Thank you for the link, I just wonder if works on a Manfrotto ballhead or I need to get one of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by dmdigital
Printable View
Thank you for the link, I just wonder if works on a Manfrotto ballhead or I need to get one of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by dmdigital
Thats the problem with big lenses, the ripple effect of having to purchase an appropriate tripod (if one hasnt got one that handles the weight), the head (gimbal type), then theres the external flash and better beamer (fill flash bird photography)... so you can add some extra $k to the equasion!
When you get the kit post up a pic of it so we can drool :D
A full size body incl battery may seem heavy in your hands, but supporting it off the lens is not an issue at all. The other way around is another matter. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by dmdigital
Their rails work with any Arca-style fittings, if in doubt the best thing is to e-mail they are good at answering questions about equipment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucaro
Flashes and tripod aren't an issue, I have a RRS BH-55 which can hold more than the tripod. I will most likely have to get the gimbal head though and the Wimberly would appear to be the best solution, but I may get by with my rail setup as this gives me free movement in 3 planes using two turntables.Quote:
Originally Posted by stooge
Don't worry I know first hand how robust the D3s lens mount is. It's stronger than the lens' portion:( Long story and a $1000 repair job on a 24-70 f/2.8.Quote:
Originally Posted by DFNDR90
I was thinking more of the sports photos. Kids playing soccer, racing cars, etc. They can get quite close.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucaro
But my bird shots are all annoying as they lens just isn't long enough. I'm working at home normally so I've just had lunch on my deck as the birds are all very active and the neighbour's tree is flowering. A lorikeet 15 metres away does not get close to filling the frame at 300mm. I haven't got a shot worth keeping yet. :mad:
Cheers, Steve
Now that I have my D300s I feel I can comment. while I have only had it a few days I have used my lenses a lot, i tend to use my 70/300 zoom the most. the 200/400mm zoom appeals to me but it's not worth it when like you you have one up to 300.
If I could justify it I would probably go the 600mm for the simple reason a lot of the stuff I try to shoot is very timid (well when I was in the NT anyway)
My dream kit is as follows: 18/200mmVR, 200/400mm VR and the biggest god damned lense made - hubble telescope would do :D
but as NASA wont sell it to me and I have the lenses that I have - non VR they will do.
I have used a 500mm mirror reflex (I think that is what it is called) in the past and really like the fact that it was short enough to use without a tripod. but even with that I wanted a bigger lense so the 600mm would be the go for me. My rationale is simple, I can always walk backwards if I cant fit what I want into the frame, but I can't always get closer (think crocs etc then think not brave)
Steve, for a nice and sharp shot at 15m you need 420 to 500 mm lens :(Quote:
Originally Posted by 300+
Blitz, is your 70-300 VR or the cheap version?
I bought mine way before VR was heard of, auto focus but old technology now - mind you still takes good photosQuote:
Originally Posted by Chucaro
small lense is nikkor larger lense is not nikkor, in the time between looking last night and this morning I have forgotten but it is one of the cheaper ones. Mind you for my current skills it is more than adequate