The official Random Discussion For TPBM Photo's and Photographers Thread (1)

Cat, congrats on the new lens. It has been that going to the gym stuff that lets you heft that baby around with no problem. Well, that and all the swings you have taken with that fish!!!

cfpackerfan wrote in post #3399828
I finally got the 70-200 2.8 IS. I'd been saving up for one of the 70-200 lenses, hadn't decided on which one. Then I just couldn't pass up the Canon rebate and the BH code discount, so I went ahead and bit.
I'd never even seen one in real life before, let alone held one.
I was surprised at 2 things:
First... it's not white. It's a purty off white creamy color.
Second... its not as heavy as I was expecting. I'd worked myself up a bit over that I guess.

Not heavy? I have the 2.8 non-IS and when I use Aussieskier's 70-200 f/4 I am truly shocked at the weight difference! I am really tempted to sell the 2.8 non-IS and buy a f/4 IS....

Or what the heck, maybe sell the 2.8 and buy the 2.8 IS...

cfpackerfan wrote in post #3399828
I finally got the 70-200 2.8 IS. I'd been saving up for one of the 70-200 lenses, hadn't decided on which one. Then I just couldn't pass up the Canon rebate and the BH code discount, so I went ahead and bit.
I'd never even seen one in real life before, let alone held one.
I was surprised at 2 things:
First... it's not white. It's a purty off white creamy color.
Second... its not as heavy as I was expecting. I'd worked myself up a bit over that I guess.

Very cool.. I'm jealous!! I was actually pretty pleased with the lenses I had on the trip, they did nicely. I only found myself longing for more reach but did ok with what I had. I would like something even longer than 200mm but not sure there is anything out there that does a good job?

Theague, I am pondering buying a 100-400 to get reach. I've heard good and bad about it, so I'm still undecided. I guess they are good, but lots of people get bad copies.

Fly by catch-up here

thomascanty wrote in post #3396560
This one could maybe use a trim,

Cute cows, all, here is one as long as we are sharing:

chemicalbro wrote in post #3396888
heres a few of the more interesting things from yesterdays visit to the museums ...i took literally hundreds of shots
i'll post some more interesting trinkets and stuff later

All very interesting, Alan. Looks like a very cool place(s) to go.

thomascanty wrote in post #3396885
The executive washroom looks nice!

Congrats, Lonnie.

Athena wrote in post #3397087
He was difficult to photograph, as he kept moving about. I think he was scared of us.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

Double AWWWWWWWWWWwwwwwwwwwww​ww

theague wrote in post #3398765
HIYEEE!!!!!

Welcome back Theague, looking forward to hearing and seeing your adventures.

Permagrin wrote in post #3398949
just a quick stop in to say that Puddle won first prize in the tulip photo contest we all entered.

Congratulations, Dan.

cfpackerfan wrote in post #3399828
I finally got the 70-200 2.8 IS.

Good for you Cat. Looking forward to seeing you putting it through the paces.

Everyone else nice to see familiar and new avi's.

Best pack up and go, now. Catch you all later

cylentka wrote in post #3399881
Theague, I am pondering buying a 100-400 to get reach. I've heard good and bad about it, so I'm still undecided. I guess they are good, but lots of people get bad copies.

Saw one this weekend, it intriqued me needless to say. The photographer wasn't much for sharing information though.

Nice seeing ya for a bit, Becky! Cute cow. Have fun!

is the 100-400 a canon? is it a big beast?

My friend in Scotland had a 70-300 Tamron. he said it isn't the best but does the job he wants it to do. He got a few good shots of some birds while we were on our trip that I couldn't come close to getting with my lenses. I won't be buying anything for awhile though so I'm not even going to get going on thinking about my next purchase. LOL

Athena wrote in post #3394801
Note that several of us did not put a duck in our avatar - I stand proud with Permie.

Ya, screw the ducks and boxes, I don't do it either...

cfpackerfan wrote in post #3394813
Do you know the difference between an a$$ kisser and a brown noser?

Depth perception.

cfpackerfan wrote in post #3394859
Probably Joshua. I vote Wade gets to do it.

Maybe Wade did it. Ummm, I mean, ya, Wade gets to do it.
:p

Permagrin wrote in post #3394968
for flirting with TD and for putting a DUCK in his avatar...

Becky N wrote in post #3396450
Yep, cow clippers are used to get cattle "fit" for show. Dairy and Beef cattle are clipped differently.

Dairy the clipping is done on the lower legs as the hair gets quite long and messy around the hocks. Top line, or hair along the back is clipped, brushed up, and hair sprayed to show a straight top line. The tail is also clipped down to the long end hairs, these are washed and fluffed out. Though some farmers actually dock the tails cause they get so messy and can be a source of bacteria. The utters are also clipped. With dairy cattle this is there most endearing factor and needs to be shown off during judging.

Beef cattle I don't know the clipping standards for them. I do know their hair is actually encouraged to grow. If you go to a fair the beef cattle will have huge fans running on them to keep them cool so their hair grows and does not shed.

thomascanty wrote in post #3396460
I wish I could access my own damn web site from work. I want to look at my cow pictures!

thomascanty wrote in post #3396496
Wouldn't you like to know...

BearLeeAlive wrote in post #3396500
Thanks Deb.
I just have that 'nasty' bug this morning, today is likely one of those fish slap kinda days for me.

And not one yet

thomascanty wrote in post #3396501
I think Permie has been punished enough. I'm changing my avatar back now.

Good, I was sick of all the *amn *ucks

chemicalbro wrote in post #3396905
the building itself (kelvingrove gallery) is beautiful in its own right... (here's a small section of the main hall)

Impressive...

chemicalbro wrote in post #3398212
um yeah im actually from mars tho.

BearLeeAlive wrote in post #3398501
But, if you don't do stuff like that to push it a bit, you will take forever to heal. Glad to hear it is getting better.

I agree, just know your limits, hope you're feeling better, great shots you've been posting lately. ( This is for Alan) lol.

theague wrote in post #3398733
Guess who's BACK!!

Theague, glad to see you made it back in one piece. You should get a free hosting online site and just give out the address instead of burning lots of cd's. It's much faster too.

Permagrin wrote in post #3398949
just a quick stop in to say that Puddle won first prize in the tulip photo contest we all entered.

this was the entry (he won a p&s)

Great shot Puds...

cfpackerfan wrote in post #3399386
Ok...the abridged version:

Chandler popped in and wanted to know about all the ducks. He laughed.

I posted several pics of Lehman Caves. Shame you missed them.

TD used Athena's pic as his avatar for awhile. Puds flirted with TD/Athena and got a well deserved thwack from Permie.

Curt posted a pic of Becky's updo, said something about cow clippers, and offered to cut Jims hair.

We got a cow clipper lesson from Becky.

Crissa posted pics of her dad and the boys. Severe PP work on a smiling Tommy.

I posted a duck shot and encouraged everyone to look at the EXIF. No one did.

Lonnie got the keys to the Executive washroom. I advised him not to use the little decorative soaps.

Deb drank battery acid this morning because she was out of coffee.

Alan posted museum shots. The harpie was awesome.

Athena posted a baby elephant. He was fuzzy and adorable.

Puds won a contest.

Theague is home, but is now going to spend money on whiskey instead of photography. Shame.

Impressive...

cfpackerfan wrote in post #3399458
Thanks. The caves were AWESOME. Absolutely gorgeous. The photos don't do them justice at all.

THe EXIF on my duck photo wasn't unusual...just new.

Very cool photos of the caves, did you do any macro's at the caves? Where's your duck/box pic, got a link?

G'mae everyone, that took alot out of me, whew...

cfpackerfan wrote in post #3399814
Don't be jealous, James. Give Delta a call, and you can be here in time for lunch tomorrow. I'll let you play with it.

Wooooo HOOOOOO. <note to title fairy ^^^^^^^^^)

cylentka wrote in post #3399881
Theague, I am pondering buying a 100-400 to get reach. I've heard good and bad about it, so I'm still undecided. I guess they are good, but lots of people get bad copies.

that is what I am wanting next. The reach will be good for MSports.

theague wrote in post #3399970
is the 100-400 a canon? is it a big beast?

Yes, Canon. It looks huge in photos at the most extended position. If I remember right. I keep trying to forget about it until after I get back from vacation so I don't spend vacation money on it.

cylentka wrote in post #3400024
Yes, Canon. It looks huge in photos at the most extended position. If I remember right. I keep trying to forget about it until after I get back from vacation so I don't spend vacation money on it.

It might look big, but it is very lightweight!

Permagrin wrote in post #3398949
just a quick stop in to say that Puddle won first prize in the tulip photo contest we all entered.

this was the entry (he won a p&s)

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

we're still not sure who's won grand prize and the other places (so rrtp is waiting on pins&needles for the results for the BB's and TD)

How exciting! Congrats Dan *has a moment of smugness knowing she cans say; I KNOW that guy*

Jamie Holladay wrote in post #3399770
<jamie is jealous of CATHY's new toy>

So is Terri, but only in the most excited happy way WooHoo Cat!


Welcome home Theague, can't wait to see your stuff. And Steve gave good advice, set up a Photobucket account. I use them, it's easy-peasy

Just zipping in and out...I'll catch up again sometime tomorrow. *sigh*

theague wrote in post #3399871
I would like something even longer than 200mm but not sure there is anything out there that does a good job?

One more vote for the Canon 100-400.

theague wrote in post #3399970
is the 100-400 a canon? is it a big beast?

It is very light for the zoom power it has. I know one lady who bought the 300 f2.8 IS but finds she uses the 100-400 more because it is so easy to use, this is a big factor with it, it's ease of use. I really like mine a lot, you do need to have good available light for it to perform, but when it does I don't believe there is a better bang for the buck for what it does. But yes, I do still pine for a real nice 300-500 prime....Some day.

Jamie Holladay wrote in post #3399992
Wooooo HOOOOOO. <note to title fairy ^^^^^^^^^)

Good eye mate, that would be soooooooooooo great.

webcrawlur wrote in post #3399979
Maybe Wade did it.

The thought never crossed my mind.

Besides, Wade has his own notebook computer so he's never on the kids puter. *wondering if I should use my newfound knowledge of temp internet files, to scan Wade's laptop. Hmmmmm*

Here.
But it really does suck. I knew that I was going to use one of those duck shots to announce the news, so I was taking all the shots at 2.8 and 200mm so the EXIF would be the clue. Therefore, they are not great. I promise better shots later.

Jamie Holladay wrote in post #3399992
Wooooo HOOOOOO. <note to title fairy ^^^^^^^^^)

Pppfffffffffffttttt!!!​!

BearLeeAlive wrote in post #3400112
Good eye mate, that would be soooooooooooo great.

Do NOT encourage the peanut gallery, Jim!