January 30, 2015, 01:51:25 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 - adhocphotographer

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 41
181
Nice image and I'd be shaking and peeing my pants if I was there with that tiger!! 

In my opinion you should just sell the 70-200 right now and put that down on a 300 f/2.8...at least if this type of wildlife photography in low light is mostly what you do.  However if most of what you do is people portraiture or something, then I can understand why you need the 70-200.

Thanks....  I won't be selling my 70-200, i use it tooooo much for portraits and other things too! I'm just going to content myself with it + a 2xtcIII until funds (and the wife) are more agreeable! :) I can certainly see the appeal of the tamron!

182
Lenses / Re: General purpose zoom for honeymoon
« on: February 26, 2014, 12:26:43 AM »
I would take the 24-105 (sigma or canon...  up to you). if can stretch to the 24-70 II...  go for that... Either way, have fun and enjoy yourselves... ;)


183
Lenses / Re: Review: Zeiss Otus 55mm f/1.4 Distagon T*
« on: February 25, 2014, 11:36:28 PM »
The IQ comparison makes every over 50(ish) lens look like c**p! wow, would love to have it, but i don't use 50mm all that often! :/

Jealous of those who have it...  I hope you enjoy it! :)

184
The Tamron looks awesome and is certainly a great deal.... I am honestly tempted!

But I did a bit of a test last night with my currently set-up (70-200 + 2xtc). I do most of my wildlife photography (for fun) in the dusk/dawn time, and f/8 for good IQ would not cut it...  hell, f/5.6 is a struggle. I find i use my 70-200 native at 2.8 a lot because the of the speed.

Weather sealing and the build quality of the lens are also important as it is India; it is very dusty and when it rains, IT RAINS!

I would choose the Tamron if most of my wildlife was taking in good light, but it is not! I can't afford the 300 right now, but i am saving, and for me I think it is worth the wait! :)

Here is an example... a shot taken at 200mm f/2.8 iso 1600 1/200. some extra reach at 2.8 would have been nice! Yes i know i can stop down and bunk the ISO, but i like the choice not to. I am also a shaky person, so crazy low shutter speeds kill me with still subject let alone a moving one! :)

ps - I would like to thank everyone on here for their in-hands review of this lens and comparison to the 300 combo. It has really helped me make up my mind...  I just need to sway the wife now! :)

185
Strangely enough, this is me making sway towards the 300 f/2.8 II over the Tamron...

186
Interesting justification for buying a lens!

(Cost of lens - re-sale cots)/rental cost per day....  if this number is smaller than the days you might rent it, you might as well buy it and sell it if and when you want to!!! :) hmmm  lets see if my wife buys into this! :P

FYI didn't work! :(

187
Lenses / Re: Picked up a new 24mm f1.4L II today
« on: February 21, 2014, 09:26:01 AM »
Don't underestimate this lens as a wildlife lens either...  i find it extremely versatile! Love it! In fact, i'm going for some street shots tomorrow with it...  :P

188
Interesting justification for buying a lens!

(Cost of lens - re-sale cots)/rental cost per day....  if this number is smaller than the days you might rent it, you might as well buy it and sell it if and when you want to!!! :) hmmm  lets see if my wife buys into this! :P

189
adhocphotographer, you've left out resale value.  It may or may not factor in.  Also it's surprising how many people don't want their image tarnished once they commit to a brand.  Really should be irrelevant but it isn't.  ;)

Damn good point...  I would hazard a guess that the 300 2.8 would hold a higher re-sale value...  As for brand and image...  it does not bother me much, but i know some people it does!

190
I'm not even considering the 200-400 at 10x the price!

Well, i already have a 2x TC III, so i might as well get the 300 2.8 II to make best use of it right? ;)

191
So, the sum of all this discussion is as such:

Tamron - Excellent value lens with great IQ (beats competition in the range), and is the cheapest 600mm lens. However, f/8 is required at 600mm to get good results. It is a zoom, so more flexible.

Canon 300 II + 2xTC III - Better IQ, faster, better build quality/weather sealing. Option to use native 300 f/2.8. Less flexible and 5x more expensive.

Get the Tamron if money is tight and/or wildlife isn't your thing and/or low light shooting is not a frequent event. Get the Canon combo if lowlight is more of an issue, you have plenty of cash to burn and you need a tank of a lens and the best IQ?

Did i miss anything? I like to have a summary at the end of these discussions! :)

192
Lenses / Re: Picked up a new 24mm f1.4L II today
« on: February 20, 2014, 03:54:01 AM »
You'll love it...  i picked mine up 6 months gone...  It is rarely off my camera... :)

Enjoy!

193
Lenses / Re: New EF-S 24mm & USM Motor Coming? [CR1]
« on: February 18, 2014, 11:32:03 AM »
pleassseeee be small...  boarder line pancake...  a scone/crumpet perhaps? :)

194
Thanks for the info, i have a lexar 1000x and a sandisk extreme (60MB/s). I don't notice a difference when shooting (a slight edge to the lexar) but clearing the buffer and downloading there is a noticeable difference.  I now use the lexar for when I do wildlife and I use burst mode, to any other time, i use my sandisk....  different tools for different jobs!

195
I would love a 300mm f/2.8, but to be honest, i would be slapping on a TC almost all the time, so having a native 600mm lens would be ideal. f/8 is a little slow for what i need (forests at dawn/dusk), but i guess this is where the ISO performance of the 5D III should come in....  hmmmmm....  I am extremely interested in this lens! I guess the 4000 Euro i would save on this lens could go to some awesome trips! ;)

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13] 14 15 ... 41