Taken just after he caught it and turned. Unfortunately the 300 was just a little too much lens.
wanyc Senior Member 256 posts Likes: 6 Joined Mar 2009 Location: New York More info | Jul 26, 2010 21:15 | #1 Taken just after he caught it and turned. Unfortunately the 300 was just a little too much lens.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ajosteve Cream of the Crop  16,468 posts Likes: 8 Joined Sep 2007 Location: Grand Canyon Arizona More info | Jul 27, 2010 08:48 | #2 Excellent shot, that fish is trying to see what has hold of it. I guess a 100-400mm would have been the ticket! Or a nifty fifty...heh..heh. Steve
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Jul 27, 2010 09:45 | #3 Yeah, shortly after this I switched to the 100-400 and used that most of the rest of the time.
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 1159 guests, 172 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
