GKPE: General Ramblings thread

what a little sh!t ... lol... glad you rescued it..

FlyingPete wrote in post #3933498
Well interesting day, 20D and 70-200 almost bought it

Took the family to the Botanic gardens for a run around and some family photos. Whilst extracting our youngest from the tunnel at the potters garden a kid grabbed my 20D with 70-200 f/2.8 attached and ran off with it dragging it along my the lens hood! I quickly took chase and he dropped it on the concrete and ran off

Seems to all be OK, the lens hood took all the damage, a few scratches on it and a big gouge out of the end, found his parents, got their number in case anything is actually broken

What the hell is with these sort of kids? How old? I'd be getting it fully serviced and charging the parents.

lance v wrote in post #3933130
well nz shrimper iv decided i need a job!? lol

i really like the look of the 85L but $3000 is alot

24-70 mite b nice but i mite do a poll and a show me ur pics thing lol

Ask the lads over at G&N you will find threads on it 75% use 24-70. The 85L is very specilied. For 95% of mine I used the 70-200F2.8

Remember with "woman" photography longer is better as it makes them look better. Closer you get the more the body is distorted.

^ i find that happens with beer too..the more i have the better they look..

Nzshrimper wrote in post #3933732
^ i find that happens with beer too..the more i have the better they look..

LOL. Yes but what a shock you get when you wake up roll over and go

Lance
https://photography-on-the.net …ghlight=24-70+F2.8&page=2

Lance dont over look the Sigma 24-70 F2.8 EX just as sharp as the canon

cheers limiss and weka.

would a 24-70 make a good walk around sort of lens as well for say a holiday in south africa?? or newhere for that matter

FlyingPete wrote in post #3933498
Well interesting day, 20D and 70-200 almost bought it

Took the family to the Botanic gardens for a run around and some family photos. Whilst extracting our youngest from the tunnel at the potters garden a kid grabbed my 20D with 70-200 f/2.8 attached and ran off with it dragging it along my the lens hood! I quickly took chase and he dropped it on the concrete and ran off

Seems to all be OK, the lens hood took all the damage, a few scratches on it and a big gouge out of the end, found his parents, got their number in case anything is actually broken

Wow..that really sucks. How old was this "kid"?

holly hell. what makes the sima so much cheaper than the canon?

P&V
Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8 USM L$2,267.19
Sigma AF24-70mm f2.8 EX DF Asph$845.00Sigma AF24-70mm f3.5-5.6 Asph HF$339.00

and what is EX? and DF? and Asph?

FlyingPete wrote in post #3933498
Well interesting day, 20D and 70-200 almost bought it

Took the family to the Botanic gardens for a run around and some family photos. Whilst extracting our youngest from the tunnel at the potters garden a kid grabbed my 20D with 70-200 f/2.8 attached and ran off with it dragging it along my the lens hood! I quickly took chase and he dropped it on the concrete and ran off

Seems to all be OK, the lens hood took all the damage, a few scratches on it and a big gouge out of the end, found his parents, got their number in case anything is actually broken

that just bad luck pete, lets hope the parents where understanding and didn't give out wrong information.

Glenn Wolsey wrote in post #3933770
Wow..that really sucks. How old was this "kid"?

Around 6 or 7 years.

theflyingkiwi wrote in post #3933797
that just bad luck pete, lets hope the parents where understanding and didn't give out wrong information.

He went a little pale when I told him the camera was worth around $4000!

lance v wrote in post #3933779
holly hell. what makes the sima so much cheaper than the canon?

P&V
Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8 USM L$2,267.19
Sigma AF24-70mm f2.8 EX DF Asph$845.00Sigma AF24-70mm f3.5-5.6 Asph HF$339.00

and what is EX? and DF? and Asph?

EX is Sigma's equivalent of Canon's L (which is not to say the quality is always as good).
Asph = aspherical

DG were lenses made for digital, DF. . not sure.

The reason sigma's cheaper? You get what you pay for, and they can't be serviced in NZ. We had a major bad run with 2 different brand new sigma EX 24-70s, both causing camera lockups (20d), and majorly front (or was it back.. i forget) focussing. In the end we shelled out the extra for a 17-55 IS. Definitely in a different class. I wouldn't recommend the siggy 24-70... not only is it prone to focussing issues, it's noisy and slow to focus, and requires you to release a clutch to swap from manual to auto focus.

lance v wrote in post #3933765
cheers limiss and weka.

would a 24-70 make a good walk around sort of lens as well for say a holiday in south africa?? or newhere for that matter

lance v wrote in post #3933779
holly hell. what makes the sima so much cheaper than the canon?

P&V
Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8 USM L$2,267.19
Sigma AF24-70mm f2.8 EX DF Asph$845.00Sigma AF24-70mm f3.5-5.6 Asph HF$339.00

and what is EX? and DF? and Asph?

Ok in a nutshell EX is there top lens. They are not weather sealed unlike the Canon. Auto focus is noisy and takes a 82mm filter. IQ they are about the same.
(I had a great copy)
On a 1.6 crop it would be fine for walk around.

Get the $900 one not the cheap one.Oh the 24-70Sigma is ok on Full Frame cameras as well

weka2000 wrote in post #3932235
Yes Sandra and I are not your normal couple. Im better at the house management and she earns the big $$$

I e-mailed Geoff Ross to comment on my website.

1) Images over sharpended
2) To much empty space in my landscapes

He is about to release another book on NZ landscapes
http://www.geoffrossph​otography.com/

He has now moved to medium format digital.
Might also flick off a e-mail to Craig Potten and David Hall.
I would rather the best tell me they are crap than get "thats nice" comment.

That's good that you're taking another approach with seeking advice from these pros. Let me just say, your images are great, and definitely some of them would be book worthy. Oversharpened or not, that's only for web usage, and making them pop - everyone on the forum including myself does that, if you don't you'll get comments like ooo that's a bit soft - but they'd really have to see 100% size to comment accurately, or go back to using a CRT.
The 1D uses algorithms which sharpen even the RAW image - I'm not sure if I even like it, as at 100%, it's almost oversharpened. I have yet to print an image, but will print some in a couple of weeks - once I get a monster pay cheque.
I think I could generate a few family portraits/head shots if I showed a few good ones - a bit of extra cash can't hurt. Especially when it's pounds (££)

FlyingPete wrote in post #3933498
Well interesting day, 20D and 70-200 almost bought it

Took the family to the Botanic gardens for a run around and some family photos. Whilst extracting our youngest from the tunnel at the potters garden a kid grabbed my 20D with 70-200 f/2.8 attached and ran off with it dragging it along my the lens hood! I quickly took chase and he dropped it on the concrete and ran off

Seems to all be OK, the lens hood took all the damage, a few scratches on it and a big gouge out of the end, found his parents, got their number in case anything is actually broken

What the heck. Where's his parents. One reason why I keep my hand firmly on my body/best lens all the time - sometimes I'm bad for putting my bag down, but always standing on my straps to avoid a quick run off when I'm not looking. Had many "lookers" in London streets, not sure if they're genuinely interested in my photography, or would to make a quick few pounds.

Many people, with their strong Londoner accent, "how much dat wurth?" - without thinking when I was new here, ohh body is £3000. I quickly changed my approach to be it's practically worthless, or say it's some old big format, and I'm looking at upgrading to something compact and more convenient

FlyingPete wrote in post #3933837
Around 6 or 7 years.

He went a little pale when I told him the camera was worth around $4000!

Unfortunately if you laid a finger on him, or even grabbed him on the shouler, you'd be nicked in this world

lance v wrote in post #3933765
would a 24-70 make a good walk around sort of lens as well for say a holiday in south africa?? or newhere for that matter

My 24-70L doesn't come off the camera. Only for the 50-500 or the 15-30 or the ...The colours and quality are superb. I had a 28-135 for my 10D and the L is so much better.

cheers weka and momenz. hmm that bad storys made me think twice about it lol