chupacabra31 wrote:
Excellent shots to say the least! Do you think I could see the full frame shot from one of the images in the sequence by any chance?
I can do this easily. This is already uploaded. I did this as a test when I got the camera. There was no post at all. 420mm ISO 800 f6.3
Scott Grant wrote:
I call that a duck diving. That would be more of a function of timing of the shutter release and a high shutter speed (1/1000th plus) to freeze the motion.
What i would consider 'explosive' would be a cattle egrets flight pattern at times. They maneuver like fighter jets and would be an incredible test for a lens to maintain focus on.
Gotcha, I guess I need to be more careful with my terminology (sorry). So you think then that the 300 f/4 AF-S along with the 1.4 TC would be more then capable of the kinds of shots that I have linked? Particularly the Elegant Tern and the Brown Pelican (those are the shots I like to capture).
fldspringer wrote:
I can do this easily. This is already uploaded. I did this as a test when I got the camera. There was no post at all. 420mm ISO 800 f6.3
Sorry I meant I was wanting to see the full 12 megapixel file which would mean you might have to post only a crop from the file where it is sharpest (because of file size upload limits). Thanks so much!
chupacabra31 wrote:
Sorry I meant I was wanting to see the full 12 megapixel file which would mean you might have to post only a crop from the file where it is sharpest (because of file size upload limits). Thanks so much!
I know what you were looking for
Here's a part of the second series tken right after the prior series.
You'll still be able to AF with any of the TC's (1.4, 1.7, even 2.0). Nikon doesn't disable AF. Granted your AF speed/performance will begin to slow/degrade as the light hitting the AF module decreases.
I don't have a 1.7 but occationally use a 1.4 TC on my 300 f4 AFS. The AF speed does slow but only slightly. Setting the focus limiter on the lens to 'INF-3m' instead of 'Full' really helps prevent the lens from racking all the way down to MFD if it begins hunting for focus.
Go with a 300 f4 with the 1.4tc.I cannot see the image quality diff.Just the stop in light....sharp sharp..sharpsharper then any nikon or canon zoom.Just got the tc2111..Works well with it in bright light but you will notice the image degradation Doug
chupacabra31 wrote:
Is there such a thing?
...
Main thing I am after is good ISO performance, awesome AF abilities (AI servo and low light AF, fast at acquire focus), 400 f/5.6 lens.
Nikon has no AFS 400/5.6 lens in its line-up.
About the use of a 300/4 + TC, I have to recall here that Canon has a similar combo, with IS system too (differently from the Nikkor AFS 300/4, the EF-L 300/4 Canon has IS, and its minimum focusing distance is similar, being 1.5 m).
Therefore, Canon has two options: EF-L 400/5.6 and EF-L 300/4 IS+TC14. With Nikon, you have to live with the AFS 300/4 (+ TC 14 E II), which is not a VR lens ...
If I had to shoot with a 300/4+TC combo, I would prefer the Canon option thanks to IS.
Antonio Tiki wrote:
The Canon f4.5 is an excellent lens. Loved using it.
However, the Sigma 120-400 f4-5.6 OS should be seriously looked at. Not only is it cheap, it is faster focusing than most other lenses.
The IQ is also better than the Nikkor 80-400 but that doesn't surprise any one. The replacement Nikkor will be excellent I'm sure.
I went this option after doing a fair amount of live testing with quite a number of lenses from Nikon, Canon, Sigma and Tamron. Love it.
The reason I bought the 300 f4 was that I had the 120-400 f4-5.6 os and had to stop it down to f8 to get it sharp.Yes it is a little better then the nikon 80-400 but not even in the same class as the 300 f4..shoot the 300 f4 wide open at 1/2000 or the sigma @ 1/500.not even close,,,O.S. or not Doug
Doug Maclean wrote:
Have to say I like the Canon options.would love to haveVR at times with the nikon 300 f4.If and when they do come out with it they will sell a ton.For birds in flight the VR should be turned off anyway.All I know is the Nikon and it is stupid sharp.This was taken with the kestrel coming towards me 30 plus mph with the 1.4 tc Doug
Damn! Just cut myself! Well done!
Do you think the D700 would be just as capable in this kind of photography (or would it be capable of producing that shot)?
Hear is a question how does this combo do photographing dark subjects (with erratic movement) on middle tone or darkish backgrounds (I.E. Black Tern with a Cattail marsh or cattails being reflected in the water type background).
Oh boy..now your talking D700 full frame or D7000 dx...shot those with a d7000.from what I have seen the dynamic range of the d7000 is at least on par with the d700 but the d700 is better at high ISO.Also costs 2x as much.Doug
chupacabra31 wrote:
Is there such a thing? I am ready to jump ship. Frankly I don't have enough invested in Canon. In fact I am more then a little dissatisfied with The canon service department. I have had my equipment in to Canon 6 times in the last year and each time it has come back slow and not fixed. I have to resend the equipment and then it gets fixed. Meanwhile I am without my gear for weeks. I understand equipment experiencing failures and needing repair, I do not fault Canon for that at all. I am just upset that Canon will not admit their mistake and try to make up for it (offering expedited shipping would be one thing, but they have never offered it).
Main thing I am after is good ISO performance, awesome AF abilities (AI servo and low light AF, fast at acquire focus), 400 f/5.6 lens....Show more →
Considering how many 400 f5.6 lenses Canon sells, I am amazed that neither Nikon nor Sigma make an equivalent 400. A 300 f4 with a 1.4x TC simply does not perform as well. If Sigma made one with IS around the same price range, I think they would find a lot of buyers.
Imagemaster wrote:
[Considering how many 400 f5.6 lenses Canon sells, I am amazed that neither Nikon nor Sigma make an equivalent 400. A 300 f4 with a 1.4x TC simply does not perform as well. If Sigma made one with IS around the same price range, I think they would find a lot of buyers.
In this case, its so close to be a non-issue. The 300 f4 is good enough that the converter degrades it to about the same level as the Canon lens. If anything, the Nikkor may still have the resolution edge.
As to AF speed, again, so close to be a non-issue.
fldspringer wrote:
In this case, its so close to be a non-issue. The 300 f4 is good enough that the converter degrades it to about the same level as the Canon lens. If anything, the Nikkor may still have the resolution edge.
As to AF speed, again, so close to be a non-issue.
Both are nice solutions. The choice depends on the body you shoot with.
Neither of those links shows any results from a 300 f4 with a TC on it. So what are you basing your comments on as to a non-issue with regard to IQ and AF speed?
