Someone at FM has the new 70-300mm DO!

[CyberDyneSystems]

I did not realize it was even out yet!?



http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/97114/0


It looks pretty sweet.. I have been thinking a lot about this lens .. I may consider it.
Anyone see a real price on it yet?

I can't beleive it is really over a grand? :shock: :shock:

[Belmondo]

I have such a hard time believing he actually got it at Ritz Camera. Can't tell much from the picture, but it looks okay.

[ron chappel]

ahhhh, are you kidding CDS? lol
I thought you lived here:D

there have been several threads right here in this forum!
+ several example galleries posted including this VERY usefull one

http://www.pbase.com/jptrunck/samples

[CyberDyneSystems]

ahhhh, are you kidding CDS? lol
I thought you lived here:D

there have been several threads right here in this forum!
+ several example galleries posted including this VERY usefull one

http://www.pbase.com/jptrunck/samples

See waht happens when I take a day out on the weekend to actually take some photos!

I'll never catch up!

Thanks for the links :)

[ron chappel]

:D Oh no,you can't be taking photo's!
You'll ruin our perfect record 8)

[CyberDyneSystems]

:D Oh no,you can't be taking photo's!
You'll ruin our perfect record 8)

S'o-kay... there all out of focus..

http://images.fotopic.net/?id=4506125&outx=600&oq=0&original=1&noresize=1&no stamp=1

[Belmondo]

That's a really nice picture of the water --- twenty feet behind the duck!

A really good effort. :wink:

[nosquare2003]

Blurred photo can be called -- art :P

[CyberDyneSystems]

That's a really nice picture of the water --- twenty feet behind the duck!

A really good effort. :wink:

lol.. it's an Osprey! :roll:

[Belmondo]

lol.. it's an Osprey! :roll:


Oh. :oops:

Well, then, it's a lovely picture. :cry: :lol:

[Tom W]

lol.. it's an Osprey! :roll:


Oh. :oops:

Well, then, it's a lovely picture. :cry: :lol:

Awww don't feel bad - I thought it was the rear fins of a whale! ;)

OK, j/k. Maybe you're backfocusing. ;)

<<ducking>>

[scottbergerphoto]

I realize it's not a scientific test, but to my eyes, looking at the pbase images posted above, the 70-200 is much sharper, with much better detail. The difference was easily noticeable and in my opinion quite significant. I think those of us that already invested in the 70-200 2.8, can relax and put the credit card back in the wallet.
IMHO,
Scott

[ron chappel]

Every other example i've seen shows the same thing-allmost as much resoloution and that destinctive soft contrast

Someone on p.net mentioned he would buy one when the hype was done and they were selling for us$5-600 in mint condition on epay
-because they ARE still better than the kit zooms
I can't see them dropping that much but i hope so

[Lamplight]

That would be a great lens for some professional sporting events where they might frown upon a mere spectator lugging around a gigantic white lens. :)

[scottbergerphoto]

That would be a great lens for some professional sporting events where they might frown upon a mere spectator lugging around a gigantic white lens. :)
Get the 100-400 IS L and forget what anyone else says!
Scott

[CyberDyneSystems]

My specific intentio for a lens of this nature is to rebuild my 10D "back-up" as a "comfotably portable digicam" weight wise...

With no battery grip and a les this size (similar in size to my optically usless Sigma 28-300mm) .. I would have a very small , portable, discreet yet USABLE 300mm rig for out door walks in the park or downtown.

The lens is smaller than the 75-300mm.. yet a better performer.

But I agre.. this is at best a $700.00 investment for me... no way I will pay the current price.