July 31, 2014, 06:55:20 AM

Show Posts

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.


Messages - charlesa

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21]
301
Lenses / Re: Owning the Canon 200-400 f/4L Vs 400 f/2.8L II
« on: July 05, 2012, 03:50:14 PM »
Why not go for a 400 mm f/2.8 L IS prime? Their price should come down now that version II is out, and the 200-400 will cost way more, and can one really comment on its IQ and sharpness prior to anyone ever seen or tested on in the wild? If it has the image quality of the 70-200 mm f/2.8 II then it would be a stunner of a lens, but at what price?

I was recently stuck in the same conundrum, until I found a second hand 400 for sale, pristine condition, tried it on a 1D-X (including with a 2x TC III) and was blown away.

302
Start to ponder the D800, then I look at the 400 mm f/2.8 glass sitting on my desk and I smile and all black thoughts evaporate  ;D

303
Lenses / Re: 400 mm f/2.8 L Mk I
« on: July 03, 2012, 04:21:30 PM »
Proud owner of 400 mm of prime glass  ;D

Can anyone suggest a suitably sturdy monopod.. no way anyone can hand hold such a beast and get half decent shots!
Most monopods from the high quality manufacturers will cope with a large white. Gitzo tend to be very expensive and their tripods look the part, but I don't think their monopods can command the same superiority, because there are a few decent ones around. I've started steering away form Manfrotto tripods, but their 680B or (681B?) will cope and appears to be better made than their tripods. Also have a look at Giottos, as their tripods are better build quality than Manrotto, so I would expect their monopods to be at teh same level, although I haven't looked at them closely, the Giottos MTL 8261B tripod I have more than copes with my 300 f/2.8 and was much more reasonable than the Gitzo equivalent.

I have a Giotto CF tripod which I am very satisfied with, but a 400 mm needs a monopod, or else a gimbal head on a tripod? Although unsure what gimbal to go for, except Wimberley have a good rep with the version II of their head, although have no idea what brackets would be needed for a 400 mm

304
Lenses / Re: 400 mm f/2.8 L Mk I
« on: July 03, 2012, 11:38:51 AM »
Gitzo GM5541 with RRS head.

Is a head strictly required or can affix the monopod directly to the lens collar?

305
Lenses / Re: 400 mm f/2.8 L Mk I
« on: July 03, 2012, 11:11:41 AM »
Proud owner of 400 mm of prime glass  ;D

Can anyone suggest a suitably sturdy monopod.. no way anyone can hand hold such a beast and get half decent shots!

306
Lenses / Re: 400 mm f/2.8 L Mk I
« on: July 02, 2012, 03:17:02 PM »
I can confirm it is the 400 mm f/2.8 L IS, it is 5 years old so no guarantee with just some wear and tear on the hood and body (it was in use by a sports photographer), the rear mount and front elements are still pristine and the IS works fine, even tested it with the 2x III TC. For 4000 euro it is a no brainer, if it malfunctions I can still get it serviced via CPS I would presume, no? Or since Canon have discontinued the lens now that the Mk II is out, the lens would be difficult to get serviced?

307
Lenses / 400 mm f/2.8 L Mk I
« on: July 01, 2012, 05:16:13 PM »
Would like to enquire whether a 5 year old 400 mm f/2.8 L make I (not II) which is in excellent condition is a good deal at 4000 euro, and what is its performance with a 2x TC III on a 1DX, whether images are still sharp.

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21]