Author | Thread |
|
03/20/2006 03:40:14 PM · #1 |
I am loving this honkin' lens! The squirrel ran up away again - but this time I got some shots of him way up the tree. Also, another chickadee pic.

|
|
|
03/20/2006 03:43:50 PM · #2 |
Very nice and clear shots. I love the broken in the bird pic and the squirrel pic's have such detail. Sounds like a great lens and you are handling it well.
|
|
|
03/20/2006 03:45:09 PM · #3 |
Wow, those look great. Glad you're having fun with it. |
|
|
03/20/2006 03:55:55 PM · #4 |
|
|
03/20/2006 03:58:57 PM · #5 |
thanks! I am loving it. That squirrel can run now, but he had better find a better place to hide. lol
|
|
|
03/20/2006 04:16:35 PM · #6 |
How far away are you in these pics?
|
|
|
03/20/2006 04:23:39 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by dwterry: How far away are you in these pics? |
The chickadees were about 20 feet away, the squirrel about 30 feet up the tree.
|
|
|
03/20/2006 04:25:00 PM · #8 |
I want one!
Do I really need two kidneys? |
|
|
03/20/2006 04:25:21 PM · #9 |
wow really nice shots with that lens, i want one now
|
|
|
03/20/2006 04:35:44 PM · #10 |
Is the 500mm chickadee shot hand held or on a pod? |
|
|
03/20/2006 04:42:41 PM · #11 |
I knew you would like this lens Linda, it is so underated...look at the brilliant bokeh in your chickadee shot! wow...I am holding on to mine
|
|
|
03/20/2006 04:58:21 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Little King: Is the 500mm chickadee shot hand held or on a pod? |
I shoot almost everything on a pod due to hand tremors. These were definetly on a pod. The weight of the lens is so much that you wouldnt want to hand hold it
|
|
|
03/20/2006 05:22:49 PM · #13 |
Uh oh Puggers has become a squirrel paparazi.
|
|
|
03/20/2006 05:28:46 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever: Uh oh Puggers has become a squirrel paparazi. |
No critter is safe from me now. ;-)
|
|
|
03/20/2006 06:35:58 PM · #15 |
Cool shots. I like shooting with my 70-210 so much I want something longer.. the Bigma would be sweet, but is there any CA/fringing/vignetting/nastiness at the long end? I was thinking the 300mm 4.0IS plus a 1.4x TC would be awesome, but the Bigma is even longer plus its a zoom.. |
|
|
03/20/2006 06:40:28 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by MadMan2k: Cool shots. I like shooting with my 70-210 so much I want something longer.. the Bigma would be sweet, but is there any CA/fringing/vignetting/nastiness at the long end? I was thinking the 300mm 4.0IS plus a 1.4x TC would be awesome, but the Bigma is even longer plus its a zoom.. |
all the shots from today are at 500mm - no vignetting or fringing that I see. The pics posted are converted from RAW, nothing else done but cloned out a twig in front of the squirrel on one shot. Oh - and cropping - but the edges were as clear as the rest of the image
Message edited by author 2006-03-20 18:41:56.
|
|
|
03/20/2006 07:41:01 PM · #17 |
he hee I bought a Sigma 170-500mm recently and its brill, just waiting for good weather to go out and use it more!!
(50-500/170-500/300-800)
 
the 800mm is the real bigma of the range though!!! The pic of it is n't too scale so its about twice as big as the two 500mm. Incredibly it also works with a converter!! 1600mm would be awesome!!
Message edited by author 2006-03-20 19:42:35. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/19/2025 03:24:58 PM EDT.