Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Feedback Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Post Screening (KL692)  
User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2169 times:

Hello I had this image rejected for the these reasons: motiv, soft, distance, and centered.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...418_k1334054629.816kl692ph-bfb.jpg

I can understand the soft part but what I don't get is the rest of the reason.

Motiv - I don't see any part of the A/C being block (unless I am wrong about what motiv means)

Distance - in order to get the whole A/C in the picture I have to be farther away from the A/C (there was a 777 that was added in database last week with type os shot)

Centered - ????????

This one for Reject reason: Front blurry/out of focus blurry soft personal
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...1333955064.2826c-gbzr_filtered.jpg

and this one for Reject reason: overexposed nose and dark towards the engines. A;so soft/blurry nose blurry soft overexposed dark personal

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...1333944108.4589a6-edm_filtered.jpg

have my share rejected photos and for the most part I do agree with the rejected reasons but this it just doesn't feel right.

Thx


A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9700 posts, RR: 27
Reply 1, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2169 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting kl692 (Thread starter):
Motiv - I don't see any part of the A/C being block (unless I am wrong about what motiv means)

Distance - in order to get the whole A/C in the picture I have to be farther away from the A/C (there was a 777 that was added in database last week with type os shot)

Centered - ????????

Motive can have many meanings - I'd suggest you read the rejection guide. In this case, the crop that you've submitted isn't particularly captivating, and doesn't show much, at least not enough to justify the large blank space in the middle. The road is squished way down at the bottom of the shot, and several of the vehicles are cut off.

Centered goes along with motive - given that that motive isn't acceptable, the aircraft is therefore way too high in frame.

Distance - again, given that the motive isn't acceptable, the crop is too loose around the airplane (too much room on the left and right).

Quoting kl692 (Thread starter):
This one for Reject reason: Front blurry/out of focus blurry soft personal

I'd definitely agree. Look at the sharpness of the passenger windows, and then at the cockpit windows. Same with the main landing gear versus the nose landing gear.

Quoting kl692 (Thread starter):
and this one for Reject reason: overexposed nose and dark towards the engines. A;so soft/blurry nose blurry soft overexposed dark personal

I don't see the overexposed, but the nose does look possibly a bit blurry. The light also isn't great.

Quoting kl692 (Thread starter):
have my share rejected photos and for the most part I do agree with the rejected reasons but this it just doesn't feel right.

I'd suggest you simply get used to having photos rejected, even for reasons you don't see. Happens to all of us, especially when we're starting out.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2167 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 1):
I'd suggest you simply get used to having photos rejected, even for reasons you don't see. Happens to all of us, especially when we're starting out.

Thanks for your feedback and I like said before, I do have my share of rejections and beleive when I say I have my share and I am aware that is perfect to me might be good for the site and to others as well.



A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1829 times:

yep another one, I just had this rejected for being soft. to be honest, I was worry about it being over sharpening but I guess not. is it the whole A/C being soft or some parts?

Thanks

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/20120616_m1339127775.8058n865pc.jpg



A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 464 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1811 times:

Whole aircraft is soft. Might need another 50 to 100% of USM, maybe even more.  


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1770 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 4):
Whole aircraft is soft. Might need another 50 to 100% of USM, maybe even more.

Thanks Sir, I will add some more usm



A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9700 posts, RR: 27
Reply 6, posted (2 years 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1762 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I might be wrong, but it looks more blurry than soft to me, in which case there may not be anything you can do.


"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1756 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 6):
I might be wrong, but it looks more blurry than soft to me, in which case there may not be anything you can do.


Hi vik, it was rejected for being soft, nothing about blurry. But who knows



A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (2 years 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1750 times:

It's difficult to say with certainty without seeing the original file but your Falcon shot looks more like softness (due to a long focal length perhaps?) than blur.

Karl


User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1730 times:

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 8):
It's difficult to say with certainty without seeing the original file but your Falcon shot looks more like softness (due to a long focal length perhaps?) than blur.

Karl

Here is the original file




A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9700 posts, RR: 27
Reply 10, posted (2 years 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1723 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I don't see any major blur, but it's definitely soft, and given how much you had to crop, I wouldn't have too much hope for that one. What lens and focal length?


"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31
Reply 11, posted (2 years 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1720 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Tail is blurry, and Vik is right, with amount you need to crop, there is little hope of making it work.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 10):
What lens and focal length?

EF-S 55-250mm @ 250mm. Exif is your friend  


User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1718 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 11):
Tail is blurry, and Vik is right, with amount you need to crop, there is little hope of making it work.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 10):
What lens and focal length?

EF-S 55-250mm @ 250mm. Exif is your friend

the tail does seem blurry since you pointed it out.

So I guess I have checking for blur on the A/C wrong. I normally just check for words on the nose and the reg# to see if they are blur. And if they are not, the I go with it. Moving forward, I will check all around.

Thanks All



A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9700 posts, RR: 27
Reply 13, posted (2 years 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1713 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 11):
EF-S 55-250mm @ 250mm. Exif is your friend

OK, really stupid question, but how the heck do you view the Exif data? I opened the shot in Photoshop, but all the data was blank in the File Info window....

Regarding the lens, the 55-250 gets very soft beyond about 200mm. When I used to use it, I never shot beyond 200mm. I'd generally have more luck shooting at 200mm and cropping a little more.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1712 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 13):
OK, really stupid question, but how the heck do you view the Exif data? I opened the shot in Photoshop, but all the data was blank in the File Info window....

LOL, I don't know how he did it either

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 13):
Regarding the lens, the 55-250 gets very soft beyond about 200mm. When I used to use it, I never shot beyond 200mm. I'd generally have more luck shooting at 200mm and cropping a little more.

Thanks Vic, I will keep it in mind. this is off topic but what do you think of the 60D camera?



A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9700 posts, RR: 27
Reply 15, posted (2 years 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1711 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting kl692 (Reply 14):
Thanks Vic, I will keep it in mind. this is off topic but what do you think of the 60D camera?

Couldn't tell you, as I haven't used it. I do use a 50D, however, which was the precursor to the 60D. It's taken some getting used to (I've only had it for a couple months), but I'm getting pretty good results out of it now. I read a lot of reviews of the 60D when I was doing research, though, and it seems that a lot of reviewers thought that it was actually a step backwards from the 50D (or at best, a step sideways).

Sharpness-wise, the full size images are actually less sharp than what I was getting out of my Rebel XS with the same lenses. But honestly, I'm beginning to think my XS was a freak of nature or something - I mean, those images were close to oversharpened sometimes (and I'm talking about the 3888 x 2592 images!).

Given that you are new to DSLR photography (I think - sorry if that's not correct), I wouldn't be in any rush to upgrade your camera body. I stuck with the XS for about two years, until I was pretty sure I was getting the best I could out of it.

Putting a quality lens on a low-end DSLR can yield great results, so I'd look at upgrading lenses before you think about camera bodies.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1706 times:

Thanks vik, but believe it or not I do photography as a part time job. I pretty much do parties and church events (baby naming, birthday parties and engagement parties) and so on. I just suck at taking pictures of fast moving objects and editing them.
The reason I am thinking about the 60D is due to video recording. I heard it is very good for recording video as well. I was looking at the 7D and there is not much of difference between the two, however that 60D is a bit cheaper. Right now my budget is $1200 to $1500, not just for the body but for sharp lens to go with it too. So what is the best lens out there.



A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9700 posts, RR: 27
Reply 17, posted (2 years 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1703 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting kl692 (Reply 16):
Thanks vik, but believe it or not I do photography as a part time job.

Ah OK, sorry about that.

Yeah, video is the one thing I wish the 50D had, but it wasn't important enough to me to warrant paying more money.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 171 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1694 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 13):
how the heck do you view the Exif data

Chrome has various plugins that allow you to view EXIF data attached to an image from within the browser. I know it would be possible to display this information for screeners of this (or any) site, or to simply display it as part of the page. I'd actually like to see EXIF data for all images by default.

[Edit] I should add that EXIF data is usually not retained when the image is rendered by the web app as it is no longer the original image. I've found here that when viewing images uploaded to users profiles, the EXIF data is viewable, but when looking at images in the DB that have the airliners.net (c) footer, etc, it's not available.

[Edited 2012-06-18 06:16:38]


John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (2 years 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1685 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 15):
Sharpness-wise, the full size images are actually less sharp than what I was getting out of my Rebel XS with the same lenses. But honestly, I'm beginning to think my XS was a freak of nature or something - I mean, those images were close to oversharpened sometimes (and I'm talking about the 3888 x 2592 images!).

That's not surprising and is pretty normal. Pixel density is greater on the 50D, and while overall it resolves more detail it won't resolve as much detail per pixel. This often gives the illusion that images straight from the camera are somewhat softer - but the Rebel XS (or 1000D) is well known for producing 'over-processed' images.

Quoting kl692 (Reply 16):
I was looking at the 7D and there is not much of difference between the two, however that 60D is a bit cheaper

Make no mistake, there are very big differences!

Quoting kl692 (Reply 16):
The reason I am thinking about the 60D is due to video recording

Something else to go wrong in that little, plastic body.....

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 15):
Putting a quality lens on a low-end DSLR can yield great results, so I'd look at upgrading lenses before you think about camera bodies

Quite.

Karl


User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1663 times:

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 19):
Make no mistake, there are very big differences!

So you Think the 7D is better! Well I am bit confuse now cause I spent the whole last night doing reviews and I must say that the 7D is winning but heard that you can't control audio level on it in recording mode.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 19):
Something else to go wrong in that little, plastic body..

Forgive me when I say this but I am lost by that comment of yours.



A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 21, posted (2 years 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1658 times:

Quoting kl692 (Reply 20):
Forgive me when I say this but I am lost by that comment of yours.

A DSLR with HD recording is a gimmick of you ask me; just another part of the camera to go wrong. If you want HD recording, buy a camcorder. If you want something that takes great stills, buy a DSLR. But that's just my opinion. I mentioned 'plastic' because the 60D has a plastic body as opposed to the alloy casing of earlier XXD models.

I seriously wouldn't buy the 7D as it will likely be overkill for what you want. Despite its faults the 60D I think would be suitable, especially if you've never used that tier of camera before. Having said that, I reckon the 50D is actually better, but they can be hard to find these days.

As someone mentioned earlier, you're best buying a decent lens rather than a better camera. A 7D with your 55-250 will still produce soft images - much softer than something like a 450D with a nice L lens.

The quality of the lens (and of course the photographer) determines the quality of the image.

Karl


User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9700 posts, RR: 27
Reply 22, posted (2 years 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1655 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 18):
Chrome has various plugins that allow you to view EXIF data attached to an image from within the browser. I know it would be possible to display this information for screeners of this (or any) site, or to simply display it as part of the page. I'd actually like to see EXIF data for all images by default.

Interesting, thanks. I'm sure Firefox has similar, but I haven't investigated.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 19):
That's not surprising and is pretty normal. Pixel density is greater on the 50D, and while overall it resolves more detail it won't resolve as much detail per pixel. This often gives the illusion that images straight from the camera are somewhat softer - but the Rebel XS (or 1000D) is well known for producing 'over-processed' images.

Yeah, that's basically the conclusion I've come to - that the higher pixel density does indeed resolve more detail, but not per pixel. The images from the 50D still look better, especially when resized.

As for the 1000D's "over-processed" images, I hadn't heard of that. I don't know that I'd necessarily agree; the extreme sharpness was actually quite nice.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (2 years 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1650 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 22):
As for the 1000D's "over-processed" images, I hadn't heard of that. I don't know that I'd necessarily agree; the extreme sharpness was actually quite nice

Nice in some ways, but not nice in others. I used one briefly in 2008, and while it was a great little camera to use, jpeg images definitely looked a touch unnatural straight from the camera. I'd been used to the slightly less 'processed' results from the XXD range so it was very noticeable.

Far from a fault (the way round it of course was to shoot RAW) but something a lot of people picked up on none-the-less.

Karl


User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1647 times:

here is my current inventory, Canon t3 (it does 720p basic video recording) 18-55 DC lens, 55-250 IS lens and 28-135 IS usm lens.


A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9700 posts, RR: 27
Reply 25, posted (2 years 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1638 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 23):
Nice in some ways, but not nice in others. I used one briefly in 2008, and while it was a great little camera to use, jpeg images definitely looked a touch unnatural straight from the camera. I'd been used to the slightly less 'processed' results from the XXD range so it was very noticeable.

Ahh, I've been shooting RAW since I started, so that's probably why I haven't had an issue with it. It was also my first DSLR, so I didn't have much to compare it to.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 26, posted (2 years 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1627 times:

Your lenses are letting you down there, not the camera. Like I said, upgrading the camera will still leave you with the basic lens limitations. Seeing as it's those limitations weighing you down, what point would there be in buying a new camera?

Karl


User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (2 years 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1599 times:

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 26):
Your lenses are letting you down there, not the camera. Like I said, upgrading the camera will still leave you with the basic lens limitations. Seeing as it's those limitations weighing you down, what point would there be in buying a new camera?

Karl

I do I agree that my lens are crap but as for the camera, while I will use it to some pictures, it will be use for recording for the most part. I am already looking at some lens mainly for other use not for A.net. And I did end up picking up the 60D and I tried it out by taking this two pictures below. I found my 28-135mm lens work better with this camera. it was like love at first sight for both.




A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 28, posted (2 years 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1596 times:

The 28-135 to be fair is the bext lens you have, so I'd consider the others for any possible upgrade first. You clearly have a decent copy, as the 18mp sensor of the 60D would show flaws much more liberally than your Rebel.

If you needed the HD recording capability, you have made the right choice.

Karl


User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (2 years 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1558 times:

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 28):
The 28-135 to be fair is the bext lens you have, so I'd consider the others for any possible upgrade first. You clearly have a decent copy, as the 18mp sensor of the 60D would show flaws much more liberally than your Rebel.

If you needed the HD recording capability, you have made the right choice.

Karl

I agree with you on the 28-135 being the best lens I have even though it is slow in focusing. I have thought about the 100-400mm Canon lens but I am afraid the cost is too much for me. What lens do you think it best to get without spending the $1000's?

thanks



A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 30, posted (2 years 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1548 times:

Quoting kl692 (Reply 29):
What lens do you think it best to get without spending the $1000's?

Whenever I'm asked this question there is only ever one answer - the 70-200 f/4 L. It's about GB£500 ($750) here but cheaper in north America, and it's by far the best value lens out there, for any camera. It's super-sharp, has super-fast, internal focusing, is built like a tank and takes some of the best images you'll ever see!

Only downside for many is that it only stretches to 200mm - but it'll give you better quality at 200mm with a significant crop than your 55-250 at 250mm.

Coupled with your 28-135 you should be okay for lenses for a good while.

Karl


User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (2 years 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1528 times:

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 30):
Whenever I'm asked this question there is only ever one answer - the 70-200 f/4 L. It's about GB£500 ($750) here but cheaper in north America, and it's by far the best value lens out there, for any camera. It's super-sharp, has super-fast, internal focusing, is built like a tank and takes some of the best images you'll ever see!

Only downside for many is that it only stretches to 200mm - but it'll give you better quality at 200mm with a significant crop than your 55-250 at 250mm.

Coupled with your 28-135 you should be okay for lenses for a good while.

Karl

Thanks Karl, I have heard good things about that lens too, it's roughly $500 to $600 for a used one. I thought about it before but I wanted to get the 100-400MM. Maybe I will get that one and later on pickup extender which will give me the 400MM.



A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlinestevemchey From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 365 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (2 years 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1524 times:

Quoting kl692 (Reply 31):
Maybe I will get that one and later on pickup extender which will give me the 400MM.

Just FYI: Unless you have a 1D or 1Ds, you will lose AF when you add a 2x extender to the 70-200 f/4.


User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (2 years 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1514 times:

Quoting stevemchey (Reply 32):
Just FYI: Unless you have a 1D or 1Ds, you will lose AF when you add a 2x extender to the 70-200 f/4.

And this really newbie question to ask but what is 1D or 1Ds?



A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 34, posted (2 years 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1513 times:

Canon's top-of-the-range, pro cameras.

I'm puzzled - you say you can't afford the 100-400L, ask what lens is best for the money then discard the advice and again return to the notion of owning a 100-400L.

The 70-200s are sharper (not to say the 100-400L isn't sharp) and to be quite honest a more useful focal length for aviation photography in general.

Karl


User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (2 years 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1504 times:

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 34):
I'm puzzled - you say you can't afford the 100-400L, ask what lens is best for the money then discard the advice and again return to the notion of owning a 100-400L.

why are you puzzled? I said I will pick up the 70-200mm and get extender later on to make it 400 and as a matter of fact i am looking at one right now



A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 36, posted (2 years 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1498 times:

Quoting kl692 (Reply 35):
why are you puzzled? I said I will pick up the 70-200mm

You said.....

Quoting kl692 (Reply 31):
Maybe

Anyway, it doesn't matter. The 70-200 f/4 will serve you well, although I'd recommend the 1.4x extender over the 2x (unless you're going to opt for the mark III, which is supposedly very effective).

Kar


User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (2 years 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1496 times:

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 36):
Anyway, it doesn't matter. The 70-200 f/4 will serve you well, although I'd recommend the 1.4x extender over the 2x (unless you're going to opt for the mark III, which is supposedly very effective).

Kar

I think I am loosing my mind, So I end up picking up the 70-200MM (my wife doesn't know about my spending in the three days) and all I am going to say is WOW. here is my the first image I took with it. I still need to play it to get used ti ut.




A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 38, posted (2 years 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1473 times:

Is that sharpened?

If you like you can send me a few full-sized images so I can compare them with with mine. Need to make sure you have a decent copy but my first impression is that you do! If you want to forward some images contact me via one of my photos here.

Karl


User currently offlinekl692 From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 675 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (2 years 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1243 times:

hello, I had this one reject for the following reasons: : ccw rotation required, magenta colour cast level colour personal.
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/20120707_d1340970662.2287c-gfur-nose.jpg



A310, A330,A346,B73H, B747,B772,B77W,CRJ
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Post Screening (KL692)
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format