Sounds like there is something else wrong here to me. I have a d750 and the 28-300mm FX and get sharp results.
It has it's limitations, but can also be very capable. I also use a 70-200 f2.8 which is great, but obviously has less range, and is heavier.
I have never had a problem with mushy pictures. Could you elaborate or post an example?
Very interesting!
Thanks for sharing.
As has been mentioned, it's the signal to noise ratio.
All things being equal, lower ISO will produce a more accurate image.
Think of each pixel as being a solar cell, converting light into electricity.
At low light levels (when we use a higher ISO), we are actually amplifying the signal (and noise).
So when the light (signal) is low, the noise is a bigger percentage of the final signal produced.
This is why putting more pixels into the same space of the cameras sensor, produces smaller 'solar panels', less signal and more noise.
There is a trade off between the amout of pixels vs noise in cameras, hence many expensive cameras are relatively low resolution (and noise).
Having less pixels in the same area ie bigger pixels (solar panels) helps produce a bigger voltage, and the noise is then very small in comparison.
There is a feature on some cameras to reduce noise on long exposures, by taking the shot, then comparing it to a 'blank' shot from the sensor, and removing the difference. This was an old technique used in radio too. Transmit 2 signals, receive it twice, and remove the difference to help reduce background noise.
Last year I upgraded to the 5k 27" version with fusion drive, and am very pleased. The fusion drive makes it a bit faster.
It starts up really fast!
That would be the version I would recommend, if affordable. I upgraded my memory 32GB, which was a more debatable upgrade in my oppinion. It was pretty fast to start with, but I work with HD video.
Like it has been mentioned, additional storage space is always a problem. The Mac has 2 thunderbolt connections, which makes for a very fast connection to an external drive. I opted for a 4TB WD RAID drive which is fast enough to edit video from in real time.
Good luck! Hope you enjoy the new machine for years to come, whatever you opt for.
Depends on the manufacturer, but generally FLASH memory can be read/writen to 100,000+ times.
I have designed electonics for harsh environments using FLASH and many other types of memory.
Wearing out is not an issue.
I use Easy Release from my android phone.
I would not want to be limited to 300mm on a trip.
I have the 28-300mm and it's a great walk around lens, small and light.
In saying that, I leave it at home on a trip and carry the trinity, along with Sigma 150-600mm.
It's heavy, but all fits into a Think Tank Airport carry on backpack and stays with me.
I guess having the 24-70mm and the Sigma 150-600mm as a pair would work pretty well.
If that were too heavy to carry, the 28-300mm.
Everyone must do what is right for them, but I would keep it simple.
There is never going to be much money in this, which is fine.
Print runs are often measured in the 10k volume +, which I doubt a local book would achieve anything near.
If I played my guitar for fun, and a friend asked me to play in his pub, I would expect a few pints for my efforts.
Personally I would not get too hung up on the amount, the kudos and addition to your photographic portfolio is far more valuable at this stage, if you want to start makeing some money from your hobby.
Perhaps you could start by asking what she is expecting to pay? Are you expecting any payment before the book goes to print?
Well done and good luck!
I would usually get anything from £5 to £200 for books, papers or magazines, depending upon how wide a publication it is.
A small local book, I would be thinking a small amount as Perry suggests, around $25 plus of course having your name which helps next time. Personally, I would be happy enough with $10 for a local book and a friend. I agree with not taking a %, just too complicated for your friend. If there is a re-print, you could ask for another payment. I have been published in books that have had a number of re-prints, each time, I get paid.
Good luck
Many thanks for the well informed replies, it is well appreciated.
This site and it's members have impressed me greatly!
I am actually British, but my wife is Thai. We have a house there and go whenever we can.
I have not explored UK critters too much yet, I have been very impressed by the wide range of interesting bugs in Asia which has me inspired to move into macro. We are going out there again soon.
The Tokina seems like a very tempting start point, with the trinity and 600mm, I don't want too much more weight!
It sounds like it will be well worth keeping the Tokina and buying the longer macro after too.
I would have never considered the Tokina, thanks.
When travelling I try to carry a good selection of lenses, we can be more selective once on location.
I will look forward to posting some of the results and getting some feedback.
Thanks everyone
Many thanks for the comments and links.
Currently I have only used extension rings with, usually the 70-200mm 2.8 VR2.
We go to Thailand regularly, and I hope to get some better insect pictures than I have in the past on our trips.
We are based in the central and north regions there and will be looking for building more picture stock.
Hi,
I was hoping that some of you may have some experience and offer some advice on which is the better macro lens, or perhaps another one I have missed.
Many thanks
If you already have the 70-200mm f4. the extra reach I would say falls into the 'softer' region of the 28-300mm.
28-300mm is a big ask for a lens IMHO. If you are after long reach, have you considered Sigma 150-600mm?
Much bigger and heavier of course, but pretty sharp I can confirm. It seems to folllow on well from the 70-200mm 2.8 without the expense and weight of the 500 or 600mm f4.
Good luck.