Had to stay home to be here and sign for the Sigma 300mm f/2.8... Most of these taken with the 2x or 1.4x TC. (I wish Exif could detect this, cause I forgot already) None too cheap ... You think it was worth it? (I do ) I'm surprised how the 5+ lb. lens wasn't too heavy for me. Using this handhold.

o Full rez to be found here (and here).
o All were shot RAW w/some post processing to WB, noise reduction, histogram stretching, etc. (I may never shoot just JPEG again!)
o All were shot handheld except the last one.
o Shot location: from: 40.929256,-73.402952 to: - Google Maps (by that little turn-around in the center)

(I'm pretty sure these were with the 2x; boat race was about 2/3 or 3/4 mile away; in full-rez you can see the boundary orange flag with black X off on the right perfectly)


(tone shift from playing with the drop-in polarizer filter it comes with)


(I think the next 3 were no TC; based on google maps link provided boats were under 100 yards away)






(I think this from here down was with the 1.4x TC ; this boat was about 250+ yards away)


(about 100 yards away)




(resting on an open Jeep door's windowsill, I think no TC; subject approx 93.2 million miles )


Hope you enjoyed.
-steve

[vievetrick]

Thanks for the info M80. I am kicking around a few ideas or more like LBA for upcoming lenses. On the short list 77LTD, 16-50 2.8 (when and if avialable), 300mm or as mentioned the 50-500 I have seriously thought about. I have been shooting some local sports and I think the reach would be great. But, on the other hand most are outside and in low light conditions so the 50-500 may not be the right choice. hmmm then again I have to get all this past the accountant (aka. my wife). So time will tell. May be time to sell some of the stuff not getting any use. but that is another thread. Thanks again

[m8o]

At risk of being OT of my own thread... OK, not a "first day" shot. Well, 1st day I took the lens to work, so there... OK too, 1st day shooting what I actually purchased this for, wildlife.

I'm not thrilled with these below at all actually; I expected more (going by full rez pix). Focus seems off; I was using spot focus on the center subject. I would have also expected deeper DOF at f/8 where the subjects were about 150 - 200 feet away too (DOF calculates to 30 ft with lens size, subject distance & f-stop). The focus was center spot, and looking @ full rez at least, focus is on with the center bird but noticably off with the lead goose.


Looking @ full rez, the lead bird was in better focus here.



I liked the bokeh color of the water reed's reflection of this below the most, and cropped out the two laggerd geese that started turning around with their arse pointing my way. Converted from RAW, did a little histogram balancing, tried sharpening at +2 to get some semblence of sharpness of the lead bird(s), which works at full rez, but this one below at a reduced resolution of the high rez JPG is better with sharpening at +1.



For any that happen upon this thread and in the know, a couple of questions
1) is this (resolution/sharpness) what I should expect from a subject this size @ that distance? (150 - 200 ft)
2) should I stop down even further, to f/13 or more? The front lens diameter is massive, so there's a lot of light coming into the barrel so I think I can afford that.
3) So what does actually yield better resolution and larger subjects of the shot? Cropping the 300mm or use one of my many TCs I have to yield from 1.4x, 1.7x or 2x larger subject at cost of lower color and contrast? I'm guessing the latter, definitely. Yes?

Thanx for any help.