Yeah, I know it. The 55-300 does quite well for large subjects up to
about 80m & birds to 20m but beyond that.........
Aln C
On 29-May-19 07:21 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
As I mentioned elsewhere, I rode with my boss and a client to a job
site in LA, expecting the job to take today and tomorrow. With three
of us, tools, and a bunch of plants to be delivered on the way down, I
decided that prudence dictated that I leave my camera case with the
bigma, K3 etc. at home. Besides, spending a day and a half working in
downtown LA, planning on a long day today, I wasn't going to have any
need/opportunity to use the long glass.
I did, however, pack the 55-300, I'm crazy, but I'm not stupid. OK,
I'm stupid too, but I'm not going to bet that hard that I won't have
any need of a long lens.
When we got back to the hotel today, there was quite a ruckus in some
of the trees, what appeared to be a couple of parrots. While I was
trying to photograph them, I also got some shots of an Oriole, a
mocking bird, a sparrow, a gull. Not, mind you, very good shots, but
I got enough shots that the birds could be ID'd, more or less, and I
did get a couple of frames that didn't entirely suck.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/albums/72157708812903137
RJ says that what I thought was parrots was either a Mitered Parakeet
or a Red-masked Parakeet.
On future trips, I guess I'll be better about bringing lenses that I
know I won't need.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
