[fluffybunny]

Montezuma’s on the left. Click the links.

You know, I didn’t even notice that about the sign until you brought it up. It was a very long short day.

By the way, I haven’t updated my contacts and friends page since setting it up. If your web address has changed or if you added your blog after I set it up please let me know. I like reciprocity.

I’ve got you in my links page at:
http://cinbody.zenfolio.com

[fluffybunny]

+1

[fluffybunny]

So is there a way to rescan the contest after is it archived and convert biblio-links to the now cached version? A kind of two step process I guess.

[fluffybunny]

+1

[fluffybunny]

+1

[fluffybunny]

Excellent. Looking forwards to what you have to say about both.

[fluffybunny]

Sounds like you got the perfect low key apprentice gig, congrats.

[fluffybunny]

The hiking solution still evades me. Closest I can figure is that there must be no single simple answer. Each hike will put different demands on your gear. I have considered some of the new “super zooms” (Tamron and Sigma) as a possibility but have not yet convinced myself to bite. My best guess with current gear is a long zoom and a wide zoom if I have never been on a particular trail.

The 17-50 has a pretty small minimum focus distance and while it is not a macro, it can do some good closeup work. I really like the old Tamron 300mm f2.8 manual I have for wildlife, but it really limits your choice of subjects. If I’m with people I wind up with a lot of head shot portraits from 100 yards. The 100-300 F4 Sigma is a better all around zoom but either one is a beast.

[fluffybunny]

Watch KEH and Canon’s refurb site.

[fluffybunny]

I have the early non-IS Tamron 17-50 2.8,.. It replaced the original 18-55 Canon 3.5-5.6 kit lens I had and was my first thoroughly researched lens. It is still my go to in that range. It even withstood me falling onto it while attached to my old 20D from a short cliff side.

I know someone who just went with the 15-85 but hasn’t had it long enough to offer feedback. Everything I’ve read leads me to believe it’s a good lens though.

As for lens changes, my next longer zoom is the Canon 70-200 F4 L. I really have not found that I miss the 20 mm focal length between the Tamron and the Canon. I guess for my shooting strategies it never presents a difficulty. I can say that the f2.8 is great to have in a zoom. The only prime I shoot regularly is a 300mm manual Tamron and I have several primes I can choose from. I go to them when lighting is truly weak, and with the 7D’s (even more so the 70D’s) ISO vs noise performance, low light is becoming less and less an issue. So really the only time I might ever need the f1.8 primes is for a razor thin DOF, and the F2.8 will still do most of what I need anyways.

My $0.02

[fluffybunny]

Sorry that you were exposed to that kind of dysfunction. Hoping that it all works out in the end. Especially for the kid.

[fluffybunny]

+1

[fluffybunny]

+1

[fluffybunny]

+1

[fluffybunny]

Phase detection vs contrast detection focusing. Should be better in low light and for video.

[Author]

Posts