Re: Opinions on FA* 400mm f5.6 ED (IF)
On Sun, 2 Mar 2003 22:41:08 -0800 (PST), Peter Jansen wrote: I find with my F-300mm f4.5 and Z1p that I have to use the 2s mirror-up at speeds as high as 1/125 or even 1/180. Luckily, I'm typically shooting in bright overcast or daylight, so it's not usually a problem to get at least 1/250 shutter speed, or faster. Which is good, as 1/250 or 1/500 is the sweet spot for my application. The MZ-S has WAY less vibration than the ME Super (I have one). I haven't done any systematic tests, but I this sure seems true to me, at least compared to my K-1000, LX, and ZX-5. Also, the MZ-S seems to spread the action out over more time than the other three cameras. It audibly progresses through a couple of different phases. The LX does this also, but the entire process happens over a shorter time, while the K-1000 and ZX-5 just seem to be crash thump all at once. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: Opinions on FA* 400mm f5.6 ED (IF)
Hi David, I guess you haven't tried it with Provia or Velvia locked on a solid tripod head with mirror lockup? If you got one great, sharp photo, then you will get more, since your technique may be at fault. It's very, very hard to get sharp, hand held tele photos, eben at high shutter speeds. I can't at all. Anyway, thanks again for this info. : ) Best Peter --- David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wrote: My sample of the 400mm isn't quite as sharp as I'd like, although I may be expecting a bit much. and Doug Franklin replied: You might be. I've found that 400 mm focal length requires significantly better technique than a 200 or 300 mm lens. I'm still climbing its learning curve. Yes, I suspect I may have been facing issues with technique. I was pretty careful but still may have been affected by camera shake. My first test was performed at long-distance (about 100 metres) on a hot day so atmospheric conditions may also have contributed to my dissatisfaction. However I do have one surprisingly good photo of a blackbird from slightly further than minimum focusing distance (ie slightly more than 2m away). Shot at 1/90th on a tripod with unlocked ballhead. I was sure it wouldn't come out but it turned out quite well. I'll scan it if you want, its quite a closeup. Most of my photos from this lens have been handheld. I know I'm pushing it even at 1/500th but thats about all I can get wide-open with 100ISO film. I'm going to have to use my monopod more often, not to mention faster film (pity Provia 400F is so expensive). I was going to do some more testing but I haven't gotten around to it yet. I should do so soon because there's not much left of Summer down here... Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Re: Opinions on FA* 400mm f5.6 ED (IF)
I believe it is 10 feet. And yes a Pentax 300mm f2.8 is on my very short list, though getting Pentax 1.4XL 2XL + the 1.7 AF converters can be another $400-600. : ) Peter --- Paul Franklin Stregevsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Peter, I'm sending you my collected comments on the Pentax 400/5.6 PKA, 400/5.6 FA, and Tamron 400/4. I used to own the 400/5.6 PKA and found it very nice! I sold it recently because I don't shoot enough over 200mm. (My XR Rikenon 300/4.5 is on Ebay right now for the same reason.) From what I have read, the FA is no sharper than the A was. It does, however, focus closer (2 m vs. 2.8 m). As I've stated here before, I think that most serious shooters are better served by a 300/2.8 and a set of 1.4X, 1.7X, and 2X teleconverters. My second choice, based on all that I've read about it, would be to get the Tamron 400/4. You'll find the extra f-stop a joy to use, 560mm is just a 1.4X TC away, and the optics are second to none. Does anyone know how close the Tamron can focus? __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Re: Opinions on FA* 400mm f5.6 ED (IF)
Peter Jansen wrote: Does anyone have experience with the FA* 400mm f5.6 ED (IF) lens (for 35mm)? How does the quality compare to the FA* 300mm f4.5 ED (IF)? How about with the A 1.4X-S converter? I have the FA*400mm f/5.6 and the F*300mm f/4.5 (optically identical to the FA*). I haven't used either with a convertor so I can't comment about that. My sample of the 400mm isn't quite as sharp as I'd like, although I may be expecting a bit much. I want to do some more testing before I start drawing concrete conclusions. However it is definitely sharper than the manual focus Tokina SL 400mm f/5.6 that it replaced. The F*300mm f/4.5 is an incredible lens. If you have the FA* 300mm already I'd advise trying it with the TC, if AF is not required. In fact, my 300mm is so much better than my 400 that I've been giving a little thought to selling the 400mm. If you're interested, twist my arm a bit and I'll shoot some sample slides for you, while deciding whether or not I really need to keep it. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: Opinions on FA* 400mm f5.6 ED (IF)
I do have the F* 300mm ED(IF) I love it agree it is one of the best. It works well with the 1.4x-S converter, but it can be a pain to focus manually (f6.3). I'm a little spoiled by AF. Perhaps I should look at the old Tamron SP f4 with a 1.4x, or bite the bullet and get the FA* 300mm f2.8 with the 2X-L converter... Pentax PLEASE make a 400mm f4 ED(IF)! Thanks for your help! Peter --- David Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Peter Jansen wrote: Does anyone have experience with the FA* 400mm f5.6 ED (IF) lens (for 35mm)? How does the quality compare to the FA* 300mm f4.5 ED (IF)? How about with the A 1.4X-S converter? I have the FA*400mm f/5.6 and the F*300mm f/4.5 (optically identical to the FA*). I haven't used either with a convertor so I can't comment about that. My sample of the 400mm isn't quite as sharp as I'd like, although I may be expecting a bit much. I want to do some more testing before I start drawing concrete conclusions. However it is definitely sharper than the manual focus Tokina SL 400mm f/5.6 that it replaced. The F*300mm f/4.5 is an incredible lens. If you have the FA* 300mm already I'd advise trying it with the TC, if AF is not required. In fact, my 300mm is so much better than my 400 that I've been giving a little thought to selling the 400mm. If you're interested, twist my arm a bit and I'll shoot some sample slides for you, while deciding whether or not I really need to keep it. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Re: Opinions on FA* 400mm f5.6 ED (IF)
On Mon, 03 Mar 2003 18:16:21 +1300, David Mann wrote: My sample of the 400mm isn't quite as sharp as I'd like, although I may be expecting a bit much. You might be. I've found that 400 mm focal length requires significantly better technique than a 200 or 300 mm lens. I'm still climbing its learning curve. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: Opinions on FA* 400mm f5.6 ED (IF)
You might be. I've found that 400 mm focal length requires significantly better technique than a 200 or 300 mm lens. I'm still climbing its learning curve. Perhaps a giant Gitzo carbon tripod with Arca Swiss head will help a bit? Oh... you will need super low vibration body like ME Super or MX too. Bodies like Z-1p won't cut. :-) regards, Alan Chan _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: Opinions on FA* 400mm f5.6 ED (IF)
On Sun, 02 Mar 2003 21:32:13 -0800, Alan Chan wrote: You might be. I've found that 400 mm focal length requires significantly better technique than a 200 or 300 mm lens. I'm still climbing its learning curve. Perhaps a giant Gitzo carbon tripod with Arca Swiss head will help a bit? Oh... you will need super low vibration body like ME Super or MX too. Bodies like Z-1p won't cut. :-) Yeah, but that's entry fees for about five races, so I won't be buying it soon. :-) TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: Opinions on FA* 400mm f5.6 ED (IF)
I find with my F-300mm f4.5 and Z1p that I have to use the 2s mirror-up at speeds as high as 1/125 or even 1/180. When I first got the F-300mm f4.5, I thought it was somewhat soft wide open. But I soon found out that it was that darn Z1p mirror slap and slower speeds. I later got a MZ-S I can go 1/60 or even 1/45 without much trouble. The MZ-S has WAY less vibration than the ME Super (I have one). It's has the softest shutter/mirror slap that I've ever tried. Give one a spin. Actually you might want one after that... Peter --- Alan Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You might be. I've found that 400 mm focal length requires significantly better technique than a 200 or 300 mm lens. I'm still climbing its learning curve. Perhaps a giant Gitzo carbon tripod with Arca Swiss head will help a bit? Oh... you will need super low vibration body like ME Super or MX too. Bodies like Z-1p won't cut. :-) regards, Alan Chan _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Re: Opinions on FA* 400mm f5.6 ED (IF)
The MZ-S has WAY less vibration than the ME Super (I have one). It's has the softest shutter/mirror slap that I've ever tried. Give one a spin. Actually you might want one after that... Care to let me try yours? I promise I'll return it. :-) regards, Alan Chan _ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
