|
Forum: Lens Clubs
07-05-2013, 02:48 AM
|
| |
Hi Kevin,
Haven't been looking in on this thread for a while, so answering an older post. . .
I have this accessory for the Tamron 300/2.8 60B, and it's a palm rest for handholding. It actually works quite well -- remember that this lens is manual focus, and the palm rest is designed to angle the hand so the fingers naturally fall on the focus ring of the lens. It's purpose is not well documented, so I remember taking a pic to illustrate its use to a member on another forum who had one and was complaining about how useless it was (but he had it mounted backwards. . .). I was surprised that I actually still had the pic in my Flickr acct.
Scott
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
08-20-2011, 12:23 PM
|
| |
Hi JP,
I don't have any 500mm primes, but I long ago decided to stick with 300mm lenses + TCs for more reach. Three main reasons -- I really can't handle the size and weight of the bigger lens, versatility, and Minimum Focusing Distance,.
The Sigma EX 500 f4.5 weighs @ 7 lbs and I've decided that @ 6 lbs is my limit -- due to my age and some physical constraints, I'm more likely to lower my limits than raise them in the future -- so YMMV.
A 300/2.8 gives me 300/2.8, 420/4, 510/4.8, and 714/6.7 with just the added weight of a 1.4x TC and the 1.7x AFA.
The Sigma EX 500 has a MFD of @ 4m (13 ft) and my 300 2.8s MFDs are between 6 and 8 feet. I tend to shoot at closer distances, so this is important for me, but again YMMV.
The 500 prime might have slightly better IQ, but I don't know if I'd really need it (or if it would really be worth another $4-5K to find out). The FA* 300/2.8 and Sigma EX 300/2.8 really do well with a 1.4x AF TC or the 1.7x AFA (and even with the AFA stacked on a Sigma EX 1.4x APO AF TC), so I'll take the weight and cost savings and be satisfied with what I have.
K20, FA* 300/2.8 + 1.7x AFA + Sigma 1.4x APO AF (714mm), f10 (@ f5.8 at the lens), 1/100, ISO 320. Tripod + Sidekick. Vertical crop from a landscape frame, sharpened with Focus Magic and downsized for the web. Taken at @ 12-15 ft
The Sigma EX 300 f2/8 APO (pre DG) is not quite as sharp (really nit-picking), but is lighter and a bit easier to handle since the barrel is not as large (I have small hands, and can't grip the barrel of the FA* 300/2.8 reliably with one hand -- and with a $3K+ lens, you want a confident grip on the lens:). . .)
K20, Sigma 300 f2.8 APO (pre DG) + 1.7x AFA (510mm), f3.5 (probably wide open at the lens, exif is weird with Sigma lenses and the AFA), 1/100, ISO 1250. Handheld. Vertical crop of a landscape frame. Sharpened with FM, NR with Noise Ninja and downsized for the web. Taken from @ 10-12 ft
It's softer for at least a couple of reasons -- handheld at 1/100, ISO 1250, lens wide open, but I think you get the idea. . . it's a great lens -- but the FA* is a tad better -- I'd rate the Sigma as a 9.6 and the FA* as a 9.9, they're that close. The FA* gets extra fractional points for the focus limiter and a touch better CA/PF control and contrast.
I doubt if I'd get much better results with the bigger lens, and I'd certainly be much less inclined to take it out to shoot because of the weight. My EX 300/2.8 cost me @ 1700 used and my FA*300/2.8 was @ $2500 (it was a little beat up cosmetically though the glass is pristine).
There's no doubt that the EX 500/4.5 is a fine lens, but I've decided that it's just not for me.
Scott
|
