-= T2i / 550D users UNITE! (2) =-

AnnieBananie wrote in post #12304955
Just a couple more from this afternoon. It's so hot out there that even the critters are hiding. Not a bird to be found, and just this one little lonesome dragonfly.

IMG NOTICE: [NOT AN IMAGE URL, NOT RENDERED INLINE]

What did you shoot the dragonfly with? Looks like you really got close.

Nice shot!

David

davidc502 wrote in post #12305428
What did you shoot the dragonfly with? Looks like you really got close.

Nice shot!

David

Thanks David. It's a big crop that makes him so big.

Here's the exif info:

Camera Maker: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS REBEL T2i
Lens: EF-S55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS
Image Date: 2011-04-27 17:10:43 -0400
Focal Length: 250.0mm
Focus Distance: 3.37m
Aperture: f/5.6
Exposure Time: 0.0003 s (1/4000)
ISO equiv: 1600
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Spot
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)
White Balance: Manual
Flash Fired: No (enforced)
Orientation: Normal
Color Space: Adobe RGB (1998)
GPS Coordinate: undefined, undefined
Photographer: Anne Rodkin
Copyright: 2011 Anne Rodkin

And this is what the actual photo looked like, right out of camera other than a resize.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

AnnieBananie wrote in post #12305485
Thanks David. It's a big crop that makes him so big.

Here's the exif info:

Camera Maker: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS REBEL T2i
Lens: EF-S55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS
Image Date: 2011-04-27 17:10:43 -0400
Focal Length: 250.0mm
Focus Distance: 3.37m
Aperture: f/5.6
Exposure Time: 0.0003 s (1/4000)
ISO equiv: 1600
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Spot
Exposure: aperture priority (semi-auto)
White Balance: Manual
Flash Fired: No (enforced)
Orientation: Normal
Color Space: Adobe RGB (1998)
GPS Coordinate: undefined, undefined
Photographer: Anne Rodkin
Copyright: 2011 Anne Rodkin

And this is what the actual photo looked like, right out of camera other than a resize.

I'm impressed with the I.Q. of the 55-250. You can actually see the hairs on this guys back and leggs which is pretty amazing when you think about it.

Were you still thinking (I'm assuming here) about getting the 100-400L ? Last I remember you rented a copy, but that was the last I heard about your experience other than some of the photos you posted.

I'm currious to hear your take on that lens; positives, negatives, what you liked and didn't like etc. I appoligize if you had already wrote a lot on the subject.

David

Just got my T2i in the mail from CLP.
I'm ecstatic.

davidc502 wrote in post #12305536
I'm impressed with the I.Q. of the 55-250. You can actually see the hairs on this guys back and leggs which is pretty amazing when you think about it.

Were you still thinking (I'm assuming here) about getting the 100-400L ? Last I remember you rented a copy, but that was the last I heard about your experience other than some of the photos you posted.

I'm currious to hear your take on that lens; positives, negatives, what you liked and didn't like etc. I appoligize if you had already wrote a lot on the subject.

David

I liked the lens, but believe it or not, except for the added range, I'm happier with the 55-250. I don't know what I'll wind up buying eventually (if anything), but for now, if I need longer, I'll just rent again. In fact, if finances allow, I will probably rent something to take along on my trip to Yellowstone and Grand Teton. I'd love to try the 500L IS. It's an expensive rental though. And of course, every time I even check the rental prices, I remind myself that I already have 500mm in my Bigma.

BlueCadet3 wrote in post #12305541
Just got my T2i in the mail from CLP.
I'm ecstatic.

Congratulations. You're going to love it. You'll probably wind up loving us too, because we're cute and adorable.......just not as cute and adorable as the T2i. What kind of lens or lenses will you be using?

AnnieBananie wrote in post #12305584
Congratulations. You're going to love it. You'll probably wind up loving us too, because we're cute and adorable.......just not as cute and adorable as the T2i. What kind of lens or lenses will you be using?

I just have the kit lens right now.
But I'm going to look into a nifty-fifty, probably a nifty-two-fifty, and eventually some L telephotos and medium ranged zooms. (24-70L, 17-40L, etc. I want a good CA lens for video.)

Oh! And either a Tokina 11-16, or Canon/Sigma 10-20.

Been absent from this thread for awhile. but have been trying out my new lens

nice squrrell.

RafaPolit wrote in post #12300762
There's another issue I wanted to quickly comment on:

Carmen, I disagree... I believe at this point Vectoria needs as much shutter speed as possible! I would even suggest she'd use ISO1600 or even 3200 if that helps getting faster shutter speeds. Of course opening to f4 or faster could help also, but would make focusing a challenge.

Now, you asked Vectoria if she had the IS on, and she answered she did, but she does not have IS on that fantastic 70-200 f2.8L so I'm sorry to tell you both that you weren't using IS Vectoria , you can't.

Rafa

I was unaware she did not have image stabilization on that lens. The point I was trying to make is that at 70mm ( the focal length she shot at ) a larger aperature would allow a faster shutter speed. If that is out of the question, then a higher ISO would have to do.

jccj58 wrote in post #12301608
I always thought a higher ISO would allow for a higher speed, but only if you have to use it. If you have plenty of light there's no reason to raise it. Try aperture priority and a low ISO, and let the camera select the shutter speed. If it isn't high enough, then bump up the ISO and you'll see your speed increase. If I'm doing it wrong someone please tell me!

ETA - I just realized someone said she has a constant 2.8 lens, so I guess that makes AV priority kinda useless....Is that correct?

John

John, you have it right. A constant 2.8 aperature simply means that an aperature of 2.8 is selectable regardless of focal length. This would not be the case for the kit lens which carries an aperature of f4.5, f5.6

Carmen

photograma wrote in post #12305694
Been absent from this thread for awhile. but have been trying out my new lens

It's working!

John

jccj58 wrote in post #12304466
Thanks Annie. After I thought about it some more I came to this same conclusion, but I had already set out to find some picture taking material.... But thanks for taking the time to answer the question.

John

Well, I'm glad you appreciated the answer, but I'm not Annie!

(at least, not as far as I know...)

UMbear wrote in post #12306089
Well, I'm glad you appreciated the answer, but I'm not Annie!

(at least, not as far as I know...)

I think you're probably right, but maybe you should look in the mirror just to be sure??

Another time lapse clip, planning on making a full short film of time lapse in LA

IMAGE LINK: http://vimeo.com/22965​762

AnnieBananie wrote in post #12304576
John, it looks like some sort of Warbler, but I can't seem to narrow it down to which type.

Found out on the bird forum it's a Prairie Warbler. Native to Florida and likes the thick mangroves.

John