Three cheers & a Happy Birthday for the Bird On The Ball

Don't know the exact Itel. word but it does translate into having more fun; getting not great photos but at least coming away with what I consider as acceptable and last but not least returning home with no regrets ---- However I'm sure my upper & lower back, neck, shoulder & whatever other supporting ligaments will fully agree & get your point! But what the hell It's only a hobby -----

It's nice to see I'm not the only one that uses a hand held meter in this digital age -- Mine is also a Sekonic L558 had it for at least 12 or so years -- Great meter -- Very accurate

Your absolutely RIGHT about this LEFT handed subject ----- My LEFT handed Son complained about this issue years ago -----

Nustfarmer ------
Really want to thank you for your most helpful response --- on what I should / should not take along to So.Italy & Sicily --- Have thought it through regarding --- What you said & how I really want to use the lens on all those 4/5 Century Temples --- Have reconfigured various Camera bags -- Have started doing push-ups & have now found room for the additional 3.6lb worth of 100-400 L IS ---- Leaving the 135 2.0 L at home
THANKS for making me think the process through
Ken S.

Motor in body vs motor in lens ----- I suspect it's flip a coin time ---- However one motor in lens advantage does come to mind in that the in-lens motor is built (or hopefully built) to meet the specific needs of that specific lens be it a 10mm to 1200mm vs a what I would identify as a more general purpose in camera lens motor --- However what do I know since I have always used Canon in-lens motor products --- Have never come across anyone with lens motor problems be they in-camera / in-lens

The only thing I found better then the Chilean Wine was the Chilean Beer!
Thanks for liking the 1st batch --- Promise - Won't send any more -- Will send on a few from our next trip --- S. Italy & Sicily -- In a few months
Again
Thanks
Ken S.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

This really is a place we must return to --- Thought I would share a few
Ken Stern

A very special place

(Download)

burkphoto --- Thanks for your excellent relationship between Film: Print & Slide vs Digital: JPEG & RAW ---- It's a comfort to see that by only shooting in raw I'm getting all the benefits of Print without all those smelly chemicals in a claustrophobic darken room --- Back in my film days the Dark Room experience was not a happy one -- It was the reason I switched over to slides

So what I'm picking up from of all these thoughtful responses is that as far as dynamic range parameters film & digital at least as far as my aging 5D MkII will get you --- are just about the same --- Must be all the modern post processing ---- Can't be me! As far as my thoughtful choice behind why I use Canon ---- Way back in 1969 a buddy of mine desperately short of cash sold me his Canon FT/QL with a FD50mm 1.4 -- As quick as I could I retired my Richoflex twin lens & have been using Canon products ever since ---- Now of course the same would have taken place if he had sold me a Nikon -- Actually wish he had sold me a leica / Contax ---- Just kidding
THANKS

For what it's worth have only shot in raw with the 5D

Dear Hogs:
I'm a amateur photographer loves this hobby but who also has the photos to prove that statement. I own and continue to use my 1st & the only DSLR -- Canon 5DMkii which I purchased in 2010 -- prior to that date I used a Canon EOS 3 shooting for the most part Provia 100 slide film --- I'm happy to admit that my chances of now getting better looking photos greatly increased since the purchase of 5D --- My question is:
I'd like to blame this improvement on me becoming a better photographer however I'm not about to start kidding my self at this late age --- So are my improved DSLR generated photos a direct result of any improvement in Dynamic Range over the film camera??

Thanks for reminding -- It was more then just guilt
I'm totally with you on that type of shot - However - It's - at least for me - one big heavy lens --- Will try using the 135 - on a tripod of course - to get those shots -- When I get home I'll see how much cropping I can get away with & still have a print worthy copy
THANKS

Dear Hogs ----- THANK YOU -- THANK YOU -- THANK YOU
At 3lbs 9.5oz the 100-400 is by far the beast in my barnyard. It's fess-up time --- Should have told you good folks just why I really wanted to take it ----- Felt GUILTY! Guilty that I had only taken it on one other of our planned often over organized trips - Patagonia -- Really worked well on that trip just as long as i did not take it on those long "organized" hikes ---- Will take the 135 instead & leave the 100/400 & 50 at home ---- Have made a very short list of photo related tasks I want to try to improve upon ---- For obvious reasons use the tripod more -- I mean if you take it why in the hell would you then leave it at the hotel or on the damn bus --- Use the 24mm a lot more --- Paid the most for it but use the 35mm almost all the time -- The 35m has become what my FD 50mm was when I used my ancient Canon FT-QL --- Last but not least "Think" before I press the bottom --- If anything comes out looking almost good or hopefully good enough I'll send a few of them along
Again --- Thanks for all your good advice
Ken S.

cjkob ---Thanks for the offer -- But -- As we both know -- my real issue of course is not the "stuff" but the shooter --- So I'm stuck with getting the shooter in better shape to carry all the stuff --- We use to do these trips every year until we both finally admitted we were "Like good wine in that we traveled poorly" So it's now every other year --- Would really be nice to get away from that totally beat-up I'll just sit here & drink feeling at end of a long day ---- This time I even want to leave/pass-up the bar go out & take some night shots!!!!!!