6D Owners Unite! Discuss and post Photos! (2)

Tigerkn wrote in post #17084284
70-200 is not long at the SD zoo . I go with crop body + 2x extender. Nice photos Chad!

Haha I should have thrown the 70-200 on the M. Did you get my PM btw?

CJCMarquez wrote in post #17084394
Haha I should have thrown the 70-200 on the M. Did you get my PM btw?

How about you give me your 70-200 and then upgrade to something a little longer.

I do lots of portraits (as people could probably tell), location stuff, studio etc. Looking to upgrade my 85mm and am either looking at the 135mm f/2 L or a 70-200mm f/2.8 (mark 1, mark 2 is far too expensive)

Any opinions on which I should go for?

Took this one yesterday. I want to try even longer exposures using the mobile app. I'll hopefully try that out soon.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/omnY​8T

sancho1983 wrote in post #17084488
How about you give me your 70-200 and then upgrade to something a little longer.

I do lots of portraits (as people could probably tell), location stuff, studio etc. Looking to upgrade my 85mm and am either looking at the 135mm f/2 L or a 70-200mm f/2.8 (mark 1, mark 2 is far too expensive)

Any opinions on which I should go for?

Haha. I love the 70-200mm far too much. Maybe when I start grad school, I'll look into selling it.

Why not look into the Tammy or the Sigma equivalent? Mine is great.

Got your PM Chad. Thanks. Love my 70-200 as well.

sancho1983 wrote in post #17084488
How about you give me your 70-200 and then upgrade to something a little longer.

I do lots of portraits (as people could probably tell), location stuff, studio etc. Looking to upgrade my 85mm and am either looking at the 135mm f/2 L or a 70-200mm f/2.8 (mark 1, mark 2 is far too expensive)

Any opinions on which I should go for?

I have the 70-200 f/4 with IS and I find it fabulous for portraits.
If you do studio portraits, or even speedlight stuff, then I don't know that you need the 2.8 aperture. I find f/4 more than sufficient.
I'd be tempted to upgrade to 2.8 if I did a lot of natural low light stuff.
Also note the f/4 is a lot lighter and easier to carry around than the 2.8.

I prefer the zoom to a prime (135L, etc) because of the flexibility I get in framing the shot (distance from subject vs. subject framing, etc.)

Had some fun in the backyard last night with this prop.

Creepy doll.

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

I do mainly do stuff with speed lights, sometimes studio strobes, sometimes natural light. I suppose I'd like the flexibility of having f/2.8 if I need it. I like primes as every one I've had has been so much better than a zoom. My 85 is so much sharper (and lighter) than my 24-105.

I'll see if any deals pop up second hand. Really need to sell a couple I have kicking around also.

Second hand is best. I got my 70-200 f/4 with IS for about $700 if memory serves. Really good bang for the buck.

There's one on a website I use going for £800 ($1350)

We always get screwed over here...

Tigerkn wrote in post #17084288
Btw, I think the Canon 6D is a piece of junk. Somebody should get rid of it with good price to me and upgrade

Ok. 10 grand and you can have mine. BTW that's body only

A panorama with my 6D and the 70-200 f/4 L IS.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/oD5E​8w

Sunrise photo shoot at Cavanaugh Flight Museum, Addison Texas

EOS 6D with EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
1/50 sec @ f/4.0, ISO 320

Fokker DR.1 Triplane (Replica), Sopwith Camel (Replica)
Cavanaugh Flight Museum, Addison Texas

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/omZP​Zq

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/omZv​Hs

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/oDsA​mh