What lens to use for Dante vs. Petkal Ducky Shootout ?

holland_patrick wrote in post #2099035
I but if you go to a place where you can feed the ducks it would work..

Well, it has worked in the past . Can not locate my 15 mm and 35 mm ducks on a short notice, but have two 85 mm shots here.....no problem at all.
The first one is 85L, the second is 85 f/1.8.

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

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

Dare I say - the 1.8 looks better

And you're right on the bokeh...I love a good creamy dreamy bokeh myself! However there are times, like posted above, that bokeh doesn't matter. It's all in the picture.

Mr. Clean wrote in post #2099213
Dare I say - the 1.8 looks better

And you're right on the bokeh...I love a good creamy dreamy bokeh myself! However there are times, like posted above, that bokeh doesn't matter. It's all in the picture.

I dare you to!!.... But I thought the same as well. I can imagine how hard it is to hit focus everytime though (especially on fast flying duckies ).........They are both nice shots.

Travis

We often fall victims to popular cliches when it comes to lens purpose "compartmentilizing". Thus, all of us head to the duck pond with that 300, 400 or 500 mm lens. However, it is often more profitable to use a shorter FL and compensate by ingenuity of approach and proximity.
As an example, I think Gary Fairhead's bird shots with his old 200 mm are at least as good as the ones he gets with the 400 mm these days.

I personally think my best birding lenses are 135L and 200 f/2.8, especially when it comes to in-flight shots. The 300 f/4 IS is pretty capable too.

Sorry for pontificating, could not help it.

I did find the 15mm swan shot. I wish I had my rubber boots on....then I would have gotten him good.

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

OMG, you are that crazy canadian duck guy (the one that has 1,000,000 pet ducks) that I saw on late night TV!!!!

Petkal wrote in post #2098648
Mark....you see, I am losing it. (or I have lost it ): yes, I meant the 24mm TS E.

The kit is inexpensive but the other two ain't.

Wow, your vision is that bad? Gues you are going to need a damn good focusing screen.

Petkal wrote in post #2098586
Dante will be using his new "neonate" EF 300 f/2.8L IS USM hopefully without a TC (?).
I have not decided yet which one to use miself, but there are three options:

(1) 24 TS E......most challenging for me because of the FL and my failing eyesight. Do not have a good focusing screen either. The advantage would be in some special effects the lens allows.

(2) EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM. No problem here except somewhat limited FL.

(3) EF-S 18-55 kit lens. A tough one, but the victory with it would be so sweet.

(Again, each one of us is allowed 3 duck shots in their final submission.)

Which lens would you use out of those three ?

None of the above. Take him out with a Quantaray or Promaster.

Lord_Malone wrote in post #2100716
None of the above. Take him out with a Quantaray or Promaster.

Lordy, Lordy......your "take-no-prisoners" training shows.
I don't wanna kill the boy, I just wanna maim him, make him limp, if you know what I'm saying.

Petkal wrote in post #2100784
Lordy, Lordy......your "take-no-prisoners" training shows.
I don't wanna kill the boy, I just wanna maim him, make him limp, if you know what I'm saying.

Well then. A good crack in the knee caps with a pipe wrench would do the trick.

I hope it's a 'blind' judging although I guess the focal length perspective would give it away...

EOSAddict wrote in post #2100845
I hope it's a 'blind' judging although I guess the focal length perspective would give it away...

Right.

Well an element of the vote will involve technical and so Bloke-eh comes into it. That blows away the kit as an option unless you want to take a chance on catching up points on the really worthwhile categories out of the three.

Originality and artistic merit you will kick his ass. He's a one trick kid/Duck DOF pony. Technical he will kick yours just because good glass hides a lot and he's practiced at Duck shooting. I would use the crummy EF-s IS wannabee L thing you have. As good as the kit but better bloke-eh

Anyway, whatever, I would weight the marks under each heading, as follows:

Techno 20%
Arty-farty 30%
Originality 50%

Reason being that anyone, even our mutually confused 'member' CC, can shoot a half decent 'technical' shot with good glass and a fat-ass buffer. But it takes a 'photographer' to shoot something worth actually looking at for more than a dismissive nano-second.

condyk wrote in post #2101408
Well an element of the vote will involve technical and so Bloke-eh comes into it. That blows away the kit as an option unless you want to take a chance on catching up points on the really worthwhile categories out of the three.

Originality and artistic merit you will kick his ass. He's a one trick kid/Duck DOF pony. Technical he will kick yours just because good glass hides a lot and he's practiced at Duck shooting. I would use the crummy EF-s IS wannabee L thing you have. As good as the kit but better bloke-eh

Anyway, whatever, I would weight the marks under each heading, as follows:

Techno 20%
Arty-farty 30%
Originality 50%

Reason being that anyone, even our mutually confused 'member' CC, can shoot a half decent 'technical' shot with good glass and a fat-ass buffer. But it takes a 'photographer' to shoot something worth actually looking at for more than a dismissive nano-second.

Thanx dude, let us see what the mods will say about the proposed rating scheme.

Pektal, you have to let me come shoot with you when you do decide to go whooping Dante with some duckie shots. I'de be willing to document the whole experience.

JaGWiRE wrote in post #2101573
Pektal, you have to let me come shoot with you when you do decide to go whooping Dante with some duckie shots. I'de be willing to document the whole experience.

Jag, that's an excellent idea !
You have to do something for me first:
Keep an eye on the duck population in the ponds of Richmond Hill....we need plenty and we need them hungry. So we ain't hitting the ponds before mid November.