[photog stuff] Got a Raptor!

Okiewan

Admin
Dec 31, 1969
29,550
2,238
Texas
For the kid :p
2 years old, figured out how to deal with handlebars right off the bat, I thought for sure he'd take some time with that. Yeah, I know, the quad thing. Will get him something respectable next year.

A new quad and a cherry sucker, it's all good.
(yes dear, I took the sucker away before he rode it).
 

Attachments

  • quad2.jpg
    quad2.jpg
    108.5 KB · Views: 233

ellandoh

dismount art student
~SPONSOR~
Mi. Trail Riders
Aug 29, 2004
2,958
0
its almost as clean as your bike :nener:

my nephews started (4yo+5yo) on a pocket rocket 18v crotch rocket with the faring removed to look more dirt friendly. taught throttle and braking control very well. as well as how to overcome the complete lack of suspension :p
 

oldguy

Always Broken
Dec 26, 1999
9,411
0
Eric had one of those when he was about 3 and by the time a neighbor bought it from us when he was to big for it (about 16 years old I think) the tires were smooth. Last I saw it it was at the 4th neighbors house and the tires were nothing but plastic with duct tape wrapped around them
 

squeaky

Roosta's Princess
Damn Yankees
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Mar 28, 2003
2,561
0
Awesome Okie! Get some dirt on that thing, wouldya??? ;)
 

rickyd

Hot Sauce
Oct 28, 2001
3,447
0
I like the last shot, mouth open, teeth cleched, lookin where he wants too go.. great form :)
 

Okiewan

Admin
Dec 31, 1969
29,550
2,238
Texas
Yes.
I considered (for about 10 seconds) the 16-35 2.8 L, but at twice the cost ( :yikes: ), I decided to "give up" that extra stop for his (typically) landscape lens :p This is what I replaced the 10-20 with, although that lens will end up back in my gear list eventually.

As far as the comparison... the 10-20 Sigma is just as sharp (step'd down a little) as the L (which really has no sweet spot that I've found), Canon is more contrasty and the colors a little better out of the camera. Build is better on the Canon, but nothing huge, I've always been happy with the Sigma EX build quality and will own more of them.

BTW, the first two in this thread were shot with the Sigma 24-70 2.8 EX.
 

Rich Rohrich

Moderator / BioHazard
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Jul 27, 1999
22,839
16,904
Chicago
Okie said:
Yes.
I considered (for about 10 seconds) the 16-35 2.8 L, but at twice the cost ( :yikes: ), I decided to "give up" that extra stop for his (typically) landscape lens :p This is what I replaced the 10-20 with, although that lens will end up back in my gear list eventually.

I love the 10-20mm Sigma but it is too wide for most non-landscape stuff so I found a good deal on a used Nikon 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5.

Angle of View for the 18-35 is 76-44 degrees (Nikon DX format) versus the 102.4 - 63.8° of the Sigma 10-20. The Nikon lens looks to have similar specs to the Canon you have.

I figure with these two I have just about every wide angle shot covered for about half the cost of the Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8D.

I looked at the EXIF data on all the car, bike & trade show stuff I've shot and the vast majority of the pics fall in the range the 17-35 will cover, plus I'll get a better viewing angle to crop from, and just better views overall.

The 10-20mm Sigma will still be my go to lens when it's anything to do with landscapes. I finally found a good deal (good old Central Camera) on a used high end, thin 77mm polarizer for it so I'll have some interesting shots coming soon from the high floors of some Chicago buildings.
 

Okiewan

Admin
Dec 31, 1969
29,550
2,238
Texas
Cool on the 18-35 ... I'm thinking the same way about the 10-20; the 17-40 will get used a lot more often, but I'd sure like to have the UWA to pull out of the bag.

Looking forward to the Chicago shots! Fall/Winter sky/air should really make them pop when you are out there in Jan. freezing your arse off for our picture viewing pleasure :)
 

Rich Rohrich

Moderator / BioHazard
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Jul 27, 1999
22,839
16,904
Chicago
Half the shots I took downtown in May were done under cold windy conditions. :whoa:
 
Top Bottom