Posts for: mongoose777
Aug 13, 2016 01:25:23 #
The 80-400 and the 200-500 are great lens as they are a lot of bang for your buck for those on a budget, but lets get real here,
there is no damn way your gonna get great results with those zoom lens and a tc in comparison to the nikon elite primes.
If this were true, then why in the hell would Nikon make a 200,300,400 & 600 prime lens to name a few?
I would then sell all my prime lens to buy these cheaper lens if they were equal in quality of these said primes.
Just be happy that these cheaper zoom lens are out there with a budget in mind and that they will get the job done for almost everybody
who uses them, except for most if not all professionals.
Happy Shooting as Nikon has given us all a great variety of wonderful lens to use for almost all out there.
there is no damn way your gonna get great results with those zoom lens and a tc in comparison to the nikon elite primes.
If this were true, then why in the hell would Nikon make a 200,300,400 & 600 prime lens to name a few?
I would then sell all my prime lens to buy these cheaper lens if they were equal in quality of these said primes.
Just be happy that these cheaper zoom lens are out there with a budget in mind and that they will get the job done for almost everybody
who uses them, except for most if not all professionals.
Happy Shooting as Nikon has given us all a great variety of wonderful lens to use for almost all out there.
Aug 13, 2016 00:46:32 #
joer wrote:
I have this lens and 1.4X II version which is said to be the same optically.
The lens takes a big hit loosing one full stop. I find the image quality is very good at f11. Didn't care for anything below that.
So in my opinion it limits you to static images or very bright light.
The lens takes a big hit loosing one full stop. I find the image quality is very good at f11. Didn't care for anything below that.
So in my opinion it limits you to static images or very bright light.
Sorry, but you are incorrect in your comments between the version 2 and 3 TC's.
Who said they were the same?
I've had both and tested them via real world sporting event gigs and the version 3 is superior!!
I have never been a fan of TC's, but the latest version has called me back as I use it with my 400FL for all my paid sporting gigs
as it has absolutely no IQ loss with this setup.
Aug 13, 2016 00:39:22 #
I have the 1.4x III and would only use it for my prime lens like my 400 2.8 FL and 600 F/4 VR2 as I would NEVER use it for my zoom lens such as my 200-400 VR2 and my 70-200 VR2 lens.
The 200-500 and the 80-400 lens are really nice lens, but if used with a 1.4x III they will suffer immensely in comparison to most prime lens.
The 200-500 and the 80-400 lens are really nice lens, but if used with a 1.4x III they will suffer immensely in comparison to most prime lens.
Aug 8, 2016 02:13:34 #
lamiaceae wrote:
This guy either has a soft ass or that is an SLR and not DSLR. You might sit on a Nikon F4 but not D4. And I hope the lens has only internal focusing, any threads would be stripped! Or he is just an millennial ass.
The F4 was built like a tank, but the newer D-bodies are pretty damn robust as I have dropped one from shoulder length on to concrete and it still worked fine, only to find the camera strap eyelet was bent. Ive seen a buddy of mine had a dragster crash against the concrete wall where he happened to be taking pics. He suffered some burns to his upper body, as his 400 and body fell hard to the ground. He had some focus issues with the lens as the body was scuffed pretty bad, but it still kept on ticking.
Aug 8, 2016 02:05:38 #
Jimmy T wrote:
I’m pretty convinced that the young man has absolu... (show quote)
You did mention you were a Canon guy.
But if it were a Canon, then the bayonet would have certainly sheered off, causing the lens to ram up your a**. (joking of course :)
Aug 8, 2016 02:02:01 #
tomcat wrote:
It's probably not his camera. A loaner from Nikon's event supply tent
If so, he's still responsible for damages caused to the loaner equipment should something happen.
You still have to fill out a waiver form and a damage disclosure, also you have to leave your drivers license
with the NPS staff in case you decide to never return,
Hmm, I wonder if a voter ID card would work? ;-P
Aug 8, 2016 01:56:19 #
Dr.Nikon wrote:
We all's got nothing to worry about ..... It's a rental ..., but hey ..., the next guy who rents the lens and camera .... Oh boy ...
I kills me to see anyone doing this to their equip .. All these years ..., I have been very careful and never dropped a lens or camera body ...my stuff has a whole climate controlled safe just for my lenses and camera bodies ... I always get top dollar when a I sell ...
I kills me to see anyone doing this to their equip .. All these years ..., I have been very careful and never dropped a lens or camera body ...my stuff has a whole climate controlled safe just for my lenses and camera bodies ... I always get top dollar when a I sell ...
I seriously doubt its a rental bc that lens is the very new 400 FL (full magnesium body) that costs about $12k.
However, I did borrow a 400FL 2.8 lens from NPS at the NCAA football championship game in Dallas, which is why I decided to buy my own.
I would never sit my 250-lb. large body against such an expensive lens.
As strong as this lens is, I still would never trust the area between the bayonet of the lens and the camera body.
Also, the trim around lens hood connected to the lens housing is only made of plastic with just a few very tiny screws holding it in place,
this would certainly sheer away from the carbon fibered hood, causing a horrific spill and some major damage.
So, I have to agree that this could very well be a fake, albeit a great marketing idea for Nikon.
Jul 26, 2016 13:16:23 #
Ive tried my 1.4x III on a 200-400 f/4 and I was somewhat disappointed at the overall sharpness.
I believe the 1.4x on a 200-500 will yield far worst results.
Im just not a fan using TC's on zoomed lens bc it takes away the twilight factor & pop that Im used too w/o.
FWIW, the Kenko is not as sharp optically as the 1.4x III, but cost is a major factor between the both.
I think the best bang for your buck these days are a Nikon D500 and the very nice 200-500 lens, especially
if used for wildlife.
I believe the 1.4x on a 200-500 will yield far worst results.
Im just not a fan using TC's on zoomed lens bc it takes away the twilight factor & pop that Im used too w/o.
FWIW, the Kenko is not as sharp optically as the 1.4x III, but cost is a major factor between the both.
I think the best bang for your buck these days are a Nikon D500 and the very nice 200-500 lens, especially
if used for wildlife.
Jul 25, 2016 21:40:15 #
Jim Bob wrote:
Why don't you shut up and go find a snake or a person of color to harass.
BTW, I am hispanic, so are you just the typical 'White privilege" or just an A**??
Im glad to know you reviled yourself by removing your red hood.
You should be banned from this forum as bigotry serves no purpose here.
Your an awful person filled with HATE!
Jul 25, 2016 21:36:36 #
Jim Bob wrote:
Of course you do. Everything you just posted proves my point.
Take your ignorance and bigotry to LiveLeak and leave this forum.
BTW, maybe you should quit watching the DNC and stop posting here at the same time
bc its clear your motivated to pick a fight.
We are here for helpful advise on photography.
Jul 25, 2016 21:25:05 #
Jim Bob wrote:
You have proven that racism and ignorance have no limits. Take off that hood and see life the way it really exists. There are more bad apples than you can possibly imagine.
So you imply to remove the hood, are you just a bigot or a race baiter?
Or perhaps just ignorant?
I stand by the Police, especially the Dallas Police Dept.
They did not deserve to be assassinated by the Black Lives Matter and Black Panther supporter.
The Dallas Police Dept has done a great job in Dallas in reaching out to all lives who live in the metroplex.
Jul 25, 2016 20:50:04 #
Jim Bob wrote:
Too bad the African-Americans who were gunned down won't be able to do the same thing.
Most of them already did, its called a MUG SHOT.
BTW, obey the law and listen for instructions by the officer and life will be easier instead of trying to fight back.
I know there are some bad apples, but its not that many.
Hey, why are you wasting your time here, you should be watching your DNP going on CNN
Jul 25, 2016 20:01:06 #
Carl D wrote:
I don't hate the police, I just don't trust them. If I wanted to get shot then I'd call a cop, but since I prefer to live, I'll call my favorite pony "Colt" to settle the situation and he's 45 years old. The cops today are trained to be nothing more than paramilitary thugs, who when not in a group are scared of their own shadow.
Settle a situation with your Colt? Yeah right...
Obviously your a liar bc you would have already been in jail for your ignorant statement.
Quite spewing conscience from your mouth while you still can.
Jul 25, 2016 19:52:19 #
Carl D wrote:
The point I'm trying to make is soldiers and sailors are getting killed everyday and we don't even know their name, but let a few cops get killed and it's a national tragedy. They both knew when they signed up for the job that getting killed was a possibility, so what makes one more special than the other?
The difference is our military is at war with ISIS who is a huge threat to the whole population of the USA.
They too know what the possibilities of what can happen with war.
I didn't know the Police Dept throughout the country was at war?
Albeit, there are a few radical groups who have been preaching HATE and want to personally target and kill our law enforcement
while this current administration do actually nothing to bridge the gap.
BTW, great idea SteveR.
Jul 17, 2016 02:43:35 #
selmslie wrote:
Maybe you should take a closer look at that link f... (show quote)
Not only does he prove he's wrong about true knowledge and facts, he's just one ignorant voice when it comes to what the real pros use to satisfy their clients.
Again, I have (2) D4s and a D500, as the D5 is truly a much better camera than all in everything, except under 1600 ISO IMO.
The stats he provided prove nothing about his actual use of the D5 other than complaining about why its not a good camera. I guarantee the main reason why he complains
about the D5 is because he just cannot afford it, so he does the next coward thing by bashing it.
Bottom line, I dont give a damn about stats or other biased opinions, it all comes down to one thing in the end, 'CAN I MAKE MONEY SATISFYING MY CLIENTS?'.
I do, and I can safely say that with the upmost confidence for my clients.
Finally, I do make a very good living in college and pro sports.