Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 68

Thread: Telephoto lens?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,345
    Phil, mine doesn't seem to creep unless I move a lot. The 70-300 comes closer to cruising than creeping.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Livin in a redneck paradise
    Posts
    1,874
    Yup, it does seem to creep a little. Not really a problem just held straight down, but being jarred in that position, ex. running, will have it fully extended shortly. Walking doesn't present much of an issue so far.

    Focusing is much better than the 70-300, though not as good as I hoped (non-SWD here).

    Bokeh seems to be not an issue so far. I think it only really becomes bad with the 1.4x teleconverter (from browsing the internet, not experience)

    Telephoto range is good, but of course I'd always like more.

    Macro performance is disappointing coming from the 70-300, I have to be a long way from anything I am trying to get a closeup of. The smallest it can be focused down to is about 3-4 inches.

    Image quality noticeably better.

    Aperture is great, I think you'll really like that part in rainy ol' England!

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Derbyshire, UK
    Posts
    2,505
    Thanks guys that's a great help. Interesting kg my 70-300 doesn't seem to creep even if I shake it. I guess this depends on manufacturing tolerances as much as usage. As I'm going for a secondhand one it'll most likely be non SWD so your focusing comment is a bit dissapointing raven, but if it's better then I guess that's ok and yes that wider aperture is a big reason for me considering the lens, the 70-300 is often not bright enough. Or should I just blame our weather
    Around every picture there's a corner & round every corner there's a picture
    - the fun's in finding them

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Livin in a redneck paradise
    Posts
    1,874
    I wouldn't be too concerned. Since this is your first high grade lens, you'll be impressed by focusing either way. It searches for focus more than my 14-54, but is just as smooth and quiet and fast for distance it does cover. It just needs to cover more distance.

    The aperture is amazing. Shooting wide open at f/3.5, without even thinking of stopping down for more image quality... (we need a drooling smiley face, come on new forum!)

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,345
    I had some sample shots to post over the weekend when the forum went on hiatus. I have been on the road for work since and not had the chance to post them. I did bring the E-5 and XZ-1 with me as I hope to get some photo time. The 50-200 stayed home as it is a bit much to carry when I am trying to do my day job. I did get time to play with the XZ-1 on the Vegas strip at night might get some of those up soon.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Derbyshire, UK
    Posts
    2,505
    No problem kg no rush as I missed a 50-200 on ebay the other day. I just got outbid by 10 cos I missed the end of the auction. I'm going to see the F1 at Silverstone in July and was thinking I could make use of one then.
    Around every picture there's a corner & round every corner there's a picture
    - the fun's in finding them

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,345
    Phil, it is a great lens for auto races. But I think that you might want the speed of the SWD even more. I took my 50-200 and a friend's E-620 to Road Atlanta for the Petit Lemans last Fall. It was great. Probably even better at F1 as I know that they rarely let you get as close to the track as I could at Road Atlanta. There are some places where I needed the 12-60 @12 to get the whole car in the frame as the track was less than 10 feet away and no fences. to shoot through.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Derbyshire, UK
    Posts
    2,505
    Phew I bet that was noisy, very cool to be so close but noisy. Interesting, do you think the SWD is that much faster? not sure I can afford one they seem to be going for quite a bit more than the older versions. Maybe it's worth renting must look into it.
    Around every picture there's a corner & round every corner there's a picture
    - the fun's in finding them

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,345
    Phil, I have never used the non-SWD, but it is supposed to be faster. Might be a good question over on DPReview as I am pretty certain there are folks who have had both.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,345
    Phil here is some backyard wildlife with the 50-200 and the E-5. The bluejay was hiding in some branches about 30 feet away. I cropped and bumped the brightness a bit.
    The butterfly was overhead about 30 feet. I prefocused on some branches and tracked him for a few seconds. I have included the full image and a 100% crop of the butterfly for you.
    Attached Images Attached Images    

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •