Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 36

Thread: Which telephoto would you get?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    South East Tasmania
    Posts
    10,705
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by dmdigital View Post
    I'm now primarily shooting FX so the 400 may not be as big an issue (no pun intended). Need to think and research more.

    Arthur have you seen the long lens rail kits that are available. RRS one is here: Long Lens Support Packages - (the web site is a bit error prone since they changed it recently)
    Thank you for the link, I just wonder if works on a Manfrotto ballhead or I need to get one of them.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hobart Tasmania
    Posts
    3,690
    Total Downloaded
    0
    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
    Carlos
    1994 Land Rover Discovery 300tdi
    1963 Land Rover Series 2a 88
    Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu3...BtsNIuTyGkAo5w
    Instagram: https://instagram.com/rover_tasmania/

  3. #23
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Perth, WA
    Posts
    163
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by dmdigital View Post
    will take weight off the lens mount, especially with the weight of the D3s body.
    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.

  4. #24
    dmdigital's Avatar
    dmdigital is offline OldBushie Vendor

    Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Arnhem Land, NT
    Posts
    8,492
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Chucaro View Post
    Thank you for the link, I just wonder if works on a Manfrotto ballhead or I need to get one of them.
    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 stooge View Post
    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
    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 DFNDR90 View Post
    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.
    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.
    MY15 Discovery 4 SE SDV6

    Past: 97 D1 Tdi, 03 D2a Td5, 08 Kimberley Kamper, 08 Defender 110 TDCi, 99 Defender 110 300Tdi[/SIZE]

  5. #25
    300+ Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Chucaro View Post
    You are lucky Steve, I use my 70-300VR @ 300mm 95% of the time
    I guess that I need 500mm focal range all the time for my birds photography
    I was thinking more of the sports photos. Kids playing soccer, racing cars, etc. They can get quite close.

    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.

    Cheers, Steve

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Goolwa SA - but top ender forever
    Posts
    2,515
    Total Downloaded
    0
    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

    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)

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    South East Tasmania
    Posts
    10,705
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 300+ View Post
    I was thinking more of the sports photos. Kids playing soccer, racing cars, etc. They can get quite close.

    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.

    Cheers, Steve
    Steve, for a nice and sharp shot at 15m you need 420 to 500 mm lens

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    South East Tasmania
    Posts
    10,705
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Blitz, is your 70-300 VR or the cheap version?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Goolwa SA - but top ender forever
    Posts
    2,515
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Chucaro View Post
    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 photos

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Goolwa SA - but top ender forever
    Posts
    2,515
    Total Downloaded
    0
    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

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!