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
Telephoto
Picking Lenses for my trip to the Southern USA
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="Fortkentdad" data-source="post: 656921" data-attributes="member: 24285"><p>I took the D500 out today with the 55-300 DX. </p><p>With and without the T.C. </p><p></p><p>Shot the tower, I'm a poor judge of distance but lets just say its a long long walk. </p><p></p><p>The sample is cropped to about one quarter of the frame. </p><p>First the TC and second without. </p><p>There was some time between these two and I didn't have the exact same spot. </p><p></p><p>[ATTACH]278780[/ATTACH][ATTACH]278781[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>Then a closer shot of a Chickadee </p><p></p><p>First with T.C. (1.4 Kenko 300) and then without. </p><p>[ATTACH]278782[/ATTACH][ATTACH]278783[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>T.C. really hurts with BIF shots. </p><p>The one without TC isn't a great shot but that was in deep shadows. And hand held. </p><p>I would think that the F5.6 vs F8 is going to make shots in the shadows very difficult and cut into the shutterspeed. </p><p>I was shooting A priority so that didn't help. In both cases these are accidental BIFs </p><p>[ATTACH]278784[/ATTACH][ATTACH]278785[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>BUT - my dearly beloved decided today we would check bags after all.</p><p>She hates losing bags, getting bags damaged, and mostly waiting for the luggage. And really wanted to just go with the checked bags to travel oh so light. That isn't going to work. Our bags we bought a couple of years ago qualified as carry on, now Air Canada limites luggage to max to 21.5 tall, and ours is at least an inch more than that. So there goes another $50 to check a bag (both ways). Upside, when I check a bag, then I get more room in my carry on for gear as I no longer have to also pack everything else I needed for two weeks into a small backpack (no more than 6" thick) and one rather small carry on case. </p><p></p><p>My trip Kit is shaping up to be the D500 (if you got it use it right?) . The 16-85 (I'm really liking this lens on the D500). The 55-300 DX for general walk about outside. I'm really going to try and pack the 70-200 for when I get to do some serious photography. And maybe the 60mm macro, double duty as a portrait lens at 90mm and macro if the flowers are out and anything else warranting extreme close up.</p><p></p><p>I'll also pack the SB-600 which may end up staying with my daughter-in-law if I can convince her that there is more to photography than 'natural light' - but she is so into organic and natural everything, flash photography is like GMO food to her. </p><p></p><p>Tested out the close capacity of the 16-85 - not macro but close up. These are my wife's not mine. </p><p></p><p>[ATTACH]278786[/ATTACH][ATTACH]278787[/ATTACH]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Fortkentdad, post: 656921, member: 24285"] I took the D500 out today with the 55-300 DX. With and without the T.C. Shot the tower, I'm a poor judge of distance but lets just say its a long long walk. The sample is cropped to about one quarter of the frame. First the TC and second without. There was some time between these two and I didn't have the exact same spot. [ATTACH=CONFIG]278780._xfImport[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]278781._xfImport[/ATTACH] Then a closer shot of a Chickadee First with T.C. (1.4 Kenko 300) and then without. [ATTACH=CONFIG]278782._xfImport[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]278783._xfImport[/ATTACH] T.C. really hurts with BIF shots. The one without TC isn't a great shot but that was in deep shadows. And hand held. I would think that the F5.6 vs F8 is going to make shots in the shadows very difficult and cut into the shutterspeed. I was shooting A priority so that didn't help. In both cases these are accidental BIFs [ATTACH=CONFIG]278784._xfImport[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]278785._xfImport[/ATTACH] BUT - my dearly beloved decided today we would check bags after all. She hates losing bags, getting bags damaged, and mostly waiting for the luggage. And really wanted to just go with the checked bags to travel oh so light. That isn't going to work. Our bags we bought a couple of years ago qualified as carry on, now Air Canada limites luggage to max to 21.5 tall, and ours is at least an inch more than that. So there goes another $50 to check a bag (both ways). Upside, when I check a bag, then I get more room in my carry on for gear as I no longer have to also pack everything else I needed for two weeks into a small backpack (no more than 6" thick) and one rather small carry on case. My trip Kit is shaping up to be the D500 (if you got it use it right?) . The 16-85 (I'm really liking this lens on the D500). The 55-300 DX for general walk about outside. I'm really going to try and pack the 70-200 for when I get to do some serious photography. And maybe the 60mm macro, double duty as a portrait lens at 90mm and macro if the flowers are out and anything else warranting extreme close up. I'll also pack the SB-600 which may end up staying with my daughter-in-law if I can convince her that there is more to photography than 'natural light' - but she is so into organic and natural everything, flash photography is like GMO food to her. Tested out the close capacity of the 16-85 - not macro but close up. These are my wife's not mine. [ATTACH=CONFIG]278786._xfImport[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]278787._xfImport[/ATTACH] [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
Telephoto
Picking Lenses for my trip to the Southern USA
Top