Previous versions of AmbientMike's message #16389032 « Canon 200-800? »
AmbientMike Offline [X]
Re: Canon 200-800?
jwolfe wrote:
Who said anything about a tc? And I run the latest noise software. ISO 25,000 on feathers does not clean up well. Bad inputs equal bad outputs.
AmbientMike wrote: jwolfe wrote:
It’s another episode of… Canon releases a product with a lot of potential and mucks it all up with lazy design.
Great idea, terrible execution. The spread of apertures is worse than a 150-600/200-600/180-600. No internal zooming. No removable foot. No arca swiss built in. Lazy all around. Compare Canon and Nikon and it’s astounding. 400 4.5, 600 6.3, 800 6.3, 180-600. I just don’t get Canon anymore. What am I gonna do with f9 at dusk? They could have used DO tech and made it f6.3 on the long end. That would have been crazy cool.
If you have a hard time, I can easily tell you how to use f/9 in the forest, for one. Not that hard.
It's f/9 but at 800mm it's going to get rid of a lot of bg. Pribably more than 600mm 6.3, pretty close anyway
600/6.3 + tc gives f/9
Well, actually, you did, in the past.
Sorry you're having a hard time cleaning up high iso. maybe you should post to one of the boards and get help
Nov 09, 2023 at 05:36 PM
Previous versions of AmbientMike's message #16389032 « Canon 200-800? »
