[dadipentak]

You may be expecting concert shots of a doo-wop group but, in fact, this is a report on some tests with my newly acquired A* 400mm f/2.8 ("Fat Albert") with my teleconverters. After a gloomy week of rain, it was a clear morning and a new-to-me hawk (a Merlin, I think) obligingly stopped by to pose in the dead oak out back so it was a great opportunity for some testing.

Here are samples of the better shots, one from each of the TCs. All were cropped to 7.71MP portrait orientation and resized to 520 x 650 jpegs--no other pp. Like the song says, "If you think I'm happy, you're right!" I'm particularly pleased with the performance of the 2x-L: at 800mm, the results are at least competitive with (and maybe better) than what I get with the SMC 1000mm--and without the fringing!

[dadipentak]

( f4, +1.0EV, 1/500s ISO 320)

[dadipentak]

( f5.6, +0.7EV, 1/640s, ISO 400)

[dadipentak]

f5.6, 0.7EV, 1/640s, ISO 1250

Attached Images

 

[netuser]

Great combo
Congrats on the new lens.

[Ex Finn.]

Fat Albert!, no, no consert shots, this was the first thing that came to my mind.
Man, A 400 2.8, good way to build biceps.

Cheers, Mike.

[dadipentak]

Thanks, guys! I'm not worthy of the lens in terms of skill but intend to work in that direction. Lifting it, however, is not a problem.

[pat_123]

I too thought of the Blue Angels transport plane when I saw the thread title! That plane does some amazing maneuvers for its size.

Fat Albert!, no, no consert shots, this was the first thing that came to my mind.
Man, A 400 2.8, good way to build biceps.

Cheers, Mike.

[Canada_Rockies]

You may be expecting concert shots of a doo-wop group but, in fact, this is a report on some tests with my newly acquired A* 400mm f/2.8 ("Fat Albert") with my teleconverters. After a gloomy week of rain, it was a clear morning and a new-to-me hawk (a Merlin, I think) obligingly stopped by to pose in the dead oak out back so it was a great opportunity for some testing.

Here are samples of the better shots, one from each of the TCs. All were cropped to 7.71MP portrait orientation and resized to 520 x 650 jpegs--no other pp. Like the song says, "If you think I'm happy, you're right!" I'm particularly pleased with the performance of the 2x-L: at 800mm, the results are at least competitive with (and maybe better) than what I get with the SMC 1000mm--and without the fringing!

I actually thought of my kids when the Fat Albert light bulbs came out. They were at that lovely ages when this was absolutely hilarious. Except to me.

[dadipentak]

It just seemed a good nickname for a lens that looks like this.

The IQ this thing delivers at 560, 680 and 800mm kinda puts the investment in a different perspective.

[Ash]

Wow.
What a massive piece of harware - good results with it so far.
Never heard of a 400/2.8 until now - very special.
Thanks for sharing this with us Dave - awesome stuff.

[dadipentak]

Thanks, Ash. It's a bit of a cart-before-horse thing since I have a lot of skill development ahead of me but I have paid some dues with the 1000mm f8.
For better of worse, any IQ issues I encounter with this thing are presumed to be operator error.

[Sigmoid]

How far from your camera position to the hawk? Are the samples cropped or full frame? And which body are you using?

Thanks,

Sig

[dadipentak]

How far from your camera position to the hawk? Are the samples cropped or full frame? And which body are you using?

Thanks,

Sig

I'd guess I was 40-50m from the bird, Sig. The samples were cropped to 7.71MP portrait orientation and resized to 520 x 650 jpegs--no other pp.
I used a K20D.

[Sigmoid]

Cool. Remarkable quality, especially for an unfamiliar super-tele. It took me months to get the hang of using my *A 600 f5.6 and I still take a few soft exposures when I momentarily loose mental focus on the focus.

To my aging eyes, the 2X returns sharper results than the 1.7X, with the 1.4 Tamron in the middle.

Sig