Thanks Dan! Yeah it’s nice to be in a state that shares ones’ values. Lots of flags still flying. I’ve got several assignments coming up in states that don’t, so I’ll go do my job, collect my cash and kick the dust from my feet.
I agree, it may be my favorite aviation image. The success of it was largely due to Glenn and Andrew and their precision performance. We thought that we had more time but the tower shut us down because we had turned the field IFR after three passes. Really it took two passes to dial it in and the third was the charm. The same sunrise zero wind conditions that allowed such an amazing image shut us down because the smoke just hung over the field. The tower called us to ask if we would shut it down for a while until the smoke cleared, but we know the light wouldn't be the same so we headed to the FBO to review our shots. Didn't take long to see that there was no reason to regroup and try again.
I believe that my scammer has disappeared. He confirmed the date and my quote and said that he was ready pay by credit card. I said that was fine, let's do it via PayPal, and told him to send me his name, company name and email so I could send him an invoice with the amount and the terms. He's been comm out ever since.
JWilsonphoto wrote:
Thanks Dan! Yeah it’s nice to be in a state that shares ones’ values. Lots of flags still flying. I’ve got several assignments coming up in states that don’t, so I’ll go do my job, collect my cash and kick the dust from my feet.
Keep your head on a swivel Jim! We are going to hell in a handbasket fast!!!!
RD
You are so right Dan, and 50% of the populace couldn't be happier about it. The class and racial warfare tactics are working well, division and mistrust on all fronts, aren't we so proud?!
JWilsonphoto wrote:
You are so right Dan, and 50% of the populace couldn't be happier about it. The class and racial warfare tactics are working well, division and mistrust on all fronts, aren't we so proud?!
I haven't watch any TV for many months, except the Euro Cup a few weeks ago. Haven't watched the Olympics on TV at all but watched some replays on Youtube. We still have athletes that respect our flag and anthem. Even when most of players the U.S. women soccer team led by that purple hair dude knelt during the national anthem, three players defied the peer pressure and stood up and placed their hand over their heart.
I just watched this video about the new all around gold medalist Suni Lee, an American of Hmong descent in Minnesota. : &t=216s
Watch what her sister said at 4:35. These are some grateful Americans, they didn't come to this country to complain, unlike that creature from Somali who represents Minneapolis in the U.S. congress.
2022 will be very interesting, it's difficult for me to believe that the majority of Americans are onboard with the mess we have now, but maybe I am naive. There are so many ironic, no, moronic, things taking place that it is difficult to fathom. The mainstream media isn't saying much about the border, but it's a mess here in Texas. Our border patrol has been overwhelmed since the election and now the administration is flying thousands of illegals all over the country under cover of darkness, 30% of whom are covid positive, yet they are mandating masks for the rest of us. I have a ton of friends who fly for the airlines and they are telling me the illegals, unvetted, many with criminal backgrounds, many with diseases we have heretofore stamped out, and they can get on a flight at any airport with a home made, or no identification and fly anywhere that they have a government issued ticket for. Does that make sense to anyone? We, as a country are so collectively stupid that we just dig a toe in the dirt and let it all happen.
Douglas L wrote:
I haven't watch any TV for many months, except the Euro Cup a few weeks ago. Haven't watched the Olympics on TV at all but watched some replays on Youtube. We still have athletes that respect our flag and anthem. Even when most of players the U.S. women soccer team led by that purple hair dude knelt during the national anthem, three players defied the peer pressure and stood up and placed their hand over their heart.
I just watched this video about the new all around gold medalist Suni Lee, an American of Hmong descent in Minnesota. : &t=216s
Watch what her sister said at 4:35. These are some grateful Americans, they didn't come to this country to complain, unlike that creature from Somali who represents Minneapolis in the U.S. congress.
I served with the Hmongs for 2 years Douglas. I only trusted them or the Montangyards. Both are very proud peoples who deserve respect and admiration.
They have always had mine!
Dan
The previous image was captured using a Canon 300/2.8 Series I. I've been thinking a lot about the new RF lenses and even my 200-400 EF. They are all great pieces of glass, and while they aren't inexpensive, for the image quality they are capable of, they are reasonably priced. One wonders, given how great these lenses perform, is it worth spending four/five times more to have lenses like the 400/2.8, 600/4 III, 800/5.6? I've been going over and over that question as I consider more esoteric "big whites". My 200-400 is an incredible lens, reaching up to 560mm with the 1.4 teleconverter flipped in, is the 600/4 III worth the expense when you have something that close? The difference in background/subject separation using an f/4 lens vs an f/5.6 or can f/8, is really pretty remarkable in a side by side comparison. If you are shooting aircraft in flight from the ground, the difference is really negligible and not worth the additional investment, but if you are shooting wildlife, portraits, car/motorcycle racing, aircraft on the ground, and you want your images to be strikingly different, they are worth the investment.
JWilsonphoto wrote:
The previous image was captured using a Canon 300/2.8 Series I. I've been thinking a lot about the new RF lenses and even my 200-400 EF. They are all great pieces of glass, and while they aren't inexpensive, for the image quality they are capable of, they are reasonably priced. One wonders, given how great these lenses perform, is it worth spending four/five times more to have lenses like the 400/2.8, 600/4 III, 800/5.6? I've been going over and over that question as I consider more esoteric "big whites". My 200-400 is an incredible lens, reaching up to 560mm with the 1.4 teleconverter flipped in, is the 600/4 III worth the expense when you have something that close? The difference in background/subject separation using an f/4 lens vs an f/5.6 or can f/8, is really pretty remarkable in a side by side comparison. If you are shooting aircraft in flight from the ground, the difference is really negligible and not worth the additional investment, but if you are shooting wildlife, portraits, car/motorcycle racing, aircraft on the ground, and you want your images to be strikingly different, they are worth the investment....Show more →
Interesting thoughts and observations, Jim. I like all the water park images – but I love the last one! The isolation of the subject against a subdued background is what helps transition a great action shot into the realms of art. Wonderful work! How much of that is down to using the wider aperture of the big primes is something that you (and very few others ?) can truly judge. But the big zooms do have a trick up their sleeve – close focus! My experience is limited to the 100-400 L IS II – I could nether lift nor afford / justify anything bigger. But the close focus of the zooms opens up a lot of possibilities with botanical subjects and gives perspectives not possible with even the longer macro lenses. All IMHO.
We need Ray to offer some thoughts on the indoor / nigh time sports gig. When I see those guys on TV there are quite a few not shooting with big lenses now. A few years ago it was all big lenses without exception. Is the better high ISO performance of modern cameras shifting the balance?
nickjohnson wrote:
Interesting thoughts and observations, Jim. I like all the water park images – but I love the last one! The isolation of the subject against a subdued background is what helps transition a great action shot into the realms of art. Wonderful work! How much of that is down to using the wider aperture of the big primes is something that you (and very few others ?) can truly judge. But the big zooms do have a trick up their sleeve – close focus! My experience is limited to the 100-400 L IS II – I could nether lift nor afford / justify anything bigger. But the close focus of the zooms opens up a lot of possibilities with botanical subjects and gives perspectives not possible with even the longer macro lenses. All IMHO.
We need Ray to offer some thoughts on the indoor / nigh time sports gig. When I see those guys on TV there are quite a few not shooting with big lenses now. A few years ago it was all big lenses without exception. Is the better high ISO performance of modern cameras shifting the balance?...Show more →
Most of the "paid" sports photographers are still using the big white 400 f/2.8. This past year I have left my 300 f/2.8 in the safe and have been using my 100-400 IS v.II. It is a very capable lens. I rarely shoot at f/2.8, I like f/4.0+. My reason is I want more of the subject/action/ball in focus. I also believe 4.0 blurs the background just enough to help the subject/action pop a little like you see in Jim's photos. I will take a hit on the high ISO/noise because I think with more action in focus, the noise is not as obvious to the viewer. Plus, I can wield that 100-400 handheld and run up and down the field for different compositions. (Think a septuagenarian running up the football sideline with two cameras with a bunch of high schools kids chuckling at the 'old guy'.) The guys with the 400's are pretty stationary, moving down the field a few steps with the plays or staying in the end zones.
As part of my gear realignment, I am considering a pro body and the 200-400 Jim talks about. I just wonder if I would miss the 100mm ability to capture the backfield action from the sideline. Same problem with baseball from the dugout at first and third base. That 100-400 is just so darn versatile.
Ray
Of course when the sun is out I will still shoot at f/5 and adjust my shutter speed up. But again, that 100-400 allowed me to stand next to the receiver as he caught the ball in the end zone while the f/5 gets the defender in focus, but blurring the non-action. Mighty versitile lens...
