I dunno which (AIS or older model) but the Nikkor 300/2.8 ED while slightly different rendering, is superb and an even-ish match to the FD 300/2.8L fluorite. The main difference is that the FD has that fluorite pastel-ish look to it - classical of so many fluorite lenses, telescopes, and spotting scopes.
Carsten, I can't imagine a better (current) camera for the lens Well, perhaps OM-D.
These heavy lenses must have been a pain to use with the original Canon F1:s.
Even if the NEX looks ridiculously small behind the lens, the tilt screen makes it fun to use, and allows me to support the lens, so I don't have to carry a big tripod around. IBIS would be welcome though. The crop factor also gives me that extra reach, so really, NEX is the perfect digital back for this.
It does not even look like taking photo. Just chimping :P. NEX makes life easier, just relax, touch the screen and press the button. No need to peak through hole
wilco23 wrote:
It does not even look like taking photo. Just chimping :P. NEX makes life easier, just relax, touch the screen and press the button. No need to peak through hole
the lcd isn't so great for tracking fast moving subjects with a big telephoto though. gotta use the evf for that.
True, fast (or even slow) moving subjects are impossible to track at close range, especially at f2.8. Closing the aperture a bit to increase DoF or pre-focusing solves that problem.
briantho wrote:
True, fast (or even slow) moving subjects are impossible to track at close range, especially at f2.8. Closing the aperture a bit to increase DoF or pre-focusing solves that problem.
i just can't keep small fast moving birds in the frame using the lcd, forget about focusing.
Tracking a small bird onto a branch is a challenge without AF and IS...but practice helps. Shot with the FD 400 f2.8L with the 2x-A (effective 800mm @f5.6) wide open. This combo weighs in at about 14 lbs, and rides on a Jobu gimbal head.
Tracking a small bird onto a branch is a challenge without AF and IS...but practice helps. Shot with the FD 400 f2.8L with the 2x-A (effective 800mm @f5.6) wide open. This combo weighs in at about 14 lbs, and rides on a Jobu gimbal head.
Are all FD lenses fluorite?
Is there a list that would show this?
Is the FDn mount different than the FD mount?
Bifurcator wrote:
I dunno which (AIS or older model) but the Nikkor 300/2.8 ED while slightly different rendering, is superb and an even-ish match to the FD 300/2.8L fluorite. The main difference is that the FD has that fluorite pastel-ish look to it - classical of so many fluorite lenses, telescopes, and spotting scopes.
roboticspro wrote:
Yup, guilty as charged...it's just that it is tough to hold the rig in one hand and a cold Sam Adams in the other hand now that I'm 62... .
Edd
that's why you need a beer helmet or helpful assistant to hold your beer.
I'd still use a tripod. I know you guys are just fun'n about and for most here I guess it doesn't need to be said but if you want consistently good results at 300mm and over a tripod is a must. I dunno about the OM-D's anti-shake yet but besides it there's no LBIS or IBIS that's good enough to cope with 300mm competently and consistently.
The consistency aspect is especially important for birding where you only get a few good opportunities during most field trips. To spend the day and come back with all motion blurred results is a bummer - even a pixel or two is enough to destroy the detail in most prints. A tripod is the solution and it doesn't even need to be a very good one. Many $100 cheapies are plenty good enough. The head is important too but not so much for stabilization as it is aiming. The gimbal allows one to interact with moving targets and changing environments the best IMO - and again even a $100 cheapy will do.
300mm is juuuust the tipping point IMO. Or 150mm on a µ4/3 for example. It's why I like the 135mm FL so much. It's about the longest FL where I can still hand-hold with consistency and there are many many good 135mm designs to be had relatively cheaply. I guess the most perfect hand-holdable telephoto lens I've ever owned (for me) is the Voigtlander Lanthar APO 125/2.5 Macro. And I do seem to like telephoto better than normal, wide, or UW lenses. From 85 on up is home for me so far.
I like the scene in Dances With Wolves where Cosner let's his Indian pal peer through his field scope! That reaction is pretty similar to the excitement I get every time I use a tele.
Bifurcator wrote:
I'd still use a tripod. I know you guys are just fun'n about and for most here I guess it doesn't need to be said but if you want consistently good results at 300mm and over a tripod is a must. I dunno about the OM-D's anti-shake yet but besides it there's no LBIS or IBIS that's good enough to cope with 300mm competently and consistently.
honestly, oly's IBIS is pretty awesome. 3 generations ago i could count on my 1/125s shots being sharp with the 350mm (700mm equiv). i usually had to keep shutter speed up for subject motion before camera shake came into play. i can only imagine what their latest greatest IBIS is like.
BTW, the other gadget I like when playing with this kind of hands free tripod+gimbal tele shooting is a remote shutter release. It's especially useful for longer than 300mm FLs. Like the actual FD 300L we're talking about here on a µ4/3. That's 600mm equiv. and of course a 400mm lens is 800mm equiv. and so on. With those lengths a finger press can result in motion blur too often - even at 1/4000s. So moving the trigger interaction off-camera is a fun cheap and effective solution. I like it anyway.
definitely all that, tripod, wireless release, I also like to use bean bags when shooting static subjects.
Bifurcator wrote:
Good to know! Thanks for that!
BTW, the other gadget I like when playing with this kind of hands free tripod+gimbal tele shooting is a remote shutter release. It's especially useful for longer than 300mm FLs. Like the actual FD 300L we're talking about here on a µ4/3. That's 600mm equiv. and of course a 400mm lens is 800mm equiv. and so on. With those lengths a finger press can result in motion blur too often - even at 1/4000s. So moving the trigger interaction off-camera is a fun cheap and effective solution. I like it anyway.
Well, perhaps OM-D.
