brian_sp wrote:
warblers already...you guys out west suck
Yep, Yellow-rumps have been here for 3 weeks, this was my first sighting of the Orange-crowned. Many more to come but there are some special ones you have out east that I would love to see one day....I have 3 species on the island I've never seen yet as this is my first spring here....exciting times if one is a warbler fan
arbitrage wrote:
Yep, Yellow-rumps have been here for 3 weeks, this was my first sighting of the Orange-crowned. Many more to come but there are some special ones you have out east that I would love to see one day....I have 3 species on the island I've never seen yet as this is my first spring here....exciting times if one is a warbler fan
Your warbler shots rock!...
It's still cold and snowy in MN... chickadee city right now. Our migrants can't seem to move past the jet stream.
I'm planning to make a long drive out to a blind to shoot prairie chickens on Sunday, but the current weather report claims that we might be hit with as much as 12" of snow... winter has a strangle-hold on Central North America.
For you guys shooting this with a D850, do you find the 300 + 1.4TC is enough for birding? I shoot all kinds if wildlife, but do like birds as well. Currently using the 200-500, so I'd be losing 80mm, but also losing a ton of weight.
Also, did you find you needed a lot of AF fine tuning when adding the TC?
apertur3 wrote:
For you guys shooting this with a D850, do you find the 300 + 1.4TC is enough for birding? I shoot all kinds if wildlife, but do like birds as well. Currently using the 200-500, so I'd be losing 80mm, but also losing a ton of weight.
Also, did you find you needed a lot of AF fine tuning when adding the TC?
I find the 420mm of the 300/1.4 to be so similar to the 500mm of the 200-500 that I don't grab the 200-500 much anymore. Tests show the 500 is only about 470-480mm at closer bird shooting ranges anyways so the difference is even less than 80mm. I needed no AFMA with the 1.4TC on either D500 or D850...I did run the Steve Perry method of 12 trials using the built-in AF tune function and I think on the 850 it needed maybe -3 or -5 but I don't usually even bother changing the setting if it is less than a 5 point off of zero.
I also use the 1.7 for 510 f/6.7 on the 300PF and that is very sharp also but did need a lot more AF adjust on both bodies (especially my 850 which seems to be generally having lenses need negative adjustment). And I've used the 2xTC which needed a lot of AF adjust on both bodies but after adjusted also produced good IQ but AF is a bit more sketchy, enough so that I do miss shots sometimes trying to quickly acquire a bird in the bush that pauses for a moment on a good perch.
I rarely use my 200-500 anymore now that I have the 300PF....I didn't expect that when I bought it and actually thought I'd only sometimes use it but it is just so much easier to shoot with because of the size/weight then the 200-500 and I get onto birds faster and miss less shots because of that.
arbitrage wrote:
I find the 420mm of the 300/1.4 to be so similar to the 500mm of the 200-500 that I don't grab the 200-500 much anymore. Tests show the 500 is only about 470-480mm at closer bird shooting ranges anyways so the difference is even less than 80mm. I needed no AFMA with the 1.4TC on either D500 or D850...I did run the Steve Perry method of 12 trials using the built-in AF tune function and I think on the 850 it needed maybe -3 or -5 but I don't usually even bother changing the setting if it is less than a 5 point off of zero.
I also use the 1.7 for 510 f/6.7 on the 300PF and that is very sharp also but did need a lot more AF adjust on both bodies (especially my 850 which seems to be generally having lenses need negative adjustment). And I've used the 2xTC which needed a lot of AF adjust on both bodies but after adjusted also produced good IQ but AF is a bit more sketchy, enough so that I do miss shots sometimes trying to quickly acquire a bird in the bush that pauses for a moment on a good perch.
I rarely use my 200-500 anymore now that I have the 300PF....I didn't expect that when I bought it and actually thought I'd only sometimes use it but it is just so much easier to shoot with because of the size/weight then the 200-500 and I get onto birds faster and miss less shots because of that....Show more →
Thanks. This sounds good. I love the 200-500, but after a few miles, it's just a burden. Have you had any issues with VR around the range that used to be troublesome (1/125 to 1/160 ish)?
