P�l, you asked "How does this lens work with the *istD? Image quality?"
I can't give you an exacting answer to your image quality question & I haven't done any objective testing of this combo either. The combination worked flawlessly for me. I had never shot this combo before & within a few frames it felt like I had been shooting it forever. I shot max jpeg in manual mode, 200 iso, auto white balance with mostly manual focus, wide open or close to it. I've printed some to 12"X18" on my 2000P @ 240 & 300 dpi & am most happy with the results. I wish you could see the prints to really appreciate the results. I know it's hard to judge results on the web but check out http://www.photocritique.net/g/s?zzZkpc-p21150439 to see an example. This is almost full frame. I haven't done any comparison (same subject - digital vs. film) of this combination with the 600mm & a film body. So far, I can't really see a big difference in this lens whether in use with a digital or film camera. Kenneth Waller ----- Original Message ----- From: "P�l Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: FA 600/4 for digital (WAS: Re: FA 600 f4.0 and FA 300 f2.8 do I really need them?) > Kenneth wrote: > > I have the 600mm FA. I don't use it a lot. But I just returned from Denali > National Park, Alaska and it earned it's keep on this trip. I was able to > use it with the *ist D (sometimes with a 1.4XL teleconvertor) & got a wide > variety of animal shots, from full body to intimate portraits. I've done > this trip several times before without the 600 and swore I wouldn't return > to Denali without one. > > > REPLY: > > How does this lens work with the *istD? Image quality? > > P�l > > >
