Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
Hello guys, again a big thank you for all your comments and links, especially Cotty and Vic! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] ...to tell you the truth, what you've got IMHO is just fine. If you could arrange to say sell some articles to a rocket magazine or something like that to pay for the expensive lens it might be worth it, otherwise, make use of what you've got... Cotty wrote: You need the extra stop. Go for it! Hehe, funny thing is, the pros and cons discussed here, they mirror exactly the struggle inside my head. Angel says: What you've got is fine Devil says: Go for it! ;-) But if you ever want to sell that lovely 300 4.5 I bet a lot of people here would be interested... Vic I will shurely keep that in mind! But at the moment I'm more on Vic's side - but until friday I must be a brave boy. There's an FA on ebay for 2000,- EUR and nobody bid on it yet. Arrgh - just let this friday pass... ;-) But perhaps there is someone here who wants to sell his not-so-overly-pricey Sigma, Tamron or Tokina big-glass some day? Thomas
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
On 13/10/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: Devil says: Go for it! Mutley snigger Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
Thomas wrote: Another question is: Can shots be done handheld with the f/2.8 ? Any chance? I'm always trying to go for the 1/4000s (fast moving objects) or even faster, but the weight could be an issue, what do you think? REPLY: I didn't have any problem hand holding the A* 300/2.8 lens although it is on the heavy side. Pål
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
But why would you want to handhold such a big heavy lens? At least use a monopod. Why buy such an expensive lens and then not maximize it's capabilities by handholding it? Sure, if you have to hand hold it a few times that's one thing, but I would never buy such a lens with hand holding in mind It has it's own tripod mount and it's there for a reason... vic
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
On 12/10/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: I'm always trying to get a 1/4000 s or even faster. This summer I've done a lot of shooting with my F*300mm f/4.5 lens wide open and IS0 400 and ISO 800 film - the shots turned out very nice but the grain now bothers me. You need the extra stop. Go for it! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Explain it to us again. What exactly are you shooting that you need a fast 300 or 200... Why are you shooting at 4,000 of a second? That seems like overkill no matter what you are shooting. Well, okay. I'm shooting aerosport models. I'm into rocketry...I've posted some of my scans in an online hobby forum. An interesting 3-set of pictures not done at 1/4000 can be seen here: http://www.raketenmodellbau.org/showthread.php?s=cc5aa43e6c73280245f40997521867b6threadid=3007perpage=10pagenumber=8 In fact, I've done lots of shots at 1/1000 on ISO100 film which where not sharp enough to my taste. Some interesting shots I have done are one page further: http://www.raketenmodellbau.org/showthread.php?s=8307f018c63ef991a12213fe5b6d003cthreadid=3007perpage=10pagenumber=9 I am the guy with the nickname rocketom in that forum. The post from 19:30 shows a model only a split second before it breaks apart... (now tell me 2,5 fps of the MZ-S are enough most of the time, HA!) The narrow depth of field on the 300 f2.8 could be a problem. Well maybe ... but I also use my F*300 f/4.5 wide open most of the time. If you are panning the camera anyway, I would think 500 of a second would be more than adequate for most uses — 1,000 of a sec at the most... The post from 21:48 shows compression waves inside the flame - you can't see them that clear at 1/500. :-) I don't htink 1/4000s is overkill, but perhaps a 300/f2.8 is overkill for a hobby ;-) Well, have fun scrolling thru' the pages, there are a few pics more on the pages towards the beginning of the thread, but not mine anymore. Thomas
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
But why would you want to handhold such a big heavy lens? At least use a monopod. Why buy such an expensive lens and then not maximize it's capabilities by handholding it? Sure, if you have to hand hold it a few times that's one thing, but I would never buy such a lens with hand holding in mind It has it's own tripod mount and it's there for a reason... Hand holding is entirely possible but like a chocolate kick-stand on a Harley - pretty pointless. If you can afford the lens, you can afford the monopod. I've heard that It's difficult to use a monopod in a Zodiac inflatable. It's pretty difficult (and indeed about as useless as a chocolate kick-stand on a Harley to attempt to use either a tripod or a monopod on ~any~ unstable platform (such as on ~any~ boat). It's also difficult to use a monopod when you need a lot of mobility, such as when looking to capture images of birds in the air, or images of almost any critter in the brush or in woods. Sure, you can use a smaller and slower lens when the light is bright, but I think that there definitely is a place for hand-holding larger lenses in the field under some conditions. Fred
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
Hi, Thomas Stach wrote: Well, why would I want to handhold it? As I described in my earlier post I'm planning to do aerosports shooting with it - very fast moving objects. A lot of shooting is done right overhead, I'm trying to capture fast objects in flight with some fps - it's sometimes even difficult to keep them inside the viewfinder. I think a tripod would be near useless. Not true. It may take some practice and will certainly require the correct initial choice of equipment but shooting fast moving aeroplanes with a long lens mounted on a tripod is perfectly feasible. See Cotty's site with last year's PDML meet. http://www.macads.co.uk/pdml/ mike
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
Vic is right. IMO there can only be 2 possible reasons for buying a 300mm 2.8 lens: 1. You need the extra stop over a much cheaper f/4 lens, notably for sport or (say) rock concerts or whatever (where flash may not be appropriate)... ... or if you plan to use it with a TC occasionally. or 2. Like me, you're a lens whore! Let's face it, a 300 2.8 says 'get a load of this you damn photo-rabble, hell I can barely zip it up in the mornings!' ;-) Sometimes that's a useful message to send, too. There have been several occasions where I've been grabbing a few quick shots to put up on the web, mostly with a digital PS. It's a lot easier to get past the trolls on the barriers if you wave a big lens at them.
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
Hello, first a 'thank you' for all your advise in this 300 f/2.8 thread! I've cut out some pieces of your posts to comment... Antti-Pekka Virjonen schrieb: I've gotten perfect handheld shots at 1/250s with my Z-1 and LX cameras. Sometimes I use the A* 300/2.8 together with the A 2X-L teleconverter, also handheld, with great results. Cotty schrieb: Thomas, I used to have a manual focus Tokina 300 2.8 - it is heavy, but not impossible at all to handhold - but then a again, I'm a big guy. Much better on a monopod. So most of you think, it's quite a task, but not impossible. Hmm. Perhaps I should get to a shop to try it out. I know one about 150 miles from here ... Mark Erickson schrieb: I'm going to go ahead say that if you are otherwise happy with your F* 300mm F4.5 lens, you might be better off spending 1.800 EUR on a *ist-D body rather than on a 300mm F2.8 lens. From what I've seen, the *ist-D image samples at ISO 200, 400, and 800 look pretty darn good. I would say, I am perfectly happy with my F*300/4.5 lens - in fact, when you look at it: Grain is the issue, not the f/2.8 versus f/4.5 ... So I should be patient and first wait for the *ist-Dee. I pre-ordered one in mid-september, but they still didn't show up in this area of germany... During the last weeks I did a lot of aeromodel-sports shooting mostly on Fuji Superia X-tra ISO400 and Kodak Supra ISO800 - and now I'm sitting, scanning... The shots will be used for the sport's association newsletter and the web - digital would be just fine. I am happy it's just a hobby. So I don't have to earn money with this, I have no short deadlines etc... On the other hand it's more difficult to justify such pricey purchases like a DSLR. Well, at least my wife is supporting me - she has a MZ-5n and for the most part is also keen on new lenses or a digital body . But if I'd show up with this FA 300/2.8 monster, she'd like to know how much I've been dumping exactly for that baby. No excuses like oh, but this is only my old Sigma 600mm mirror lens...I do have it since the eighties...hasn't seen much use recently, hasn't it? Hehe... No no, this won't function...so I'd better be able to underline the need... ;-) Paul Eriksson schrieb: What about a tamron? I have the AF version described in this ebay auction http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=2954172301category=48558 . I've had it for a couple of months and I can't fault it... Oh, I didn't know they were making one for Pentax in AF. What did you pay for this one? Am I right assuming that it isn't to be sold anymore? :-( Thanks again all, Thomas
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
Thomas Stach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul Eriksson schrieb: What about a tamron? I have the AF version described in this ebay auction http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=2954172301category=48558 . I've had it for a couple of months and I can't fault it... Oh, I didn't know they were making one for Pentax in AF. What did you pay for this one? Am I right assuming that it isn't to be sold anymore? I have the current Sigma EX300 f/2.8 APO and it's superb. Costs around $2200.00 U.S. Email me if you need to know more. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
Antti-Pekka Virjonen schrieb: I've gotten perfect handheld shots at 1/250s with my Z-1 and LX cameras. Sometimes I use the A* 300/2.8 together with the A 2X-L teleconverter, also handheld, with great results. I've used the A* 300/2.8 both hand-held and on a monopod. Hand-held, it's really not all that difficult for me to use, assuming that the light is not too dim (requiring less than quick shutter speeds). I've also used it hand-held with the A 2X-L in bright light, too. Of course, the above comments are relative in a way - I used to own an A* 600/5.6, and used that hand-held in bright light a few times, and that was substantially more difficult (although possible). Certainly, the 300/2.8 with a 2X TC on it (resulting in 600mm at f/5.6) is significantly easier to hand-hold than is the big 600/5.6. Fred
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
From: Thomas Stach [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8 Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 18:34:28 +0200 Hello, first a 'thank you' for all your advise in this 300 f/2.8 thread! I've cut out some pieces of your posts to comment... Paul Eriksson schrieb: What about a tamron? I have the AF version described in this ebay auction http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=2954172301category=48558 . I've had it for a couple of months and I can't fault it... Oh, I didn't know they were making one for Pentax in AF. What did you pay for this one? Am I right assuming that it isn't to be sold anymore? :-( I paid $1000 + tax for it in a store in ex+ condition. The lens on ebay is only the second of these lenses that I've seen so I asume that they are relatively rare. /Paul _ Instant message during games with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now FREE! http://msnmessenger-download.com
RE: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
Thomas, I have the A* 300/2.8 and I simply love it. Before I got mine I tried the Tamron 300/2.8 manual focus (ugly green color) with the adaptall PKA adapter. I think the Pentax is slightly better optically but the main point why I prefer the Pentax is I don't like using any adapter mechanics when using such a heavy lens. The camera body attached to the Tamron with the PKA adapter made the mount feel wobbly which I did not like at all. I don't really know a fair price for the lens on today's market, but I got mine for about EUR 1600 way back in the last century... Handhelding is pretty nice with this lens, even though it weights close to 3kg. I have gotten better pictures handheld with this than with lighter lenses of similar focal length. Believe it or not, the mass of the lens helps keeping the camera more steady than with a lighter lens of similar focal length (like using a massive tripod instead of a lightweight tripod). I've gotten perfect handheld shots at 1/250s with my Z-1 and LX cameras. Sometimes I use the A* 300/2.8 together with the A 2X-L teleconverter, also handheld, with great results. The 300/2.8 + LX is a heavy combination to carry around but the good point is one does not need to visit the gym that often ;-). Using a monopod would help to prevent your hands getting weak if you need to track your subjects for a long time. AF could be nice but so far I have been satisfied with the manual focus and the occasional 1.7X AF-adapter AF assisted manual focus approach. You will face the same kinds of ISO problems with digital (more noise instead of more grain when you go to higher sensitivity)... and you will want as fast lens as you can afford and which is available. Antti-Pekka --- Antti-Pekka Virjonen Computec Oy, Turku Finland Gsm: +358-500-789 753 www.computec.fi * www.estera.fi -Original Message- From: Th. Stach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 10:56 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8 Hello all you big glass experts, what do you think would be a fair price for such a lens? I've seen the SMC-A version for 1.800 EUR and the newer SMC-FA for about 2.700 EUR. I'd also take a Sigma or Tokina, but I'm not sure if these were ever done for Pentax. AF preferred. I've done some terrific shots with my F*300 f/4.5 this year- but these shots were only possible with ISO 400 or ISO 800 film. If I could have used the f/2.8 and ISO 100 film, well... Another question is: Can shots be done handheld with the f/2.8 ? Any chance? I'm always trying to go for the 1/4000s (fast moving objects) or even faster, but the weight could be an issue, what do you think? I'd love to check out such a lens, but I've never seen one live. Or I should wait for digital, where ISO is not an issue... Thanks in advance for your appreciated advise, Thomas
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
Hello all you big glass experts, what do you think would be a fair price for such a lens? I've seen the SMC-A version for 1.800 EUR and the newer SMC-FA for about 2.700 EUR. I purchased my SMC-A 300mm F2.8 along with my A2X-L teleconverter for a little less than $2000 US about 3 years ago. I do miss autofocus, but I don't know if it's worth $900 to me. I've done some terrific shots with my F*300 f/4.5 this year- but these shots were only possible with ISO 400 or ISO 800 film. If I could have used the f/2.8 and ISO 100 film, well... You should realize that the plane of focus at f2.8 is quite thin, so accurate focus is really essential if you want high-quality images. Another question is: Can shots be done handheld with the f/2.8 ? Any chance? I'm always trying to go for the 1/4000s (fast moving objects) or even faster, but the weight could be an issue, what do you think? Handheld? Maybe. Several companies make shoulder stocks that allow you aim your camera/lens system like a rifle and brace it against your shoulder. I don't own one, but would probably get one if I used my 300mm lens more than I do. Another accessory to consider is the Wimberly long lens support, especially if you want to use the lens with a teleconverter. I'd love to check out such a lens, but I've never seen one live. Or I should wait for digital, where ISO is not an issue... I'm going to go ahead say that if you are otherwise happy with your F* 300mm F4.5 lens, you might be better off spending 1.800 EUR on a *ist-D body rather than on a 300mm F2.8 lens. From what I've seen, the *ist-D image samples at ISO 200, 400, and 800 look pretty darn good. Thanks in advance for your appreciated advise, Thomas
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Th. Stach wrote: Hello all you big glass experts, what do you think would be a fair price for such a lens? I bought mine for $2000 USD in around 1990 and sold it for under a thousand to a dealer in around 2000. The MFs are pretty rare so they are likely to cost more than they are worth compared to other brands of 300/2.8. You can get Nikon 300/2.8 MFs for under a thousand right now because the market it flooded with them. Can you hand-hold it? If you are really good. The 300/2.8 A* is an order of magnitude heavier than anything except the 500/600, and quite noticeably heavier than the Nikon 300/2.8 MF. I don't remember ever hand-holding the Pentax but I can successfully hand-hold the Nikon (forgot my monopod one day) so it should be possible. It's not a sharpness issue if you have enough light to shoot fast shutter speeds (1/focal length, right), but rather that it is VERY fatiguing! The Pentax AF might be lighter than the MF I owned. DJE
Re: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8
What about a tamron? I have the AF version described in this ebay auction http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemitem=2954172301category=48558 . I've had it for a couple of months and I can't fault it. I did a test between the tamron a Pentax M* 300mm f/4.0 and my FA* 200mm f/2.8. The 200mm came out on top but surprisingly the Tamron came out a head of the M* at both f/4.0 and f/8.0. I looked at sharpness, contrast and color rendation. /Paul From: Th. Stach [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: WTB in the future: 300mm f/2.8 Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 09:56:23 +0200 Hello all you big glass experts, what do you think would be a fair price for such a lens? I've seen the SMC-A version for 1.800 EUR and the newer SMC-FA for about 2.700 EUR. I'd also take a Sigma or Tokina, but I'm not sure if these were ever done for Pentax. AF preferred. I've done some terrific shots with my F*300 f/4.5 this year- but these shots were only possible with ISO 400 or ISO 800 film. If I could have used the f/2.8 and ISO 100 film, well... Another question is: Can shots be done handheld with the f/2.8 ? Any chance? I'm always trying to go for the 1/4000s (fast moving objects) or even faster, but the weight could be an issue, what do you think? I'd love to check out such a lens, but I've never seen one live. Or I should wait for digital, where ISO is not an issue... Thanks in advance for your appreciated advise, Thomas _ Get a FREE computer virus scan online from McAfee. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
