A little sunrise color from the Hill Country (Vanderpool)

[MilesOfTexas]

I went down to the hill country area around Vanderpool last Saturday to see what I could find as the sun was beginning to rise.  I found this windmill with some great looking clouds behind it.  I really love this kind of shooting.  I just wish I could have got some of the hills in it, but I have a strong dislike for roads in my photos unless they add a uniqueness to them.

Composition for this was perfect until I cropped it for 16x20, which is my typical SOP, but it still looks ok.  I may mess with the cropping some more later on.  It isn't quite what I want at the moment.

[MilesOfTexas]

May I offer one too?

Wow, very nice QS! 

[MilesOfTexas]

I upgraded my Canon 70-200mm f/4L a couple of days ago to the 70-200mm f/2.8L and finally got around to taking a test shot this morning.  I had some focus issues with the f/4 and had it repaired by Canon, but this lens seems to have better sharpness, contrast and color.  I am very happy with it and can't wait to get out and use it.  This is just a shot of a tree in my yard.

I was also playing with exposure on this shot.  Metering called for 1/500th/sec at f/2.8, so to try and achieve middle tone on the trunk of the tree, I dropped the shutter speed to 1/250th/sec.  I really like the result.

[iCe]

I upgraded my Canon 70-200mm f/4L a couple of days ago to the 70-200mm f/2.8L and finally got around to taking a test shot this morning.  I had some focus issues with the f/4 and had it repaired by Canon, but this lens seems to have better sharpness, contrast and color.  I am very happy with it and can't wait to get out and use it.  This is just a shot of a tree in my yard.

I was also playing with exposure on this shot.  Metering called for 1/500th/sec at f/2.8, so to try and achieve middle tone on the trunk of the tree, I dropped the shutter speed to 1/250th/sec.  I really like the result.

Nice shots. Imho the 70-200 f2.8L is the best all around lens that Canon sells. I bought one for my 1N (film camera) back around 1990 and gave it to a kid struggling to put himself through A&M about 5 years ago. Last I heard he passed it on to a gal that was trying to break into wedding photography. I replaced it with the IS version a few years ago. I passed that one on to my daughter and now shoot the IS II version. It's always on one of the camera bodies...

[MilesOfTexas]

Nice shots. Imho the 70-200 f2.8L is the best all around lens that Canon sells. I bought one for my 1N (film camera) back around 1990 and gave it to a kid struggling to put himself through A&M about 5 years ago. Last I heard he passed it on to a gal that was trying to break into wedding photography. I replaced it with the IS version a few years ago. I passed that one on to my daughter and now shoot the IS II version. It's always on one of the camera bodies...

I can't agree more!  Until now my favorite has been the 24-70mm f/2.8L, but now I think I have two equally great lenses.  I keep the 24-70mm on my camera body simply because I shoot wide angle more than I do long.

Canon announced a new 70-300L.  I was really looking forward to an L zoom to 300mm, but I really need f/2.8 because I shoot a lot of after dark, outdoor rodeos, but the new lens has a variable aperature between f/4 and f/5.6.    I was holding off buying the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8, but I guess I won't hold off anymore, haha.

[MilesOfTexas]

I am getting a great education just listening to you pros! Thanks
QS

Haha, one day I hope to make it to that level.  Until then I am just having a ton of fun learning as I go. 

[iCe]

Only a wannabe with lots of gear here...

I gave my 24-70 to my daughter. I've got so many primes that cover the low range that I didn't need it. It was more of a portrait lens. If you ever want to know about or see some images from a Canon lens in the list below (I didn't include the 70-200), let me know, I've shot more than a few images with each one (except the 135mm lens... not sure what that's about).

800mm f5.6L IS
600mm f4L IS (better lens than the 800 imho. Often the 800 is way too long not to mention f4 is usually much desired)
300mm f2.8L IS
200mm f2L IS
180mm f3.5L macro
135mm f1.2L
100mm f2.8 macro
90mm TS-E f2.8 (if you like to shoot landscapes any of the tilt and shift lenses are the bomb)
85mm f1.2L II
MP-E 65mm f2.8 (specialty macro lens. Good to 5x magnification but needs a lot of light and finesse to produce an image)
35mm f1.4L
24mm TS-E f3.5L II (The 24mm TS-E and the 17mm TS-E are fantastic landscape lenses)
17mm TS-E f1.4L
14mm f2.8 L II

Here's one from the MP-E 65mm at around 4X... This is not cropped. It took some time to get this shot. The lens was about an inch or so away and there were a lot of other wasps "at home".

[MilesOfTexas]

Only a wannabe with lots of gear here...

I gave my 24-70 to my daughter. I've got so many primes that cover the low range that I didn't need it. It was more of a portrait lens. If you ever want to know about or see some images from a Canon lens in the list below (I didn't include the 70-200), let me know, I've shot more than a few images with each one (except the 135mm lens... not sure what that's about).

800mm f5.6L IS
600mm f4L IS (better lens than the 800 imho. Often the 800 is way too long not to mention f4 is usually much desired)
300mm f2.8L IS
200mm f2L IS
180mm f3.5L macro
135mm f1.2L
100mm f2.8 macro
90mm TS-E f2.8 (if you like to shoot landscapes any of the tilt and shift lenses are the bomb)
85mm f1.2L II
MP-E 65mm f2.8 (specialty macro lens. Good to 5x magnification but needs a lot of light and finesse to produce an image)
35mm f1.4L
24mm TS-E f3.5L II (The 24mm TS-E and the 17mm TS-E are fantastic landscape lenses)
17mm TS-E f1.4L
14mm f2.8 L II

Here's one from the MP-E 65mm at around 4X... This is not cropped. It took some time to get this shot. The lens was about an inch or so away and there were a lot of other wasps "at home".

Fantastic shot (and brave I might add)!!!  I have a macro on my 'to get' list, but there are a couple of others I need first, such as either a 16-35mm or a 17-40mm, and the 120-300mm.  What I really need most are some really good GND filters that are truly neutral, and those run about $200 each.

[iCe]

Fantastic shot (and brave I might add)!!!  I have a macro on my 'to get' list, but there are a couple of others I need first, such as either a 16-35mm or a 17-40mm, and the 120-300mm.  What I really need most are some really good GND filters that are truly neutral, and those run about $200 each.

Not so much brave as patient. It took about 45 minutes to work the lens and tripod in to get that shot. Move it in a few inches. Leave (hastily). When they settle down go back and move it again. The MP-E 65 is weird. You set magnification and then move it in and out for focus. It doesn't auto focus. You physically move the camera in and out... pita... It also all but requires a good flash setup. I use the ring flash that Canon makes. It snaps right on to the MP-E 65

I've got some Singh-Ray Reverse GND's and GND's. You can't beat them. Some fit a P holder and some are the 4x6 version you hold with your hand. Both have their place. There's a good Singh-ray warming circular polarizer in a P holder at the bottom of one of the tinaja's going in to Ernst Tinaja  I left it there on my last trip. Unwillingly.

Take a look at the 24mm TS-E. It's manual focus but the tilt function makes for a good landscape lens.

[MilesOfTexas]

Fantastic shot (and brave I might add)!!!  I have a macro on my 'to get' list, but there are a couple of others I need first, such as either a 16-35mm or a 17-40mm, and the 120-300mm.  What I really need most are some really good GND filters that are truly neutral, and those run about $200 each.

Not so much brave as patient. It took about 45 minutes to work the lens and tripod in to get that shot. Move it in a few inches. Leave (hastily). When they settle down go back and move it again. The MP-E 65 is weird. You set magnification and then move it in and out for focus. It doesn't auto focus. You physically move the camera in and out... pita... It also all but requires a good flash setup. I use the ring flash that Canon makes. It snaps right on to the MP-E 65

I've got some Singh-Ray Reverse GND's and GND's. You can't beat them. Some fit a P holder and some are the 4x6 version you hold with your hand. Both have their place. There's a good Singh-ray warming circular polarizer in a P holder at the bottom of one of the tinaja's going in to Ernst Tinaja  I left it there on my last trip. Unwillingly.

Take a look at the 24mm TS-E. It's manual focus but the tilt function makes for a good landscape lens.

I'll check out the  Singh-Ray filters.  I have been wanting one of their reverse ones for some time.  I need to get larger than the P series though because on my FF the P-Series isn't wide enough and I end up having to crop the left and right edges when using my 24-70 at 24mm.  I definitely want to get some TS-E lenses!

I appreciate the filter feedback.  The ones I was looking at are designed for cinematic shooting, which you know will be very good, but very expensive.

[iCe]

I'll check out the  Singh-Ray filters.  I have been wanting one of their reverse ones for some time.  I need to get larger than the P series though because on my FF the P-Series isn't wide enough and I end up having to crop the left and right edges when using my 24-70 at 24mm.  I definitely want to get some TS-E lenses!

I appreciate the filter feedback.  The ones I was looking at are designed for cinematic shooting, which you know will be very good, but very expensive.

I shoot a 1DsMK3 (and 1DMk4) and I'm trying to remember if I've had any problems with a P holder and the 24mm lens. I know it won't work with the 14mm and 17mm lenses due to the way the lens is built. Now that you mention it, I think that the reason that I bought the hand held version of the Reverse GND was vignetting under 35mm.

The TS-E offers something that you can't get with a "normal" wide angle lens and that's composition control without converging or diverging lines. It forces you to shoot with a level and plumb camera body but the shift function lets you shift the foreground / background. Vertical lines, if you use it right, remain vertical. The 24mm shot below was created with a T-S lens. I wanted big sky and less foreground so I shifted the lens up. If I had wanted predominantly foreground I would have shifted down. It took me a few shots to learn to set exposure when the lens is in it's neutral position and ignore the meter once I shift the lens. Shifting up increases the apparent (but not actual) exposure and shifting down does the opposite. The tilt function lets you play with focal point. I'm starting to sound like a lens salesman 

Here's one at 35mm with a P holder and decent sun and clouds



and here's one at 24mm (TS-E lens) with the hand held version of the Reverse GND. I didn't get the sun / cloud combination that I wanted on this shot but it's Big Bend and I don't think there can be "bad" photographs taken in Big Bend, maybe less gooder  but not bad.



Here's an example of the tilt function. I moved the focal point to the inscription on the door.

[Terlingua50337]

It ain't the Hill Country but it is a sunrise windmill.

[MilesOfTexas]

I shoot a 1DsMK3 (and 1DMk4) and I'm trying to remember if I've had any problems with a P holder and the 24mm lens. I know it won't work with the 14mm and 17mm lenses due to the way the lens is built. Now that you mention it, I think that the reason that I bought the hand held version of the Reverse GND was vignetting under 35mm.

I would love to be using a 1DsMK3, but I do love my 5DMK2!  I am axiously waiting for the 1DsMK4.  I hope to have one sometime next year, but right now I am concentrating on filters and lenses.

The TS-E offers something that you can't get with a "normal" wide angle lens and that's composition control without converging or diverging lines. It forces you to shoot with a level and plumb camera body but the shift function lets you shift the foreground / background. Vertical lines, if you use it right, remain vertical. The 24mm shot below was created with a T-S lens. I wanted big sky and less foreground so I shifted the lens up. If I had wanted predominantly foreground I would have shifted down. It took me a few shots to learn to set exposure when the lens is in it's neutral position and ignore the meter once I shift the lens. Shifting up increases the apparent (but not actual) exposure and shifting down does the opposite. The tilt function lets you play with focal point. I'm starting to sound like a lens salesman 

Well, the best salesman is a happy customer!  I really do want to get one or two, but they will have to wait, haha.

Here's one at 35mm with a P holder and decent sun and clouds

That is absolutely gorgeous.  My current filter would have color cast the sky red, which really annoys me.  Why call it 'neutral' if it isn't!!!

and here's one at 24mm (TS-E lens) with the hand held version of the Reverse GND. I didn't get the sun / cloud combination that I wanted on this shot but it's Big Bend and I don't think there can be "bad" photographs taken in Big Bend, maybe less gooder  but not bad.

I love the effect that the reverse GND creates!  I agree with you that is no such thing as a bad photo of Big Bend!

Here's an example of the tilt function. I moved the focal point to the inscription on the door.

That is just neat!

[MilesOfTexas]

It ain't the Hill Country but it is a sunrise windmill.

That is gorgeous!!!