shots with new lens

ving (David) · #1 22-12-2008, 10:32 AM

these are both at full stretch (ie 500mm) and f8. i still have a bit to learn about shooting with this lens but it shows potential.

iceman (Mike) · #2 22-12-2008, 10:34 AM

Looking good, Dave!

Kevnool (Kev) · #3 22-12-2008, 10:37 AM

Lovely shots Dave, I see picked the cleanest and well groomed seagull in the sky.
Top work with the new lens.
Cheers Kev.

ving (David) · #4 22-12-2008, 10:50 AM

thanks guys. still objects are easy, but moving ones i need to get the hang of all over again. i got stacks of OOF gulls LOL

got some great peilcan shots tho. the DoF with this lens can get really narrow!

Dennis · #5 22-12-2008, 10:52 AM

Hi Dave

A couple of terrific photos – well done! The seagull looks sharp; I assume it was almost on top of you from the cropped wings!

I love the composition, colours and DOF of the crab photo – top stuff.

Cheers

Dennis

ving (David) · #6 22-12-2008, 01:19 PM

the seagul was pretty much where you said it was lol.

thnaks dennis

AlexN · #7 23-12-2008, 01:01 PM

Both shots are great indeed...
I particularly like the crab shot.. DOF, colors and subject are all great, Not that I have anything against seagulls.. But... Its a seagull

which lens is this? Sigma 150-500? 50-500? 170-500?

I had the 170-500mm a few years back and found that it would produce some seriously sharp images provided I held it very steady... right out at 500mm it was brilliantly sharp..

(my best with the 170-500 posted - A Seagull

!!! Hope you dont mind)

RB (Andrew) · #8 23-12-2008, 01:03 PM

Congrats on the new lens David.
Nice shooting.

ving (David) · #9 23-12-2008, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexN

Both shots are great indeed...
I particularly like the crab shot.. DOF, colors and subject are all great, Not that I have anything against seagulls.. But... Its a seagull

which lens is this? Sigma 150-500? 50-500? 170-500?

I had the 170-500mm a few years back and found that it would produce some seriously sharp images provided I held it very steady... right out at 500mm it was brilliantly sharp..

(my best with the 170-500 posted - A Seagull

!!! Hope you dont mind)

its the 150-500mm. i found the minimum of 150mm limiting (though i could have changed lenses) but hand held shots are so easy with the OS on

AlexN · #10 23-12-2008, 01:50 PM

the 150-500 is the best of the 3.... the 50-500 is a bit soft, the 170-500 doesnt have OS or HSM.. so its big, heavy, slow focusing and long f/l (ingredients that do not mix together well.)

150 can be limiting at times.. this is where it pays to have 2 bodies... 70-200 on one, 150-500 on the other

ving (David) · #11 23-12-2008, 03:50 PM

lol, this lens weighs 2kg without the camera attached, noway i'd carry another camera LOL

AlexN · #12 23-12-2008, 04:29 PM

Harden up son!

Try lugging a 1dmk3/300 2.8 + D200/70-200 2.8 around for a few hours... 8kgs of cameras does wonders for your neck/shoulders

ving (David) · #13 23-12-2008, 04:33 PM

rofl!
Pass!

this setup was enough for me