even closer. I know it will never be as good (in it's current iteration), but close enough for my purposes.

The Canon gear may be spending more time in the safe.

[Itsed65]

Osprey with an horderve by lennycarl08, on Flickr

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by IRide

The big gear is awesome stuff, but my bag with the X-T1, three zooms (covering from 15mm to 300mm) and my Gitzo Traveler tripod weigh just over half of my Canon bag with one zoom and two primes and no tripod. I'm quite happy with that.

Of course the image quality isn't the same, or the price, but it's close. As I get more familiar with massaging the Fuji files I hope the perceived IQ is even closer. I know it will never be as good (in it's current iteration), but close enough for my purposes.

The Canon gear may be spending more time in the safe.

I would always be torn about not getting the best possible shot when I'm in a "special" place. If I hadn't had my 5D2 when it snowed at the Grand Canyon, or if I hadn't had the 5D2 when I was in the London Eye with a full moon, I couldn't have printed those images at 50" for my office.

At the other extreme, I had a G11 that took great pictures so far as color and contrast went. One of my favorite shots with that rig was pond, red rocks, great sky and a pioneer homestead from the 1800s near Larkspur, Colorado. I'm looking at it hanging over my desk right now, BUT the largest that I could print it was 18"x24", due to limited pixels (that sensor is tiny).

Still, there's a compact, FF Sony that looks attractive. One of those, with the right lenses, would be nice, but that'd represent a new, sizable investment, on top of the Canon rigs (one FF and one crop) that I'm unlikely to get rid of.

I'm a "linebacker build", so I may be more tolerant of a heavy load. Still, my left shoulder aches a little right now from hand holding over 1,000 shots of bees, hummingbirds, goslings and other birds, using a 1,000mm rig hand held.

Dave

Fluff. by dcstep, on Flickr

[dcstep]

Ed, I see that you shot the Osprey with the Canon 100-400mm. What happened to the Tamron 150-600mm? Would you still recommend it?

Dave

[Itsed65]

The Tammy is still a good lens for the price. I use it a lot when chasing trains, and it worked very well at the zoo and in Yosemite. It is not good as a bird in flight lens due to a frustrating auto focus on moving targets. It was on my 7D and I just happened to grab the 5D with the dust pump on it. This shot was more opportunity, as I was down at a fishing pier on the bay and it just flew over me. I actually had the 700mm setup on the 1D in the car, and I wish I had it at that moment. I may go back later in the week with the heavy artillery and see what happens.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Itsed65

The Tammy is still a good lens for the price. I use it a lot when chasing trains, and it worked very well at the zoo and in Yosemite. It is not good as a bird in flight lens due to a frustrating auto focus on moving targets. It was on my 7D and I just happened to grab the 5D with the dust pump on it. This shot was more opportunity, as I was down at a fishing pier on the bay and it just flew over me. I actually had the 700mm setup on the 1D in the car, and I wish I had it at that moment. I may go back later in the week with the heavy artillery and see what happens.

So, compared to the 100-400mm, for action shooting on a xxD or 7D, you'd grab the 100-400mm before the 150-600mm?

[Itsed65]

If I know I'm going after moving critters, yes, the old 100-400 still gives me pretty good results.

Down the Hatch by lennycarl08, on Flickr

[M_Six]

I almost traded the 400 5.6 straight up for a Tamzooka, but backed out of it. I really have my heart set on the new Sigma 120-300 f2.8 sport lens. I've seen some amazing shots with it and many of them are with the Siggy 2x TC.

[IRide]

Dave, nice shot.

I agree that some photographers may always have doubts regarding caliber in the belief that if they were using a different (more expensive) body, lens, tripod, etc. that somehow their photos would be exponentially better. However, after seeing the photos you have posted for almost a year, I bet you shots were just as good and just as printable back in those ancient time of the Canon 20D and 40D.

Another side of photography, especially for us amateur types, is enjoyment in the actual act of taking a photo. Of course, the extension of the enjoyment equation if the quality of the final product. Some of us are not of the "linebacker" build and may be farther down the back side of the age factor and derive more total enjoyment (considering the taking of the photo and the final output) with gear that gives a final product that may be 90% as good (which is always a subjective determination) as the big guns.

I'll be hanging on to my Canon gear for a while longer, but for my uses, I see more mirrorless in my shooting future.

Originally Posted by dcstep

I would always be torn about not getting the best possible shot when I'm in a "special" place. If I hadn't had my 5D2 when it snowed at the Grand Canyon, or if I hadn't had the 5D2 when I was in the London Eye with a full moon, I couldn't have printed those images at 50" for my office.

At the other extreme, I had a G11 that took great pictures so far as color and contrast went. One of my favorite shots with that rig was pond, red rocks, great sky and a pioneer homestead from the 1800s near Larkspur, Colorado. I'm looking at it hanging over my desk right now, BUT the largest that I could print it was 18"x24", due to limited pixels (that sensor is tiny).

Still, there's a compact, FF Sony that looks attractive. One of those, with the right lenses, would be nice, but that'd represent a new, sizable investment, on top of the Canon rigs (one FF and one crop) that I'm unlikely to get rid of.

I'm a "linebacker build", so I may be more tolerant of a heavy load. Still, my left shoulder aches a little right now from hand holding over 1,000 shots of bees, hummingbirds, goslings and other birds, using a 1,000mm rig hand held.

Dave

Fluff. by dcstep, on Flickr

[Weebl]

and I bet it doesn't make your bike ride sideways.

[IRide]

Originally Posted by Weebl

and I bet it doesn't make your bike ride sideways.

Haha. If I loaded all that gear in a side case that would be the situation. It would remind me of my ride in Patagonia with the incessant 50 mph plus crosswind. Exciting, but not exactly fun!

[druu]

Mark, a new x-e1 and the 18-55 f/2.8-4 kit lens is like 700 bucks brand new at adorama 665 for open box. Mind you that kit lens is around 700 bucks brand new so you're kind of getting a free camera. We rented out the 56mm 1.2 and that thing is phenomenal. The price is just right too, cheaper than the 85L by a margin of almost 1/2, just a little difficult if not impossible to find at the moment.

Personally i think IQ is on close to my SLRs (5d3/7D combo), except that the keeper % is lower since EVF lag is still present.

I just like having something that I won't be sad about if it breaks. Even at 700 bucks its cheaper than any L lens or specialty prime.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by druu

Mark, a new x-e1 and the 18-55 f/2.8-4 kit lens is like 700 bucks brand new at adorama 665 for open box. Mind you that kit lens is around 700 bucks brand new so you're kind of getting a free camera. We rented out the 56mm 1.2 and that thing is phenomenal. The price is just right too, cheaper than the 85L by a margin of almost 1/2, just a little difficult if not impossible to find at the moment.

Personally i think IQ is on close to my SLRs (5d3/7D combo), except that the keeper % is lower since EVF lag is still present.

I just like having something that I won't be sad about if it breaks. Even at 700 bucks its cheaper than any L lens or specialty prime.

B&H had a deal the other day for Fuji mount Zeiss lenses. It was almost 50% off if you bought the two lenses together as opposed to singly. I was tempted and I don't even own a Fuji yet.

[druu]

The deal is back btw. I suppose though for a mirrorless camera and evf, Manual focus lenses are not the most ideal, with the evf lag, especially for travellling. But that price for two zeiss touit lenses is still incredibly tempting.