[Rudra Sen]

Originally Posted by navin

What is a Tilt-Shift lens used for then?

Navin, by saying PC I meant Perspective Control Lens.

[jkdas]

@ Nomad; that is a great pic.

This thread is scaring of people with too much know-how

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by NomadVagabond

About high ISO performance. That's not the forte of P&S & entry level DSLR's at all so why complain about them at all when one has those the first place.

I didn't just complain, I upgraded the body.

Originally Posted by NomadVagabond

Well that example was given after I had posted the photograph of the landscape. I didn't have the slightest clue of the buffaloes. The photograph which you had previously posted was of you standing next to the car in the low light. And well that could be taken care off by many of the standard lenses.

Ok, now I am truely confused. I never posted any car shot in lowlight with me standing next to it, where is that post?

I posted the buffalo racing shot in post #658 on 6th April 2009, 09:01 as an example for lowlight action photography.

Originally Posted by Samurai

1) I upgraded the dSLR body because my eariler dSLR body was not auto focusing at low light, had high noise at higher ISOs and no IS ability. In other words, low light photography was always a challenge with it and I love low-light photography. Check this low-light action photography with old equipment: https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/trave...lo-racing.html (Kambala: The ancient sport of buffalo racing)

You replied to that in post #662 on 6th April 2009, 13:39 with a still landscape.

Originally Posted by NomadVagabond

Flickr: More detail about Reflections.

I took this photograph 2yrs back when my understanding about photography was very limited. I just had my Canon 400D and the 18-55mm kit lens. With almost no knowledge about night photography I had just followed a basic advice which every expert tells one to use...i.e. use a tripod. Apart from that, My cheap 50mm 1.8 does stuffs which my more expensive 100-400mm fails to do in low light situations.

Since post #658 on 6th April 2009, 09:01 was before post #662 on 6th April 2009, one would think that you had seen the Buffalo shot before posting the landscape. Instead you say you hadn't seen the Buffalo, but a car in lowlight with me standing next to it. Are we both reading the same thread?

[suman]

Originally Posted by NomadVagabond

For past 3yrs I've been a regular at Bharatpur bird sanctuary. And frankly speaking I've NEVER seen anyone sport a 70-200 of whatsoever make or F-stop over there. Infact the most common lenses we get to see there 500mm f/4 and 600mm f/4.

Wow! Sounds like amateurs don't visit Bharatpur at all these days

[kaushik_s]

Originally Posted by suman

Wow! Sounds like amateurs don't visit Bharatpur at all these days

Well for birding canon 70-200mm is very very inadequate. Trust me when I say this as I've both the canon 70-200mm models currently ;-) and although they are the best piece of glass in their class but they just won't work for SERIOUSBirding. You may get a few occasional shots of some big birds and mammals but that's all about it. BTW, for other purposes for which they are meant for, say landscape, fashion, street, portrait etc etc only a few can beat them.
Regards,

[navin]

exactly, even the 70-300 4.5-5.6 is not usable for good birding.

[NomadVagabond]

Originally Posted by navin

exactly, even the 70-300 4.5-5.6 is not usable for good birding.

Totally agree, when you say "good birding"

Originally Posted by kaushik_s

Well for birding canon 70-200mm is very very inadequate. Trust me when I say this as I've both the canon 70-200mm models currently ;-) and although they are the best piece of glass in their class but they just won't work for SERIOUSBirding. You may get a few occasional shots of some big birds and mammals but that's all about it. BTW, for other purposes for which they are meant for, say landscape, fashion, street, portrait etc etc only a few can beat them.
Regards,

Very very true. No serious birder goes out with 70-200. It's an excellent street/fashion lens.

Originally Posted by suman

Wow! Sounds like amateurs don't visit Bharatpur at all these days

They do visit. But, Bharatpur is declared as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO. And serious birders and professional wildlife photographers make it a point to visit the place every year. Keoladeo National Park - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by Samurai

Ok, now I am truely confused. I never posted any car shot in lowlight with me standing next to it, where is that post?

Damn, I don't know man. Me too totally confused. Forget it...I don't know which shot I saw. Sorry for all the trouble.

Originally Posted by jkdas

@ Nomad; that is a great pic.

This thread is scaring of people with too much know-how

Thanks for appreciating the photograph. Don't know about the scaring part though...

Regards,

Anirban.

[kaushik_s]

Originally Posted by navin

exactly, even the 70-300 4.5-5.6 is not usable for good birding.

yup, learned it the hard way, got frustrated, dumped the lens, dumped birding too ;-) . 400mm is the absolute minimum required and a deep pocket :-(

[NomadVagabond]

Originally Posted by kaushik_s

yup, learned it the hard way, got frustrated, dumped the lens, dumped birding too ;-) . 400mm is the absolute minimum required and a deep pocket :-(

Now, someone is singing music for my ears. Yes 400mm goes like the absolute bare minimum for birding. Though you can start with likes of 400mm f/5.6 which is a very good lens and cheap enough. But, then a tele zoom like the 100-400/80-400 would be a better option for that range. And then slowly save money and graduate to a 500/600mm.

Btw, has anyone of you ever seen or heard anyone use the Sigma 300-800mm??? It's known as the Sigmonster. And the reviews show fantastic shots.

Regards,

Anirban.

[extreme_torque]

Originally Posted by NomadVagabond

Well first of all. No, I wasn't offended at all. Maybe my reply sounded a bit harsh. I'm sorry if I sounded like that. About high ISO performance. That's not the forte of P&S & entry level DSLR's at all so why complain about them at all when one has those the first place.

Who said entry level DSLR's dont have good ISO performance?? The reason you buy semi pro or pro bodies is because of the incremental enhancements, stuff like handling, build quality, higher burst rate, wether sealing, more intuitive interface, better auto focus especially focus tracking and not just megapixels.

Originally Posted by NomadVagabond

Well I very well understood that point before too. That's the reason I've myself graduated from a 70-300 to a 100-400 and from 400D to 50D. Yes equipment does play a serious role. But, that's only when the person behind the equipment is capable of handling the equipment as well as the equipment is meant to perform. I also agree to the point that the quality of the glass matters a lot and specific lenses are made for specific purpose. That's the reason I was asking around a few days ago for 85mm f/1.8. http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/gadget...ml#post1215917 And that's for a simple reason and that's the 50mm 1.8 which I have got is fantastic but not long enough. While using that lens you usually tend to disturb the person and loose out on the natural expressions.

A Canon 50D, a 100-400 IS L lens and you were saying equipment doesnt matter. Hypocricy?
If someone want to upgrade to 'only' a higher quality gear and not medicore stuff why do you assume that he isnt capable of handling the equipment? Just because he refused to compromise on quality?

Originally Posted by NomadVagabond

I totally agree with the sharpness of the 70-200mm F/4 or any of the series with different F-stops. But, it's NOT a birding lens whatsoever. For past 3yrs I've been a regular at Bharatpur bird sanctuary. And frankly speaking I've NEVER seen anyone sport a 70-200 of whatsoever make or F-stop over there. Infact the most common lenses we get to see there 500mm f/4 and 600mm f/4. Yes if you speak about normal wildlife mammalian photography then 70-200 is sometimes seen. But, then you see more of 100-400 or 80-400's over there. Now, let me clear this up. I'm NOT talking about regular photographers or fashion photographers going there for a shoot. But, I'm talking about serious birders. If you go and ask any serious wildlife photographer, they'll seldom be carrying a 70-200. Almost none of the ones I personally know own a single one of them. You can check serious wildlife photography sites like India Nature Watch and check the profiles of photographers over there and their equipment base and you'll find not even 5% of them might have a 70-200. So, boss it was a totally out of question when it comes to bird photography.

Well I agree and know 70-200 isnt near good enough for birding but it doesnt mean that you cant do it. You have to be as close to the subject as possible and pray that bird doesnt fly away but then the point of discussion is that gear matter. No matter how good is the person behind the camera, without right gear he would strictly be average.

[HellwratH]

Posting a link I came across. Suits the context pretty well.

Gallery Presentation - photo.net

Well, I am amazed at those pics and especially even more coz they were taken with a P & S camera. The point being, unless you can imagine what you want to portray through your pictures, they might never turn out good. And sometimes to portray (paint) your imagination using light, you might need good gear.

P.S: I am aware that some of the photos in the above link have been post processed quite heavily. But when I look at a photo, I don't really care what camera did he use or how much PPing has gone into that picture. All I care about is whether I liked what the artist is portraying through his pictures.

[Samurai]

Ah! Birding in shoestring budget... Amazon.com: Rokinon 800mm f/8.0 Multi-Coated Mirror Lens for Canon EOS Rebel XSi, XS, XTi, XT, 5D, 30D, 40D & 50D Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

Has anyone ever tried these?

The longest glass I have is 50-200mm F/2.8-3.5 and the longest Olympus glass is 300mm F/2.8 only. The only way Olympus users can do birding is by using Sigma 135-400mm or 500mm (Bigma).

[NomadVagabond]

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

Who said entry level DSLR's dont have good ISO performance?? The reason you buy semi pro or pro bodies is because of the incremental enhancements, stuff like handling, build quality, higher burst rate, wether sealing, more intuitive interface, better auto focus especially focus tracking and not just megapixels.

Well can you tell me which entry level DSLR has acceptable noise performance at say even ISO 400 forget higher ISO speeds. Kindly refer to this link Canon EOS 1000D / Rebel XS Review: 19. Photographic tests (Noise): Digital Photography Review and the test comparison done Canon 1000D, Nikon D60, Sony A200 & Olympus E420. Do you still find those ISO performance acceptable? If you do so...well then I'm sorry it simply doesn't work out for me and most serious photographers.

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

A Canon 50D, a 100-400 IS L lens and you were saying equipment doesnt matter. Hypocricy?

Yes, I do NOW own a 50D, and that's after I've clicked around 45,000 frames and 3yrs and getting my 400D serviced thrice for both dust and shutter servicing. FYI the 400D is rated for 50,000 shutter cycles. I guess I've squeezed enough juice out of my beloved camera already before I graduated to the 50D. And for the 100-400, I have a Sigma 70-300mm APO DG-Macro (Didn't even have a Canon glass other than the 18-55). Which I started out with and still use from time to time.

Look at it this way. I could've been advocating L series alone and high end bodies since I myself use them. But, I don't because I believe that one needs to first master the basic equipment and then graduate. You don't put a trainee pilot on a Sukhoi the very first day. They are taught to fly in the simple yet effective jet trainers first. I hope the point is conveyed.

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

If someone want to upgrade to 'only' a higher quality gear and not medicore stuff why do you assume that he isnt capable of handling the equipment? Just because he refused to compromise on quality?

Quality comes with expertise in handling. Not, alone by the equipment. If I'm given a hasselblad I might end up taking pathetic photographs because I'm not upto the mark!!! Time and again I've repeated the same thing that it's the mating of skills and equipment, not alone that of equipment.

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

Well I agree and know 70-200 isnt near good enough for birding but it doesnt mean that you cant do it. You have to be as close to the subject as possible and pray that bird doesnt fly away but then the point of discussion is that gear matter.

Praying doesn't work in wildlife. Specially for birding it definitely doesn't work. Birds have been gifted with flight and they take to the wing as soon as they spot any threat. If you think that birders are Idiots investing in more than an avg of 4 lakhs in a single lens alone for birding. Then yes we are idiots. What more do I say about that.

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

No matter how good is the person behind the camera, without right gear he would strictly be average.

The same applies the otherway round too. No matter how good the gear is, without the right person behind the gear. You'll just end up with useless photographs.

Regards,

Anirban.

[kaushik_s]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Ah! Birding in shoestring budget... Amazon.com: Rokinon 800mm f/8.0 Multi-Coated Mirror Lens for Canon EOS Rebel XSi, XS, XTi, XT, 5D, 30D, 40D & 50D Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

Has anyone ever tried these?

Don't tell me that you are thinking of buying that thing unless ofcourse you love the donuts


BTW, ET, NV and whomsoever, I guess we all are debating to a point to which actually everyone is agreeing but just having a different point of view. So better put rest to this matter and start shooting and sharing photos

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by kaushik_s

Don't tell me that you are thinking of buying that thing unless ofcourse you love the donuts

Well, I learnt my lesson long back when I bought a fisheye lens for my Sony F-717.