Hi I'm back from holiday in snowy Finnish Lapland. I was shooting birds from fixed hides of my friend. Nice to be able to do that since arranging everything (place, hide, food for birds etc.) is 70-90% of the work I quess. The weather was ok but not perfect all the time, resulting in about 42 rolls of slides... haven't yet gone throught it all after I got them back from processing but there seems to be some shots that I like though. Back to business: >the focusing wasn't as critical as compared to shooting birds. BUT if you >compare the costs of getting to 800mm in other ways... it's definitely >worth a try. Of course it would be best if you could borrow one and see >how you like it. But the fact is that for some of us, there is no >alternative way to get to 800mm. > >Best regards, > Hugo. Neither for me, but I have only used 100-400 with 1.4x and the biggest problem seems to be the increased focal length with f8, thus longer shutter speeds with a longer lens. I also try to stop down 0.5 to 1 stops to max the quality, with and without the 1.4x, whenever I can. I believe 400/5.6L would be better with the 2x but don't know how much. But: no zoom, no IS. ...While we are waiting for the EF600/5.6L (with or without DO) for the same price as the 300/2.8L (or half price as a DO version, if they get DO working properly enough). In my opinion Canon should concentrate more than what they have done in the past in mid-range (price & weight-wise) high quality lenses. E.g. 17-35/4L, 24-85/4L (IS ?), 28-105/4L IS, 35/2 USM, 400/4L IS, 600/5.6L IS come in my mind first. regards Vesa _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
