-= T2i / 550D users UNITE! (3) =-

Nice Killer, I think I can see you in one of her eyes....

white venom wrote in post #13507611
heres some Christmas related HDR shots to add

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …ypphotography/6​445028253/
smallXmasTree by aspectls, on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …ypphotography/6​471245013/
TravisXmasTree4 by aspectls, on Flickr

Nice shots they look great.

Shaisgs wrote in post #13508056
Today I've officially become a proud owner of a Canon 300mm F/4L IS lens

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

Hi there great shots and congrats on your new lens. Can you share a thing or two made you decide for that lens?

trulie98 wrote in post #13508444
Wow, Peter, the ultimate compliment. Thanks man. I do have a website where these images can be purchased listed in my signature. I haven't sold much yet, but it is there.

No prob I really like very nice landscape I love the golden foreground and yeah we will check your website.

trulie98 wrote in post #13508446
I like it Peter!

Thanks.

KILLERCLOWN wrote in post #13508478
Looks awesome peter

Thanks kc

trulie98 wrote in post #13508526
Nice HDR's Peter and White Venom. Have you guys ever tried or used Oloneo? I've been using it for my HDR work and I quite like it. I've used Photomatix before too.

I will check that out Troy and thank you.

T2i4me wrote in post #13508552
Interesting look Peter, kind of looks like a painting. Sure looks different with that uniform lighting look.

He he he I followed instructions and setting of 1 dude in photoshop/YouTube.
Thanks t2i

Wide Boy wrote in post #13508657
Nice Killer, I think I can see you in one of her eyes....

Dam, now you know i'm bald
Thanks.........

KILLERCLOWN wrote in post #13508652
Been busy with hospital trips for the last few months, camera is now a stranger.
Snapped these of our pet cat Ziggy with the 18-55 kit lens, boy I'm missing the outdoors

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Ziggy 1 by T!me0ut, on Flickr

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Ziggy 2 by T!me0ut, on Flickr

Ziggy is a cute bundle of fur...great job keeping clarity in the eyes despite some lower light. I hear you, cabin fever and darker early here in the midwest is going to set in soon if I don't get out!

KILLERCLOWN wrote in post #13508696
Dam, now you know i'm bald
Thanks.........

hahahahahahaaa hahahaha.. im joining ya...

i had a pic of putting an xmas tree into a trailer.. so i used the clone tool to get rid of my bald spot. wife said.. did you save the original.. i looked at her and said..

What original? ? ?

trulie98 wrote in post #13508526
Nice HDR's Peter and White Venom. Have you guys ever tried or used Oloneo? I've been using it for my HDR work and I quite like it. I've used Photomatix before too.

I have never used Oloneo, I will have to check it out

bobobird wrote in post #13507018

stunning!

Thanks everyone for the kind words, I'll definitely be out taking photos more often now!

Peter- I've owned the Canon 55-250mm lens since March. It has been my primary zoom lens so far. Since I take many bird and nature photos I always felt the need for more reach. Recently I purchased the 18-200mm lens for convenience. Since the range was pretty similar to the 55-250mm I decided it was time to upgrade the long range. After lots of debating between the 400 f5.6L, 100-400mm IS and the 300mm f4L I decided the latter was the way to go. Firstly, it was the cheapest I could find second hand. Secondly, the 400 f5.6L's focus distance is 3 meters which is too far for me. The 300 f4L is good up to 1.5 meters which makes it great for macro work as well. Thirdly, in the future I can get a 1.4X TC and get more reach for little loss in quality. I heard too many mixed reviews of the 100-400 so skipped on that one. So far I have no regrets

TeleFragger wrote in post #13508716
hahahahahahaaa hahahaha.. im joining ya...

i had a pic of putting an xmas tree into a trailer.. so i used the clone tool to get rid of my bald spot. wife said.. did you save the original.. i looked at her and said..

What original? ? ?

Like your style

Shaisgs wrote in post #13508774
Thanks everyone for the kind words, I'll definitely be out taking photos more often now!

Peter- I've owned the Canon 55-250mm lens since March. It has been my primary zoom lens so far. Since I take many bird and nature photos I always felt the need for more reach. Recently I purchased the 18-200mm lens for convenience. Since the range was pretty similar to the 55-250mm I decided it was time to upgrade the long range. After lots of debating between the 400 f5.6L, 100-400mm IS and the 300mm f4L I decided the latter was the way to go. Firstly, it was the cheapest I could find second hand. Secondly, the 400 f5.6L's focus distance is 3 meters which is too far for me. The 300 f4L is good up to 1.5 meters which makes it great for macro work as well. Thirdly, in the future I can get a 1.4X TC and get more reach for little loss in quality. I heard too many mixed reviews of the 100-400 so skipped on that one. So far I have no regrets

Thanks shaisgs me too I am looking for an extra reach I have tconverter for my 70-200 f4l but it is not autofocus if I get the 1.4x tc But I think I will just use the money from that to add to my new lens I am hoping I could it before the end of the year the 100-400mm I know there are a lot mixed reviews specially they said about being dust pump machine that occurs after owning it for two yrs or less but we will see I may end up to anything once I have the cash on hand. Thanks shaisgs for sharing.


At killerclown great shot on your cat. Now we know you are bald he he he. Hey nothing wrong with.

why dont you guys look at the bigma??? sigma 150-500.. got plenty of reach... if you guys are mainly looking for birds and the sort... i am having a tough time as the 55-250mm runs tight @55mm when our soccer kids are near us.. then @250 it is pretty good.. but they dont make a 55-25L as all i see is starting in the 70mm range and falling at the 200mm range.. grrrrr

Peter2516 wrote in post #13509027
Thanks shaisgs me too I am looking for an extra reach I have tconverter for my 70-200 f4l but it is not autofocus if I get the 1.4x tc But I think I will just use the money from that to add to my new lens I am hoping I could it before the end of the year the 100-400mm I know there are a lot mixed reviews specially they said about being dust pump machine that occurs after owning it for two yrs or less but we will see I may end up to anything once I have the cash on hand. Thanks shaisgs for sharing.


At killerclown great shot on your cat. Now we know you are bald he he he. Hey nothing wrong with.

Peter I think the "dust pump" moniker is not warranted. I saw a rental 100-400 at a local camera shop, the date code indicated it was 5 years old and they rent it out a lot. I looked at it and outside of a lot of external wear marks the glass inside was dust free. The shop owner said he has not experienced this problem and the lens had not been serviced. Maybe it's an issue with people who live in dry dusty environments.....that would not be Washington. What I like about the 100-400 when set in the 100mm position it's fairly short and easy to carry in a bag.

T2i4me wrote in post #13509351
Peter I think the "dust pump" moniker is not warranted. I saw a rental 100-400 at a local camera shop, the date code indicated it was 5 years old and they rent it out a lot. I looked at it and outside of a lot of external wear marks the glass inside was dust free. The shop owner said he has not experienced this problem and the lens had not been serviced. Maybe it's an issue with people who live in dry dusty environments.....that would not be Washington. What I like about the 100-400 when set in the 100mm position it's fairly short and easy to carry in a bag.

I hear yah.....that thing don't worry me. The sigma 150-500mm is not bad of a choice but I like the look of the white lens and the red ring around it. he he he. Plus there is something L gives he he he.

Peter2516 wrote in post #13509509
I hear yah.....that thing don't worry me. The sigma 150-500mm is not bad of a choice but I like the look of the white lens and the red ring around it. he he he. Plus there is something L gives he he he.

i hear ya.. i know someone that picked one up.. and from the VET (philly eagles old stadium) he got to use it and you could see into the QB's helmet !!!!! and it was clear..
he also showed me a macro shot of 150-500 and a TC !!!!!!
he loves it and you can get one for $900 and gain 100mm over the 100-400... he got his i believe for $350.. so he jumped on it..

just throwin it out there...

I was in the same exact dilemma, if to go for the Sigam 150-500mm or one of the canon L lenses.

I figured that it's either buy once nice, or buy twice. So far I have no regrets. I'll add a TC in the future and have the basic reach and flexibility I need.

TeleFragger wrote in post #13509173
why dont you guys look at the bigma??? sigma 150-500.. got plenty of reach... if you guys are mainly looking for birds and the sort... i am having a tough time as the 55-250mm runs tight @55mm when our soccer kids are near us.. then @250 it is pretty good.. but they dont make a 55-25L as all i see is starting in the 70mm range and falling at the 200mm range.. grrrrr

I considered that lens before buying the 100-400, but to be honest I'm not a big Sigma fan so it needed to really wow me to buy it. What I do recall the Sigma was quite a bit heavier, 63oz compared to 48, and jumps to F6.3 rather early in the range and the Canon is slow enough so did not want something worse. Cost wise about the same (if you buy the Canon used) but resale appears much better on the Canon. I figure if 400mm is not getting what I need then I need to walk closer! With the high megapixel bodies these days cropping does not sem to degrade the image much and it's far cheaper than buying focal length. Just my two cents.