Random bits of info

So I got the 70-200 f4 lens and got a chance to shoot one of the boys soccer games last week. I'm definitely getting more keepers but it's not just a result of the lens. I spent some more time studying what you need to do for sports photography and figured out I was doing some things wrong. First, I need to shoot in AI Servo focus mode which has predictive autofocus. Combine that with drive mode in continuous shooting and you should be able to get more in focus shots with moving subjects. That seemed to help quite a bit. I've always shot in continuous drive mode but didn't use AI Servo focus. I also set the shutter on 1/250 so I'd always freeze the action. The mistake I made was turning off the IS. I figured it would save some battery life because I was getting low and thought(I don't know why) it might slow the autofocus a bit with a moving subject. Problem is I forgot that the lens on my camera fully extended is a 320mm lens, hence some blurred shots. I'll...

I ended up with the 70-200 f/4 IS USM. I figured in the end the f/4 should be good enough for shooting soccer outdoor and may even work for indoor if there is enough light. The boys don't play indoor yet but they may someday. Hopefully I'm covered. There were a bunch of things that went into my decision: 1. Build quality of 70-200 L lens is outstanding from what I've read. 2. 70-300 f/4-5.6 has a focus ring that rotates during AF which can cause issues if you have a hand on it when it's focusing. I could see that being an issue. 3. 70-300 f/4-5.6 has a front rotating element which makes using polarizers next to impossible. 4. photozone.de results for 70-200 are amazing. According to those tests the lens is excellent throughout it's range and across the entire image 5. I figured you only live once and I was fortunate enough to have the mondy to get it so why not. It will be here on January 20th. I'm excited to try it out.

This is actually getting to be fun. The more I look, the more bargains I am discovering. Apparently the 55-250 and the 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USM IS are pretty highly thought of lenses that don't carry a large price tag. The 55-250 is $255 brand new. The 70-300 comes in at $550. So that gives me some more thinking to do and options to consider. My big concern would be if these would work well for shooting my son's soccer games. Not sure how the AF works on these regarding sports. I'll have to look into it some more.

One of the things I've wrestled with in the past is whether or not I want to start a little photography business. This would obviously be something on the side where I shoot after work or on weekends. I almost got going a few years ago but never quite pulled the trigger. I did a senior photos shoot for a neighbor and they loved the results, or so they told me :). I thought that would get me started but I never put any effort into getting more business. Here I am a couple of years later with a renewed spirit for taking photos and that question popped into my mind again. The big reason it did was that I used a friends 28-70 f/2.8 lens this fall and loved how the photos looked. I decided I wanted one for myself. Well, if I'm going to spend that kind of money then I should try to make some money as well right? For me, the answer is wrong. I just don't want to give up my free time to take photos for someone else, then process them, then print them, then meet with the person to g...

I've figured out a great way to save money on lenses. Simply research them so much that you become thoroughly confused about which one you should buy. You then sit on your hands forever continuing to research and get some clarity. It's working well so far. I think I've actually narrowed down my choices to three. The Sigma 17-70 2.8 to 4 and the Tamron 28-75 2.8. I like that both lenses cover the typical portrait range which is what I'm most interested in. And finally the Sigma 24-70 EX Macro. I like that the one Sigma has a wider range and seems like it would be a better everyday lens. I'm waiting to see some more reviews of it but the reviews of it's predecessor seem pretty positive. Reviews of the 24-70 EX seems excellent as well and that is a Sigma EX lens which is supposed to be a more solid build. It all boiled down to figuring out what kind of photographer I am. I am never going to try to make money off this hobby. I might do an occasional portrait sho...

I have simple needs for managing my photos. I want to be able to easily organize them. Right now I use iPhoto and love it. I don't care about how iPhoto stores photos in Events. I end up tagging all photos and have a bunch of Smart Albums to sort it all out. I love that I have a bunch of keys mapped for tagging photos. Apparently I've set shortcuts up correctly because I can remember 3 months later what my tag was for a certain person. I've been playing around with Picasa on the Mac lately and I really like it. It was easy to pick up and start using. I've been playing around with the facial recognition in it and it works amazingly well and I like how it has a People section so I can see all photos for a person, much like the Smart Albums in iPhoto except it recognizes people for me, I don't have to tag a photo. The tagging, however, seems lacking in Picasa. I can't setup the key shortcuts like I can in iPhoto and having keyboard shortcuts is significantly fast...

I'm still not picking up the camera every day like I wanted to start doing. It's not bothering me though, I'll get there. I do find myself thinking more about photography which leads me to look around a lot more and see more interesting things. I'll get there with picking up the camera every day, just need to make a point of it. I do have my Canon S3 in the work bag now so it's with me. At least I'm starting to look more and think more about what's going on around me.