Since the body has IS built in, would an older 300 2.8 or 400 canon non is lens be a good choice. No IS but body handles it and would cost substatially less. Anyone doing this with the a7ii for comparison?
skater911 Goldmember 1,281 posts Likes: 3 Joined Dec 2006 More info | Jun 28, 2015 23:26 | #1 Since the body has IS built in, would an older 300 2.8 or 400 canon non is lens be a good choice. No IS but body handles it and would cost substatially less. Anyone doing this with the a7ii for comparison? Nikon D850 l Nikon 28 1.4E l Nikon 50 1.8 g l Nikon 24-120 F4 l Tamron 100-400 l
LOG IN TO REPLY |
gonzogolf dumb remark memorialized More info | Jun 28, 2015 23:59 | #2 Often the addition of IS is accompanied by an optical upgrade as well.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jun 29, 2015 02:32 | #3 I am sure the addition of IS to a lens like the 300 or 400 5.6 will be great as we know they are very sharp lenses. But the same old problems of old lenses will appear, lack of parts for example. http://natureimmortal.blogspot.com
LOG IN TO REPLY |
dmward Cream of the Crop More info | Jul 04, 2015 09:09 | #4 This link should answer a lot of your questions. David | Sharing my Insights, Knowledge & Experience
LOG IN TO REPLY |
pyrojim Goldmember 1,882 posts Likes: 4 Joined Jan 2010 Location: San Jose, CA More info | Jul 04, 2015 15:25 | #5 dmward wrote in post #17620264 This link should answer a lot of your questions. https://luminous-landscape.com …ron-150-600mm-antarctica/ I updated the firmware in my Metabones IV adapter and now have the benefit of in lens IS along with IBIS for Canon 300 F4. Even with teleconverters. http://digifotografi.com …-and-sigma-teleconverters I'm looking forward to the A7RII and glad that it will do a better job at AF with the lenses via adapter.
PhaseOne H25
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 04, 2015 15:34 | #6 Thank you for the link. That was great info. I am getting excited for the a7rii. Nikon D850 l Nikon 28 1.4E l Nikon 50 1.8 g l Nikon 24-120 F4 l Tamron 100-400 l
LOG IN TO REPLY |
dmward Cream of the Crop More info | Jul 06, 2015 16:20 | #7 pyrojim wrote in post #17620625 I didn't think that stabilization would "add" so nicely as you have indicated... Unless the camera body can tell the lens exactly how to behave... In the instance when the lens has IS the camera relies on the lens to provide that axis of stabilization and it supplies the others. David | Sharing my Insights, Knowledge & Experience
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 ANebinger 1254 guests, 148 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||