|
re lens
Jason,I had two copies of the 70-300 F 4-5.6.I notice a lot of people say how good they are,maybe I had two very bad copies,but I thought they were hardly any better than my 75-300 kit lens,if at all.
Its soft at the 300 end,reasonable at 200/250,But what is the point of having 300 when its not really getting the results.
You have a 70-200 F4 an outstanding lens,use it when the feeders bring the animals up to car.And the longer lens on your other camera.
In fact that would be an ideal combination,I have a 70-200,but its a f 2.8,its big and fat,not suited for field trips,I got it for other reasons,but If I had enough money I'd buy a f4 non IS 70-200 as a 'knock about' lens for everyday use.
Those bigger heavy lens,you will really notice the space and weight in the vehicle,I do similar trips (but not to Africa) and it makes a big difference.
Here are some basic images,with the 400L.its so much sharper than the 70-300
The wren-is a image I took within the first half an hour I ever used the lens,It has no PP,apart from crop,I stuck it in some posh photo comp,just because I was pleased with the sharpness,I expect no result-some pro togs always dominate-well this image got runner up in the nature section-put some noses out of joint-the 400L has been a winner ever since.
The other is a parrot,some PP in CS5,I took this image in low light,around 5 pm
Chris
PS the size of the L 400 is the same size as your F4 70-200,when the hood is not in use,the hood on this lens is another plus
it twists and pulls out,save so much time putting the usual hoods on in the field,and it makes a nice sound too!sound like those
old ship captains' telescopes when the pulled them into use.
|