I took some snow photos in Tahoe a few weeks ago (posted to flickr) and it’s tough (lost a lens cap and there was condensation everywhere), but the results were great.

For Bruce:
I use the lightweight 55-200 VR lens for portraits. It does a terrific job as long as you have plenty of light and/or good flashes. I like the longer lenses because it makes candid portraits easier, and flattens facial features. Best of all, you don’t need to sell a lens to afford it!

I have been a casual browser of your blog and I really do appreciate some of the images you put up from time to time. It was from you, that I decided to add the 17-55 to my already existing Sigma 30mm 1.4. Now comes the time that I find having a longer lens to be more useful.

I want to ask you, if you don’t mind doing a quick metadata search sometime, what focal length do you use most in your photography? I’ll be doing event/gathering and portrait photography and I find the 17-55 isn’t *that* much of a jewel to me. I feel I can get by a lot with my 30 stopped down. What do you think, for you? I travel once in a while, but I don’t find the need for a 17mm all the time. I can easily stitch panos taken with the 30mm.

See, for me, I find going really close for a tight portrait at 55mm to be a real drag, I am thinking of selling the 17-55 in favor of the 70-200. I don’t have the money to have both in my arsenal at this moment in time. Nor have I ever experienced the 55+ range. But I own a Fuji dSLR and I think having a long lens for portraits only makes sense.

I am sorry I had to post this on your blog, I could not find your email.

Thanks,
Bruce (b.yh.yan gmail com)