The 4th official Random Discussion For TPBM Photo's and Photographers Thread (4)

Pete wrote in post #4315154
Hmmm.. I miss the 70-200 f/2.8....

But the 135L does ok at sports, if I get the framing right.

very nice Pete.

ghostrider_9 wrote in post #4315185
I actually tossing about getting the 100-400 L 2.8, but it is a push/pull and I am not too certain about how comfortable I would be with that . . .

I've also thought about getting a 300 prime, but haven't looked at prices yet.

If I may, I would go for the 300 prime over the 100-400. couple of reasons (I am about to get killed)
1. IQ is going to be better. (tons better) 100-400 is said to be soft. I have not shot with one but that is what the people that shoot what I shoot tell me about it, compared to the 300 prime.
2. You can pan hand held with the 300 prime just as well as you can with the 100-400.

I asked the advice of one the pros just a couple of weeks back. No need for the 300 f/2.8 - too much money and the f/5.6 is great for M'sports. Slap a 1.4xTC on it, retain autofocus and you have 420mm. Not a 500 but still some dang good reach with something you can actualy pan with.

BTW that is on my Christmas list, PM me for my snail mail addy if your so inclined.

ok I just moved some photos from my laptop to here ..here are a couple of shots taken in NH I guess I am blessed with powerful skies .
1.

HTTP response: 403 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 403 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

Those skies are just awesome, Deb.. I love them.

Jamie Holladay wrote in post #4315271
very nice Pete.

If I may, I would go for the 300 prime over the 100-400. couple of reasons (I am about to get killed)
1. IQ is going to be better. (tons better) 100-400 is said to be soft. I have not shot with one but that is what the people that shoot what I shoot tell me about it, compared to the 300 prime.
2. You can pan hand held with the 300 prime just as well as you can with the 100-400.

I asked the advice of one the pros just a couple of weeks back. No need for the 300 f/2.8 - too much money and the f/5.6 is great for M'sports. Slap a 1.4xTC on it, retain autofocus and you have 420mm. Not a 500 but still some dang good reach with something you can actualy pan with.

BTW that is on my Christmas list, PM me for my snail mail addy if your so inclined.

I am the kind of person that will rent whatever I am looking to buy before I buy it, so I can be certain of whether or not I truly like it. All the specs in the world are great, but the true test is when you are holding it in your hand and runnning it through it's paces. That is when I decide that I either like it or keep looking. I ran a 1.4 on the 70-200 and loved it. With the 1.4 and the 1.6 inherent to the camera it was like having a 156-448.

I also shoot mostly sports as well as motorsports and am looking for something with the largest aperature I can afford.

BearLeeAlive wrote in post #4314951
And the forerunner to all the games Terri listed is the Super Macro Guessing Game (SMGG). That is where I met our dear Terri. ;D

Gosh, I haven't played that game in AGES!
Jim made me an addict for a while

Jamie Holladay wrote in post #4314981
did you say that out loud for the world to read.

Yep!

Pete wrote in post #4315332
Those skies are just awesome, Deb.. I love them.

What he said

Pete wrote in post #4315332
Those skies are just awesome, Deb.. I love them.

I second this . . .

Thanks you guys ..
So terri ..your a recovering macro addict ?

Jamie Holladay wrote in post #4315271
very nice Pete.

If I may, I would go for the 300 prime over the 100-400. couple of reasons (I am about to get killed)
1. IQ is going to be better. (tons better) 100-400 is said to be soft. I have not shot with one but that is what the people that shoot what I shoot tell me about it, compared to the 300 prime.
2. You can pan hand held with the 300 prime just as well as you can with the 100-400.

I asked the advice of one the pros just a couple of weeks back. No need for the 300 f/2.8 - too much money and the f/5.6 is great for M'sports. Slap a 1.4xTC on it, retain autofocus and you have 420mm. Not a 500 but still some dang good reach with something you can actualy pan with.

BTW that is on my Christmas list, PM me for my snail mail addy if your so inclined.

you won't get killed from me. I've used both extensively. I really did give my 1-4 a fair go too...it may have been the copy but my point was that it was the lens I had, it did a lousy job at what I needed it to do. I LOVE my 300 F4IS. Love it. Even with a tc. In fact, I prefer the 300 because I can turn it into 420 if I need to or keep it at 300.

Large apertures are seldom necessary when shooting motorsports...Since we typically use shutter speeds of 1/320 and slower while shooting in daylight...apertures of f/8 and f/11 are not at all uncommon. If you think for one second that the 100-400 is a bad lens for motorsports, you should check out some of the works of Jim DeFord...member name defordphoto on here.

Woolburr wrote in post #4315450
Large apertures are seldom necessary when shooting motorsports...Since we typically use shutter speeds of 1/320 and slower while shooting in daylight...apertures of f/8 and f/11 are not at all uncommon. If you think for one second that the 100-400 is a bad lens for motorsports, you should check out some of the works of Jim DeFord...member name defordphoto on here.

oh yeah, his stuff is great. I suppose it just depends on your 1-4...if it's a good one or a bad one. (and I HATE that there are so many soft copies running around out there...imo it's the worst QC'd lens around)

Permagrin wrote in post #4315437
you won't get killed from me. I've used both extensively. I really did give my 1-4 a fair go too...it may have been the copy but my point was that it was the lens I had, it did a lousy job at what I needed it to do. I LOVE my 300 F4IS. Love it. Even with a tc. In fact, I prefer the 300 because I can turn it into 420 if I need to or keep it at 300.

For shooting boids...the 300 is a way better choice...I love that combo.

I am patiently waiting to see what happens with the 5D in terms of Christmas, I buy myself stuff with the money I've earned, tho our new carpeting took a chunk. I got a check the other day for some events I shot about 4-5 months ago!!

okay one more to show ya's ..

HTTP response: 403 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

Miniflash wrote in post #4315436
Thanks you guys ..
So terri ..your a recovering macro addict ?

:o:o:o

Crissa me 2...patience is a vertue right ..lol I want a 5D so much I can taste it ..lol