5D MK3 w/16-35 7D w/24-70 combination

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by paul_mori, Dec 7, 2012.

  1. Are there any working photogs or amateur documentary/street photogs here that are using this combination; 5D MK3 w/16-35 and 7D w/24-70?
    Thoughts, considerations, practicalities?
    Thanks,
    Paul.
     
  2. I'm sure they're stellar combinations, but why limit yourself to them?
     
  3. Limit myself?
     
  4. All that gear will weigh 7 pounds, not including bags etc. That's a lot for street photography. But I'm sure the image quality would be excellent.
     
  5. You'll certainly attract attention to yourself, which I assume is what you want.
     
  6. @H.P. What the hell? If you've nothing constructive to say then please *X&$#**X&$#**X&$#**X&$#* off.
    Is this forum for photographers or Rockwell Level 0'ers?
    I'm not interested in theories, but the sane opinions of anyone actually using this combo or with a 5D MKII...
     
  7. Paul,
    I own and frequently use the 5D Mk II with the 17-40, and the 7 D with the 24-70. I know it is not the exact combination you asked about but those are the lenses I have. I carry them over my photo vest which serves as my gadget bag on a dual strap. I am not inconspicuous when I walk around the city, but then I usually do this when covering events. Interestingly enough, people see me and seem to immediately disregard me as though I were part of the scenery. I like this combination very much it allows me to cover the range from fairly wide to short tele by simply picking up that body. So if I am wanting to grab something relatively wide like a large group or a shot with a monument or architectural or panoramic feature I can do it fairly quickly. If I am wanting to grab something a bit more intimate. Or get really close, just grab the 7D. This allows me to stroll the streets of Washington DC not unnoticed, but ignored. and have a super range of possibilities. I don't have anything bad to say about the combination except that it violates some peoples ideas of "the right way" to enjoy my hobby.
     
  8. Thanks, Michael. Good man. I've been thinking it would be a very useful events combination going from (approx.) 16mm - 110mm.
    I'm interested in your opinion of image qualities between the two cameras with their respective lenses, particularly the background blur. If a foreground figure is in focus, and the back thrown out, do images from either camera (sensor and focal length notwithstanding) match reasonably well? When you've downloaded the day's shoot how do they compare?
    Thanks again,
    Paul.
     
  9. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    "any working photogs or amateur documentary/street photogs here that are using this combination; 5D MK3 w/16-35 and 7D w/24-70? . . . I've been thinking it would be a very useful events combination going from (approx.) 16mm - 110mm."​
    No, but I use APS-C w/16 to 35/2.8 and 135Format w/ 70 to 200/2.8, quite often.
    Effective FoV equivalent: 26mm to 56 & 70 to 200 all at F/2.8
    (Gap 57mm to 69mm)
    Effective FoV equivalent available (with swapping lenses): 16mm to 320mm.
    Gap - 57mm to 69mm.
    WW
     
  10. @H.P. What the hell? If you've nothing constructive to say then please *X&$#**X&$#**X&$#**X&$#* off.​
    What a nice polite person you are.
    Just to set the scene, I use a 5D and a 40D, both with battery packs. I guarantee that they will attract plenty of attention, unless in a press scrum or a very touristy area.
    If your intention is to capture slice of life pictures, this is not the kit to employ. For stuff like that, I use Leica (for film) or M43 for digital. In very sensitive areas, I'll use pocketable digitals like the Ixus 70 or the Coolpix S10.
    More important though, is attitude. I would suggest that your outburst merely adds weight to my original suggestion that your interest lies in "playing photographer" rather than achieving interesting images.
     
  11. I almost have the combination you describe but cannot remember ever using it (my only difference is 5DII not 5DIII). For
    street use I find a less obvious camera and prime work better (I usually use a Leica M8 with a 21mm - effective 28mm
    lens). For some reason I have never liked the 24-70 on my 7D and usually use this lens on my 5DII. I actually tend to
    find that I use my 16-35 II on my 7D or a 70-200 a lot more. If you explain why you think you need such a wide coverage
    of lenses and bodies and what you are looking to achieve I could be more helpful.
     
  12. Indeed. HP's original comment was my first thought as well. Obviously everyone doesn't work the same, but a big portion of street photography and documentary work (amateur or not) is catching life as it happens. Having a kit on par w/ what most wedding photogs carry on them is NOT subtle. It ATTRACTS attention, and diminishes the appearance of genuine emotion in your subjects. IMLE of street photography - having too much gear can easily destroy the scene you are trying to capture.
    While his comment was not perhaps appropriately respectful of your obvious talent and kit ;-) Your response is way beyond, and completely inappropriate. You solicited opinions in your post, and he gave it. Don't get all in a raging tizzy because his opinion did not fall completely into fawning line with your own. jeez.
     
  13. Firstly, Philip. Thank you for your input.
    H.P., get fucked. You know nothing about me. I am wanting intelligent discussion about gear.
    My attitude? You started being a wanker by insinuating I was after attention. I realise the Internet is full idiots, but come on, at least try to moderate the snotty remarks.
    That being said, thanks for you 10c worth regarding your preferred 'slice of life' kit.
    I'd like to keep this discussion, however brief it might be, focussed and without snide remarks.
    Marcus, you too?! I am not in a raging tizzy, you git. You deserve that comment. If someone insinuates your intentions are to be a poser then you have the right to call them out on it, don't you?

    BTW you are not corresponding with some amateur here. Hence the level of kit under discussion and my desire for the opinions of people with IQ's higher than a carrot.
     
  14. You know nothing about me.​
    Alas, I seem to be learning far too much about you.
     
  15. but come on, at least try to moderate the snotty remarks.​
    Oh dear, you do seem to have come off the medication far too soon. I'm sure you will be better in due course. In the meanwhile, contemplate this nice calm scene and breath slowly and deeply...
    00b6l4-507435584.jpg
     
  16. Troll?
     
  17. Sorry Peter, et al.
    I just don't like people swearing at me. I tend to react badly.
     
  18. H.P.: There is no need to use the F bomb anywhere at anytime. It is upsetting and a turn off to read this here.
     
  19. @H.P. I just don't like people swearing at me. I tend to react badly.

    Well, then you know what to do don't you? Or do you?

    You could start by not making baseless insinuations as to peoples motives. Another hint is to stay on topic. And if you've nothing constructive to say, keep your fingers away from the keyboard.

    Peter, it's more of a turn off to read through worthless posts that contribute nothing to our practice, and which seem little more than Internet baiting.
     
  20. Paul,
    In order to attenuate the flaming and trolling, let's take this offline. You can check some of the stuff I got with the kit in question at http://imagepro.photography.com/Michael_Gregory
    And do pop me an e-mail at mlgreg@me.com
     
  21. Peter, it's more of a turn off to read through worthless posts that contribute nothing to our practice, and which seem little more than Internet baiting.​
    At the risk of being accused of more trolling, may I seek clarification? I just wonder if this shot is of you...
    00b6lm-507439684.jpg
     
  22. Is photo.net usually this bad? I can see there are some genuine people here. But H.P., why do you even bother? Do you use the combination of cameras and lenses in the thread title? Do you have anything to add? What are you? Another, what? Internet loser?

    Come on, tell me your experience of using the 5D MKIII w/16-35 alongside a 7D w/24-70, please?
     
  23. Another, what? Internet loser?​
    Yep, that's me...
    00b6m3-507441584.jpg
     
  24. So, you have zero experience using the gear in question, huh? Great! Please feel free to continue contributing your expertise. You are awesome and I'm learning a lot.
     
  25. You are awesome and I'm learning a lot.​
    There you are, you can be nice when you try. Now show us some of your pictures, so we can advise you. Here are some more of mine...
    00b6m9-507441884.jpg
     
  26. @H.P. Now show us some of your pictures, so we can advise you.

    I don't have time for that game. I am not here for that. You've read the thread title. Now if you've nothing else to add...
     
  27. I don't have time for that game.​
    Oh dear, and we were doing so well, there. Perhaps a nice picture of a camera will cheer you up. See: this one is really butch...
    00b6mK-507443684.jpg
     
  28. Why drag Bob into this? I'm sure he's got far better things to do.
    Let's try again. First, take your Tourette syndrome pills. Then say to yourself, "the world is a nicer place when I'm polite to people". After that, I'm sure you'll manage a constructive discussion with all and sundry...
    00b6ma-507447584.jpg
     
  29. @H.P. Why drag Bob into this? I already have, not that he'll probably give a *X&$#**X&$#**X&$#**X&$#*.
    And after this, I won't be discussing anything with you you *X&$#**X&$#**X&$#**X&$#*.
    Others are welcome.. :)
     
  30. Bob, I know you are monitoring this thread and paul mori has named you as a witness. Please put a stop to this. It has spiralled out of control and at present has nothing remotely related to photography.
     
  31. Sorry, again, Peter. I know I shouldn't feed the animals but...
     
  32. stp

    stp

    Deleted my comment. [God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.]
     
  33. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    Extract – general terms of use:
    'You may not post obscene, pornographic, degrading, harassing or humiliating User Content on the Site. Please refer to our Community Guidelines for further explanation of what is acceptable in this regard. You may not post or transmit any false, defamatory, abusive, threatening or illegal User Content or User Content that infringes on the rights of others or the ability of others to enjoy the Site. We have the right to determine, in our sole discretion, whether User Content violates these restrictions or is otherwise unfit for the Site. We have the sole right to delete, modify or edit any such User Content that you upload to the Site.
    Failure to abide by these restrictions may result in sanctions including termination of your user privileges on photo.net and cancellation of your account, as well as legal sanctions, if applicable.​
    I for one would expect that this thread terminated and some of the content removed.
    WW
     
  34. There's more misogynist vulgar slang in this single thread than I've read on the rest of photo.net and on every other photography forum I've ever visited. It's offensive and pathetic, and it all originates from one "member."
    May I suggest not only that this thread be closed, but also that the member in question's account be deleted so that no one else is subjected to his infantile spleen.
    I think the moderators should be maintaining a minimum standard of decorum in this community.
     
  35. @ Peter J Please put a stop to this. It has spiralled out of control and at present has nothing remotely related to photography. And who do we have to thank for that? I repeatedly asked H.P. if he had anything to contribute, and if not then he could keep his fingers away from the keyboard.
    @ Mark Pierlot I think the moderators should be maintaining a minimum standard of decorum in this community.
    Me too. But it should start with with censoring H.P. for his baseless accusation of motive.
    Or can you not see that? You're a photographer. Can you not see how some random person claiming you want to attract attention is way out of line?
    I may use strong words at times, but it's not without justification.
    The Internet is rife with people like H.P. who have nothing to contribute. So, STAY ON TOPIC and all's fine.
    Also, if some of you live such sheltered lives that you can't handle strong words. I'd say come and do some conflict photography. Live a bit and see what the world's like.
     
  36. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    I may use strong words at times, but it's not without justification. . . Also, if some of you live such sheltered lives that you can't handle strong words. I'd say come and do some conflict photography. Live a bit and see what the world's like.​
    paul - it is not the words per se: it is the form and manner in which they were used - and in consideration of the audience and the rules of use of this site.
    You could easily make a strong point of view; in fact you could make a stronger point view without the use of vulgar, bar-room words - because the use of the words has attracted the attention of both the general reader and also the Photographers from whom you seek responses.
    These people would most likely have lost focus on the matters you have raised: BECAUSE the focus is now on the inappropriate language you chose to use.
    This has nothing to do with respondents having a sheltered life or not. But has a lot to do with the appearance of your motives and sincerity, from the outset.
    If you have lived life and you know what the world is like, then you will certainly understand the finer art of communication and how one might tailor it to suit the audience, WITHOUT compromising one's own points of view, or message one wishes to send.
    WW
     
  37. Can you not see how some random person claiming you want to attract attention is way out of line?​
    So Mrs Mori's little boy is the victim of a big bad troll? Because the moderator has removed most of the vicious abuse, it's no longer clear that this person responded to a simple comment with the most vulgar and offensive personal attack seen on PN for quite some time. Of course, I well understand why the moderators would want to clean up the foul drivel posted but it does rather destroy the context.
    Still, I'm sure he'll be nice and polite to everyone in future and perhaps even show us some of his marvellous pictures.
     
  38. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    H.P. - I think it would be quite clear to anyone who reads this thread the type of language and the type of abuse which was hurled.
    There is no mistaking to what words these phases allude:
    "There's more misogynist vulgar slang in this single thread . . . "
    and
    "the use of vulgar, bar-room words"
    WW
     
  39. Sorry, William, just venting.
     
  40. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    . . . no apology to me is necessary.
    I was merely stating a fact, that it would be obvious, to most readers.
    The language directed to you personally on this thread, was utterly disgraceful and totally unnecessary - and that is also a fact.
    WW
     
  41. Can't believe this thread is still here...Surely this is a prime one for instant deletion?
     
  42. Can't believe this thread is still here...Surely this is a prime one for instant deletion?​
    Tanzan and Ekido were once traveling together down a muddy road. A heavy rain was falling. As they came around a bend, they met a lovely girl in a silk kimono and sash, unable to cross at an intersection.
    "Come on, girl," said Tanzan at once. Lifting her in his arms, he carried her over the mud.
    Ekido did not speak until that night when they reached a lodging temple. Then he could no longer restrain himself. "We monks don't go near females," he told Tanzan, "especially not young and lovely ones. It is dangerous. Why did you do that?"
    "I left the girl there," said Tanzan. "Are you still carrying her?"
     
  43. DEATH

    Tanzan wrote sixty postal cards on the last day of his life, and asked an attendant to mail them. Then he died. The cards read:
    I am departing from this world.
    This is my last announcement.
    Tanzan. July 27, 1892.
     

Share This Page

1111