Using of 70-300 mm lens (Page 4): I had a Canon kit lens, 75-300 and could not take a good pic with it for nothing. I practically gave it away. I just picked up a 70-200 f/2.8L and I’m...

Resqu2 Loc: SW Va

I had a Canon kit lens, 75-300 and could not take a good pic with it for nothing. I practically gave it away. I just picked up a 70-200 f/2.8L and I’m blown away by the lens. It seems like you can’t miss a shot. But it’s not cheap by any means.

blackhorse 1-7

Whenever someone begins a sentence with the words, "you obviously do not understand anything..." is simply demonstrating failure of all social norms and grace. Such a person should just be ignored, while the rest of us continue on without him.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

blackhorse 1-7 wrote:

Whenever someone begins a sentence with the words, "you obviously do not understand anything..." is simply demonstrating failure of all social norms and grace. Such a person should just be ignored, while the rest of us continue on without him.

In cthahn's defense, it wasn't the first sentence in his response. Not that it makes any significant difference, eternal damnation and evisceration could be appropriate however!

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

caraboy wrote:

I am so disappointed in this member's remarks beca... (show quote)

"Floating comments" {not anchored to text via "Quote Reply"} always cause more confusion than understanding, but in any case, just ignore the trolls.

dyximan

Understood but that's not the point I think me by most here when you can or can't take a good photo with a 70 to 300 which I think you can use to have to stand back a little further but perhaps it would've been nicer if he simply explained about light or aperture a prime lens. But the point wasn't necessarily the message but how it was delivered by the messenger. And yes it's obvious that the gentleman didn't know much about lenses but if the gentleman had half a brain he would realize that this is in fact a forum of questions and answers and comments and how else can we learn if we don't ask. And who would want to ask if they were going to be chastised for their ignorance. And I wonder how he would react if someone pointed out how obvious that it was that he was oblivious to hid stupidity, and insensitivity to a fellow photographer. who's just trying to learn like he probably did when he was younger

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

dyximan wrote:

Understood but that's not the point I think me by ... (show quote)

But a 70 -300mm {zoom} lens has 200mm as one length it can be zoomed to, so you can stand at exactly the same spot you would stand at while using 70-200mm lens.

ron james Loc: Cardiff Wales uk

on a similar vein and not trying to highjack thread but yesterday i tried to take a few close ups of a golfcaddy touch using my D5600 with 18-55 kit lens - set to auto with flash - this was indoors - i just couldnt get a clear picture (at least one i was happy with) despite auto focus - what should i be doing to get a good clear picture - subject matter was on a table top .

dyximan

And cthahn is very much an arrogant prick so don't think all here on the hog are like him, although unfortunately I am finding more and more that are. Just try and take the positive Info and encouragement and try and leave the negative behind. As this is a pretty good website with a lot of information and experiences to be had by all.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

Peterff wrote:

cthahn is not the website. <snip>.. please do not denigrate a good website because of a single individual, <snip>.

Just give 'em hell!

Actually the best response to troll bait is no response. Better to simply click Report Issue, select 'inappropriate language/pictures', and add a comment like "off topic" , "unnecessary inflammatory", "no contribution to the thread" etc.

adamsg Loc: Chubbuck, ID

Sorry it wasn't clear. I was responding to cthahn.

bigdukeor

One thing to be aware of, is that you will want to separate your subject from the background, so that the depth of focus blurs out the background somewhat. The further the distance, the more your subject will stand out. I have a 28-300, and it works fine. But I prefer using my 24-120. Both are Nikon lenses.

ron james Loc: Cardiff Wales uk

hi duke -re background - know that makes perfect sense -its something i never thought about the auto focus picking up background- if i used manual focus would that get better results ? obviously i will trial that later today

vbr
ron

rfcoakley Loc: Auburn, NH

I interpreted the recommendation regarding separation of subject from background differently than stated below. I don't believe that it was in reference to a potential for the camera's auto focus process to mistakenly focus on the background instead of the subject. Rather, I believe that it was in reference to achieving a more pleasing image by having a subject sharply in focus and a background out of focus. When properly used, the camera'a auto-focus process is more of a semi-auto process in that the photographer should be selecting the focus point in the viewfinder (typically locating the focus directly over the subject's eyes). Whenever I find that a shot that I've taken was focused on the background and not on the subject, it is almost always because I did not correctly position the focus point on the subject when the shot was taken.

ron james wrote:

hi duke -re background - know that makes perfect sense -its something i never thought about the auto focus picking up background- if i used manual focus would that get better results ? obviously i will trial that later today

vbr
ron

bigdukeor

yes, that will leave your subject sharp, but using a F3.5 to 5.6 will ensure it too. You can adjust the ISO lower if needed too.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

k. v. rajasingham wrote:

Dears, as I don't have 70-200 lens, can I use 70-300mm lens for portraits. I would like to know what will be the difference. Hope anybody will help. Thank u.

Please ignore cthahn. He is a troll who usually just makes a single negative remark on almost every posted thread. Just ignore cthahn and all other trolls.