These elephants are something I’ve never noticed at our California Academy of Sciences:
These elephants, the ones moving along.
They also have leopard vocalizations, which is something new, I think. Look up.
See you there!
Consarnit, I remember back in aught-nine when a person could buy a 47-inch focal length EOS camera lens for a mere $120,000, but these days? In these days, the very same lens will run you $180,000:
Go ahead and slap it on your $400 Drebel – it’ll fit. No fancy IS Image Stabilization or nothing, but it’ll fit
All the deets:
“The Canon 1200/5.6L USM, the longest fixed telephoto lens ever built by Canon, contains 13 elements (2 Fluorite) in 10 groups and focus’ down to 49.5′. With an angle-of- view of about 2° on a full-frame 35 mm camera, calling this lens a ‘tele’ is like calling King Kong a monkey.
Built-to-order by Canon from 1993 to 2005, each lens was hand-crafted at the rate of about 2-per-year and a delivery time of about 18 months. Only a dozen-or-so were ever made. Who bought them? National Geographic magazine and Sports Illustrated are known to own a couple, the Feds probably have a few squirreled away somewhere, and a few well-heeled photo enthusiasts.
This particular lens is extremely clean inside and out. Included with this lens is a leather slip-on ‘lens cap’, the original fitted aluminum trunk case, a custom trunk case with wheels that holds the original trunk case, and a prodigious measure of ego satisfaction. Weighing in at over 36lbs and an overall length of 33 inches, a sturdy tripod and pan/tilt head is highly recommended.
Pack mule not included.“
Canon’s aging beast, the Clinton-era EF 100–400mm f/4.5–5.6L IS USM lens is no more – after 16 years of production, it’s being replaced by the EF 100–400mm f/4.5–5.6L IS USM II, a more conventional design.
Here are some “dust trombones*” right here, back about a decade ago, all extended to the 400mm telephoto setting, the better to see the Blue Angels over Fort Mason, my dear:
Click to expand
The thing about the old lens is that it offered IMAGE STABILIZATION (IS) plus an “ULTRASONIC” MOTOR (USM) (for fast auto-focus) in the same package. At the time, Nikon couldn’t keep up, so it would make you choose betwixt one feature or the other, if you were lucky. Nikon lost a lot of customers during the Aughts for just this reason.
I’m sure the updated lens will be better (and of course, lots pricier) in most respects.
Adieu, push-pull lens.
*Pull it in fast enough and you can feel the breeze on your face, since all that air inside needs to go somewhere…
Take a close look at this motorcyclist’s helmet on Geary – in between the two tall buildings, you can see the coming construction site of 1481 Post.
Dude gives off a Hank Schrader vibe:
Some people who opposed the 8 Washington Wall on the Waterfront project just might support a tall spire on the top of Cathedral Heights, right?
I think so.
Anyway, all moto helmets should be chromed, huh?
“@umi: did you leave a pentax camera on one of the benches outside 18th street in potrero? tell us the model & lens, we’re holding it…”
I don’t know if he does it anymore, but around town there’s a celebrity photographer who would take full-length portraits of party guests using his full-frame Canon DSLR (MSRP = $8000) and a super wide-angle lens.
It was grisly – you’d end up seeing people with big heads and tiny legs. Kind of like this.
That’s what you might call a bird’s eye view of Bernie Ecclestone’s shoes:
Next stop: Animals Close Up, With A Wide Angled Lens
Now, I don’t think that you could ban DSLR use in San Francisco. There’d be a rebellion or something.
Cause if something happens, it didn’t happen unless it was recorded somehow – that’s how we look at it.
Our Folsom Street Fair 2009 was a great day for walkies with the slave, past the guy with the Nikon, past the guy with the Canon, past the Leather Etc…(!) store…:
Just be on the look-out for this guy. I think he’s up to something:
You’ll have to figure out for yourself just exactly where in Marin County this nude beach is, in this mostly-SFW photo from a while ago. The place was officially closed at the time due to an unsafe stairway and it’s more-than-likely officially closed at this time.
But actually, your nudist types like out-of-the-way places anyway, the kind that require long descents from the nearest road.
The nude types were to the east of the stairway and the never-nudes were to the west – it all worked out. All the while, a couple of fun fearless females felt free to parade up and down the whole beach by the low tide line, on the catwalk, they did their little turn on the catwalk, yeah on the catwalk, on the catwalk, yeah, they did a little turn on the catwalk for about half-hour:
Click to expand
By the way, is there a special law that disallows photography on Public Nude Beaches? Not that I’m aware of.