All too true. My 80-200/2.8 Tokina is almost never where it needs to be
unless I'm within 50 yards of the car. Maybe one of these days I'll
learn to carry the Zuiko 200/4 or maybe even get a 200/5 to go along
with the Tamron 24-135. :-)
Chuck Norcutt
Moose wrote:
> Daniel Sepke wrote:
>> Or you could buy into the Arca Swiss world. Gain multi manufacturer support,
>> many accessory devices and superb craftsmanship from at least two major and
>> several minor makers. Yes the buy in is higher but I have never regretted
>> the choice myself. I made the call to buy in right at the beginning of my
>> major kit building so avoided the round of upgrades that seems to plague the
>> tripod/head business. Of course as ever YMMV :) .
>>
>
> Yes, MMDV. One tightrope I walk in choosing equipment is between
> functionality and size/weight. Cost is often as issue, as well, but of a
> different nature.
>
> The old saw is still true, the camera, lens, tripod, head, and so on,
> that doesn't get to the site of the shot is of no value, no matter how
> wonderful it is. I have several pieces of photographic equipment that
> fit all too often into this category.
>
> If I were a pro, things would be different. Shooting this locomotive,
> I'd have hauled in the 16# Manfrotto tripod, a 20+MP camera and the
> Zuiko 18/3.5 for a true panorama shot. I would have at least considered
> using a ladder to peek over the adjacent locomotive and try a shot from
> maybe twice as far away and a bit above. Might be striking.
>
> I'd also pick a different time of day or year for the light from the big
> window or hang a huge diffuser and probably have to use additional
> lights. And I'd have to hire a child to stand around looking cute. :-)
>
> But I do this for fun. To the extent that others enjoy any of my images,
> I'm pleased, but my primary motivation is to please myself. So the
> equipment has to fit into the "Moose will actually carry it with him
> more than once" criterion. Big tripods, heads and QR mechanisms are
> non-starters there.
>
> In this case, the gear I hauled around hanging from my body on a warm
> day in Old Sacramento, 5D, 28-300, 17-35 and 90 macro Tamrons and 50/1.8
> Canon was just at my limit. That combination of lenses is also a work of
> compromise between size, weight and function. If I had the Canon L
> equivalent lenses, they couldn't all go with me most of the time.
>
> Every once in a while, I go through a period of serious desire for the
> Canon 100-400L lens. So far, these periods have ended with the
> realization that it would be forever the piece of gear left home or in
> the car, but "I'll use it next time." My resistance is helped by the
> similar fate of the similar size/weight Tamron 80-200/2.8. Wonderful
> lens, but I've taken very few images with it over the years for the
> simple reason that it's not been there when the shot is to be taken.
>
> Soooo, My affection for the light, handy QR products is purely
> practical. They do a better job in the field with me than would much
> sturdier and "better" versions that wouldn't be there. Also, as the
> equipment that they may be called on to support is subject to the same
> selection rules, not as much strength is required of my tripod/head/QR
> gear.
>
> The Velbon Heads and QR plates I like are quite sufficient for 5D and
> 28-300 Tamron, which is the biggest, heaviest combo they are likely to
> have to support. On those very rare occasions where I haul heavier gear,
> or want more precision, the Manfrotto geared head and Hakuba CF tripod
> are great. If things get really serious, the massive Manfrotto hexagonal
> plates, massive three way head and massive tripod are quite sufficient
> for even the 150-500/5.6 or 1000/11 and any cameras that may happen to
> be hanging off them.
>
> Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|