Nzshrimper a good height for ...  10,173 posts Joined Aug 2006 Location: Christchurch - New Zealand More info | Hosting of websites .. -- found this deal.. © All rights given away
LOG IN TO REPLY |
weka2000 Is that a 300mm in your pocket?  More info | Oct 31, 2006 17:41 | #10247 FlyingPete wrote in post #2197473  Yeah I was digging for 'Dr Evil' though  The lens I use the most is my 28-105 f/3.5-4.5. Its short comings for me have been the wide end (I often have to use my EFS 'kit' to cover), sharpness wideopen and hand holdablity in low light. From this I have decided that the 24-105L f/4 IS is the best bet, wider at 24mm (still may need the kit lens though, but hopefully less often - will move to a 10-22 at some point to cover the gap  ), sharper, slightly brighter at the long end and IS to help with hand holdablity. Only downside is it is quite a bit heavier!You know anyone who has one you could test
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Moppie Moderator  15,103 posts Gallery: 24 photos Best ofs: 1 Likes: 452 Joined Sep 2004 Location: Akarana, Aotearoa. (Kiwiland) More info | Oct 31, 2006 17:42 | #10248 Nzshrimper wrote in post #2197479 i think i had something to do with yours Moppie - Sorry.. and Tinkerbells..  Apology accepted, especially since now its summer its not a totally inaccurate statement
LOG IN TO REPLY |
weka2000 Is that a 300mm in your pocket? More info | Tested the 24-105 and its fine except for vignetting at the F4 across the range
LOG IN TO REPLY |
FlyingPete I am immune  More info | Oct 31, 2006 17:45 | #10250 weka2000 wrote in post #2197521 Tested the 24-105 and its fine except for vignetting at the F4 across the range  ....time to upgrade  Eh? That is on the 5D I take it? What does it do hood off? Peter Lowden.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Nzshrimper a good height for ... 10,173 posts Joined Aug 2006 Location: Christchurch - New Zealand More info | Oct 31, 2006 17:49 | #10251 Moppie wrote in post #2197513 Apology accepted, especially since now its summer its not a totally inaccurate statement Who got Tinkerbells? disco lizard.. is now know as ... Tinkerbell asking for trouble.... © All rights given away
LOG IN TO REPLY |
DiscoLizard Tinkerbell asking for trouble  1,391 posts Joined Jul 2006 Location: New Zealand More info | Oct 31, 2006 17:56 | #10252
When a dumb kiwi #$ick nicks the ball through the slips,
LOG IN TO REPLY |
weka2000 Is that a 300mm in your pocket? More info | Oct 31, 2006 18:41 | #10253 FlyingPete wrote in post #2197532 Eh? That is on the 5D I take it? What does it do hood off? That was with the hood off
LOG IN TO REPLY |
FlyingPete I am immune More info | Oct 31, 2006 18:44 | #10254 weka2000 wrote in post #2197757 That was with the hood off . Its all gone by F8, hell I brought a 30D for the bigma to get rid of that ones issue. Looks like "L" primes 24, 35, 50, 85Better get the superglue remover out... Peter Lowden.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
dgcorner Goldmember 4,722 posts Joined Sep 2005 Location: New Zealand More info | Oct 31, 2006 18:45 | #10255 Is it worth getting the Canon extension tubes over the Kenko ones? There are a couple on TM I am seriously considering... John
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Moppie Moderator 15,103 posts Gallery: 24 photos Best ofs: 1 Likes: 452 Joined Sep 2004 Location: Akarana, Aotearoa. (Kiwiland) More info | Oct 31, 2006 18:46 | #10256 dgcorner wrote in post #2197769 Is it worth getting the Canon extension tubes over the Kenko ones? There are a couple on TM I am seriously considering... Didn't you just sell your Kenko ones?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
FlyingPete I am immune More info | Oct 31, 2006 18:47 | #10257 dgcorner wrote in post #2197769 Is it worth getting the Canon extension tubes over the Kenko ones? There are a couple on TM I am seriously considering... They are a tube with electrical connectors and no optics. The only difference I noticed when playing with them was build quality, it made no difference to the images, however I was a little more reluctant to hang my 70-200 off the Kenko ones than the Canon ones! Peter Lowden.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
FlyingPete I am immune More info | Bring back bellows. I had some on my OM1, allowed me to go 5:1 Peter Lowden.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
dgcorner Goldmember 4,722 posts Joined Sep 2005 Location: New Zealand More info | Oct 31, 2006 18:55 | #10259 Moppie wrote in post #2197778 Didn't you just sell your Kenko ones? Have you been hanging around Tony to much? Nope, not Kenko ones. They were full manual generic ones that were such a pain to use... hence not too much macro shots from me... and I love doing macros... FlyingPete wrote in post #2197788 They are a tube with electrical connectors and no optics. The only difference I noticed when playing with them was build quality, it made no difference to the images, however I was a little more reluctant to hang my 70-200 off the Kenko ones than the Canon ones! I have to agree on the build quality... I wouldn't want my 70-200 falling off... John
LOG IN TO REPLY |
weka2000 Is that a 300mm in your pocket? More info | Oct 31, 2006 18:55 | #10260 dgcorner wrote in post #2197769 Is it worth getting the Canon extension tubes over the Kenko ones? There are a couple on TM I am seriously considering... Canon air is a lot more expensive
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is IoDaLi Photography 1634 guests, 142 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
I never look for trouble.
you should try focusing at that distance!
