Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 26, 2007, 10:35 AM   #21
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6
Default

I imagine that having the 300 would indeed cause me to miss a lot of shots I'm used to getting. I might be able to live with a 200 fixed and presume I could crop and and enlarge (I imagine you just rolled your eyes...what a rookie???:roll - any comment? I do use a monopod, but have never used a lens that doesn't have IS. I expect I shouldn't have a problem with the Sigma in that regard, because of the monopod. In the end, for what I'm shooting,do you lean towardsthe 120-300 f/2.8 for me or the 100-300 f/4, price aside?
pointandshootguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2007, 10:48 AM   #22
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

pointandshootguy wrote:
Quote:
In the end, for what I'm shooting,do you lean towardsthe 120-300 f/2.8 for me or the 100-300 f/4, price aside?
Price asside, the 120-300 2.8 is going to be more flexible - it will allow you to shoot in low light when the 100-300 could not. If you're positive you would NEVER need to shoot in low light then the 100-300 is a great way to go because it's so much less $$$$. But, there's a reason I shoot with the 120-300 instead of the 100-300 - 2.8!
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2007, 1:30 PM   #23
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

pointandshootguy wrote:
Quote:
... I do use a monopod, but have never used a lens that doesn't have IS. I expect I shouldn't have a problem with the Sigma in that regard, because of the monopod...
The monopod helps in the fatigue department (i.e. the weight)
-> The IS rarely comes into play if you're talking about shooting outdoor sports like you mentioned in your 1st post! To freeze the action you already need a high enough shutter speed from the camera that your handshake will never be a factor... You might as well turn the IS off and save on the battery


I shoot birds which are mostly static so IS should help me more in the shade right?
Well not really either - The IS on my 500 f/4 is usually in the OFF position to enable sharper pictures and here's why:
When I shoot birds in nature I usually have to point my camera up in the trees and guess what? With the shade from the leaves, the bright sky is usually right behind them branches, so yes IS will help me get that shot, but the subject will usually be underexposed against a brighter background. To compensate I usually use a fast flash burst which will also make IS redundant (BTW a flash offers other benefits such as color saturation and contrast as opposed to IS alone in poor lighting)!
-> I will gladly buy a lower priced 500 f/4 without IS if I had to do it over again...
(A Sigma 500mm f/4.5 anyone? 1/3-stop less but a whole lot lighter!!!)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:57 PM.