vuyisich

<p>OK, I shot a bunch of photos at different apertures. Comparisons are here:<br>

http://wildwestluxurytours.com/Blog/2012_pages/Rokinon_8_mm.html</p>

<p>Sorry, I have not shot wide open yet (I will try to do it today and post an update, if it stops raining). Since I found out that the hyperfocal distance at f8 is only 0.4 m, I thought I could just use the lens with that combo.<br>

The lens cap design is not great. It stays on based on the friction of its two "teeth" with the hood, so it's pretty easy to knock off. Also, the cap can only stay on the hood in one position. If you rotate it a bit, it will not latch on.</p>

<p>If anyone is interested in an ultra-wide lens for crop sensor dSLRs, I posted a mini review of the Rokinon (or Samyang) 8mm fisheye lens.

<p>http://wildwestluxurytours.com/Blog/2012_pages/ABQ_and_Rokinon_8_mm.html</p>

<p>The lens combo I suggest is not on your list:<br>

Canon 18-135. Light, sharp, great range.<br>

Canon 100-400. Others have already raved about it.<br>

Have fun!</p>

<p>I will research the Panasonic system some more, but at this point in time I am hesitant to buy into it because:<br>

- Canon has been amazing to me over the last ~13 years or so. My gear never limits me in what I want to accomplish. It's fast, reliable, and provides amazing photos. I am just not sure how well the handling and photo quality will be with Panasonic (I will look into it though). The fact that someone as respectable as Brian uses the system gives me hope.<br>

- As I pointed out in my first reply, switching to Panasonic will only save me 300 grams, which is not worth the risk for me. I guess I was hoping for a more dramatic weight reduction (in half).<br>

Thanks Walt for the link. Pretty exciting news.</p>

<p>I just did a weight comparison between Canon and Panasonic. Here it is:<br>

Panasonic GH2, 7-14, and 14-140 lenses: 1200g (14-280 mm equivalent)<br>

Canon T2i, 10-22, 18-200 lenses: 1520g (16-300 mm equivalent)<br>

I guess I thought that the micro 4/3 system offered significantly greater weight advantages, so I am a little disappointed.</p>

<p>I have been using a Canon digital Rebel (currently T2i) with 10-22 and 28-135. I love the quality of the photos I get with both lenses at all focal lengths. However, I often feel that the system is too big and heavy, and wish that Canon would make a system like micro 4/3. So here is my wish list:<br>

1. The body: something smallish, like one of the Panasonic micro 4/3 cameras with no mirror. Sensor size similar to 4/3 to allow for smaller lenses. About 15 MP.<br>

2. Wide angle lens: 16-XX mm equivalent (f3.5-5.6 is fine).<br>

3. Telephoto: XX-200 mm equivalent (f3.5-5.6 is fine as well).<br>

All this for less than $2,000, and very small and light. Do you think that Canon will make such a system? Would you buy it?</p>

<p>What time a year?<br>

There are hundreds of miles of 4x4 roads surrounding Breckenridge. If I were you, I'd get a 4wheeling book and rent a 4x4. You can spend weeks driving up the roads and hiking to the peaks and ridges for some amazing views. This page should give you some ideas.<br>

http://www.wildwestgallery.com/blog/2010/07Brecken.htm</p>

<p>I just wrote a tutorial on this. See here:<br>

http://www.wildwestgallery.com/blog/Monitor.htm</p>

<p>I have spent the last 2-3 months setting up my darkroom so that my prints look the way I see them on my monitor (I order prints through online services). I finally managed to do that, and wrote up a quick tutorial on how to do the same thing.<br>

I hope this helps someone, as I was looking for this kind of tutorial (without using technical terms) earlier, but could not find one.<br>

Here is the link:<br>

http://www.wildwestgallery.com/blog/Monitor.htm</p>

<p>Actually, I made a slight mistake.<br>

The photo I linked above was taken from N Virginia St, just north of the UofU campus. The address I posted above gives you the same mountain views, but the foreground will be filled with downtown.</p>

<p>Bryce can be extremely cold in February. It is also dangerous to hike, because of ice.<br>

I would suggest either Zion or Capitol Reef (if highway 12 is open over Boulder Mtn).</p>

<p>I would go here:<br>

N Churchill Dr, 84103<br>

which allows you to shoot this:<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/3167427</p>

<p>If you can drive 2 hours one way, I would recommend:<br>

- Alpine Loop on Mt. Timpanogos (south of town)<br>

- Bonneville salt flats (west of town)<br>

- Uinta highway,if open (east of town)</p>

 

<p>I also recommend the slow discharge batteries. They work great in my flashes. Here is more info:</p>

<p>http://www.wildwestgallery.com/blog/batteries.htm</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have never sat in a 207, just seen a lot of them at airports (like Page). I suspect that the last seat will offer views on both sides, although if the person next to you is friendly, you can shoot on both sides from any other seat, just not as easily.<br>

One more thing. I suggest you wear a dark (black) towel/apron/shirt/skirt (anything) over your head and camera, so that you minimize or eliminate the reflections.</p>

<p>That plane looks to me like a Cessna 207, with seating for 2+2+2+1. I would try to be in the last row by myself if I were you.<br>

Unless the company has special permits (which I doubt), they have to always be at least 2,000 ft above the rim. You are probably going to need all your lenses. While crossing the canyon, you will most likely need the 16-35 to get that wide angle of view down the canyon. If you want to isolate a subject, you'll need one of the other lenses, which you can change to easily.<br>

Here is what I do: I always use ISO 400 and f5.6 (with my 10-22) or f8 (with my 28-135), and hope to shoot at least at 1/250 sec. I shoot short bursts (3-5) for each composition, and almost always come out with a crisp shot. The plexiglass has never been a problem for me, since it's out of focus. However, the reflections off it can be a problem. Here are some photos from one of my flights:<br>

http://www.wildwestgallery.com/blog/2008/04flight.htm<br>

Please post your photos when you get back. I will be flying in our Cessna 182 the weekend of 13/14 June, so it will be nice to see your photos before I go.</p>

 

<p>A few months ago I asked for help with my 28-135 lemon lens. It had been fixed three times by Canon, but the problem reappeared each time. I spoke with the Canon Customer Service and they only offered to keep repairing it indefinitely. I sent an e-mail explaining the situation and asked them to escalate the issue past the service people. To cut the long story short, Canon sent me a brand new 28-135 lens with a 1 year warranty, and pre-paid for the return of the faulty lens. I just wanted to share the story hoping it may help someone in the future.</p>

<p>I think that Brad's response is one of the most truthful and useful answers I have read on these forums in recent times. I agree 100 % with him.</p>

<p>I have not contacted the other Canon people yet. I was looking for an advice here first.<br>

I bought the lens from Amazon in November 2007, so they have nothing to do with it.</p>

<p>Hi all.<br>

I have owned a Canon 28-135 lens since November 2007. In both June and November this year, I sent the lens to Canon (Irvine) for the same problem (no focus lock at 28mm setting). Now, the lens started exhibiting the exact same problem again. I contacted the Canon Care Center and asked if it was possible to get a replacement lens, since mine broke down 3 times with the same problem. They said they could not do that, and recommended I contact either the Canon Factory Service Center (by phone) or the Canon Customer Relations Department (by snail mail). They also offered me a pre-paid shipping label to send my lens again for repair.<br>

My question is: has anyone been in a situation like this? Any recommendations for a course of action? I would really like Canon to replace my lens (I love it), but how do I achieve that?<br>

Thanks in advance.</p>

<p>David, I have been using the same technique you describe as my main blending method. One difficulty I encounter is when I have sharp edges, like dark rocks against bright sky in your example. This method produces nice sky, but the rock edge is very dark, then transitions to bright some distance away. If there was a way to brighten the rock right up to the edge, that would then look natural. I know it's possible, as many photographers do it (especially Marc Adamus), but I don't know how to do it.</p>

<p>Thanks for the efforts.</p>

As far as I know, D60 does not allow exposure bracketing (please check though), which is sometimes essential for capturing a photo. I would choose the XSi for that reason only.

I researched this a year ago, and decided to buy 2 batteries for my XTi from an ebay seller called orphanbiker. The batteries have performed as well, if not better than the original.

Here are my recommendations:

 

http://www.wildwestgallery.com/blog/batteries.htm

Thanks everyone so far. I should have probably added to my original question that number one reason I would get a new LCD is to be able to prepare a photo for printing, such that the print will look exactly the same as on the monitor (I am able to do that with my current CRT, but it's dying).

 

Ziggy, I am curious: if you order a print from an sRGB printer, does it look the way it looks on your Eizo or the other LCDs that you like less? If the print does not look as good as on the Eizo, then how do you prepare a photo for an accurate print?

 

Thanks again. I am learning a lot here.