to be successful, need good (if not great AF) and an adaptor (already have this, but needs to continue to work) for EOS EF and EF-S lenses.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
None of the options apply to me so I cannot vote ... I'm saving for the 600mm f/4 II. Based on my usage, I don't see where this lens fits my requirements.
Where's the option "i want one but by doing so my wife would kill me, hire a hit man, or divorce me" option?
I had the chance to play a little with the lens.
I don´t want a build in TC and I don´t want such a heavy lens for travelling. I am happy with my big white telephotos.
A EF 100-400 L IS replacement for travelling is what I want and what I need.
Too expensive, too heavy, too short. But then I am not a pro so its just an amateur's opinion.
Still, the 500mm f/4 IS II is very tempting even for an amateur...
I will and I will concurrently have to file for divorce. Which I guess means my (ex) wife will own half the lens. I wonder which half she wants?
stupid poll. why isn't there an option that says, I'd rather buy a used car.
I ordered two. Always good to have backups.
Shoot, if I had $12K, I'd get it.
Hell if I had $6K, I'd get an old 400mm Prime f/2.8.
Is it too soon to speculate on a 200-400 f/2.8 with 1.4x? How expensive and how heavy would that lens be?
Just wanted to pose a question to those with sufficient experience AFMA testing and adjusting several lenses and bodies. Specifically, I want to discuss Accuracy (how 'spot-on' focus is relative to a target) and Precision (the repeat-ability of focus).
I have found that more often than not, zero AFMA adjustment on a body for a given lens yields more precision (repeatable results) even if the depth of focus is "off" (front or back) rather than once you adjust the AFMA in either direction, even by +/- 1. This is why I am starting to believe factory calibration of body to lens is better than AFMA tweaks.
Sometimes, but less frequently, higher precision (repeat-ability) is found on an AFMA setting other than zero, but it isn't always the "best" AFMA offset in terms of image accuracy/sharpness.
I believe this is why the FoCal AFMA testing application has a AF Consistency test, which allows you to test various AFMA values in a repeatable fashion, to seek-out the best AFMA setting with the most repeatable results.
Have any of you found the same to be true? That sometimes you may want to trade accuracy for better precision (repeat-ability).
My wallet says (pleads) yes.