A couple of Aggie shots from last season

[ctp93]

I am SO ready for college football...

[Jim]

I'm no aggie fan, but that third one is a great action shot!! It makes me miss football already.

[ctp93]

I am relatively new to photography, and I wish I had known as much about post processing as I do now. It took me forever to figure out why I was losing my sharpness on my web images until I found out that I was saving everything at some crazy compression level. I guess I could go back and redo them now, but that would take forever. HAHA

That particular shot you mention was with a my old 75-300. I have grown to hate that lens, but it was lal I had for a long time.

[LoungeLizard]

Originally Posted by ctp93

That particular shot you mention was with a my old 75-300. I have grown to hate that lens, but it was lal I had for a long time.

Why do you hate it?

[Wendy]

So, what lens were the first and second shots taken with? If you say the 70-200 2.8L, I'll give you my first born. (you'd give him back pretty quickly anyway ) I figure I can show these photos to my husband and tell him what lens you took them with, and I'll have that lens in my hands within the hour. :mrgreen:

Seriously, those are great shots!!! I am very envious. If I took those photos, my dh would have poster size prints hanging throughout our house.

[sbug_adam]

i miss aggieland, LOL. great shots!

Adam

[ctp93]

Those were all with the 75-300. When I bought the lens, I loved it. It is the IS version, but I NEVER use the IS. The lens is ok. I have noticed that there is some variation in copies though. Mine is pretty sharp in general, but some are not. I know people who have taken at least two back to get a sharper copy.

Overall, for the money, it is great. But once I got the 70-200 2.8L, I almost never touch the 75-300 anymore. I only use it when I am hunting and then only when it is good light.

I did shoot a couple of high school football seasons with it in TERRIBLE light. It was difficult to get REALLY good shots with it in the poor light, so I don't even bother now.

If I had extentsion tubes, I would just sell the lens and use my 70-200. I'd get the same f-stops and sharper images.

I guess it isn't really that bad...just not the low light performer I wish it was. With all the low light stuff I shoot, it isn't great for me.

[ctp93]

Wendy, this is the 70-200 2.8L in TERRIBLE light. This was a rainy day, right before a huge storm...and it was almost sundown. 1600 ISO.



Now this lens is my favorite toy. I have collected some nice glass over time, and the 70-200 2.8 is by far my most used and prized lens.

[gene74]

what mode do you usually use for this? Aperture?

[ctp93]

I shoot manual most of the time with the 70-200. If you mean the 75-300, I was shooting AV most likely. There was plenty of light at the games. (One cool thing about shooting college football is the day games)

When I was shooting the softball game it was really getting dark fast, so I was at ISO 1600, 2.8, and 200. I would have had better stop motion if I was shooting at 300 or probably even 250, but it wasn't too bad.

[Sheldon]

I use to march in College (many moons ago), so naturally I love the 1st image! GREAT shot!

[Sheldon]

Originally Posted by ctp93

Now this lens is my favorite toy. I have collected some nice glass over time, and the 70-200 2.8 is by far my most used and prized lens.

I have to agree, its an Awesome lens!! Its on my camera 75% of the time.

[sbug_adam]

thats still good looking shots!

Adam