about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: WThiry  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add WThiry to your Buddy List
Nikon 400mm f/2.8D IF-ED AF-S II Nikkor

2127_180
Review Date: Sep 24, 2011 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $6,299.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Very Sharp, Excellent Build Quality, Fast Focus.
Cons:
Like others have said, Two Piece Lens Hood.

I lusted after one of these for quite some time. I use to shoot Canon and once owned the 400 f/2.8 IS. It was a great lens, but its gone, and I've found a new best friend for shooting football and soccer. I've been using a 200 f/2 and a 300 f/2.8, but nothing reaches out and touches someone like a 400 f/2.8 piece of glass, with an AFS focus engine. The 200 is too short, but for low light situations its a must have. The 300 is great, but its too short for field sports. Yea you could add a TC, but they are hit and miss. I asked alot of questions before I bought this, and got alot of feedback. Some said get a 200-400, others said a 300. With a 200 f/2, a 300 seemed silly, and the 200-400 is f/4 and I can't make it f/2.8. So I took the plunge, and I'm glad I did. Thanks to all who contributed to pushing me in this direction. I guess the only thing better at f/2.8 would be the VR version, but I can't afford that much, but at this point I really don't care! If you can find one of these and its in good shape take the plunge, you won't be sorry.

 
Markins Q-Ball M10

1817
Review Date: Jul 29, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $389.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: SMOOTH, holds a 400mm f/2.8 IS perfectly, and allows free movement, easy to use
Cons:
None

I just bought the M20, but I wanted to post this review. New to the ballhead usage, but this thing is great. Matched up with my new Gitzo 1325 tripod, and my Gitzo 1321 leveling plate, I gave this a whirl today at 4 soccer games. This sure beats using a monopod. Leaves my hands free for a 70-200 when the action get too close for the 400mm. Was thinking about purchasing a Wimberely Sidekick, but as of now I don't feel I need it with this. The range of motion is great with this ballhead, and I let my hands off of it and it stays put with the lens on it, no tipping etc. Its a gem..........

 
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

ef70-200_28lisu_1_
Review Date: Jan 8, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,689.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Build quality, weather seals, L Glass
Cons:
None, weight isn't an issue IMO, carry a 400 f/2.8, now that's a load

I usually don't post reviews, but I look at them alot to help point me in a direction, so I thought I would return the favor.
I bought this lens after it first came out, then sold it to finance purchase of a 200 f/1.8. Never should have sold it, OH sure, I love my 200 f/1.8 but could have found other way's to raise the money instead of selling the 70-200 IS. Anyway, after having owned the non IS version and now owning the IS version again, this lens is GREAT. Hand holding for indoor basketball, HS or College this lens rocks. The images are SUPER, try a normal HS Gym "sorry" lighting. Took it for a ride the other night, at ISO 1250 in AV mode, so I ended up with 1/160 or 1/200, yea I got some blur from motion of the players, but stationary shots or frozen jump shots at the peak of the jump were great. Next time I'm going to Manual mode. Like everybody says, if you can afford the extra $$$ for the IS, DO IT.