Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
General Lenses
Lens for action
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Skribbles" data-source="post: 51559" data-attributes="member: 9214"><p>The 70-300 ED VR looks alright, I'd love the 70-200 2.8 but unfortunately its way out of my budget at the moment.</p><p></p><p> </p><p>[ATTACH]9659[/ATTACH][ATTACH]9660[/ATTACH]</p><p>Hmm, I spose I could have a not so great 55-300, it just feels clunky, not smooth (both zoom and focus), I don't know of anyone else with one to compare.</p><p></p><p>Haha, the D4 would be marvelous but yeah, that price tag... </p><p></p><p>I mainly use AF-C or AF-A, I know using AF-C is not helping what I'm seeing but when using continuous high shots I just miss too much with AF-A, would rather have a shot thats slightly out than not at all.</p><p></p><p>Do you mean the backfocus issue?</p><p>I attached a couple of pics of a barcode which I layed out on an angle and took a pic level to the ground, both are focused on the number 2 ( even used the focus point identifier thingy in the camera to confirm), I realize it's not the 'correct' way of doing it but figured it would give some idea.</p><p>One is with my 18-55 and the other my 55-300.</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>I havn't done a lot of wildlife stuff with it the 55-300 mainly gets used for the RC Racing, I would like to, just a matter of going out and doing it.</p><p>In my opinion it can be difficult at times with the RC's, being so small and so fast while also trying to fill the frame with them, I have used this lens for some 1/1 off-road racing and it seemed alright for that, much easier and a higher success rate.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Skribbles, post: 51559, member: 9214"] The 70-300 ED VR looks alright, I'd love the 70-200 2.8 but unfortunately its way out of my budget at the moment. [ATTACH=CONFIG]9659[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]9660[/ATTACH] Hmm, I spose I could have a not so great 55-300, it just feels clunky, not smooth (both zoom and focus), I don't know of anyone else with one to compare. Haha, the D4 would be marvelous but yeah, that price tag... I mainly use AF-C or AF-A, I know using AF-C is not helping what I'm seeing but when using continuous high shots I just miss too much with AF-A, would rather have a shot thats slightly out than not at all. Do you mean the backfocus issue? I attached a couple of pics of a barcode which I layed out on an angle and took a pic level to the ground, both are focused on the number 2 ( even used the focus point identifier thingy in the camera to confirm), I realize it's not the 'correct' way of doing it but figured it would give some idea. One is with my 18-55 and the other my 55-300. I havn't done a lot of wildlife stuff with it the 55-300 mainly gets used for the RC Racing, I would like to, just a matter of going out and doing it. In my opinion it can be difficult at times with the RC's, being so small and so fast while also trying to fill the frame with them, I have used this lens for some 1/1 off-road racing and it seemed alright for that, much easier and a higher success rate. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
General Lenses
Lens for action
Top
