GKPE 8, Yet more NZ ramblings from some flightless Kiwis.

RobDickinson wrote in post #18716470
Just played with the eos r. It's a damned fine camera.

But it's 2018 and it costs 4k so it pretty much should be.

Id buy one if I was looking, if I didn't have a 5d4 already. I might swap the 5d4 for one if I can. Might.

So a good upgrade from the 6D?

but I think that would be a yes

Yeah totally. Placed between 6d2 and 5d4 market wise.

Mark0159 wrote in post #18716445
Hey, lets not forget the new camera by Leica, the S3 and even tho there is no price that goes with it. that little red badge is going to suck all your cash.

https://petapixel.com …pixel-medium-format-dslr/

looks like we read the same website

well after the last month reading and watching youtube clips on landscape composition, post processing and other bits it will be interesting to see if my photography improves.
Have looked at all my photos and realise there is a rather large collection of snaps with a few lucky shots, I know its time to "compose" a photo if I'm to have any luck (skill) in improving.

And I got a new second-hand lens just now 24-105mk2 $950
No need for 100-400 at moment

weka2000 wrote in post #18718438
And I got a new second-hand lens just now 24-105mk2 $950
No need for 100-400 at moment

nicely done - I've got my 100-400 operational again (minus the barrel tightening mechanism) if you need to borrow it.

Good that you got it working again. Lat time I used that lens was when we went to the snow


I think I shot at 17mm way to much, the 24-105 was my 3rd most used lens and its a great walk around lens.
Part of me looking at my work I noticed I try to get everything into a shot most landscapes are 17mm

weka2000 wrote in post #18718438
And I got a new second-hand lens just now 24-105mk2 $950
No need for 100-400 at moment

To be honest that has taken me by surprise.

kiwichris wrote in post #18718455
To be honest that has taken me by surprise.

what that I made a decision and brought a lens

weka2000 wrote in post #18718458
what that I made a decision and brought a lens

No, the actual lens. I had the MK1 version and am not sure that the later MKII is in fact any better than the 1st IS version. I would have looked at what was the focal length most used that I like, and perhaps gone for a prime of that length.

Frankly I wanted to suggest that perhaps you invest in a nifty 50 on the full frame, and leave all the others at home for a while. That would make you think about every step you take and don't just shoot landscapes but do flowers, street, the duck ponds etc.

joeseph wrote in post #18718443
nicely done - I've got my 100-400 operational again (minus the barrel tightening mechanism) if you need to borrow it.

Isn't that a tad awkward to use now? Glad you made it useable though.

kiwichris wrote in post #18718473
No, the actual lens. I had the MK1 version and am not sure that the later MKII is in fact any better than the 1st IS version. I would have looked at what was the focal length most used that I like, and perhaps gone for a prime of that length.

Frankly I wanted to suggest that perhaps you invest in a nifty 50 on the full frame, and leave all the others at home for a while. That would make you think about every step you take and don't just shoot landscapes but do flowers, street, the duck ponds etc.

I have a sigma 50f1.4 never gets used. I found that going away that 17-40 to wide and 70-200 to long, all my filters are 77mm. The only prime that I looked at was 24mm Tilt and Shift. I don't need F2.8 glass so F4 is fine.


When I looked at focal lengths in my landscape data there was only the 17mm stand out focal length but the 17-40 and 24-105 lens were basically equal in usage with 70-200 third, motorsport was 300mm plus. Model photography 70-200 followed by 24-105.


I will get the 100-400 at some stage, interesting that sigma have just released 60-600 so will see what those reviews look like.


The key fact is I need to get out more

kiwichris wrote in post #18718475
Isn't that a tad awkward to use now? Glad you made it useable though.

It's not too bad - just need to keep a finger on the barrel so it doesn't move once you've got the length right, so to speak.
Will order another barrel part when funds permit.

weka2000 wrote in post #18718797
I have a sigma 50f1.4 never gets used. I found that going away that 17-40 to wide and 70-200 to long, all my filters are 77mm. The only prime that I looked at was 24mm Tilt and Shift. I don't need F2.8 glass so F4 is fine.

When I looked at focal lengths in my landscape data there was only the 17mm stand out focal length but the 17-40 and 24-105 lens were basically equal in usage with 70-200 third, motorsport was 300mm plus. Model photography 70-200 followed by 24-105.

I will get the 100-400 at some stage, interesting that sigma have just released 60-600 so will see what those reviews look like.

The key fact is I need to get out more

The reason I suggested the 50mm is that is the lens with closest outlook of the human eye (on full frame). So perhaps dp some exercises where you throw on the 50 f1:4 and do some landscapes. Don't worry too much about filters, you can fix stuff in the digital darkroom in camera raw.

The 1:4 will give you depth of field ranging from razor blade thin, to from here to eternity and in all honesty, that is one of the main creative tools you have in your box. So do a close up of the tree with a soft harbour background, or do the opposite, get the harbour in focus and a soft tree in the foreground to see how it all works, for example. That is why I work mainly in aperture priority

When you get home then you can play with crops and developing techniques in whatever software you use, even layers and HDR if you wish, to produce whatever it is that satisfys what you are trying to achieve.

When you have mastered landscapes on the 50mm you will then get great landscapes on the zooms. BTW the 50mm is a prime lens.

Went for a bit of a fly this morning....