If you look in the first photo you can see the LF guy bending down (for a reference point only). If you look at his rig it is bending down like in the second photo. Just really doesn't look.
Gary Petersen wrote:
I looked at a magnified version in photoshop and it looks like a quick and dirty photoshop job. Besides, no one would hold that by the body only.
Photoshopped? Why would someone want to photoshop these photos
Gary Petersen wrote:
I looked at a magnified version in photoshop and it looks like a quick and dirty photoshop job. Besides, no one would hold that by the body only.
Say what? Why would someone want to PS a Canon in Action Photo What would be the point?
Gary Petersen wrote:
I looked at a magnified version in photoshop and it looks like a quick and dirty photoshop job. Besides, no one would hold that by the body only.
Photoshop? right...
The lens is on a tripod and he is chimping... he's not holding it just by the body..
On the left: My friend Martijn with 20d, 70-200f2.8L, 2x ext II, manfrotto tripod.
On the right: me with 1D, 100-400L, manfrotto tripod
We were taking pictures of the replacement of a tv antenna on top of our broadcasting tower in Ijsselstein, the netherlands. This tower is higher than the french eifel tower
A special team from switzerland was brought in to replace this 8000 kg weighing antenna, 356meters up in the air, with a helicopter (Super Puma AS 332 C1)
Caleb Williams wrote:
Doesn't he realize that the 300 2.8 isn't a macro and can't focus on a dog that close to the lens. Maybe it's not a TC, but a extension tube...
Maybe he's looking past the dog?
