Collecting Pics Of Lenses. Care to Contribute?

Good lord .... that's a sweet setup you've got there airbutchie!


David

Snow Goose wrote in post #6639151
Here is my bird/wildlife arsenal. From left to right: EF 600mm f4L (non IS), EF 500mmf4L IS, EF 300mm f2.8L (non IS), 70-200 f2.8L (non IS), Ef 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 plus 1.4X II, 1.4X and 2X extenders. Missing from the photo is my newly acquired EF 800mm f5.6L IS.
Bob

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

That is insane! You could buy a car for the price of those!

Very nice though!


David

I suppose since everyone else is showing there Sigmas, I'll follow suit. My feeble lineup, Sigma 150-500mm, Sigma 18-200mm, and...Hey!?! Who put that Canon 70-300mm DO in there????

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

feeble? The 18-200 is no L killer, but for a superzoom aint too bad. The 150-500 is a great lens, and the Canon 70-300 DO is also great for what it does. Looks none to shabby to me!

katodog wrote in post #6703944
I suppose since everyone else is showing there Sigmas, I'll follow suit. My feeble lineup, Sigma 150-500mm, Sigma 18-200mm, and...Hey!?! Who put that Canon 70-300mm DO in there????

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO

Certainly not along the same lines as all those pretty white lenses, but black's not bad for a color, and they take great pics.

Nah, not feeble, but when I look at all that Canon white, it makes me wonder. The Bigmos definitely takes no backseat to the Canon 100-400mm lens, I tested the Canon alongside it and, other than the 100mm difference on the high end, they both produced almost identical images. I wouldn't consider it an "L Killer", but it'll keep up with no trouble at all.

The 18-200mm is an excellent lens, and it gives me perfect shots. The Canon DO was something I got in a trade, and I actually like it a lot. It worked great for shooting bird shots at the inlaws, from about 6 feet away. I haven't given it a lot of use other than that though, since I seem to be favoring the 18-200. If it wasn't getting cold out, I'd run to Brookfield Zoo and use the Canon there to see how it did. But it is an excellent lens from what I can see so far.

Personally, I have the DO and I love it. It takes great pics, It just requires a little more sharpening than other lenses (You can sharpen it more without artifacts). So either crank up the in camera sharpening, or be sure to shoot RAW and do post processing.

My for sale pics

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Wow! Why, may I ask, are you selling such a fantastic line-up of lenses?

Mmmm L envy


David

All that for sale??

Tell me you are not converting to the dark side!!!

photobitz wrote in post #6716445
All that for sale??

Tell me you are not converting to the dark side!!!

Unless he is selling the photo to someone who cannot afford the gear

LOL. Perhaps

The dark side isn't so bad. Although I'm yet to get my glass collection back to what it was - I really miss my Canon 24-70 - that was such a beautiful lens.

lol, the Nikon 24-70 is a cracker too, but way pricey. I'm waiting to see what the new Sigma 24-70 HSM is like before I make the decision though.

not really a L but a lens.

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE