|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,411
|
![]()
First impression on opening was , solid feel andgood looking lens. Case is a little flimsy (like fisheye 10-17mm but larger). Had to get used to quiet focus, hear nothing but view snaps into focus quickly. Focuses faster than Sigma EX 100-300mm F4 or Tokina ATX 840. Took lens to Rookery I have been following for 7 to 8 weeks. Lens seems to be sharp, on first impression of viewing results. Worked with Kenco 1.5 Teleconverter but focus noticably slower. Without Teleconverter my first impression is a higher percentage of BIF in focus.
As of now I am pleased with the trade off. I did not miss having no zoom for this kind of use and will use the Tokina when needed. At this point I am happy with the change. This weekend I will post some similar photos with and without the TC and with and without croping. I did not try any BIF with TC. Ed |
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,411
|
![]()
Egret crop
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 179
|
![]()
Simply beautiful. What a lovely creature. I vote for you keeping the lens.
Can you share the camera stats and lens settings? What am I likely to have to save (hide) for eventually buying one of those lenses? Old Engineer |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,177
|
![]()
Pretty impressive for a first day shot, and a white bird, too. I'm going to be following your experiences with this lens with great interest - though I'm still not convinced I'd be any better off. I actually like not having the zoom - less to think about when you are looking way out there.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hobart Tasmania
Posts: 489
|
![]()
I'm jealous
:angry: Phil |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northwest Ohio
Posts: 1,965
|
![]()
Phil and Harriet sum it up pretty well. First day with the lens and you get shots like that!!??As Paulie said at the Thunderlips fight (ie. Rocky III for those too young to remember), "I don't need this!"
Glenn |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,024
|
![]()
Ed,
Its a shocker, Terrible, terrible. Quick send it to me and I will take it off your hands. :blah: Great Shot ![]() PK |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,154
|
![]()
I want one!!! My F 100-300mm f4.5-5.6 zoom simply is not as sharp and cannot focus fast enough to keep up (one stop slower and no SDM, along with the usual zoom compromises).
I think you have a great lens there, and the simpler optical formula of a prime lens should give better results with the teleconverter than you would get with a zoom. (Although there are always many variables to take into account when we mix optical devices) Ira |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
|
![]()
Looks good so far...I would still prefer a f/2.8 though.
Dawg |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California USA
Posts: 5,206
|
![]()
Congratulations - the faster focus should be a boon for bifs. Besides the nonSDM TCslowing the focus speed by reverting to mechanical focus (or isn't that why it is slower?), TCs have been known to degrade an image, especially if not specifically matched to the lens, so it will be interesting to compare shots with the TC with crops to the same size from images tzaken without the TC. You might be better without it.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|