malla1962 Cream of the Crop  7,714 posts Likes: 5 Joined Jul 2004 Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk More info | Aug 27, 2005 10:16 | #1 Hi,tookthese shots at a nearby pond today,well its more like a swamp realy.I just wanted to try my ef1.4x11 on my 70-200f2.8.  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size.  HOSTED PHOTO please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
kingsown Goldmember 2,838 posts Likes: 300 Joined Jul 2005 Location: barrow-in-furness More info | Aug 27, 2005 14:12 | #2 the top shot looks a bit out it does not seam to have the same dof as the second shot maybe the compression but the doughnut affect is a bit offputing on the top shot or the ef1.4 is to much for the lens at such a shallow dof or the very low angle of the shot ,this seams the only difference in the shots ,has any one else a point on this http://barrowdpc.com/cpg1414/index.php
LOG IN TO REPLY |
malla1962 THREAD STARTER Cream of the Crop 7,714 posts Likes: 5 Joined Jul 2004 Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk More info | kingsown wrote: the top shot looks a bit out it does not seam to have the same dof as the second shot maybe the compression but the doughnut affect is a bit offputing on the top shot or the ef1.4 is to much for the lens at such a shallow dof or the very low angle of the shot ,this seams the only difference in the shots ,has any one else a point on this I will try stopping down next time.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
yakbut Goldmember 1,446 posts Joined Feb 2005 Location: Barrow in Furness UK More info | Are they full size. I dont think there as sharp as they would have been, if you had used your 100-400. http://barrowdpc.com/cpg1414/index.php
LOG IN TO REPLY |
malla1962 THREAD STARTER Cream of the Crop 7,714 posts Likes: 5 Joined Jul 2004 Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk More info | yakbut wrote: Are they full size. I dont think there as sharp as they would have been, if you had used your 100-400. No not full size a very heavy crop.if they were full size that lens would be were the birds are.I think f5.6 would have been better and got a bit closer.So yes my 100-400 would have been better.LOL
LOG IN TO REPLY |
JohnEllis Goldmember  1,064 posts Likes: 2 Joined Feb 2005 Location: Barrow-in-Furness More info | Sep 05, 2005 04:06 | #6 Yes as you say the 400 would have been better .... good effort. Canon 400, 5d, Cameras. Canon Zoom 70-200 2.8 I.S. USM Lens, Canon Extender.Canon 1x1.4 Extender.
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 was a spammer, and banned as such! 1592 guests, 134 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
