Check out People Photography section of our forum.
Posts for: imagemeister
Jan 20, 2012 23:38:42 #
I cannot comment on the Canon extenders - they are too expensive for me relative to the Tamrons - but I do use and recommend Tamrons ! even the cheaper non "pro" ones are very good especially for the money. And, the Tamrons will physically fit all lenses.
Jan 20, 2012 23:15:25 #
Jan 20, 2012 23:13:33 #
The 70-200 W/ 2X is more compact / ergonomic giving the same magnifiaction as the 100-400 and with less oportunity for inhaling dust into the optics.
Check out Professional and Advanced Portraiture section of our forum.
Jan 19, 2012 10:29:51 #
MT Shooter wrote:
quote=wkscheer quote=MT Shooter Never seen such ... (show quote)
My monpod is my FIRST choice and is with me constantly - unless I am at a nesting site or using 600mm then Tripod !
Jan 19, 2012 09:51:40 #
Here is what I use - Manfrotto #222 Grip ballhead with #234RC swivel head - works great I recommend highly !
Jan 16, 2012 19:27:48 #
Well, I am on a buget too, so here is what I have/recommend - for the wide side - Sigma 17-70 2.8-4 OS ( $469 ) and for the tele end Canon 70-200 F4L non IS ( $600 ) You will need a monopod to go with the Canon - but much cheaper than IS though ! ( IS adds $500 ). If you ever want great telephoto images GET the CANON. you can add 1.4X and 2X as you want/need them.
Jan 15, 2012 18:43:36 #
Acording to Photozone.com the 300 is sharper than the 400 alone. ( indeed, the laws of optics says that all good 300's are/should be sharper than 400's )- With 1.4x on the 300 - IF the 400 is still "better" , the difference would be so small as to be imperceptable.
Jan 15, 2012 15:04:15 #
P.S. There is one other option - The Canon 70/80-200 F2.8 with 2X extender. I have the older 80-200 that I bought off e-Bay for $800 and I use it with the Tamron SP 2X - It is great ! - So, for a Grand you COULD be in business.
Jan 15, 2012 14:34:09 #
The only drawback to the Canon 100-400 is the long push/pull which pumps air - along with everything that is IN the air. So it will get dirty and require maitenance. The other drawback is , due to the comlexity / mechanics of the lens, there are "good" ones and then there are "better" ones out there - more so than with the 400 prime. The "better" ones are equal in sharpness to the 400 Canon prime, but the prime will stay cleaner longer and has better ergonomics and less to go wrong with it over time. The drawback of the prime , of course is no zoom !
Jan 14, 2012 15:17:39 #
MT Shooter wrote:
I tried one out, but the AF was all messed up when... (show quote)
How would you rate the sharpness on the one that worked flawlessly ?? Thanks........Larry
Jan 14, 2012 14:55:33 #
Anybody out there have direct shooting experience with the Sigma 120-300 F2.8 AT 300mm and f2.8 - and with extenders wide open also ?? Please no opinions - speak from experience -- I have read ALL the reviews !
Check out Black and White Photography section of our forum.
Jan 13, 2012 21:41:42 #
Think of the subject you are trying to photograph as "jewelry" . To begin with you would need "tent" type lighting ......Google jewelry photography for other ideas.
Jan 13, 2012 21:03:35 #
Well, I have used the 500mm F6.3 Korean mirror lens. IF, you use a lenshood on it, and, IF you do good post processing, and IF, you hold it steady - as with a tripod or monopod, and IF you can focus accurately --- you will get an OK image - nothing to brag about but OK. IF you have a later higher pixel count body with a good 300mm lens, you might be just as well off or maybe better cropping. That's my 2-cents.
Jan 11, 2012 22:07:02 #
If size and weight are NOT an issue - Consider the Sigma 120 - 300 F2.8 zoom. With a 2X gets you to a REAL 600mm and AF ! These can now be had used for under $2k.
Jan 8, 2012 08:22:34 #
If you are serious about shooting wide angle, The Tokina 11-16 is held in very high esteem among experience shooters.
Check out Panorama section of our forum.