Mt Spokane Photography said:I found it difficult to magnify them much, they seemed to me to lack quality compared to my 100-400L.
Since they are advertising photos, probably taken with great care at f/8 and likely hundreds of images were taken to get the three, I'd expect to see every hair in sharp focus. They should easily beat my photo from my 100-400 at 400mm and cropped at f/8
Steve said:Mt Spokane Photography said:I found it difficult to magnify them much, they seemed to me to lack quality compared to my 100-400L.
Since they are advertising photos, probably taken with great care at f/8 and likely hundreds of images were taken to get the three, I'd expect to see every hair in sharp focus. They should easily beat my photo from my 100-400 at 400mm and cropped at f/8
They're full size images; go to Download -> View All Sizes and you can see the full size originals. It looks brutally sharp to me at 600 f7.1 in that hippo shot.
Mt Spokane Photography said:I tried that on the deer, the highlights had a lot of halos, and the hair looked over sharpened. Still, it did look good for the price. Its more what I had expected.
Steve said:Mt Spokane Photography said:I tried that on the deer, the highlights had a lot of halos, and the hair looked over sharpened. Still, it did look good for the price. Its more what I had expected.
Flickr adds sharpening and some other automatic "improvements" to uploaded photos. Its pretty annoying.
Mt Spokane Photography said:So does CR, so I usually link to SmugMug. I'll likely want to look at the lens, but I've been bit too many times by Sigma to be enthusiastic. I'll be waiting for reviews from multiple review sites.