On 25 Aug 2006 at 13:18, Keith E. wrote:
> Everything was peaceful in Tiny Town, until Harman Bajwa
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >The Canon site depicts the new lens with something
> >called "DW-R". Any idea what that means ?
>
> I _think_ it means Dust Weather - Resistant, but I'm not sure.
FWIW, Reichmann did a comparison of this combination (70-200 IS + 2x)
with the 100-400 IS on Luminous Landscape. A little more grist for
the mill . . .
Ken
At 01:07 PM 8/29/2006, you wrote:
Folks,
What kind of image quality should I expect to see at or near wide open
with a 70-200/2.8 IS +
I've used the 70-200/2.8 IS with 1.4 a lot and have great results. with the 2x,
it's a more
complicated conversation. I have terrible results with action shots. Boat race
photos are abysmal
with the 2X, but really good with the 1.4. Birds in the Everglades last year
were spectacular with
the 70-
I've shot some Arena Football with my 70-200 + 1.4 and the results were just
fine. Normally I wouldn't use the 1.4x but I was shooting strobes so I could
afford the 1 stop loss of the 1.4s.
I don't know about the 2x...
Mike
- Original Message -
From: "Tom Christiansen" <[EMAIL PROTECT
At 1:07 PM -0700 8/29/06, Tom Christiansen wrote:
Folks,
What kind of image quality should I expect to see at or near wide open
with a 70-200/2.8 IS + 1.4x TC and 70-200/2.8 IS + 2x TC?
Anybody has some real-world experience to share?
Thanks,
Tom
For my purposes, fine with the 1.4, not wort
> Folks,
>
> What kind of image quality should I expect to see at or near wide open
> with a 70-200/2.8 IS + 1.4x TC and 70-200/2.8 IS + 2x TC?
>
> Anybody has some real-world experience to share?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tom
70-200/2.8 IS + 1.4x TC is quite acceptable.
70-200/2.8 IS + 2x TC gets rath
Folks,
What kind of image quality should I expect to see at or near wide open
with a 70-200/2.8 IS + 1.4x TC and 70-200/2.8 IS + 2x TC?
Anybody has some real-world experience to share?
Thanks,
Tom
*
***
***
* For list instructio
Harman Bajwa wrote
> --- "Baker, Adam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > RRP is £20 more than the 350D
> >
>
> According to Jessops, the Retail price of the 350D is
> 440 quid whereas the new 400D is pegged at a masterly
> 650 quid. You probably meant 200 not 20.
>
I was comparing the RRP of