So what did you think about the 300 prime? How much did you miss VR? Did you in fact return it?
Neal
Neal
-
-
Re: Hey Wayne...
Neal, I had little time to really see how well it did, since I lost almost all of the photos I took with it before really getting a chance to look at them! I did see a few extremely sharp shots.. that said, I'm too old and shakey to use such a light lens without VR..Originally posted by wingman
Two things cropped up shortly after PRS which might have kept me from going forward with my daring plan with the 200-400.. one, my truck suddenly needed a $1200. AC repair.. solution.. got out my tools and fixed it for $350. myself!
The other, much more dreded and not yet resolved was the crashing of the 320gb drive! As of yesterday, they are still "looking for parts" despite the fact that I sent them a brand new, duplicate drive (made hours later) to use as a parts bin... bottom line on this part of the story is though, due to the extreme generosity of those who frequent this site, the repair costs were covered by those visitors..
This left me just enough room on my card/s to do the dirty deed and take the plunge.... It's here, it's heavy and I need to get some barbells to make ready but man o man, it's a beauty!
I may, indeed, wind up having to sell it after all is said-and-done if things don't go well in the upcoming year..
Anyway, long story short, I go up tomorrow or next day (depending on weather/pilot availabilty) to shoot a string of A2G's and try it in that role.. it *should* do quite well for property "portraits"...
And yes, indeed, I did send the 300 back as soon as I got home. Not enough can be said for B&H Photo's return policy!
Wayne
PS.. going to move this thread to the photo forum.. trying to keep some sense of order here as we approach RENO...Wayne Sagar
"Pusher of Electrons" -
Re: Hey Wayne...
So you sprang for the big dog, eh? I will be VERY interested in your experience with it! Looks like I'm going to get a D2X, as Birgitta will be going largely digital this year with one of the D200s.
NealComment
-
Re: Hey Wayne...
Good friend of mine, (Gary Thompson, beautiful Stearman guy) looked me in the eye while at his place recently and asked "how many summers do you have left"... told me of the importance of asking yourself that question, OFTEN...Originally posted by wingman
So, yea, bottom line, I don't want to wonder what'd be like to have the best Nikon body and the best Nikon lens/lenses to do what I do.
I'm also, very likely, going to sell my 24-120vr and get the 18-200vr, as, as unlikely as it seems, I've read over and over that the 18-200 is a superior lens (much sharper).. and it certainly would give me the spread I need! Hang two bodies around my neck at pylons, shoot with either the 18-200 or the 200-400... now I do understand the 18-200 is a DX lens, so it's not the same spread as a non DX, so I still have a bit of gap between it's "200" and the 200 of the "big dog"
Anyway.. that's the plan..
You're gonna LOVE the 2X!!!!!!!
Other than the fact that it is a lot heavier than the 200, it's a really good body. So good, I doubt I'll ever replace it.. not that I'll ever be able to afford to in my lifetime with the recent purchase!!!!!!!!!
I WILL miss the portability of that 80-400vr! Wish Nikon would make a bit better version of it.. i.e. internal focus...
My luck, they will.. and soon and the value of the 200-400 will drop into the toilet!
What to heck... gimme 20 good summers and I'll be happy!
Wayne Sagar
"Pusher of Electrons"Comment
-
Re: Hey Wayne...
I do like our 18-200 a lot...
and I do like Mr. Thompson's attitude!
NealComment
-
Re: Hey Wayne...
Gary is a wonderful man! In life, we're blessed with many things, one of these are the friends we manage to make during the journey!Originally posted by wingman
This man has opened so many doors for me since I first met him shortly before launching this website..
Delightful, delightful person!
He's been building airplanes for a very long time too.. check out the b&w.. his first one!
I did not notice until much later when processing the photos, that he had a HUGE SEG during much of the flight.... Asked him "is it that much fun to fly her?" "well, yes, but, I was really smiling at you hanging out the door of the airplane, you had something trailing behind you, I think we shared a moment"...
We certainly did!
Attached FilesWayne Sagar
"Pusher of Electrons"Comment
-
-
Re: Hey Wayne...
Will the 18-200 leave a gap? I thought the DX meant it was designed smaller for the smaller sensor but the 1.5x still applies to both lenses regardless (same as canon EF-S?)
JarrodComment
-
Re: Hey Wayne...
Jarrod, I think the DX lenses are "shorter" than what they say on them.. meaning, if you put one on a film body, the 200 would be less... in this way, if you get a wide DX lens, it actually gives you the width you are looking for.. but you do lose the magnification factor, since it's factored into the lens already...Originally posted by jarrodeu
Make sense?
WayneWayne Sagar
"Pusher of Electrons"Comment
-
Re: Hey Wayne...
Neal,Originally posted by wingman
You have both the 24-120vr and the 18-200vr... right? If so, which do you find superior? I currently have the 24-120vr and the plan would be to sell it to get the 18-200... worth it?
WayneWayne Sagar
"Pusher of Electrons"Comment
-
Re: Hey Wayne...
Go here and click features and go to Key FeaturesOriginally posted by AAFO_WSagar
JarrodComment
-
Re: Hey Wayne...
Wayne -- We have the older non-VR version of the 24-120. This is a much-maligned lens with a less than stellar reputation, but I've found it to be extremely sharp when used conservatively, at middling Fstops -- F8 to F16. The 18-200, I think, is similar -- excellent if not pushed too hard in low light, not used wide open, etc. Still a "prosumer" lens and still rather slow (F5.6 at the long end) but a wonderfully versatile "walking around" lens. It's at least as sharp as the older lens in similar conditions, and I really do love the spectacular range of focal lengths.
I still tend to gravitate to the old 24-120 for air to air, as this lens is physically somewhat shorter and I find it better balanced on the camera for use in tight spaces when I'm twisting around in an airplane cockpit. Remember that I differ from you in that I don't much like or trust VR for work when I or the subject are moving.
Also, I've almost never done anything in the air where I've needed more than about 100 mm or so. Any situations where the subject airplanes were farther away than that have tended to turn out badly due to motion blur, haze, etc.
NealComment
Comment