The lost Philea lander has just been located by the Rosetta mother ship using the narrow angle on-board camera. It has a resolution of 5cm/pixel, and clearly spotted the lost lander from an elevation of 2.7 km altitude. The target is only about 1 meter in size and the altitude translates to nearly 2 miles! (I'll create a new rumor that the camera was made by Canon!) See link, interesting read.
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Rosetta/Philae_foundJohn
The nest belongs to the neighbor's meter, so I'm just staying far, far away, except for the long telephoto lens!!! Thanks for looking and commenting.
Thanks for looking, actually the meter is read by remote radio signal. I especially like the translucent appearance of the wing.
Photos yesterday by good wife using her 60d and 70-300L - hummers cropped. She has a very good eye; sometimes outdoes me. View in download.
Beautiful Mike, all of them. But I find it interesting that upon checking the online metadata, that most of these were taken in September of 2008 with a Nikon D700. Here's the amazing thing, it has only 12.1 MP sensor, and the pics are probably as good as a newer 24 or 36 MP version. Don't want to start a big argument, but so much for the huge MP argument.
John
I got a (mint) used Canon 16-35L f4 from Robert's Camera a few weeks ago and I love it. Was in a rather dark venue just last Thursday with the lens on a 5d3 and got amazing pics of people and the interior; used available light and no flash. I just set the ISO on auto and shutter speed on 1/30 and all was perfect. The ISO never went above 400.
John
Not yet, write back if I can answer any questions.
Love 'em, have to consider that route for next summer's vacation.
Yes it is, thank you. Write back ASAP, though i will be away from the net after 2:30.
Canon EF 17-40 f4L Ultra wide lens for sale, $550+$10 shipping. Includes lens, hood, both caps, original box and Canon warranty. Like my 400, this lens is also like new, with no body marks and perfect glass. I have replaced this with the EF-S 10-18, again for the IS.
John
Virtually unused Canon 400 f5.6L in like new condition, no marks anywhere and unblemished glass, $850+$15 shipping. Includes lens w/self-contained hood, tripod collar, case, and both caps; no filter or box. I have replaced with an IS lens, as I'm not as steady as I once was. You're seeing some window reflections on the objective lens, not defects.
John
My take. Keep the 80d and EF-S lenses if at all possible. I have a 5d III with 6 EF L lenses and a 70 d with 2 EFS lenses. I find myself using the 70d and the 18-135 or 70-200L much of the time for nature photography, partly for the vari-angle screen on low shots; I could not live without that feature, and of course the built in flash. Low light demands the use of the 5d. Fairly often , I'll carry both the 5d with 24-105L and the 70d with the 100-400 mkII, and I'm closing in fast on my 80th year. Good luck on YOUR choice, but I know what I'd do.
John
Just don't tell anyone (oops too late on that), or display it!
As an owner of the three Canon L lenses mentioned, 70-200 f4L IS, 70-300L IS and the 100-400L Mk2, if I could have only one, I would choose the 70-300L IS. It's fairly light and compact, moisture/dust resistant and sharp as either of the other two. I think it's the best all around tele-lens made, bar none. My wife uses it exclusively, except for some interior close-up work. Actually she stole it from me, so l got the 100-400 to replace it, but I most frequently carry the 70-200, lighter for my 78 years, and save the 100-400 for times when I really need the reach. [Edit] And in response to your frugal comment, check out used: they're pretty dang reasonable.