Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: GWZ
Page: <<prev 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 30 next>>
Feb 10, 2017 09:18:41   #
I have the D5300 and highly recommend it. It captures high quality images and is light enough to carry all day without noticing it.
Go to
Feb 1, 2017 13:37:16   #
MT Shooter wrote:
If interested in the Tamron, wait a few weeks, their new "G2" version of that 70-200mm F2.8 lens is on its way!


MT Shooter, thanks for the heads up. I was not planning on making a decision/purchase until sometime in March, so I will be on the lookout for the G2 version.

Gary
Go to
Feb 1, 2017 13:36:22   #
traveler90712 wrote:
The Tamron lens is rated higher then others by DxO (https://www.dxomark.com/) and is much less expensive then the Nikon version. I have the tammy and love it. Go for it.


Traveler, thanks for the input.

How long have you had it? How has it been used? Have you had any issues with it?

I don't anticipate using this lens professionally, but rather on an occasional basis for birding, etc....

Gary
Go to
Feb 1, 2017 13:29:39   #
IBM wrote:
Tamron, makes some good lens ,but a couple years ago I read a write up on there wide angel , it rated excellent but some of the same copies of same lens tested didn't fair so we'll, it may have been some kind of fault in the production , but make sure you can bring it back
And exchange it ,at the least little sign of flare or any other thing you may notice in a picture


IBM, thanks for the input.
Go to
Jan 31, 2017 13:24:23   #
Greetings all,

I am a few months away from purchasing either a Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II, a Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD, or a Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/4G ED VR for use on a Nikon D5300 and/or D7100, and would appreciate your input.

My specific focus (pun intended) of this post is the build quality and long term reliability of the Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD.

I am interested in the Tamron because (1) reviews (both on UHH and other websites) indicate the image quality is as good as, if not slightly better, than the Nikon, and (2) it is significantly less expensive than the f2.8 Nikon.

Request - I would appreciate hearing about the build quality and long term reliability of the Tamron from anyone who has used this lens for a number of years and/or used it intensely (e.g., wedding photography) for a period of time,

I would also appreciate comments from those who have used both the Tamron and the Nikon lenses as well.

My next step is to rent the lenses and see how they feel on the camera.

Thanks in advance for your assistance. It is appreciated.

Gary
Go to
Jan 25, 2017 09:07:13   #
CPR wrote:
Not in the market for this myself but just a few comments on the D5300.
Great stills, great HD Videos with stereo mike built in, built in GPS, Built in wireless connection to a smartphone, good low light without noise, in addition to the items mentioned by Sarge69.
denny


I second Denny's comments.

I have one, and highly recommend it if someone is looking for a solid starter camera that can grow with. The two things I especially like are (1) it is very light, so you can carry it all day and not get tired, and (2) the rear flip screen is very beneficial in many situations.

Gary
Go to
Jan 24, 2017 11:13:42   #
cameranut wrote:
Would it be possible to set up a blind in the area that would work to your advantage? It doesn't have to be anything fancy, and the deer might come to some cracked corn or apples.


Cameranut, a blind really is not necessary in this case. The deer typically appears in the areas close to the road in the sunrise and sunset times. My friend told me there have been a number of times he has seen 3, 4, or even 5 cars pulled over, all with the drivers taking pictures with their phone cameras, so it is not like the deer is people-shy.

For me it's just a matter of having the time at the right time to get there, as opposed to me going there when I have the time, which is most often the case.

Thanks for the thought though.

Gary
Go to
Jan 24, 2017 07:51:47   #
asicit wrote:
Might not be the best shot but I was in some practice while on a schooner trip. I think this was my first shot I tried in the fog. No time for much thinking as tis boat came zipping out of the fog. Comments and critique welcome


I like it as is.

If I were to crop it I would crop the top portion so that it is roughly the same height above the wake/boat as below.

Gary
Go to
Jan 23, 2017 06:49:47   #
cameranut wrote:
Piebald in horses means that the face is entirely white, so I'm going to assume the same for deer. Since this deer seems to be entirely white all over the body, I would guess that it is an albino. Lucky find. Hope you can get some more shots of it.


Piebald, thanks for the comment and for looking.

And I can say for a fact that it is all white as that is what I saw when it bounded away. I tried to get a few shots while it was running away, but the undergrowth was pretty dense with lots of smaller trees, so all I got were a few images of an out of focus white mass that looked nothing like a deer.

I will keep trying, but it is hit-and-miss.

Gary
Go to
Jan 22, 2017 13:37:03   #
JeffDavidson wrote:
Lucky sighting and interesting commentary.


Jeff, Glad you liked it.

Yes, it was lucky. I was out there a number of times and stayed around for a while each time with no sightings.

As for the commentary, I wanted to try to convey just how lucky this sighting was. 5 minutes either way, and nothing. Or, continue into town instead of turning around when I did, and nothing again.

Gary
Go to
Jan 22, 2017 08:38:51   #
Emp wrote:
Great shot of a rare animal!!!


Thanks EMP. BTW - I originally come from LI (Queens County/Nassau county).

Gary
Go to
Jan 22, 2017 08:37:04   #
rando wrote:
Was this photo taken near the old Seneca Army Depot by any chance?


Rando - no, this was taken in central Indiana.
Go to
Jan 21, 2017 19:25:08   #
photophile wrote:
Good catch, pretty creature.


Thanks Karin. It's all about the chase. This time it was successful.
Go to
Jan 21, 2017 19:19:32   #
oldtigger wrote:
i think you got a real one


Oldtigger, from what you did with the picture it looks like the eye is pinkish and has some blue to it. Too hard for 100% certainty, but to me it looks more like it than not.

BTW - how were you able to get the image cropped and then appear pretty crisp in the download? I tried to crop/enlarge, but only came out with a very mushy image.

Gary
Go to
Jan 21, 2017 19:17:42   #
chase4 wrote:
Great shot and thanks for the back-story. chase


Thanks Chase.

I will keep going out and see if I can stumble upon it again. Next time I will go out with the 300mm loaded on the camera from the get-go.

Gary
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 30 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.