MedicineMan404 wrote:
40Driggs Yes I have.
For perched bierds it's OK. This is a slight...1/4-1/8 second my best guess....hesitation when going from 10 feet to 20 feet and back to 15 feet etc.
Sharpness of the 300PF is wonderful eh. I'd reckon it a tie with the EOS 300mm F2.8 ISii I sold (and don't miss the weight at all).
Geoff I kinda feel I'm derailing the 500PF emphasis of this thread?
Only excuse I can think of is that many are comparing the two lenses.
I certainly find the combo fine for perched bierds. BIF I don't know. I bet it could be done but
probably not so easy as other contenders.
40Driggs here's a downy using the same A7Riii+Commlite+300PF+1.4TCiii I just posted to Flickr.
I'd def. use this say on a trip to Costa Rica for the bierd feeding stations.
I have no problem with what you discuss and in the end only Fred can police it and I'm not reporting
I've been discussing Sony stuff on here and that is even more off topic
MedicineMan404 wrote:
40Driggs Yes I have.
For perched bierds it's OK. This is a slight...1/4-1/8 second my best guess....hesitation when going from 10 feet to 20 feet and back to 15 feet etc.
Sharpness of the 300PF is wonderful eh. I'd reckon it a tie with the EOS 300mm F2.8 ISii I sold (and don't miss the weight at all).
Geoff I kinda feel I'm derailing the 500PF emphasis of this thread?
Only excuse I can think of is that many are comparing the two lenses.
I certainly find the combo fine for perched bierds. BIF I don't know. I bet it could be done but
probably not so easy as other contenders.
40Driggs here's a downy using the same A7Riii+Commlite+300PF+1.4TCiii I just posted to Flickr.
I'd def. use this say on a trip to Costa Rica for the bierd feeding stations.
40D, on the trip last week I focused on the D500+500PF but one day I did walk with the A7Riii+Commlite+300PF.
A slow storm came in and the light turned to crappola=just a horrible ugly grey. I did shoot flying egrets and herons with the combo-just no keepers=no proof But I think in a place with decent light and at least large bierds like egreat/herons/commorants/etc. I could do BIF with this combo. It did track at least panning with the bierds.
Heck, I even had the a9+100400GM on the trip but never touched it. I really wanted to focus on the 500PF and the new to me D500.
And on the IQ of the a7riii, well that saves me from even thinking about a D850
kriskunisch wrote:
Does Geoff only have a say? I think an Image Quality comparison between the 300pf w/ TC vs. the 500pf is worthy of a slight derailment. I would fully expect for AF to be better on the 500pf vs any lens with a TC mounted (but open to be surprised here as well).
Hard to say, both are f/5.6 combos, and nowadays we don’t get artificial limiting of AF speed when TC is attached. Surely there would be plenty of comparisons of 300PF+1.4x vs 200-500 f/5.6 AF speed that should give us a reasonable idea how the 300 combo stacks up.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Hard to say, both are f/5.6 combos, and nowadays we don’t get artificial limiting of AF speed when TC is attached. Surely there would be plenty of comparisons of 300PF+1.4x vs 200-500 f/5.6 AF speed that should give us a reasonable idea how the 300 combo stacks up.
The AF motor is more robust (quicker) on the 500PF when compared to the 300PF... I have both. I do not think the lenses are using the same AFS drive.
OwlsEyes wrote:
The AF motor is more robust (quicker) on the 500PF when compared to the 300PF... I have both. I do not think the lenses are using the same AFS drive.
The rain and / or heavy clouds seems to be a persistent pattern in MN these days. Because I only have two days a week when I can do any meaningful photography, I do the best I can to shoot in spite of the atmospherics. Because of this low light, all of the images are at ISO 1600.
The first two pictures are for those interested in the performance of the 500PF at a distance. The first image is a crop of the second. The original shot was at least 120m if not 150m away. The crop is how I envisioned it, as I hoped to approach the spike buck.... but he decided to jump into the brush and then into the woods. As I pursued the little guy, I encountered four more deer.
The second point of interest to those considering the lens is the bokeh. Many of the shots were taken in thick secondary riverine forest. There is a lot of clutter about. I think that the bokeh is surprisingly nice despite being an f5.6 lens. While I did a bit of noise reduction in the piebald shots, the others have not had the noise reduced.
Finally, in the captions I indicate if the images are full captures or cropped.
cheers,
bruce
Piebald Deer cropped to 13.5MP from the D500
Piebald Deer Original (uncropped)
Fawn... suddenly realizing that I was lying on the ground (Cropped 13MP)
But I think in a place with decent light and at least large bierds like egreat/herons/commorants/etc. I could do BIF with this combo. It did track at least panning with the bierds.
