Bumping this thread, just got one of these 
Wide open with 1.4x (slight crop):
Redlineracer12 Member 168 posts Joined Feb 2008 More info | Bumping this thread, just got one of these
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Redlineracer12 Member 168 posts Joined Feb 2008 More info | Another goose, this time without extender. Still cropped.
And here is a 100% crop (with some usm applied, something like 250,.3,0)  I'd say that's pretty darn sharp for wide open 
LOG IN TO REPLY |
_aravena isn't this answer a stickie yet?  12,458 posts Likes: 12 Joined Feb 2007 Location: Back in the 757 More info | Apr 19, 2009 11:55 | #198 It's awesome to see how well this works with a TC. Can anyone compare this with the 70-200? I want more reach and I doubt I'll be getting a 100-400L for awhile so I'm curious about how well this performs compared to the Sigma 70-200 F2.8. Last Shot Photography
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Redlineracer12 Member 168 posts Joined Feb 2008 More info | With the 1.4x at 420mm.
Again with 1.4x, even though I didn't need it...
Both had some USM applied.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
photobitz PlatinumMeasurebaiter  6,501 posts Joined Jan 2006 Location: NSW, Australia More info | May 08, 2009 11:09 | #200 _aravena wrote in post #7761161  It's awesome to see how well this works with a TC. Can anyone compare this with the 70-200? I want more reach and I doubt I'll be getting a 100-400L for awhile so I'm curious about how well this performs compared to the Sigma 70-200 F2.8. I don't shoot at 2.8 that often and of course it's not very sharp but it does do well at F4 and I use it for weddings, but still, not sure how much I shoot at F2.8 since I try to use flash or boost the ISO sometimes. A 2x TC on the 70-200 will degrade the image noticeably but I found very little difference when I used a 2x on the 100-300 (when I had it). I have since gone to a 100-400 but it was a tough decision between which of the two to keep. The 100-300 is a solid performer. Dan
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Mr.Clean Cream of the Crop  6,002 posts Likes: 3 Joined Jul 2005 Location: Olympia, Washington More info | May 08, 2009 15:12 | #201 _aravena wrote in post #7761161 It's awesome to see how well this works with a TC. Can anyone compare this with the 70-200? I want more reach and I doubt I'll be getting a 100-400L for awhile so I'm curious about how well this performs compared to the Sigma 70-200 F2.8. I don't shoot at 2.8 that often and of course it's not very sharp but it does do well at F4 and I use it for weddings, but still, not sure how much I shoot at F2.8 since I try to use flash or boost the ISO sometimes. In my experience, the 2x TC belongs no where near ANY 70-200 Mike
LOG IN TO REPLY |
_aravena isn't this answer a stickie yet? 12,458 posts Likes: 12 Joined Feb 2007 Location: Back in the 757 More info | May 08, 2009 16:27 | #202 Not with a TC, I just meant the lenses themselves. Last Shot Photography
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Tony-S Cream of the Crop  9,911 posts Likes: 209 Joined Jan 2006 Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA More info | May 23, 2009 15:42 | #203 Holy crap! Has anyone seen the price of this lens now? Almost US$1,400. Glad I got mine when it was only $1,000. "Raw" is not an acronym, abbreviation, nor a proper noun; thus, it should not be in capital letters.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CountryBoy "Tired of Goldmember label"  5,168 posts Joined May 2006 Location: Okie More info | May 25, 2009 15:47 | #204 _aravena wrote in post #7761161 It's awesome to see how well this works with a TC. Can anyone compare this with the 70-200? I want more reach and I doubt I'll be getting a 100-400L for awhile so I'm curious about how well this performs compared to the Sigma 70-200 F2.8. I don't shoot at 2.8 that often and of course it's not very sharp but it does do well at F4 and I use it for weddings, but still, not sure how much I shoot at F2.8 since I try to use flash or boost the ISO sometimes. I think the !00-300mm f/4 was/is a much better lens, both in IQ and AF speed. Tony-S wrote in post #7975698 Holy crap! Has anyone seen the price of this lens now? Almost US$1,400. Glad I got mine when it was only $1,000. I posted something about that last week, https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=696486 , Hi
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Tony-S Cream of the Crop 9,911 posts Likes: 209 Joined Jan 2006 Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA More info | May 25, 2009 17:20 | #205 Went back and double-checked; mine was $899 in August of 2006. That's better than the stock market. "Raw" is not an acronym, abbreviation, nor a proper noun; thus, it should not be in capital letters.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
May 25, 2009 21:55 | #206 CountryBoy wrote in post #7985675 I didn't check, but I bet the 120-300mm took a price hike also. B&H now lists it for ~$3200...used to be $2700 John
LOG IN TO REPLY |
olz Senior Member  701 posts Likes: 1 Joined Apr 2005 Location: Århus, Denmark More info | May 29, 2009 17:19 | #207
Cheers
LOG IN TO REPLY |
olz Senior Member 701 posts Likes: 1 Joined Apr 2005 Location: Århus, Denmark More info | Jun 12, 2009 05:16 | #208
* Camera: Canon EOS 20D * Focal Length: 300 mm * Aperture: f 4 * Shutter: 1/800 sec * ISO Speed: 200
* Camera: Canon EOS 20D * Focal Length: 237 mm * Aperture: f 4 * Shutter: 1/500 sec * ISO Speed: 100
* Camera: Canon EOS 20D * Focal Length: 300 mm * Aperture: f 4 * Shutter: 1/6400 sec * ISO Speed: 200
* Camera: Canon EOS 20D * Focal Length: 300 mm * Aperture: f 16 * Shutter: 1/8000 sec * ISO Speed: 400 - don't ask...  Cheers
LOG IN TO REPLY |
rodrt121 Mostly Lurking 17 posts Joined Apr 2007 More info | Jul 22, 2009 04:58 | #209 I love this lens, so sharp although heavy.  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Denis99 Member  114 posts Joined May 2009 Location: South Wales,UK More info | Some wonderful images with this lens (on the thread), has convinced me to buy the 100-300 f4. Regards, Denis
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 Marcsaa 505 guests, 126 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
