Well, I consider myself to be a Christian, I have a BS in geology, and I believe in evolution. I see no conflict there at all. If our Lord decided to use evolution as His method of creating our universe, solar system, earth, and us, who are we to question Him? I do believe that the earth is about 4.5 billion years old. No, I don't believe every word in my Bible...but nor do I believe every word in my geology texts. 'Nuf sed.
He did not win the second election because of the color of his skin. He won it because all the freeloaders want to keep getting things free - food, smart phones, etc...even citizenship. We are doomed, people.
No, you're not overreacting. Stand by your guns, Larry.
He has always had an aura standing behind a podium with a teleprompter in front of him...but he failed miserably in front of a group of elementary school children without the prompter. The man is, simply stated, a fraud, a Socialist, and absolutely the worst thing to happen to America since Pearl Harbor.
Not all electricity-producing windmills are of the tall, white, slowly-moving type. I've seen some in southern California that whir like a window fan. Still, I thought eagles were smarter than that....
Merry Christmas, and enjoy that new gift!
Yes, I can see it. What a beautiful sky...and you captured it quite well!
Those are both new lenses. Personally, unless you suffer from either Parkinson's Disease or the DTs, my recommendation is to go with the less expensive lens. I've been using their 70-200 F/4 lens without stabilization, and I've never had a problem. The few times I have needed to shoot at slower shutter speeds, I have simply used either a tripod or a beanbag. Normally, the more you spend on a Canon "L" lens, the better the glass....but to me, there comes a point of diminishing returns. I'd pay more for the f/2.8, but probably not for the IS version. If you need to take a lot of low-light photos hand-held, of course, pay for the IS. If you use a tripod, you should turn off the IS anyway. Just my opinion, of course, and I'm sure that many will disagree with me. I hope this helps.
I like the elk antlers and the boards better in color, but the BS is better overall - especially the sky. Nice job!
I really like this one. It sure beats a snapshot, and your composition is terrific.
Bring on the brickbats if you want to vent, but I shoot almost exclusively in jpeg. I save in both tiff and jpeg, and am very satisfied with my results. I don't care about selling photos, and since I'm 71 years old, I figure that after I die, no one will give two hoots or hollers about my images anyway...so who cares? Not I.
If you do much backpacking and/or traveling via airplane, I strongly recommend you check out the 3Leggedthing.com line of carbon fiber tripods. I dearly love my "Brian" model, and it is at the lower end of your cost range. I use mine with a ball head from ReallyRightStuff.com.
Just my opinion, but I'd crop out as much of the man-made stuff as posible.
I would prefer a shot singling out either one of the waterfalls rather than seeing the both in one image...likewise with the trees.
I like them, too - and I'm enjlying these photos - love the San Juans!