Any photographers in here?

[sleeper3]

What's wrong with the background?

 

[Vocko]

There is a trace of something behind the lens

 

[FunkyBuddha]

Man, taking a photo of a lighter colored lens on a white background is TOUGH!

Mad pimpin'!

 

[sleeper3]

TRU THUGZ



I don't see anything behind the lens... give me a direction or something!

 

[FlyinHawaiian]

He meant in the reflection of the glass

 

[Vocko]

No, wait a second...


edit: See what I mean? I can see it on my laptop screen without editing.

 

[judman13]

You could just use a black or gray background...

 

[sleeper3]

oh, I can't see that on my screen. Thanks for the heads up. I thought I had gotten it all.

also, Rebel XTi + 70-200 f/2.8 =






When you put the camera on this lens, it still feels like you're just carrying around the lens without the camera. It's weird!

 

[Vocko]

Beatiful shoots, loving the dof

 

[sleeper3]

The lens gets slightly softer at f/2.8, but not soft enough to worry about. at f/4, it is disgustingly sharp!

 

[LaraS]

Ugh, I want one like now.

 

[FlyinHawaiian]

No kidding...

10-22mm
24-70mm
70-200mm

FML

 

[sleeper3]

No kidding...

10-22mm
24-70mm
70-200mm

FML

+2x teleconverter = perfect setup

 

[FlyinHawaiian]

yep... Time to win the lottery I guess...

 

[sleeper3]

psh, if I won the lottery, I'd have a 7d, 1dmkIV, 5dmkII, 16-35 f/2.8, 24-70 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8 II, 300 f/2.8, 400 f/2.8, 1.4x tele, and 2x tele. If you're going to dream, dream big!

 

[LaraS]

I am still trying to decide between the 100-400 and 70-200. I prefer the sharpness of the 70-200, but need the reach of the 400.

>_> Bleck.. decisions.

 

[sleeper3]

oh, also, I'd throw in about 4 580EXs, pocket wizards, a 100mm f/2.8L macro, and the 90mm f/2.8 TS lens for good measure. Also, one of every kind of filter in every size that I need.


laraw, the question is: how important is f/5.6 @ 400mm to you. If you're ok shooting f/8, get the 70-200 f/2.8 and a 2x tele. If it's really important, get the 100-400, or a 70-200 f/2.8 II and a 2x tele.

 

[sleeper3]

oh, and a macro ring flash!

 

[LaraS]

laraw, the question is: how important is f/5.6 @ 400mm to you. If you're ok shooting f/8, get the 70-200 f/2.8 and a 2x tele. If it's really important, get the 100-400, or a 70-200 f/2.8 II and a 2x tele.

Well, we can forget the 70-200 f/2.8L II... that is out of my budget right now. xD

My concern with using the 70-200 with 2x tele mainly stems from the feedback I have gotten from a few friends... and this article: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/400v400.shtml

 

[FunkyBuddha]

You'll definitely lose that quality as you're adding another element to the setup. That's a given. I would keep saving and maybe rent the lens for now whenever you need one.

If I won the lottery, I'd open my studio and you guys can use it whenver you're up here ...provided the time is available haha